- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
There are female submariners...
Canada’s clunker subs should be sold as scrap
- Thread starter Sub_Guy
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
To the guy who said we don't need subs I would ask...why do the Chinese think that submarines are important??
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061113-121539-3317r.htm
China sub stalked U.S. fleet
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 13, 2006
A Chinese submarine stalked a U.S. aircraft carrier battle group in the Pacific last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times has learned.
The surprise encounter highlights China's continuing efforts to prepare for a future conflict with the U.S., despite Pentagon efforts to try to boost relations with Beijing's communist-ruled military.
The submarine encounter with the USS Kitty Hawk and its accompanying warships also is an embarrassment to the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, Adm. William J. Fallon, who is engaged in an ambitious military exchange program with China aimed at improving relations between the two nations' militaries.
Disclosure of the incident comes as Adm. Gary Roughead, commander of the U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet, is making his first visit to China. The four-star admiral was scheduled to meet senior Chinese military leaders during the weeklong visit, which began over the weekend.
(click on the link if you want more)
According to our submariners the Victoria is extremely quiet and is capable of doing roughly the same thing i.e. surprising the enemy by remaining undetected until it is too late (for them).
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061113-121539-3317r.htm
China sub stalked U.S. fleet
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 13, 2006
A Chinese submarine stalked a U.S. aircraft carrier battle group in the Pacific last month and surfaced within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles before being detected, The Washington Times has learned.
The surprise encounter highlights China's continuing efforts to prepare for a future conflict with the U.S., despite Pentagon efforts to try to boost relations with Beijing's communist-ruled military.
The submarine encounter with the USS Kitty Hawk and its accompanying warships also is an embarrassment to the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, Adm. William J. Fallon, who is engaged in an ambitious military exchange program with China aimed at improving relations between the two nations' militaries.
Disclosure of the incident comes as Adm. Gary Roughead, commander of the U.S. Navy's Pacific Fleet, is making his first visit to China. The four-star admiral was scheduled to meet senior Chinese military leaders during the weeklong visit, which began over the weekend.
(click on the link if you want more)
According to our submariners the Victoria is extremely quiet and is capable of doing roughly the same thing i.e. surprising the enemy by remaining undetected until it is too late (for them).
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
It should also be the answer to those who wish to degrade the ASW capability of our surface fleet by placing all our eggs into the BHS option. We have to keep doing the ASW thingie (something Canada has done very well since the Battle of the Atlantic) 
because potential enemies have subs.
because potential enemies have subs.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
IN HOC SIGNO said:It should also be the answer to those who wish to degrade the ASW capability of our surface fleet by placing all our eggs into the BHS option. We have to keep doing the ASW thingie (something Canada has done very well since the Battle of the Atlantic)
Unfortunately IHS, that does not seem to matter to some people....well those that tend not to really consider what they are posting.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Ex-Dragoon said:
It's just so one dimensional when the arguments to scrap subs and ASW are trotted out.
A
aesop081
Guest
IN HOC SIGNO said:
Let me tell you something about Awefully Slow Warfare.......
no, wait. I keep hearing its dead :
- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 530
Okay, I need clarification.
I was told the 'Canadianization' of the submarines included some fairly expensive retrofitting of facilities to accommodate ladies.
Was that incorrect?
Matthew. ???
I was told the 'Canadianization' of the submarines included some fairly expensive retrofitting of facilities to accommodate ladies.
Was that incorrect?
Matthew. ???
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Cdn Blackshirt said:
Nothing hard about having both genders use the heads......
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Ex-Dragoon said:
Oh you mean those bidets that we had installed??? ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 260
On a side note the people I've talked too at FMF and the control shop are saying they are spending much less time on the Subs. We've had two operational (functional) and sailing now for some time. Maybe the media should take some time to point that out. A navy no matter what will be a cash hog. If your not willing to field a complete team than grab you bat and balls and go home.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
Cdn Blackshirt said:
We all share the same facilities on the sub. Up in the WSC where the sputs/trainees ride, the racks are 3 across, and yes the female rode up there too! There was nothing in Canadization geared towards accommodating ladies, they don't really get any special treatment, if you want privacy stay on the surface!!
Canadianization from my simpleton point of view included installing Canadian Comms Equipment (rebuild of radio), Ditching the kipper electrical outlets, and installing a milk machine! OH and the installation of one sweet ass XBOX network!
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Thank you Dolphin for the clarification
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
It should also be pointed out that the figures to have the boats refitted and maintained do not take into account that when operational our submarines are the most cost effective unit the navy can deploy. Just ask any of the bean counters how much it costs in fuel alone to keep a frigate at sea (especially when conducting ops that require the GTs being flashed up) as opposed to a diesel boat chugging along on battery power. I realize that there are many roles that surface ships fill that subs aren't capable of...but there are a great many that the sub can do as well, and for more bang for the buck. As for the comments that the boats are "decrepit", by both the author of this article and some forum members - perhaps they could forward their opinion to the commanding officers of some of the international units and task groups that we successfully engaged this past year. They may beg to differ. Cheers :skull:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
In agreeing with Geo on your post Seadog, well done. Also was there not mention on this site and in the press of the capabilities of these submarines in shallow water combined operations in a low intensity conflict. A facet some of the posters have overlooked. Additionally, have some not of our own commented on this ability when trying to find them and there uniqueness in their ability to be the 'silent service'.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
An excellent point, 3rd Herd. In fact these submarines are a force multiplier on many levels, but are especially unique when operating in littoral waters with joint support. In an age where everyone with a leaf on their shoulder seems to be screaming out for the necessity of joint operations, the concept of a well maintained and servicable submarine fleet seems even more of a "must have". It's no secret (watch some recent CBC docs or even open the odd copy of Maple Leaf) that we have been developing close ties with such organizations as the Pathfinders to bring this unique capability to the table. That being said, are we operating a cutting edge submarine fleet? No we are not, I have seen that first hand. But neither do we have cutting edge tanks or aircraft...but you don't see anyone screaming to simply scrap the armour corps or our fighter wings with no solid replacement plan in sight. In my humble opinion, to scrap the Vic class at this point would mean not only losing a valued asset...but would probably result in the loss of the knowledge and skill-sets needed to take submarines to sea. And that, my friends, is a problem no cheque book or shiny new boat can solve two years down the road. Remember, ladies and gentlemen, its not just about equipment. It's about having experienced and capable people who are able to operate said pieces of kit.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
+1 Seadog and 3rd Herd, nice to see others share what I have been trying to say about the utility of submarines since the topic came up.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Interesting quote:
"There is, perhaps, a danger in seeing the Victoria-class in terms of the analogy of the dog which finally catches it own tail: “Now that I have it, what do I do with it?” "Those who are inclined to think along those lines simply do not understand the emerging role of the submarine in both contemporary and future naval strategic thinking."
Source:
Haydon, Peter T. 'CANADA’S FUTURE SUBMARINE CAPABILITY'
Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Foreign Policy Studies
Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
http://www.navyleague.ca/eng/ma/papers/Future_Submarine_Capability.pdf
"There is, perhaps, a danger in seeing the Victoria-class in terms of the analogy of the dog which finally catches it own tail: “Now that I have it, what do I do with it?” "Those who are inclined to think along those lines simply do not understand the emerging role of the submarine in both contemporary and future naval strategic thinking."
Source:
Haydon, Peter T. 'CANADA’S FUTURE SUBMARINE CAPABILITY'
Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Foreign Policy Studies
Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
http://www.navyleague.ca/eng/ma/papers/Future_Submarine_Capability.pdf
Similar threads
