Replacing the Subs

[Spencer100]

Naval Association of Canada has a paper out

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/204330/towards-a-renewed-canadian-submarine-capability.html

I am sure this thread will last a few years! (Decades?)


I just want to be the one to start it

 

[Spencer100]

Here is the link to the full paper

https://www.navalassoc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Niobe-Paper-4-Collins.pdf

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Ask for 6, hope to get 5. Hook into an existing contract. A diesel electric sub with AIP backup is likely the best we will get. I am sure the Aussies would welcome us getting involved and that solves the weapons issue and ITAR as well.

 

[Karel Doorman]

Ask for 6, hope to get 5. Hook into an existing contract. A diesel electric sub with AIP backup is likely the best we will get. I am sure the Aussies would welcome us getting involved and that solves the weapons issue and ITAR as well.

or you could join the Dutch program,same demands/capabillities as Canada's got/want(ok,Australia's subs will be quit a bit bigger)

 

[deepblue202]

If it is going to take over ten years or more why not see if we can join with the Japanese and their 29SS project. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

There are a few programs that speak to our needs and we should attach observers to each of them to study what's going on, what we like, don't like and devolop from them and our current fleet a list of Must have, really want and what would be nice. Then we can negotiate to take part in one of those contracts, that means more training opportunities, faster learning curve, spare parts and better relations.

 

[Karel Doorman]

If it is going to take over ten years or more why not see if we can join with the Japanese and their 29SS project.

Normally,the "B"letter(in Dutch "B" brief)will be passed this summer,then we will know which builder is going to build our new subs.

There are 3 shipbuilders in the race;
-Naval Group,with a barracuda derivative(think that one's to big for us,but my thoughts),but for the rest a nice sub 
-TKMS ,with a 212 derivative,think that one is not for us
-Saab/Damen with the A-26(ER version may be spot on for us)

but have to wait what the politicians think is the best one(omg)

 

[Underway]

or you could join the Dutch program,same demands/capabillities as Canada's got/want(ok,Australia's subs will be quit a bit bigger)

Not sure if that's correct.  I expect our requirements are probably closer to Australia.  We are also on an island continent...  Not that a new Dutch sub wouldn't be amazing compared to an old UK one.

 

[CBH99]

I’ve been watching the show Submarine School & it’s been fantastic.  Had absolutely no appreciation for how technical commanding a submarine could be.  In episode 3, her first engagement with a small diesel submarine didn’t go well... I’m wondering if ours are comparable?  **sorry for the short posts with poor sentence structure.  Posting on my iPhone sucks**

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Our subs were used for a Norwegian version of the Perisher meant for allied nations without nuke subs

 

[dimsum]

I’ve been watching the show Submarine School & it’s been fantastic.  Had absolutely no appreciation for how technical commanding a submarine could be.  In episode 3, her first engagement with a small diesel submarine didn’t go well... I’m wondering if ours are comparable? 

In essence, yes.

 

[Half Full]

  In episode 3, her first engagement with a small diesel submarine didn’t go well... I’m wondering if ours are comparable? 

Speaking from experience, on board HMCs OTTAWA the only sub we had difficulty when in finding was the Victoria class.  We went up against the Australians (easiest), South Koreans, Type 212s, LA, & Virginia(2nd hardest). Although older than some of the other classes, the crew training and even the sub itself is still ahead of many others.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I’ve been watching the show Submarine School & it’s been fantastic.  Had absolutely no appreciation for how technical commanding a submarine could be.  In episode 3, her first engagement with a small diesel submarine didn’t go well... I’m wondering if ours are comparable?  **sorry for the short posts with poor sentence structure.  Posting on my iPhone sucks**

The BBC did a program called 'Perisher' in the 80s, following up on interest after the Falklands War.

Very good, and on YouTube now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw2Q-_qswjQ

 

[Karel Doorman]

The BBC did a program called 'Perisher' in the 80s, following up on interest after the Falklands War.

Very good, and on YouTube now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw2Q-_qswjQ

The Submarine Command Course (SMCC), previously known as the Commanding Officers Qualifying Course (COQC), and informally known as The Perisher because of its supposed low success rate, is a training course for naval officers preparing to take command of a submarine.

Created by the Royal Navy during World War I, the course was originally intended to address the high attrition rate of submarine commanders, as the previous method of handing down knowledge from officer to officer was prevented by wartime deaths. Following World War II, the Royal Netherlands Navy became involved in the course; the Dutch later partnered with the British to run the course, and following the British conversion to a fully nuclear submarine fleet, took over responsibility for running the course for diesel-electric submarines. Officers from other nations regularly participate.

The four-month course is run in four stages, the first and third involve learning ashore in simulators, while the second involves learning at sea. The fourth phase is the assessment, during which the candidates (of which the maximum is six) show their ability to command a submarine unaided during war-like conditions. The success rate for the SMCC is 70% and, on failing, candidates are prevented from serving on submarines in any capacity.

 

[Karel Doorman]

Not sure if that's correct.  I expect our requirements are probably closer to Australia.  We are also on an island continent...  Not that a new Dutch sub wouldn't be amazing compared to an old UK one.

Well,i think there are only a handfull of navies that have coventionals that can go for long distances.

Correct me if i'm wrong but think it's Australia,Japan,Canada and The Netherlands,so that's what i meant,all of these those subs(classes) are very close(requirements),but offcourse there are differences in weight/length etc,but still are very close capability wise.

 

[Uzlu]

Well,i think there are only a handfull of navies that have coventionals that can go for long distances.

Correct me if i'm wrong but think it's Australia,Japan,Canada and The Netherlands,so that's what i meant,all of these those subs(classes) are very close(requirements),but offcourse there are differences in weight/length etc,but still are very close capability wise.

And maybe also India?

The Type 216 is designed specifically to meet the "larger conventional submarine" needs of countries like Australia, India and Canada.

http://www.navyrecognition.com/mobile/index.php/oceania/australia/submarines/264-type-216-u-216-conventional-submarine-ssk-aip-tkms-hdw-submarine-class-216-howaldtswerke-deutsche-werft-thyssenkrupp-marine-systems-royal-australian-navy-datasheet-pictures-i

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Whichever sub we get I hope it has the ability to launch cruise missiles. That gives us a strike capability, even if we don't choose to use it.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The success rate for the SMCC is 70% and, on failing, candidates are prevented from serving on submarines in any capacity.

That's pretty good. I'd have thought it would be much tougher to pass than that.

 

[OldSolduer]

Whichever sub we get I hope it has the ability to launch cruise missiles. That gives us a strike capability, even if we don't choose to use it.

Rest assured Canada will retain its squeamishness about cruise missiles.

 

[dimsum]

The success rate for the SMCC is 70% and, on failing, candidates are prevented from serving on submarines in any capacity.

I've never understood why you had to give up your dolphins if you don't become Command-qualified.  It's not like all of a sudden your expertise just evaporated. 

I wonder if any surface ship CO-candidate has ever failed their command course, and if so, got kicked out of the trade (which is essentially what it is).