• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Replacing the Subs

GR66 said:
I seriously hope nobody read that article and didn't realize that!
Click to expand...
these days reality and the imaginary world some people have concocted are difficult to keep separate. April fools is just a dystopian caricature of our everyday existence
 
Halifax Tar said:
What did I miss ?
Click to expand...


april-fools-day-meme-1.jpg
 
suffolkowner said:
The Hakugei is actually the fourth Japanese submarine to use lithium batteries following the last two Soryu submarines Oryu and Toryu and the first of the Taigei class the Taigei.
Click to expand...
The South Korean KS-III Batch 2 SSK will also have Li-Ion batteries. So far, two (for a total of three) are presently under construction.
 
The article is very light on any kind of substantial sourcing to its claims, I would lean on filing it under "unlikely" to be very charitable. 12 submarines is entirely out of touch with reality with regard to Canadian sensibilities, budget, etc. I'd expect to see a 1:1 replacement of the Victoria class at minimum, maybe an increase to six submarines at the very most. Even a small scale submarine program is going to be a very difficult and complex endeavor, I do not even want to start considering the amount of risk that such a large 12 submarine program would entail.
 
Rainbow1910 said:
The article is very light on any kind of substantial sourcing to its claims, I would lean on filing it under "unlikely" to be very charitable. 12 submarines is entirely out of touch with reality with regard to Canadian sensibilities, budget, etc. I'd expect to see a 1:1 replacement of the Victoria class at minimum, maybe an increase to six submarines at the very most. Even a small scale submarine program is going to be a very difficult and complex endeavor, I do not even want to start considering the amount of risk that such a large 12 submarine program would entail.
Click to expand...

Dreaming on any replacement sub at all.

But I hope I'm wrong
 
Rainbow1910 said:
The article is very light on any kind of substantial sourcing to its claims, I would lean on filing it under "unlikely" to be very charitable. 12 submarines is entirely out of touch with reality with regard to Canadian sensibilities, budget, etc. I'd expect to see a 1:1 replacement of the Victoria class at minimum, maybe an increase to six submarines at the very most. Even a small scale submarine program is going to be a very difficult and complex endeavor, I do not even want to start considering the amount of risk that such a large 12 submarine program would entail.
Click to expand...
You don't do negotiations at all do you. Lol.

12 is the number we really need to do the jobs the government is asking for.

This is also not an original article. He who shall not be named wrote the original and that has much more detail. So I'm not entirely sure of what to do with the link....
 
If you want 6 then you make a case for 12. GOC "talks" you into accepting 6 and they are happy. Meanwhile you got exactly what you wanted. Plus then you have a reason to say no to some tastings... "if we would have bought 12 we could have done that"
 
In the 1986/87 a handful of pretty smart people - admirals and senior civil servants and one or two academics - made a cogent case for 12: it was, they said, the absolute minimum number of boats required for a three ocean Navy that an ted to have two available in each fleet on an almost continual basis. DND's engineers and RAM-D specialists thought 12 was an optimistically low number. The 12 boats were all to be nuclear powered. They then destroyed their own case by low-balling the costs to a degree that even the Canadian media could fathom and ignoring things like crewing and refuelling.
 
Realistically four subs isn't a credible submarine force for wartime operations. It's simply a peacetime capability maintenance force. The same way that 15 combatant warships is a peacetime navy for a country with the coastline and maritime trade that we have. We definitely need more subs and more warships (and auxiliaries) than we have/have planned but the question is how do we man them?

Certainly there are GOC/CAF specific recruiting and retention issues that need to be resolved, but military recruitment and retention is an issue right across the liberal West. Barring a crisis that results in a change in societal outlook that makes us take defence as seriously as nations like Poland or Finland we will struggle to man the subs/ships/aircraft/regiments/battalions that we have now, never mind expanded forces.

If we really want to have a military that is large enough to make a serious contribution in a major conflict I don't think we have much choice but to jump on the automation/unmanned bandwagon. We might not be able to man 12 subs, but can we man 4 x subs and 12 x XLUUVs? Or just 18 x XLUUVs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Oldgateboatdriver
    • Like
Type 31 for Canada?
Replies
18
Views
3K
FJAG
FJAG
Edward Campbell
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Next Canadian Government
18 19 20
Replies
394
Views
18K
Colin Parkinson
Colin Parkinson
Edward Campbell
    • Wow
    • Like
    • Sad
PAK National Arrested in QC Plotting Attack in NYC
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Haggis
Haggis
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
    • Like
Analysis of US Wishlists 2025
Replies
0
Views
3K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
    • Like
Canadian, Eh?
Replies
0
Views
2K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top