Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

[Todjaeger]

Also contains some information on the masts for the Attack submarines. Personally very dubious they will ever complete the Attack program. History of submarine procurements in Australia is even worse than our own.

Care to expand on that, since that assertion is counter what to what I am aware of with respect to RAN sub procurement. The RAN, like the RCN had operated Oberon-class boats and when the RAN were preparing to start decommissioning and replacing those subs, the RAN inspected the RN's mothballed Upholder-class diesel-electric subs since they were candidates for the replacement subs. Ultimately the inspections Australia did of the Upholder-class subs found sufficient issues with those subs and how they had been stored to determine that they were unsuitable for RAN needs and it would be better for Australia to go with a new design and also develop a mostly domestic sub production capability.

Yes, the design selected for RAN service was not, at least initially, quite up to the performance capabilities that the RAN wanted or had specified. Those issues AFAIK have since been resolved in a satisfactory manner. Meanwhile, the RCN did end up purchasing the ex-RN Upholder-class subs and renamed the class of subs the Victoria-class. Unfortunately some of the issues that were found by Australia did end up causing some issues for the RCN which had led to limited service from and restrictions on what various RCN subs could do while the issues were pending resolution.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Most iasues relatedbto the Victoria Class stems from the lack of financial resouces afforded by our Libtard governments of Chretien and Martin. Had the money been provided in quantity in the initial years then the program wouldbt have had so many ripples.

 

[ngatimozart]

History of submarine procurements in Australia is even worse than our own.

I doubt that very much. Just to reinforce @Todjaeger post above, they did have problems with the introduction of the Collins Class SSK and by all accounts much of that was to do with the Prime contractor rather than the RAN. Once the RAN got the USN involved to sort out integration problems, the Collins is now one of, if not the best SSKs afloat. Whereas the RCN and the Victoria class??? Please don't make me want to yak into the great white telephone.

 

[John Fedup]

Most iasues relatedbto the Victoria Class stems from the lack of financial resouces afforded by our Libtard governments of Chretien and Martin. Had the money been provided in quantity in the initial years then the program wouldbt have had so many ripples.

The Upholder purchase was a disgrace. The money spent on making these vessels fit would have enabled a purchase of new subs which certainly would be around long after our Victoria class get paid off.

 

[Redlands18]

Interesting video on the Hunter class. Doesn't look like they are starting their build much earlier than we are (go to 3:07 in video, build starts date of "late 2022 early 2023"). Also contains some information on the masts for the Attack submarines. Personally very dubious they will ever complete the Attack program. History of submarine procurements in Australia is even worse than our own.

Since 1960 Australia has procured 12 Subs in 2 batches of 6, Canada 7 in one batch of 3 and 1 batch of 4 2nd hand Subs that were not correctly Mothballed and outright rejected by Australia. If they had not been available would Canada now even have a Submarine Fleet at all?
Australia has a project in place to build 12 new Subs to replace the current 6, Canada has no project currently in place to replace their Subs despite being technically older by several years than Australia’s.
So i don’t know where you are getting the idea from that Australia’s Sub procurement is worse than Canada’s from.
Edit : my apologies Canada did operate 2 Guppy’s during the 60s as well.

 

[Todjaeger]

Most iasues relatedbto the Victoria Class stems from the lack of financial resouces afforded by our Libtard governments of Chretien and Martin. Had the money been provided in quantity in the initial years then the program wouldbt have had so many ripples.

I seriously doubt this, unless your are blaming the RCN purchase of the Victoria-class on those GOTD due to limited funding, and/or the lack of a thorough inspect and subsequent even more thorough repair and replace refurbishment of the subs. From memory, there were some significant issues with the electrical systems of the subs which played a large part in the fire aboard HMCS Chicoutimi which kept that specific sub out of commission until September of 2015, almost twenty years after Canada had purchased the ex-RN subs.

There have also been several more recent issues for both the subs and the RCN as a whole involve poor quality welds, which at least for the subs kept at least two of them restricted to shallow dives only for several months while hundreds of welds were inspected and some had to be re-done.

 

[John Fedup]

Since 1960 Australia has procured 12 Subs in 2 batches of 6, Canada 7 in one batch of 3 and 1 batch of 4 2nd hand Subs that were not correctly Mothballed and outright rejected by Australia. If they had not been available would Canada now even have a Submarine Fleet at all?
Australia has a project in place to build 12 new Subs to replace the current 6, Canada has no project currently in place to replace their Subs despite being technically older by several years than Australia’s.
So i don’t know where you are getting the idea from that Australia’s Sub procurement is worse than Canada’s from.
Edit : my apologies Canada did operate 2 Guppy’s during the 60s as well.

It is my believe the RCN was aware of the poor mothballing but opted for the Upholders anyway as it was the only way to retain submarine expertise. Had the Upholders not been available, the RCN's submarine capability would have vanished forever. Most likely, it will end with the Victoria class.

