Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Sender said:
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.

www.koreatimes.co.kr

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 www.koreatimes.co.kr
Click to expand...
I think France and Germany might have a bit to say about the list of Submarine choices, considering they have both sold numerous Sub designs to numerous nations and both have designs that fit the bill, France has done a huge amount of design work on the Shortfin design (RAN Attack). None of the 3 named countries, ROK, Spain and Japan have ever exported a Sub.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
South Korea has exported submarines to Indonesia - the Nagapasa class.

Spain's submarine-building efforts have not gone well. The S-80 as originally built was good at submerging, but had a problem surfacing again . . . . It's taken 20 years & major redesign & rebuilding from being ordered into production to the first one being on sea trials. Given that, I wouldn't touch a Spanish sub with a bargepole until I'd seen it in service. Maybe all the problems have been fixed, but I'd want proof.

Japan has been successfully designing, building & operating submarines for a long time. The JMSDF is currently operating 24 Japanese designed & built subs. The only anxiety would be over their support for overseas customers.
 
K

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Hmm.. if you judge the Koreans by the KSS-III Batch 2 design, there are few competitors that come close, even among European leaders like TKMS and NG.

- 3800 tons submerged displacement, lithium batteries, dedicated VLS x 6.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
About 25 metres longer than the biggest Type 209, fatter, & twice the displacement. I'm sure the Koreans used things they'd learned from building Type 214 & modified Type 209, but it's a bit of a stretch to call it the same design.
 
S

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Would the Canadian navy consider advanced lithium powered submarines capable of safely transiting under the various ice in those regions?
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
seaspear said:
Would the Canadian navy consider advanced lithium powered submarines capable of safely transiting under the various ice in those regions?
Click to expand...
Lithium will be the batteries for most future SSKs. As for use in the Arctic, limited IMO. Not excited about SSKs. They would be useful for domestic patrol on the east and west coasts. Transit speed and endurance limitations make them next to useless for supporting friends in the Asia Pacific (unless they can be based there). The same applies to the far North plus the under ice issue.

New SSKs would allow the RCN to at least maintain submarine skills.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
seaspear said:
Buying a series of submarines that have restricted mission capabilities just to maintain skills sounds the most expensive option ,is it only the Canadian Navy proposing submarines for the government to consider if its interested?
Canadian Navy Lobbying for C$60 Billion Acquisition of 12 Submarines (defense-aerospace.com)
Canadian Patrol Submarine Discussion Ramps Up – Canadian Naval Review
Click to expand...
At least this point it is the RCN advising the government on future requirements. As per my earlier post, these subs would be pretty much limited to our east and west coastal areas. Getting 12 boats is not going to happen, I think 6 is the maximum any future government here might commit to. SSNs are best best fit for our geography and would be a useful capability to support our allies. Unfortunately they aren’t available to us even if our government wanted them. The French option would likely end in delays and litigation, not to mention political opposition worried about possible Quebec involvement. If the Victoria class isn’t replaced, it is unlikely the RCN will ever get back into the sub game.
 
S

Sender

Active Member
seaspear said:
Would the Canadian navy consider advanced lithium powered submarines capable of safely transiting under the various ice in those regions?
Click to expand...
This article sums up the current thinking on use of SSKs in the Arctic quite nicely: The Under-Ice Environment as a Strategic Space – Vanguard

I believe the sudden interest by the RCN in the Korean and Japanese subs is twofold. 1) Both nations lead in the development of advanced battery tech, which has obvious advantages, and 2) both offer bigger designs than the Europeans, which give the boats better endurance, better habitability (a key in retention), and more flexibility for future technology insertion. Just my opinion, of course. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Sender said:
This article sums up the current thinking on use of SSKs in the Arctic quite nicely: The Under-Ice Environment as a Strategic Space – Vanguard

