Replacing the Subs

[Good2Golf]

Crap .
It's not a really good replacement in any sense of the word.
But would Churchill do as as a starting point to get farther North.? Could you for example stage our hopefully soon to be KC330's out of the airport?
There is a rail line that terminates there if I'm not mistaken it does so in a deepwater port.
I'm thinking baby steps here.

Part of me was thinking ‘baby steps’ first and look at Iqaluit or the like…get deep water *there using Reverse Sinogeomorphing or the like.

 

[Maxman1]

We used to have a station in Iqaluit, CFS Frobisher Bay.

 

[Kirkhill]

Why not focus on Iqaluit, Churchill and Tuktoyaktuk?

Tuk and Churchill are already connected to the South. Iqaluit has (?) a brand new deep sea port. All of them have airports.

Add in Resolute as well - https://www.arcticsecurity.ca/pdfs/Development-of-Resolute-Bay-Presentation-NL2020.pdf

Tuktoyaktuk Port Canada | Sea Ports | SeaRates

Get information on Tuktoyaktuk Port, Canada when you search online at SeaRates. Learn more about Tuktoyaktuk sea port coordinates, port sizes, port codes & more.

www.searates.com

Some of the jetties may need to be extended or dredged - the Tuk terminal is only 6.1 m deep while HdW draws 5.7 m.

Add in upgrading the FOLs at Iqaluit, Rankin and Yellowknife and you get a twofer - civil and military benefits.

 

[YZT580]

Trudeau couldn't care less about being a credible, reliable ally. As long as he has some adoring "crowds" and can bamboozle people to vote for him, get selfies, he gives the finger.

But I think it would really get to him if he were being mocked or laughed at and ridiculed. I don't believe his ego could tolerate that without causing an implosion

 

[Good2Golf]

But I think it would really get to him if he were being mocked or laughed at and ridiculed. I don't believe his ego could tolerate that without causing an implosion

I have to give credit where credit is due. He does a pretty good job of being blind to criticism.

 

[suffolkowner]

Canada in talks with six countries over future submarine needs | Shephard

The Canadian Patrol Submarine Programme (CPSP) is in its options analysis phase that includes engagement with potential builders to determine next steps.

www.shephardmedia.com

6 countries

Spain S80+
France Scorpene/Shortfin
Germany U212CD?
Sweden A26+
Japan Tagei
SK KSS-III

 

[OldSolduer]

Canada in talks with six countries over future submarine needs | Shephard

The Canadian Patrol Submarine Programme (CPSP) is in its options analysis phase that includes engagement with potential builders to determine next steps.

www.shephardmedia.com

6 countries

Spain S80+
France Scorpene/Shortfin
Germany U212CD?
Sweden A26+
Japan Tagei
SK KSS-III

Does the US make non nuke subs? I would hope the weapons and sensors blend in with US stuff or whatever you sub guys use.

 

[suffolkowner]

Does the US make non nuke subs? I would hope the weapons and sensors blend in with US stuff or whatever you sub guys use.

Not anymore they dont but Electric Boat stepped in to get the S80 back on track. I wonder if it is really worth it to have all sytems switched over to your preferred choices on these small run of subs?

The U.S. Navy Needs Diesel-Electric Submarines Now

SSK submarine acquisitions would promise not just capable and affordable platforms but a diplomatic boon. Indivisible alliances stand the best chance of weathering peacetime strategic competition as well as hot war.

www.19fortyfive.com

 

[Pelorus]

Not a submariner, engineer, or a requirements/FD guy, but from speaking to a bunch over the years I always got the impression that one of our big problems with the Victoria-class was trying to make them work with a mix of UK, Canadian, and US systems. Some of this was unavoidable due to the age of the class as there were requirements to replace obsolete equipment, etc.

I hope that a replacement submarine will be as close to MOTS as possible. Use whatever weapons, sensors, etc. comes with the winning bid, Canadianize as little as possible. Upgrades inline with whatever modernization the manufacturer develops for future iterations, etc.

