Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

[alexsa]

Not disagreeing with you at all. Just pointing out that there exists technology that would allow for an extended duration, slow speed submarine capability, without going the full-blown and expensive SSN route. There was also AMPS (see link below) , which was specifically designed for submarine use. All Canada really needs is a power source that would allow for extended undersea patrols, potentially under the ice caps, without the need to surface regularly for battery top up. We don't need a sub capable of long-duration high-speed submerged transits. Would it be nice to have. Of course, but the cost is so prohibitive it is highly unlikely it would ever get government approval, especially where an AIP equipped SSK can do 95% of the mission. If we needed to sprint away from danger at full speed, that's where the batteries would allow us that capability. The point of my post was that if the government was really serious about patrolling below the ice cap, there are Canadian technologies that could be developed to support that need. The current regime is quite supportive of Made in Canada solutions, and supports them through this program: Innovation for Defence Excellence and Security (IDEaS)

AMPS: The AMPS 1000: An advanced reactor design for marine propulsi..|INIS

Noting the the slow poke discussion is, rightly, headed to the appropriate thread I want to touch on speed. The biggest short coming of the SSK is speed and indiscretion ratio. Australia tried to solve this issue with the Collins (a very large conventional submarine for its time) and the Attack Class. Both extremely capable options but operations were limited by the battery. AIP and other mechanisms only provided extended slow speed endurance with a reduction in the indiscretion ratio.

For Australia (and I suspect Canada) there is a need to deploy quickly and stay on task for a long period. An SSN will always be able to deploy quickly and react as necessary to close a target if it is not heading directly into the vicinity of the boat. Where an SSK is operating at speed the indiscretion ratio goes up with associated risk. The SSN can also ‘get out of dodge’ in a hurry if their position is compromised. Again the SSK is less capable in this regards. For instance, if your boat is letting loose a bunch of TLAMs change location after doing so is a really good idea.

In addition to this you need to consider that systems such as AN/BYG-1 and sensors are power pigs. They use a lot of energy which impacts battery life for an SSK and would be an important consideration for a low power reactor.

Your slow poke SSN slow speed SSN would have long endurance but misses out on the ability to deploy and react quickly. Speed is quite important noting that even SSN’s have endurance limits and spend much of the deployment time in transit will impact endurance when on station.

I am certainly not bagging our the SSK, the Collins is an impressive vessels and would be a potent adversary. The same is true of the modern Japanese units and some of the European offerings, however, where the boat needs to deploy at long distance an SSN with significant power generation is a better option. It would appear that Canada would benefit from having SSN’s in the RCN, but whether this is realistic from a political and cost sense is a different issue.

 

[John Fedup]

Noting the the slow poke discussion is, rightly, headed to the appropriate thread I want to touch on speed. The biggest short coming of the SSK is speed and indiscretion ratio. Australia tried to solve this issue with the Collins (a very large conventional submarine for its time) and the Attack Class. Both extremely capable options but operations were limited by the battery. AIP and other mechanisms only provided extended slow speed endurance with a reduction in the indiscretion ratio.

For Australia (and I suspect Canada) there is a need to deploy quickly and stay on task for a long period. An SSN will always be able to deploy quickly and react as necessary to close a target if it is not heading directly into the vicinity of the boat. Where an SSK is operating at speed the indiscretion ratio goes up with associated risk. The SSN can also ‘get out of dodge’ in a hurry if their position is compromised. Again the SSK is less capable in this regards. For instance, if your boat is letting loose a bunch of TLAMs change location after doing so is a really good idea.

In addition to this you need to consider that systems such as AN/BYG-1 and sensors are power pigs. They use a lot of energy which impacts battery life for an SSK and would be an important consideration for a low power reactor.

Your slow poke SSN slow speed SSN would have long endurance but misses out on the ability to deploy and react quickly. Speed is quite important noting that even SSN’s have endurance limits and spend much of the deployment time in transit will impact endurance when on station.

I am certainly not bagging our the SSK, the Collins is an impressive vessels and would be a potent adversary. The same is true of the modern Japanese units and some of the European offerings, however, where the boat needs to deploy at long distance an SSN with significant power generation is a better option. It would appear that Canada would benefit from having SSN’s in the RCN, but whether this is realistic from a political and cost sense is a different issue.

