Replacing the Subs

[KevinB]

Special Report: Under the Ice and Into the Future, Strengthening Canada’s Submarine Capabilities

Canada faces an urgent need to modernize its submarine fleet, particularly with under-ice capabilities, to maintain strategic autonomy and meet its international obligations. Public Service and Procurement Canada (PSPC) must urgently fast-track the acquisition of under-the-ice capable submarines...

www.natoassociation.ca

another look at the subs

The joke of this is that all of Canada’s requirements for a submarine point to a SSN as being required, but Canada rules out a SSN.

To get an AIP under ice boat that meets the KPP’s (what you call HLMR’s) it is going to be a new boat of a size and strength not seen before.

 

[GR66]

The joke of this is that all of Canada’s requirements for a submarine point to a SSN as being required, but Canada rules out a SSN.

To get an AIP under ice boat that meets the KPP’s (what you call HLMR’s) it is going to be a new boat of a size and strength not seen before.

And yet still be a MOTS purchase we are told

 

[Halifax Tar]

why do we want to do that?

Somebody thinks we have some national interest over here. We're here an awful lot.

And forward deploying things like POL, HAZMAT, common use stores, and Ammo would make it much easier on the Logistics side of the house.

You could leave a ship or sub there and rotate crews. Rotating the vessels home when its DWP time.

 

[YZT580]

Somebody thinks we have some national interest over here. We're here an awful lot.

And forward deploying things like POL, HAZMAT, common use stores, and Ammo would make it much easier on the Logistics side of the house.

You could leave a ship or sub there and rotate crews. Rotating the vessels home when its DWP time.

ship, a definite yes for reasons stated above. The sub would just be there to provide a "see the world" response for the crews. From a civilian viewpoint I see no reason to station a relatively scarce resource thousands of miles away to join with at least 20 or more other subs that are only a day or two away from home port. Will France, Spain, Greece or Italy be deploying on this side of the Atlantic as part of their patrol area; not a public relations tour? There is an obvious need to patrol the Atlantic and a need for us to step up and do that. That in itself could easily keep a dozen boats busy and we have two other oceans to deal with as well

 

[Halifax Tar]

ship, a definite yes for reasons stated above. The sub would just be there to provide a "see the world" response for the crews. From a civilian viewpoint I see no reason to station a relatively scarce resource thousands of miles away to join with at least 20 or more other subs that are only a day or two away from home port. Will France, Spain, Greece or Italy be deploying on this side of the Atlantic as part of their patrol area; not a public relations tour? There is an obvious need to patrol the Atlantic and a need for us to step up and do that. That in itself could easily keep a dozen boats busy and we have two other oceans to deal with as well

France has colonies in the Americas. This year I was in the North Sea and off of Iceland with a Spanish FFH and AOR as part of an SNMG. A Portuguese sub just went under the ice.

You have the entrance to the black sea, the entrance to the Suez and the Russian Naval base at Tartus, You have massive economic choke points that have global impact, and multiple avenues for adversaries to impact those routes. And Souda Bay is a prime staging location.

If Canada offered to put a sub and ship there, we would be welcome with open arms.

 

[Underway]

The joke of this is that all of Canada’s requirements for a submarine point to a SSN as being required, but Canada rules out a SSN.

To get an AIP under ice boat that meets the KPP’s (what you call HLMR’s) it is going to be a new boat of a size and strength not seen before.

Good enough right now is the enemy of perfect too late.

And you don't need AIP to meet the indiscretion rate anymore, Li batteries can do that for you.

 

[KevinB]

Good enough right now is the enemy of perfect too late.

And you don't need AIP to meet the indiscretion rate anymore, Li batteries can do that for you.

Okay but you still don’t have ice strengthened boats with those either.

You could get RCN submariners on USN VA boats in a few months - and get into AUKUS - and frankly be in the same sort of time frame.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The timing of this cannot be discounted - on the same day Blair was meeting with his South Korean counter-part on Friday in Canada, Topshee was meeting with his Japanese counter-part in Japan.

I think we are hoping that Japan joins in the bid against South Korea for the sub order. I just don't see how the Germans-Norwegians can realistically make our stated timelines to produce 12ish subs, with the start delivered by 2035 and then the next 11, plus their own subs.

Canada Navy chief sees more chances for multiservice exercises with Japan​

"....an agreement would also be indispensable should Japan decide to bid for the Canadian Navy’s new submarine replacement program. Canada plans to invest about 60 billion Canadian dollars ($43 billion) to replace its four-decade-old Victoria-class submarines with up to 12 off-the-shelf, conventionally powered boats, the first of which is to be delivered no later than 2035.

Ottawa has already issued a formal request for information to interested parties, with a Nov. 18 deadline, but it is still unclear whether Tokyo will reply or place a formal bid."

Canada Navy chief sees more chances for multiservice exercises with Japan

Ottawa has been gradually boosting its military engagement with Asian partners since unveiling its Indo-Pacific Strategy in late 2022.

www.japantimes.co.jp

 

[Rainbow1910]

The joke of this is that all of Canada’s requirements for a submarine point to a SSN as being required, but Canada rules out a SSN.

To get an AIP under ice boat that meets the KPP’s (what you call HLMR’s) it is going to be a new boat of a size and strength not seen before.

To call it an "under ice boat" is a bit misleading given that the recently released RFI states the design "will operate near and in ice, with potential to operate under ice for short periods of time to transit from one ice free area to another."

There was also a question posed to industry that is relevant here:

"CPS will operate in and near ice, and potentially under ice for short periods. There is no intent to modify the submarine to be routinely through ice capable. What are the structural or equipment changes needed for this operating environment (i.e. upward looking sonar, ice deflectors for masts, hull valve covering, HVAC, etc.)? Identify any specific materials or systems required to operate in extreme cold temperatures that would result in design changes."

This requirement is entirely reasonable for a large conventional submarine with modern technology like Li battery banks, especially given Canada is likely to utilize these boats more so as they do the AOPS. Patrolling chokepoints and Arctic approaches within the warmer months, effectively being in the Arctic when there is actual vessels there minus the rare heavy icebreakers in the colder months/northern latitudes. Given the timeline we're looking at alongside the reality of warming in the North, all of this seems reasonable to me.

Okay but you still don’t have ice strengthened boats with those either.

You could get RCN submariners on USN VA boats in a few months - and get into AUKUS - and frankly be in the same sort of time frame.

We've talked about SSN's for Canada ad nauseam here, countless different people have explained pretty thoroughly why they are unlikely to ever happen for Canada. That is doubly so for the current climate within the NATO SSN community, where there is already significant pressure on US/UK/AUS industry to address prior boat orders, let alone the additional ones stipulated by AUKUS. I don't see any world where there is going to be bandwidth for Canada to enter this space, not for decades at least.

I don't think it's productive to constantly hand wring about SSN's, there is a lot of things the Canadian Forces ideally should have but reality isn't so kind.

 

[Underway]

Agreed on all points. For the cost of SSNs I can see a who host of other more pressing capabilities that could be purchased. Electronic attack and Naval Strike for the RCAF as a starter. Space communications and surveillence for the Arctic.

 

[KevinB]

Agreed on all points. For the cost of SSNs I can see a who host of other more pressing capabilities that could be purchased. Electronic attack and Naval Strike for the RCAF as a starter. Space communications and surveillence for the Arctic.

I don’t disagree. I guess where I diverge is I see no point in Canada having a non Nuke boat — and all of the funds for the project could probably be better spent on your above items, as well as Uncrewed Subsurface systems for the arctic.