Status on Victoria-class Submarines?

[Lex Parsimoniae]

I thought you said you were at the main SCLE briefings? Interesting....

I did and I was.

FYI, there were a number of briefings held for the JR's and SR's, especially when the release rate started to approach 50% of MOG 5(UW) JR's. The one I mentioned was in the Roger with a couple of GTO's and the SCLE PM.

There was never anything close to a 50% release rate in the Canadian submarine service, ever.  I suppose if a TA team lost a NET, and there only be 2 on the team, then you could claim a 50% attrition rate.  Lies, damn lies, and statistics I guess.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

I did and I was.

You also said "There were only crew briefings - not briefings by rank level.  The crew of a VCS is only 48 - why would you split it up for briefings anyways?"

If you were at the SCLE briefings you'd know that the entire submarine community was there, not just people assigned for crew at that time.

As it happened, there were other briefings as well, given to the SR's and JR's on "why we shouldn't slap in". That wasn't actually the title, but it was why they were giving the briefings.

There was never anything close to a 50% release rate in the Canadian submarine service, ever.

Right. That's why there are still more than 50% of the original Oberon crews in the service. Even though they're pushing 70 now.

Or maybe, just maybe, the actual release rate of the submarine service and every other service over time is 100%. 

At the time, the release rate was very high and looked to increase. We were told it was approaching 50% of qualified JR's. It was a concern to the people staying in because of the rather significant drop in training standards to train their replacements.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm sure you guys have better things to discuss, other than who was where at what time. Get past it and move on.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[KJK]

DID is reporting a Canadian request for 36 kits to convert Mk 48 Mod 4 heavy torpedos to Mod 7 Advanced Technology units. I knew these torpedos were expensive but $125 million for 36 kits plus spare parts!!!! OMG!

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/sub-support-contract-creating-canadian-controversy-04563/

KJK

 

[Sub Standard]

DID is reporting a Canadian request for 36 kits to convert Mk 48 Mod 4 heavy torpedoes to Mod 7 Advanced Technology units. I knew these torpedo's were expensive but $125 million for 36 kits plus spare parts!!!! OMG!

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/sub-support-contract-creating-canadian-controversy-04563/

KJK

It might seem expensive but it replaces pretty much all the insides of the torpedo (sensors, guidance fuel tanks signal processing) giving use pretty much a whole new torpedo with a massive jump in capabilities.

 

[Acer Syrup]

So do we get a return deposit on the MOD 4 conponents? Or can we sell them to some other navy?  ;D

So at $3.5 million a pop (or should I say the fact that we will only have 36 for awhile)... Do the subs have some sort of a training dummy to practice with?

 

[KJK]

I would think the Mod 4 parts are so old they belong in a museum.

KJK

 

[GAP]

Navy to upgrade torpedoes for troubled subs
CBC News Posted: Apr 8, 2011
Article Link

Canada's navy plans to spend about $120 million to upgrade 36 torpedoes, but they still won't work in its four submarines without further refits, CBC News has learned.

The navy has MK-48 American torpedoes in stock, but the four British-built submarines aren't capable of firing them.

Even after the weapons are converted, Canada would still have to spend millions more to refit the submarines to fire them.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay confirmed the plans on Friday but said no decision had been made about the procurement.

"Of course I know about it," MacKay said during a campaign stop with Conservative MP Gerald Keddy in Bridgewater, N.S.

"There's absolutely no decision taken at this point. The Department of National Defence is continuously looking at different procurements whether it be munitions, whether it be new equipment."
U.S. disclosed purchase

Canada's plan to upgrade the torpedoes was revealed by the U.S. Defence Security Co-operation Agency, which oversees arms sales to foreign countries. The agency said the equipment, parts, training and support would cost more than $120 million Cdn. It notified the U.S. Congress about the sale in mid-March.

Since Canada already has the torpedoes, it will have "no difficulty absorbing these additional conversion kits," the agency said in a new release.

Canadian Defence Department officials have yet to respond to questions from CBC News.
More on link

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I don't know why CBC is reporting old news because this was mentioned when we first bought the subs. When they were still Upholder class they fired Sub-Harpoon and Spearfish torpedoes and were incapable of firing MK48s. Now that the Navy is getting around to start to rectify that it becomes a big scandal again. Well done News Media!

 

[ModlrMike]

I don't know why CBC is reporting old news...

Because this quote is in the sidebar:

  'I’m not surprised for a minute that they once again tried to hide and deny another misspending adventure'—Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc

Anything the CBC can do to make the Conservatives look bad. They don't even point out that it was the Liberals that bought the boats in the first place.

 

[yoman]

HMCS Victoria ready for action again

By Katie DeRosa, Times Colonist April 22, 2011

After years of expensive refits and repairs to make it seaworthy, the Canadian Navy submarine stationed at CFB Esquimalt is out of the dry dock and in the water.

HMCS Victoria was pulled out of drydock and into Esquimalt Harbour on Sunday, navy spokeswoman Lt-Cmdr. Nathalie Garcia confirmed.

However, neither the Navy nor the Department of National Defence would comment Thursday on the plans for the submarine now that it is operational. Garcia said an official launch for the submarine will take place in the coming weeks, but did not have a specific date.

The navy's only other functional submarine is HMCS Corner Brook, set to arrive at CFB Esquimalt from CFB Halifax this summer.

The four second-hand submarines have been a lightning rod of controversy since the Canadian government purchased them from Britain for $891 million in 1998. The British Royal Navy launched the dieselpowered submarines in the late 1980s and took them out of service in 1994.

Since it was delivered in 2000, HMCS Victoria has spent most of its time in Canada in drydock undergoing $195 million in repairs.