Good points which I totally agree with. One point I would add, any hybrid semi-SSN, IMO, would be uncompetitive with a large build of AUKUS subs should Canada be allowed to participate in. Quantity and participation would be economically beneficial, especially to the electorate.

 

[John Fedup]

I see now that there is another thread on submarine propulsion. My apologies. I will post there from now on with regards to this topic.

I decided to respond on the propulsion thread.

 

[seaspear]

I came across this thesis on the need for nuclear submarines for Canada ,obviously an old topic ,to read some of the claims would suggest that Canada is reliant on the U.S and other friendly nations goodwill to protect its sea-lanes
Canada’s Need for a Nuclear Submarine Capability to Ensure Arctic Sovereignty and Security (forces.gc.ca)
Brazil that was mentioned in this thesis is set to have the first nuclear submarine built in the Southern Hemisphere with the aid of France its hard not to compare Canadas needs to Brazil's in protecting its sovereignty
Brazil is developing its own nuclear-powered submarine (www.gov.br)
Brazil Submarine Capabilities (nti.org)

 

[Vivendi]

Now that the US has said there will be no more participants to the nuclear leg of AUKUS, it seems France would be the only option for Canada to get nuclear subs... However looking at how Macron is "Macroning" himself in China, not sure if it's a great idea to go French:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1645429005326090243

 

[Sender]

An interesting look into the AOPV build process inside the Irving Assembly Hall. The ship under construction is the 5th AOPV, Frédérick Rolette .

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1648401089581187075

 

[ngatimozart]

An interesting article published by the ANI (Australian Naval Institute) about the Canadian acquisition of the four ex RN Victoria Class SSK their subsequent costs, usage and the replacement project that started in 2021.

AUKUS: Canada stuggles to keep up | The Australian Naval Institute

navalinstitute.com.au

 

[John Fedup]

An interesting article published by the ANI (Australian Naval Institute) about the Canadian acquisition of the four ex RN Victoria Class SSK their subsequent costs, usage and the replacement project that started in 2021.

AUKUS: Canada stuggles to keep up | The Australian Naval Institute

navalinstitute.com.au

I doubt there will be any submarine replacement until our electorate grows some brains. Even then, the replacement will likely mean cuts to other military kit (e.g. CSCs,)

 

[ngatimozart]

I doubt there will be any submarine replacement until our electorate grows some brains. Even then, the replacement will likely mean cuts to other military kit (e.g. CSCs,)

I think that 12 new build long range SSK is rather ambitious to say the least. The problem isn't the electorate, but Canadian defence procurement ideology and systems - along with the bureaucracy. No matter what political party occupies the Treasury benches, the outcome is still the same. Much like India.

 

[John Fedup]

I think that 12 new build long range SSK is rather ambitious to say the least. The problem isn't the electorate, but Canadian defence procurement ideology and systems - along with the bureaucracy. No matter what political party occupies the Treasury benches, the outcome is still the same. Much like India.

The problem is the electorate. The priority for pollies is reelection, regardless of party. Whining from the electorate sways all of them. Procurement and bureaucracy just enhances the negative outcomes. A quick glance at the Australian threads wrt the review just reenforces my view pollies here will downgrade the CSC program leading to fewer more expensive hulls along with less capable GP frigates that will only be marginally less expensive and be delivered even later than the expected delivery for the current CSC build.

 

[Vanquish]

The problem is the electorate. The priority for pollies is reelection, regardless of party. Whining from the electorate sways all of them. Procurement and bureaucracy just enhances the negative outcomes. A quick glance at the Australian threads wrt the review just reenforces my view pollies here will downgrade the CSC program leading to fewer more expensive hulls along with less capable GP frigates that will only be marginally less expensive and be delivered even later than the expected delivery for the current CSC build.

I understand how you feel. Honestly though I don't really feel that it's that way or needs to be. I do believe Canadians suffer from complacency in regards to the military but that's only because no one in the media/government cares to actually inform the citizens of the actual need for a properly funded and manned military. I would personally wish we spent like the Americans on our military however I realize that's not completely practical as it's not in our culture.