 

[OldSolduer]

Not a submariner, engineer, or a requirements/FD guy, but from speaking to a bunch over the years I always got the impression that one of our big problems with the Victoria-class was trying to make them work with a mix of UK, Canadian, and US systems. Some of this was unavoidable due to the age of the class as there were requirements to replace obsolete equipment, etc.

I hope that a replacement submarine will be as close to MOTS as possible. Use whatever weapons, sensors, etc. comes with the winning bid, Canadianize as little as possible. Upgrades inline with whatever modernization the manufacturer develops for future iterations, etc.

What? No Canadianization? Heresy!! Blasphemer!!!

FWIW I agree with you.

 

[Dana381]

What? No Canadianization? Heresy!! Blasphemer!!!

FWIW I agree with you.

I know little but the F35, C17, C130J, and CH147F were bought pretty much off the shelf right? Maybe the procurement people realized Canadianizing everything is a big part of why they can't seem to buy anything on time or on budget.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Not a submariner, engineer, or a requirements/FD guy, but from speaking to a bunch over the years I always got the impression that one of our big problems with the Victoria-class was trying to make them work with a mix of UK, Canadian, and US systems. Some of this was unavoidable due to the age of the class as there were requirements to replace obsolete equipment, etc.

I hope that a replacement submarine will be as close to MOTS as possible. Use whatever weapons, sensors, etc. comes with the winning bid, Canadianize as little as possible. Upgrades inline with whatever modernization the manufacturer develops for future iterations, etc.

MOTS isn't an automatically good or bad choice, it is a conscious tradeoff like anything else. Canadian submariners are used to dealing with American systems and weapons at this point, there is a very substantial advantage in supply chains and interoperability if we can put American systems into the submarines we purchase. As states though, this will complicate the design, increase costs and effort to integrate the required components. On the flip side, going completely MOTS can result in some egregious supply chains stretching across entire oceans where you have the potential for foreign nations to have subpar equipment or political/economical relations with the partner or within the partner itself degrade to the point where modernizations in the original host nation are not possible.

You might also run into interoperability concerns as well if foreign systems are too exotic or divorced from NATO standard, albeit this depends on exactly which export partner you decide to go with and to what degree you specify integration with allies. If we get into a conflict (large, small, shooting war or economical slapfight), having key systems and weaponry being able to be supplied by our generally very closely allied land neighbor is a big boon. The Americans take their submarine development and operations very seriously, they shouldn't be orphaning systems and will always have some variant or modernization available for Canada.

It is all a tradeoff, I lean more towards American weapons, combat management systems and sensors if possible but I am aware that is inviting the potential for complications depending on the export partner at hand.

 

[Furniture]

MOTS isn't an automatically good or bad choice, it is a conscious tradeoff like anything else. Canadian submariners are used to dealing with American systems and weapons at this point, there is a very substantial advantage in supply chains and interoperability if we can put American systems into the submarines we purchase. As states though, this will complicate the design, increase costs and effort to integrate the required components. On the flip side, going completely MOTS can result in some egregious supply chains stretching across entire oceans where you have the potential for foreign nations to have subpar equipment or political/economical relations with the partner or within the partner itself degrade to the point where modernizations in the original host nation are not possible.

You might also run into interoperability concerns as well if foreign systems are too exotic or divorced from NATO standard, albeit this depends on exactly which export partner you decide to go with and to what degree you specify integration with allies. If we get into a conflict (large, small, shooting war or economical slapfight), having key systems and weaponry being able to be supplied by our generally very closely allied land neighbor is a big boon. The Americans take their submarine development and operations very seriously, they shouldn't be orphaning systems and will always have some variant or modernization available for Canada.

It is all a tradeoff, I lean more towards American weapons, combat management systems and sensors if possible but I am aware that is inviting the potential for complications depending on the export partner at hand.

If we went with Korean kit I doubt we'd have too many supply chain issues, flying stuff from Korea or Florida isn't all that different when you're in Esquimalt.

Japan and Korea already work closely with the US, so I doubt their kit would have many interoperability problems. At the very least their kit would have no more issues than any other country's kit.

