Replacing the Subs

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Wiki claims the 212 can stay submerged for 21 days and cover 1600NM. The real specs are surely not on Wiki so it is likely longer.

Do the math, Dana. 1600 NM in 21 days means traveling at 3 Kts - that is basically just a little better than 5 Km/h. I've been known to walk faster than that when I am in a hurry. And that is the real problem with AIP: they don't have any more "high power" than classic Diesel Electric boats when underwater. As soon as they go over 4 Kts, they start to draw from the batteries and if they do speed runs, draw the batteries down just like a diesel boat and just as fast, after which time they must do a couple of days (at least) at around 2 Kts just to rechage the batteries fully.

So, advantage of AIP over Diesel: they don't have to near-surface (snorkeling depth) to recharge and can recharge noiselessly. Disadvantage: they take a lot longer than diesel boats to recharge their batteries and be ready for the next set of high tempo ops.

Either way, Diesel and AIP boats are submarines made for the tactics of loitering at very slow speed near choke points, then pouncing on their prey. They both have no chance against a nuke in wide open waters.

 

[Dana381]

Ice Strengthening to work under Multi Year pack ice is an entirely new hull design and not the 212. Your 1b boat is now a completely different vessel, and needs to be build from scratch.
I suspect the Virginia’s would be the cheaper option to those.

Why multi year ice, strengthen it enough to be able to transit under moderate ice and limit your under ice maneuvers. If the ice is melting at the rate the tree huggers tell us it is it shouldn't be an issue. With shipping increasing the ice gets broken up often so it should be able to surface.

Do the math, Dana. 1600 NM in 21 days means traveling at 3 Kts - that is basically just a little better than 5 Km/h. I've been known to walk faster than that when I am in a hurry. And that is the real problem with AIP: they don't have any more "high power" than classic Diesel Electric boats when underwater. As soon as they go over 4 Kts, they start to draw from the batteries and if they do speed runs, draw the batteries down just like a diesel boat and just as fast, after which time they must do a couple of days (at least) at around 2 Kts just to rechage the batteries fully.

So, advantage of AIP over Diesel: they don't have to near-surface (snorkeling depth) to recharge and can recharge noiselessly. Disadvantage: they take a lot longer than diesel boats to recharge their batteries and be ready for the next set of high tempo ops.

Either way, Diesel and AIP boats are submarines made for the tactics of loitering at very slow speed near choke points, then pouncing on their prey. They both have no chance against a nuke in wide open waters.

And just how often will we need to perform those operations? I'm asking genuinely. I would think if we got 4 nuke boats that one would be on operations at a time, maybe one per coast. The others in maintenance or heading into or out of maintenance. The boat on duty would be in training with allies or on our own and spend all it's time in our coastal waters or at war games. It would likely be 10 years or more before anyone got the guts/permission to take our most expensive piece of kit under multi year Arctic ice.

60 bcad could buy 12 AIP subs that would have appx the same crew needs as the four nukes and have many more boats on duty at a time patrolling the 98% of the world that isn't under multi year ice.

 

[Underway]

Not sure I agree 100%. A DE is defeated with simple hold down tactics. It’s a pretty significant weak point.

A nuc is always in a sensor profile; the same can’t be said about diesel boats.

You're not wrong. I'm just looking at strategic and you're looking at tactical.

A DE can't be defeated with simple hold down tactics when its under friendly air cover or contested air space, which in the majority of the example concept of operations locations would be. From my understanding flying MPA's in contested airspace is pretty risky.

You mention we don’t do that mission “in passing” like it’s no big deal. We don’t do it because we are a militarily cheap nation. That is actually a fairly big deal that we can’t add to that fight.

It isn't a mission set we do for various reasons. Cost is one thing. Even if we spent our full 2% of GDP on the military we still wouldn't do that mission. Because only two countries in the world do that mission. UK and US.

 

[KevinB]

You're not wrong. I'm just looking at strategic and you're looking at tactical.

A DE can't be defeated with simple hold down tactics when its under friendly air cover or contested air space, which in the majority of the example concept of operations locations would be. From my understanding flying MPA's in contested airspace is pretty risky.


It isn't a mission set we do for various reasons. Cost is one thing. Even if we spent our full 2% of GDP on the military we still wouldn't do that mission. Because only two countries in the world do that mission. UK and US.

Honestly all that points to me is Canada is better off without subs.
Put a bunch of passive sensors around the shoreline and patrol with MPA etc.

 

[childs56]

Canada should become a leading Diesel Boat expert. They did some amazing things with the O Boats and provided valuable intel. We can do more with better tech.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Holding down a sub for 21 days must be extremely expensive and by that time surface assets could likely break up the hold down?

21 days between snorts?

At less than 1 bcad each for the 212's and appx 5 bcad for a Virginia Could we not get much more bang for our buck buying three times as many 212's and use the infra savings to pump up recruiting? Having a solid patrol of our waters on both coasts with a proper size sub force would be better in my mind than having maybe 1 nuc boat operational at any given time. 60 bcad can buy a lot of AIP subs even if you count most of it for life cycle costs. Maybe, just maybe the navy is getting serious about our sub force.

This debate reminds me of the Sherman vs Tiger fight in WW2. Many cheaper units won over a few expensive units.

If fish are in the water, I’d want to be in the Tiger sub. Mounted warfare and submarine warfare are significantly different beasts.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

You're not wrong. I'm just looking at strategic and you're looking at tactical.

I guess I see it as failing at the latter results in failing at the former.

