Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP, Victoria-class replacement)

[Apophenia]

A German (and Norwegian) submarine is perfectly suited for Arctic environments, because it will operate there...

Indeed they do. And that is certainly a distinction from the Koreans.

But coastal Norwegian waters remain largely icefree due to the North Atlantic Drift (although, granted, Svalbard benefits less from that tail end of the Gulf Stream). The key difference is that, in season, Canadian subs will be in the ice from the time they enter Amundsen Gulf or Lancaster Sound.

 

[warspite]

Just saw this: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...n&cvid=020eda7a95f8419aec01794854286aee&ei=15

 

[Scott Kenny]

A German (and Norwegian) submarine is perfectly suited for Arctic environments, because it will operate there. Unlike the Koreans, Germans and Norwegian designers have plenty of experience with cold water operations and the pitfalls that come with them. Probably only the Russians and Swedes have a more comprehensive grasp on this matter.

Now look at where Halifax is compared to the edge of the ice, compared to where the German and Norwegian sub bases are.

That's a good 1500nmi, just to get to where they start to patrol from Goose Bay. Basically 6-8 days travel one way. Refuel in Goose Bay, and then out for the actual patrol. On the way back, refuel in Goose Bay and come home to Halifax.

Just saw this: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...n&cvid=020eda7a95f8419aec01794854286aee&ei=15

So, the local production offer apparently won the day. Too bad for the Koreans, I would have liked to see one of their boats.

If sovereignty assurance through deterrence is a primary Arctic mission, it makes most sense to secure both west and east approaches to the Northwest Passage. Put another way, Canada does not have one "Arctic zone".

There's not really a closer/better place to base the subs on the Pacific side, though. Alaska is completely in the way, running way down the West Coast and then out the Aleutian islands.

That's why I was saying the Arctic flotilla would be based in Halifax. There's actually access to the Arctic that way, and functionally no access without US permission in the Pacific.

My reference was to type-specific familiarisation not baseline training.

At least in the USN, that's handled on the ship proper. You have basic sub school and then you're sent to your rating school**, then to your actual ship. Training units tend to be somewhat generic. The ship control simulator in Groton is based on 688s, the ship control simulator in Bangor is based on an Ohio. The Firefighting trainers are based on 688s, the flooding wet trainer is based on an old 640-class main seawater bay.

** Usually. Supply, Cooks, and Admin get their rating school before sub school, technical types have to pass sub school first. The radars/sonars/etc used on subs and surface ships are different, but the systems used on each class of sub are also different.

===================
Then again, now that the purchase decision has been made, they can make all the trainers specifically for the Type 212 and they'll last for a generation of ships or more.

 

[Ozair]

So, the local production offer apparently won the day. Too bad for the Koreans, I would have liked to see one of their boats.

I don't see local production anywhere, I do see Canadian industry participation. Am I missing something?

 

[GK. Dundas]

We were/ are going to purchase tomahawks from the US. Problem is they no longer manufacture the tube launched variant.
I still thinK range and the VLS system on the KS III made it a world beater.

 

[Apophenia]

So, the local production offer apparently won the day.

Maybe. Although building "Canadian industrial capacity" can mean many things - not necessarily having local production under the NSS.

... Too bad for the Koreans, I would have liked to see one of their boats.

Moi aussi. Oh well, at least a procurement decision has been made.

... functionally no access without US permission in the Pacific.

True. But once FONOPs nation denies us access through international waters, we've got bigger issues to deal with.

That's why I was saying the Arctic flotilla would be based in Halifax.

And so, it seems, it will. With the Type 212CD decided upon, it will make most sense to refocus on Halifax while reducing our future submarine presence at Esquimalt.

 

[Scott Kenny]

And so, it seems, it will. With the Type 212CD decided upon, it will make most sense to refocus on Halifax while reducing our future submarine presence at Esquimalt.

With a dozen subs in the fleet, you could have 4 based at Esquimalt and the other 8 based in Halifax (4 for the Arctic, 4 for the Atlantic).

 

[helmutkohl]

so the Australian frigate selection has been made, and now the Canadian submarine, what else is currently ongoing? the NZ and Saudi ones?

 

[TomS]

so the Australian frigate selection has been made, and now the Canadian submarine, what else is currently ongoing? the NZ and Saudi ones?

Denmark and Thailand frigate programs.

Probably quite a lot more that I'm forgetting.

 

[EmoBirb]

I still thinK range and the VLS system on the KS III made it a world beater.