I believe the sudden interest by the RCN in the Korean and Japanese subs is twofold. 1) Both nations lead in the development of advanced battery tech, which has obvious advantages, and 2) both offer bigger designs than the Europeans, which give the boats better endurance, better habitability (a key in retention), and more flexibility for future technology insertion. Just my opinion, of course. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Click to expand...
Limited Arctic operation because of the long transit distances and under ice is still an issue. Yes, USN SSNs will assist but realistically these possible SSKs will be east and west coast boats because 6 boats is the likeliest number and following the rule of 3s….one for the east and west coasts and perhaps an occasional trip to the eastern Arctic from Halifax. We should have SSNs for the same reasons Australia concluded but there are none available and the political will isn’t present (maybe not for SSKs either).
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Sender said:
This article sums up the current thinking on use of SSKs in the Arctic quite nicely: The Under-Ice Environment as a Strategic Space – Vanguard

I believe the sudden interest by the RCN in the Korean and Japanese subs is twofold. 1) Both nations lead in the development of advanced battery tech, which has obvious advantages, and 2) both offer bigger designs than the Europeans, which give the boats better endurance, better habitability (a key in retention), and more flexibility for future technology insertion. Just my opinion, of course. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Click to expand...
Attack-class submarine - Wikipedia
The largest design likely to be offered to Canada is the Shortfin Barracuda design from Naval Group, which was chosen by Australia, and has been shortlisted by both India and the Netherlands in their respective programs. At 97m and 4500-5000t it is the largest SSK design since the Japanese I-400 Subs of WW2.
Type 216 submarine - Wikipedia
TKMS of Germany also has the Type 216 design on its books at 90m and 4000t.
 
S

Sender

Active Member
Redlands18 said:
Attack-class submarine - Wikipedia
The largest design likely to be offered to Canada is the Shortfin Barracuda design from Naval Group, which was chosen by Australia, and has been shortlisted by both India and the Netherlands in their respective programs. At 97m and 4500-5000t it is the largest SSK design since the Japanese I-400 Subs of WW2.
Type 216 submarine - Wikipedia
TKMS of Germany also has the Type 216 design on its books at 90m and 4000t.
Click to expand...
There is a certain sense of urgency in the project office that favours an in-service (or close to in-service) boat. The first of the Victorias could age out as early as 2035, so time is ticking. Also high on the list is a high degree of automation - crew size is a really big factor.
 
Last edited:
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I doubt any SSK design that isn’t close to being deployed will be in the running. Could be new battery and SMR technologies for propulsion within 10 years.
 
K

koxinga

Well-Known Member
If we are talking about in-service or soon to be in-service design from a European manufacturer, TKMS is building for Israel, the Dakar class and it somewhat of a proxy to the KSS-III Batch 2.
 
S

Sender

Active Member
HaroldBloggins said:
The reason the Polar ice breaker was taken and given back to Seaspan was legal action threatened by Seaspan. The order books are the order books.
Click to expand...
The term compensated was tongue-in-cheek. I was referring to the fact the second Polar went to Davie, and the subsequent mewling by Seaspan. The reality is Seaspan lost nothing from their "order book". The second Polar was never theirs - it was added well after Seaspan was given the non-combat portion of the NSS (or National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy, as it was referred to at the time). They just assumed they would get any and all large non-combat vessels, but with the addition of Davie, that all changed. @John Fedup and I were just speculating that they would shut up and stop complaining about the "loss" of the second Polar if they got a third JSS...
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Sender said:
CANSEC 2023 has started today. Will be interesting to see what comes out. I expect we'll get some updates on CSC, and it looks like VARD has put forward a design to replace the MCDVs:
www.navalnews.com

Vard Unveils New 'Vigilance' OPV Design - Naval News

Vard's new Vigilance Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) is tailored to the future needs of the Royal Canadian Navy.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com
Click to expand...
Saw the article earlier on NavalNews. Seems like a good replacement option for the Kingston class. Looking forward to more details.
 
S

Sender

Active Member
John Fedup said:
Saw the article earlier on NavalNews. Seems like a good replacement option for the Kingston class. Looking forward to more details.
Click to expand...
Yeah, me too. I'm going to guess it will be somewhere around 80m, lightly armed (if I had to guess, same gun as AOPV - 25mm), ice strengthened, between 1500-1800 tons. There really isn't much in the way of detail, but I would assume it will be based on an existing VARD design, which are shown here (click on 7 Series):

Vessel Gallery - Vard Marine

vardmarine.com vardmarine.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top