A DE can't be defeated with simple hold down tactics when its under friendly air cover or contested air space, which in the majority of the example concept of operations locations would be. From my understanding flying MPA's in contested airspace is pretty risky.

The true strength in sub ops is that they don’t have to or routinely only operate in/under a Fdly sfc or air “dome” though. They can freelance.

They are “anywhere/everywhere” until they become a datum.

It isn't a mission set we do for various reasons. Cost is one thing. Even if we spent our full 2% of GDP on the military we still wouldn't do that mission. Because only two countries in the world do that mission. UK and US.

France?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I have personally put nuke boats into “non-sensor“ mode on at least a couple of occasions…

But their bathy is always up to date. I’m thinking “placement in the column re: the layer” vice short term flow noise degradation.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

But their bathy is always up to date. I’m thinking “placement in the column re: the layer” vice short term flow noise degradation.

Meh- you would be surprised.

I am not some super ASW guru- I’ve been seriously undressed by a couple of boats. By the same token, I made a monkey out at least two boats, that I had no business beating in a Sea King…

 

[dimsum]

By the same token, I made a monkey out at least two boats, that I had no business beating in a Sea King…

Even sub skippers have bad days

 

[Lumber]

Can you guys elaborate what you mean by "in a sensor profile" and "non-sensor" mode? I just got finished teaching asw tactics and I have no idea what you're talking about. Sigh.

 

[dimsum]

Can you guys elaborate what you mean by "in a sensor profile" and "non-sensor" mode? I just got finished teaching asw tactics and I have no idea what you're talking about. Sigh.

in before OPSEC

Kidding. Carry on.

 

[KevinB]

Can you guys elaborate what you mean by "in a sensor profile" and "non-sensor" mode? I just got finished teaching asw tactics and I have no idea what you're talking about. Sigh.

All I know about ASW I got from Tom Clancy.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Can you guys elaborate what you mean by "in a sensor profile" and "non-sensor" mode? I just got finished teaching asw tactics and I have no idea what you're talking about. Sigh.

Ya it’s a bit of a “veiled speech” thing I guess. I consciously stray from “official terms/lingo” out of fear of crossing a line.

To me, in a sensor profile is “PCS and depth of the skippers choosing”. Snorting is a necessity, and the sub is vulnerable. This is why I said hold down will take that sub out of the game easily (it can and has).

When SKT said “non-sensor mode”, my read on that was “Dipper/Dip Gang with hot contact close and a nuc that was digging holes and maneuvering to escape the datum/TSR. “Sub goes faster, makes more noise, it’s own sensor performance degrades” stuff.

For anyone interested, here’s an intro to “how water affects ASW 101”. Sonar Propagation

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Meh- you would be surprised.

I am not some super ASW guru- I’ve been seriously undressed by a couple of boats. By the same token, I made a monkey out at least two boats, that I had no business beating in a Sea King…

Luck is a 2 sided coin

I should know more about MH ASW from exercises but as I’ve said before, we aren’t overly strong at exercising our own forces concurrently even though we are all relatively close on either coast. I’ve done coop with Cdn MH before; once - in the Med on MANTA ‘17. I wish we’d do better…I have significantly more time working with Allied MH and skimmers than our own.

 

[suffolkowner]

If we were a serious country we would be looking at nuclear subs the wide expanse of the Atlantic and Pacific on our doorsteps would indicate the need for power, speed and endurance. But we are not. So I will be ecstatic if we manage to procure 6 SSK's whether they are 212CD or A26 or some other possibility

Regarding arctic sea ice. There is very little multi year ice left up there

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2023/04/age_figure.png

 

[GR66]

Luck is a 2 sided coin

I should know more about MH ASW from exercises but as I’ve said before, we aren’t overly strong at exercising our own forces concurrently even though we are all relatively close on either coast. I’ve done coop with Cdn MH before; once - in the Med on MANTA ‘17. I wish we’d do better…I have significantly more time working with Allied MH and skimmers than our own.

This is absolutely insane and yet another example of how un-serious we are about defence as a nation. And you can't lay this one at the feet of the GOC...this type of thing is 100% a CAF own goal.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Before the outrage bus gets too revved up- the west coast sqns routinely exercise together.

Part of the issue is that the Cyclone and the Aurora don’t naturally team as well as the Sea King/Aurora did.

There are also multiple targetry limitations.

Finally, the MH fleet has been finding its feet after a long decade of conversion. The CP140 fleet has been airframe constrainted by the block upgrade strategy.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

We could definitely do better. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen ever, but we don’t maximize trg potential.

I’d love to see $$ spent on linking of simulation assets. Back in ‘95 or so, I was at the Mounted Warfare Sim Center in Ft Knox (it was the US Army COE for Armor trg back then). We were doing 60 Tp (Regt Recce) in Bradley sims for a tank sqn that were in Abrams sim and were linked to an Apache flight in their sims…and the Apache crews were in Germany IIRC and SAT-linked. Amazing what they were doing back then.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Before the outrage bus gets too revved up- the west coast sqns routinely exercise together.

Part of the issue is that the Cyclone and the Aurora don’t naturally team as well as the Sea King/Aurora did.

There are also multiple targetry limitations.

Finally, the MH fleet has been finding its feet after a long decade of conversion. The CP140 fleet has been airframe constrainted by the block upgrade strategy.

The east coast has the added pressures on aircraft requirements with operational and training sqns co-located. FG tends to default Pri 1 a majority of the time.

Several sig contributors, but the end result is what it is. I’d love to see some funding towards sim capability improvements.