The thing is, if range and VLS would have been a priority, then Canada would have bought into AUKUS-SSN. Because KSS III still carries the drawbacks of an SSK but with the added cost (remember you have to fill these tubes) of the VLS. The Type 212CD is the financially more sound choice and the one motivated by industrial and economic concerns. It's also to be argued what use Canada has for an SSK with land attack missiles. For the ROK it's to balance against the DPRK artillery and missile forces, doubtful Canada would entertain illusions of launching missiles at Russian Naval Bases from a Diesel sub. In the wider North Atlantic context, to which Canada belongs, the Type 212CD is the more logical choice, meant to operate along choke points, being an intelligence asset as well and overall providing defense against the Northern Fleet. And given that Germany and Norway will operate the Type too, if need be, repairs and maintenance could be conducted at the other side of the Atlantic. Three NATO members situated at the Northern Atlantic sharing the same modern AIP submarine has a lot of "soft" benefits.

 

[Aegrotare]

Do you have any sources for youre claims?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/submarines-germany-canada-norway-south-korea-9.7259709

 

[Scott Kenny]

The thing is, if range and VLS would have been a priority, then Canada would have bought into AUKUS-SSN.

Except for the US not wanting Canada to have a nuclear sub, because that would actually threaten US Arctic operations and claims.

And ignoring the order-of-magnitude-greater costs of a nuke boat that the cheapskates in Ottawa would never approve.

(edit) Yes, I think that what Canada really needs is a nuclear sub.

 

[DWG]

Except for the US not wanting Canada to have a nuclear sub

Which scuppered the Canada Class SSN in 1988, with the US exercising its rights under a 1959 agreement with Canada to veto any Canadian purchase of submarine nuclear reactors and under the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement to prevent the UK offering anything - though they did eventually allow the UK to pass over details of the Trafalgar Class reactor.

And that was during a period when US-Canada relations were positive, versus now when they are somewhat rocky.

 

[Apophenia]

... And that was during a period when US-Canada relations were positive ...

Unless you followed US government statements on the Northwest Passage at the time.

... versus now when they are somewhat rocky.

Classic British understatement?

 

[GK. Dundas]

Well we haven't started laying minefields ....yet.
The latest whine from the American ambassador .( the charm school just took his money and ran !) Is that Canadians are boycotting American booze .
Apparently it's not only wrong it's very very mean.
When he's not threatening to invade or hold his breath until he turns blue. He's apparently smoozing with Western separatists.
So yeah they might be considered a little rocky...Just a bit.

 

[GK. Dundas]

I still think this Government is too euro centric and that drove part of the decision. They're afraid of the Pacific it seems.
I also think the Government was bothered by the capability offered up by the VLS it offered up options that might of led to having make some hard and painful decisions.
Not choosing KS III provided the ability to excuse them selves from having to make those decisions.

 

[Ozair]

I still think this Government is too euro centric and that drove part of the decision. They're afraid of the Pacific it seems.
I also think the Government was bothered by the capability offered up by the VLS it offered up options that might of led to having make some hard and painful decisions.
Not choosing KS III provided the ability to excuse them selves from having to make those decisions.

Maybe they are more worried that the west side will leave...

 

[Scott Kenny]

Maybe they are more worried that the west side will leave...

Ain't BC leaving, but Alberta/Sasketchewan.

 

[Ozair]

Ain't BC leaving, but Alberta/Sasketchewan.

OT

Yet... When you have to sign an agreement between a Province and the Federal Government in this way it signals an element of discontent. Even the thought of Alberta actually leaving isn't conceivable but were it to happen I think BC consideration would happen.

 

[Apophenia]

Ain't BC leaving, but Alberta/Sasketchewan.

Leaving?! Support for succession is low - like fringe group low - across the Prairies. The Alberta referendum is really about a played-out Premier grandstanding and threatening separation to gain constitution 'reforms'. Current polls suggests that around 15-18% of Albertans support outright independence.

Politically, Albertan succession could actually strengthen British Columbia's place in Confederation. (Until now, we've tended to be a bit invisible out here to the Ottawa bureaucracy ... a curve of the earth thing?)

In any case, Edmonton's games will have no impact on the submarine purchase or MARPAC. Meanwhile, even if Smith, et al could grow their support beyond 'Maple MAGA', Alberta would still be saying goodbye to any access to 'tidewater'.

 

[GK. Dundas]

They probably also think they'll be part of NATO and NORAD to go along with their corridor to the Pacific Ocean .
Quebec separatists suffer from the same delusion as their Western counterparts.
And the Scots variants tend to think that RN will still build its ship in a independent Scotland not to mention NATO will be beating down their doors as well..

 

[Apophenia]

They probably also think they'll be part of NATO and NORAD to go along with their corridor to the Pacific Ocean...

Indeed. And there were a lot more souverainistes in '92 than there are 'Maple MAGA' now in AB. The latter are already being reassured that, post-indie, Albertans will be able to keep their Canadian bank accounts, passports, and retirement plans. (Yeah, that'll totally happen!)

And this is before we even get to the financial impact of closing every GoC office in AB, not to mention shut-downs for CFB Cold Lake (AB ANG?), CFB Suffield, CMTC Wainwright, Edmonton Garrison, etc. Maybe Smith et al think they can compensate for losing access to all pipelines through BC by no longer having to pay their share of the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project?