That being said though I read everything I can find on the Canadian military in the news. Trouble is there isn't much. The media really doesn't spend any effort to educate Canadians about the military, again because there's no viewership for articles based on that due to Canadians apathy. Aside from that while I watched and read about the CSC Type 26 costs ballooning into the billions and the stories written about those costs I don't actually know anyone who read them or cared. Why, because Canadians don't know if they should care. Most Canadians just think it's another government mismanaged project. They don't actually have a problem with the building of new ships and getting other military gear they just aren't being informed enough to know whether they should actually care and why. The ones that care usually have a connection to the military in some way or are anti military like the plow shares people.

I actually think if the sitting government came out and said that we needed SSN's and explain why the majority of Canadians would be okay with that, again because most of them really don't know or care why. Of course the media would try and create mass panic but if the Government of the day just made it so it would soon become an after thought like every other story in regards to the military.

I wish the main Canadian political parties ie the Liberals and the Conservatives could put aside their political differences and reach an agreement on a white paper and support it unequivocally no matter which was the sitting Government much like the Australians are able to do. Then the military could finally have hope for proper and stable funding and direction.

 

[Vanquish]

Talking about the CSC Type 26 has anyone heard of any more information on the design review? It was supposed to be done by the end of 2022. Personally I feel it doesn't help that the government sits on information about the military all the time. Meanwhile the media only talks about the billions of dollars being spent on something that the Canadian tax payer has no tangible evidence of or information about in regards to any actual progress being made, yet alone steel being cut.

"EURONAVAL 2022 — Lockheed Martin is planning to complete the preliminary design review for the Canadian Surface Combatant by the end of this year, a significant milestone for a shipbuilding program responsible for recapitalizing a large portion the Canadian surface fleet, a company executive told Breaking Defense."

Canadian Surface Combatant ship to see design review within weeks: Lockheed Martin - Breaking Defense

The CSC will replace Canada's Iroquois-class destroyers and the Halifax-class frigates.

breakingdefense.com

 

[John Fedup]

Talking about the CSC Type 26 has anyone heard of any more information on the design review? It was supposed to be done by the end of 2022. Personally I feel it doesn't help that the government sits on information about the military all the time. Meanwhile the media only talks about the billions of dollars being spent on something that the Canadian tax payer has no tangible evidence of or information about in regards to any actual progress being made, yet alone steel being cut.

Agree, the lack of information only feeds negative media stories. The media needs to make a buck, they will do this by hyping negative or positive stories, wrt the Canadian government, negative sells better.

I understand how you feel. Honestly though I don't really feel that it's that way or needs to be. I do believe Canadians suffer from complacency in regards to the military but that's only because no one in the media/government cares to actually inform the citizens of the actual need for a properly funded and manned military. I would personally wish we spent like the Americans on our military however I realize that's not completely practical as it's not in our culture.

Agreed, unfortunately.

That being said though I read everything I can find on the Canadian military in the news. Trouble is there isn't much. The media really doesn't spend any effort to educate Canadians about the military, again because there's no viewership for articles based on that due to Canadians apathy. Aside from that while I watched and read about the CSC Type 26 costs ballooning into the billions and the stories written about those costs I don't actually know anyone who read them or cared. Why, because Canadians don't know if they should care. Most Canadians just think it's another government mismanaged project. They don't actually have a problem with the building of new ships and getting other military gear they just aren't being informed enough to know whether they should actually care and why. The ones that care usually have a connection to the military in some way or are anti military like the plow shares people.[/QUOTE}

Unlike many allies, the media and government information being presented to the electorate concerning defence projects is simply appalling. Sadly, it is my belief it probably would not make much difference (Canadians are whiners as Mulroney remarked years ago).

I actually think if the sitting government came out and said that we needed SSN's and explain why the majority of Canadians would be okay with that, again because most of them really don't know or care why. Of course the media would try and create mass panic but if the Government of the day just made it so it would soon become an after thought like every other story in regards to the military.

No, I doubt it. Canadians would only see the cost as something that could be diverted to free$hit.