Lastly, I highly doubt relations with Korea will deteriorate to the point we can't work with them... They have been on our side since the 1940s.

 

[GR66]

If we went with Korean kit I doubt we'd have too many supply chain issues, flying stuff from Korea or Florida isn't all that different when you're in Esquimalt.

Japan and Korea already work closely with the US, so I doubt their kit would have many interoperability problems. At the very least their kit would have no more issues than any other country's kit.

Lastly, I highly doubt relations with Korea will deteriorate to the point we can't work with them... They have been on our side since the 1940s.

Flying stuff from Korea in the middle of a conflict with China however might be somewhat problematic compared to flying it from Florida.

 

[YZT580]

If we went with Korean kit I doubt we'd have too many supply chain issues, flying stuff from Korea or Florida isn't all that different when you're in Esquimalt.

Japan and Korea already work closely with the US, so I doubt their kit would have many interoperability problems. At the very least their kit would have no more issues than any other country's kit.

Lastly, I highly doubt relations with Korea will deteriorate to the point we can't work with them... They have been on our side since the 1940s.

what about ceiling height

 

[Furniture]

Flying stuff from Korea in the middle of a conflict with China however might be somewhat problematic compared to flying it from Florida.

If we are at war with China, we can likely just repair and rearm in Korea...

Easier than flying stuff from Florida to Busan too.

 

[GR66]

If we are at war with China, we can likely just repair and rearm in Korea...

Easier than flying stuff from Florida to Busan too.

Busan might be a little "hot" if there is a major war with China. I'm thinking Pearl Harbour or Perth might be more likely...and both of those will already be servicing subs with American gear.

 

[suffolkowner]

making a list of the submarines again. Not sure how easy the systems integration would be if you go to whoever and say I like your sub but can we swap out this for that etc..

	U212CD	Scorpene	A26	S80	Taigei	KSSIII
Displacement	2500	1900		3200	3000	3600
Length	73	70.62	66.1	81.05	84	89
Beam	10	6.2	6.75	11.68	9.1	9.6
Draught	7	5.8	6	7.3	10.4	7.62
Complement		31	26	32	70	50
Range		12000		8000	12000	19000
endurance		71	45	55		20 submerged
Engines	MTU 4000	MTU			kawasaki	MTU
AIP type	hydrogen fuel cell	ethanol	stirling	ethanol		PEM fuel cell
AIP manufacturer			Saab
batteries	Li-ion				Li-ion	Li-ion
combat system	Atlas/Kongsberg	Naval		Navantia		Hanwha
optronics	Hensoldt					Safran
sonar	Kongsberg	Thales				thales
torpedo	Atlas DM2A4	Leonardo		Atlas DM2A4	type 18	LiG

they all have their own in house national defence contractors as thats kinda the point

 

[Furniture]

Busan might be a little "hot" if there is a major war with China. I'm thinking Pearl Harbour or Perth might be more likely...and both of those will already be servicing subs with American gear.

And Japanese, Korean, British, French, etc... We won't be going into a war with China alongside just the US.

I get that American kit makes people feel warm and fuzzy because it's familiar, but if we can get comparable kit elsewhere for less time/money, it's worth exploring.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Netherlands wants their next subs to be able to launch Tomahawk.

'Niche capability': Netherlands to assess 3 offers for 4 new submarines - Breaking Defense

Amsterdam plans on acquiring four diesel-electric submarines equipped with US Tomahawk long range missiles to provide a “niche capability within NATO and the EU,” a spokesperson for Netherlands State Secretary of Defense Van der Maat, told Breaking Defense in a statement.

breakingdefense.com

Yet another example of the increasing importance of increasing range and supplying that range independently of Air Forces.

A CF18 has a combat radius of 537 km and requires a mile of hard runway while exposing a pilot to enemy fire.
A Tomahawk has a combat radius of some 1500 km (plus or minus) and can be launched from a sub, a ship or a truck in a field and exposes no one to enemy fire.
A PrSM with similar operating requirements has a combat radius of over 500 km and the GMRLS-ER and GLSDB both have combat radii of 150 km.
And the missiles don't need a recovery plan.