Since arriving at CFB Esquimalt in 2003, there have been a series of launch dates for HMCS Victoria, which were ultimately delayed because of technical setbacks.

HMCS Victoria sailed for a few months in 2004 but was pulled from service after a fire on HMCS Chicoutimi, one of the four subs, killed a

crewman on its voyage from Britain. Chicoutimi, also housed at CFB Esquimalt, is not expected to sail again until 2012.

In the last 10 years, HMCS Victoria has spent more months undergoing repairs than days at sea - it has spent 115 days in service and 120 months in dry dock - with taxpayers picking up the hefty bill.

In 2007, the Victoria Shipyards and its partner companies were awarded a five-year, $370 million contract to maintain the Canadian military's four submarines, but the total contract could be worth $1.5 billion if extended over 15 years.

In an interview last May, the boat's commanding officer, Lt-Cmdr. Christopher Ellis, said HMCS Victoria was slated to sail February 2011. Because it has not been to sea for five years, Ellis said at the time that HMCS Victoria would spend its first eight to nine months at sea in safety trials and crew preparation.

Ellis said in May that HMCS Victoria was set to be the first Upholder-class submarine to fire a MK-48 torpedo.

Those torpedoes, the sole weapon aboard the boats, were recently the source of political backlash from Liberal MPs after news leaked that the Canadian government was considering spending $125 million on torpedo refit kits from the U.S. None of the Britishbuilt submarines are capable of firing the navy's stock of MK 48 torpedoes.

HMCS Victoria is also slated to take part in the international Rim of the Pacific exercise which takes place every two years off Hawaii.

kderosa@timescolonist.com
© Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist

Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/HMCS+Victoria+ready+action+again/4660301/story.html#ixzz1KOwakVPA

Nice to see her back in the water after all this time.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

and armed as well, guess that was the reason for the MERX bid on the Mk 48 upgrades.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The four second-hand submarines have been a lightning rod of controversy since the Canadian government purchased them from Britain for $891 million in 1998. The British Royal Navy launched the dieselpowered submarines in the late 1980s and took them out of service in 1994.

Let's lay the blame where it belongs, at the feet of the Liebrals.

Those torpedoes, the sole weapon aboard the boats, were recently the source of political backlash from Liberal MPs after news leaked that the Canadian government was considering spending $125 million on torpedo refit kits from the U.S. None of the Britishbuilt submarines are capable of firing the navy's stock of MK 48 torpedoes.

Trying to make hay from the fact that the Liebrals didn't do their due diligence when THEY made the purchase and, typically, they are trying to blame someone else for their own incompetence.


Of course we can't expect the liebral friendly and biased media to take the 'natural governing party' to task during an election, especially if they cam make it look like the 'Canadian government' look like the Tories.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Cmon, open up tell us how you really feel about the Liebrals.....

 

[Neill McKay]

Of course we can't expect the liebral friendly and biased media to take the 'natural governing party' to task during an election, especially if they cam make it look like the 'Canadian government' look like the Tories.

I thought the article was pretty neutral.  You almost seem to be suggesting that it wasn't biased enough in the other direction since it didn't go out of its way to point out who was in power when the submarines were procurred.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I thought the article was pretty neutral.  You almost seem to be suggesting that it wasn't biased enough in the other direction since it didn't go out of its way to point out who was in power when the submarines were procurred.

Yes but when the Liberals first got the subs and it was made known that they would be Canadianized which included removal of the Spearfish and SubHarpoon for the MK48s, then they have the gall to have a backlash against the Conservatives for updating the weapons the Liberals basically forced them to continue using. Recceguys points seem cut and dry to me. So to paraphrase:
1) Oberon class gets scrapped
2) Upholder class gets picked and after a long period of political dithering the Upholders now Victorias come home.
3) For whatever reason the British weapon systems are removed and the Oberon class systems are fitted into Victoria class
4) Mk48s have been in storage for x years need to be updated and the Liberals scream blue murder.
Get the point?

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

For whatever reason the British weapon systems are removed and the Oberon class systems are fitted into Victoria class

Word at the time was that the government didn't want to buy Spearfish and a new EW system. They would have run to ~$500 million or so.

 

[cameron]

Here's my first question, Canada bought these boats in 1998, it's now2011, thirteen years later and HMCS Victoria is just becoming operatational.  When all four boats are fully operational how much more years of service can we expect from them.  Second, at this point won't it make more sense, fiscally and otherwise, to scrap the Victorias and buy new boats, such as the French Scorpene Class or perhaps better yet, the Swedish Gotland Class?

I know that scrapping the Victorias would be politically sensitive, but should any more money be spent on them?  With the Arctic Ocean becoming more accessible Canada desperately needs subs to protect its sovereignty in the Arctic, and I look forward to the day when I can hear of Canadian subs taking part in operations worldwide just as our frigates and destroyers do.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

and I look forward to the day when I can hear of Canadian subs taking part in operations worldwide just as our frigates and destroyers do.

Sub deployments are OPSEC so the chances of you of hearing about anything like that are pretty low.

won't it make more sense, fiscally and otherwise, to scrap the Victorias and buy new boats, such as the French Scorpene Class or perhaps better yet, the Swedish Gotland Class?

Considering how long its taking to choose a new AOR and get Naval helicopters in service what do you think the answer will be?

 

[Pat in Halifax]

BTW-Submarines can be extremely valuable in the Arctic environment. (O boat guys here can attest to but, then, that is OPSEC) Ask this question again 18 months from now-Let's see where we are then.
Submarines (my opinion only!) will be our first AOPs in theory.