I wish the main Canadian political parties ie the Liberals and the Conservatives could put aside their political differences and reach an agreement on a white paper and support it unequivocally no matter which was the sitting Government much like the Australians are able to do. Then the military could finally have hope for proper and stable funding and direction.

Me to but probably won't happen any time soon short of all out war.

 

[ngatimozart]

I think that both Canadian and Kiwi populations haven't experienced direct enemy action on their homelands in the last 200 years, whereas Australia was bombed by the Japanese in 1942 and had a direct naval attack on Sydney harbour. That definitely sticks in their memory and I would suggest is a strong motivation for the Aussies.

 

[swerve]

Canada had a few cross-border Fenian raids in the second half of the 19th century IIRC, but that's more in the nature of terrorism than military action.

There was direct enemy action in Canadian waters in WW2, in the Gulf of St Lawrence & even the lower St. Lawrence river. Over 20 merchant ships sunk & 4 Canadian warships. The Germans also attempted to land spies & pick up escaped PoWs, though I think they failed.

 

[John Fedup]

Canada had a few cross-border Fenian raids in the second half of the 19th century IIRC, but that's more in the nature of terrorism than military action.

There was direct enemy action in Canadian waters in WW2, in the Gulf of St Lawrence & even the lower St. Lawrence river. Over 20 merchant ships sunk & 4 Canadian warships. The Germans also attempted to land spies & pick up escaped PoWs, though I think they failed.

Depending on the future US domestic situation, the case could be made Canada isn’t doing enough to secure our southern border either. The Fenian raids of the 19th century might be replaced by fringe right wing militias in the 21st century promoting who knows what.

 

[76mmGuns]

I think that both Canadian and Kiwi populations haven't experienced direct enemy action on their homelands in the last 200 years, whereas Australia was bombed by the Japanese in 1942 and had a direct naval attack on Sydney harbour. That definitely sticks in their memory and I would suggest is a strong motivation for the Aussies.

Agree. We, Australia, also have a large neighbour just a few hundred km away, who has not always been friendly. We have been lucky Indonesia has been focused more on internal security than conquests. New Zealand is so remote, even Indonesia is thousands of km away from them, and very strongly shielded by Australia.

 

[Sender]

The problem is the electorate. The priority for pollies is reelection, regardless of party. Whining from the electorate sways all of them. Procurement and bureaucracy just enhances the negative outcomes. A quick glance at the Australian threads wrt the review just reenforces my view pollies here will downgrade the CSC program leading to fewer more expensive hulls along with less capable GP frigates that will only be marginally less expensive and be delivered even later than the expected delivery for the current CSC build.

Not so sure I agree. There have been several polls now showing quite a large majority of Canadians in favour of more spending on Defence.

About two thirds of Canadians support increasing defence spending to reach NATO target: Nanos

Most Canadians support increasing defence spending to reach the two per cent target set by NATO allies, according to a national survey conducted by Nanos for CTV News.

www.ctvnews.ca

.

 

[John Fedup]

Not so sure I agree. There have been several polls now showing quite a large majority of Canadians in favour of more spending on Defence.

About two thirds of Canadians support increasing defence spending to reach NATO target: Nanos

Most Canadians support increasing defence spending to reach the two per cent target set by NATO allies, according to a national survey conducted by Nanos for CTV News.

www.ctvnews.ca

.

Yes, I posted this on another thread. One observation was the 18-34 age group didn’t support increasing funding so who knows. Some suggest this group will mature and be supportive as they get older, especially if the geopolitical situation worsens. Then again, they will still want social benefits so given our debt, either the economy has to grow or something needs to be cut. Pollies have a long tradition on what gets cut first.

 

[Sender]

Interesting reporting by the Korean Times that seems to suggest at least a passing interest by Canadian officials in Korean submarines. It suggests senior Canadian officials have toured the yards where these subs are produced. It also suggests that the submarine replacement program is a real thing, and may be starting to gain some momentum.

Korea eyes submarine deal with Canada

A planned summit between President Yoon Suk Yeol and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is prompting speculation over a potential submarine deal between Korea and Canada as Ottawa plans to replace its aging submarines.

www.koreatimes.co.kr