 

[Long range]

Your probably right on our submarine capability ending with the Victoria class an order of 6 of the new 212 CD that Germany and Norway are getting would be a huge upgrade to our sub fleet but that's not going to happen how the government came to decide that upgrading a 40 year old submarine that lost its ability to fire harpoons doesn't have a aip system is better than buying new is beyond me

 

[StingrayOZ]

Personally very dubious they will ever complete the Attack program. History of submarine procurements in Australia is even worse than our own.

Not sure the Chinese feel the same. I don't think there is any serious doubt about the submarines being built, that isn't to say the program doesn't have its challenges. The Attack class project is a very big ambitious project. However, history seems to only remember the issues from the Collins class, not the many triumphs of the Collins and earlier Oberons.

It is not possible to correlate to a Canadian (naval?) project of the same size and complexity. Even the most ambitious programs, say the Canada class, had the first 5 or 6 submarines built outside Canada.

Most likely, it will end with the Victoria class.

It would be a real shame for Canada to lose their submarine capability. The Victoria class won't last for ever, subs take time to build, even if any new subs only performed coastal missions, it is still very valuable capability. Many smaller countries operate submarines. Removing that dimension from the Canadian Defense Forces would really move Canada's capability to a much more limited level.

A very odd decision given the current state of the world.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Todjaeger the electrical issue which caused the fire was due to water entry from an open hatch.
The libtard GOTD didn’t put enough money into the pot to get the job done in a timely manner. Again this is the Canadian way that I keep speaking about. Spending money doesn’t really matter. How many jobs are you creating. Because the work was in the UK the GOTD didn’t want to spend the money because it wasn’t keeping Canadians employed.

 

[ASSAIL]

Todjaeger the electrical issue which caused the fire was due to water entry from an open hatch.
The libtard GOTD didn’t put enough money into the pot to get the job done in a timely manner. Again this is the Canadian way that I keep speaking about. Spending money doesn’t really matter. How many jobs are you creating. Because the work was in the UK the GOTD didn’t want to spend the money because it wasn’t keeping Canadians employed.

One of the main reasons the RAN rejected the Upholders was that all the electrical cabling was the wrong/inferior specification and if we took them the entire boat would need rewiring.
Volk is more familiar with this than me but it was discussed here several years ago.

 

[Calculus]

Care to expand on that,

Sure

The Attack will be an order of magnitude more complicated than Collins, with a lot of new and untested technology. Therefore,

1. The lead ship will be delayed, due to teething pains, and costs will rise as a result

2. The $50 Billion budget will prove to be too little

3. The politicians will get up in arms, and there will be "inquiries"

4. The general public will lose patience, with the Collins issues still fresh in mind (if they have forgotten about Collins, ABC will be quick to remind them)

5. The project will be curtailed, or possibly even cancelled.

This does not even take into account the inevitable scope creep, or questions of manning, to name a few. And to claim that the issues with Collins were all on Kockums is blatantly wrong, as is described here: Australia’s Collins-Class Submarines Enter a 20th Year of Trouble To paraphrase: "An Australian audit reported that the entire program was beset with poor planning, lack of client-shipyard coordination, lack of performance vision, and poor craftsmanship from the builder Kockums."

From an outsiders perspective Attack seems like Collins all over again, except on an even larger scale. I admire the sheer ballsy nature of the project, and hope it succeeds, and if so, that Canada buys some as well, but a hell of a lot of things will need to execute perfectly for this to happen, and history would suggest that for Australia this will be a very difficult project to see to completion. This is not a criticism or an attack, just an observation, however, and I am happy to be proven wrong.

 

[John Fedup]

Australia has lots local sub experience now and they are in a partnership with France's submarine builder. You can bet the US will provide engineering assistance should be program run into some problems as it is essential to have a strong allied sub presence in the Asia Pacific. As for public patience, Australians aren't in the same whining category as Canadians for the simple reason they are more aware about defence requirements in general and they are especially aware of their increasing hostile geopolitical environment. It may take longer than planned and be somewhat over budget but I believe it will get done to the satisfaction of most Australians.

 

[Black Jack Shellac]

Further to my comment regarding the CCGS Capt. Jacques Cartier, Seaspan has announced they have commenced sea trials.

 

[Todjaeger]

Todjaeger the electrical issue which caused the fire was due to water entry from an open hatch.
The libtard GOTD didn’t put enough money into the pot to get the job done in a timely manner. Again this is the Canadian way that I keep speaking about. Spending money doesn’t really matter. How many jobs are you creating. Because the work was in the UK the GOTD didn’t want to spend the money because it wasn’t keeping Canadians employed.

Water entering through an open hatch was part of the issue. As Assail mentioned, one of the issues the Australian inspection found was that the wiring needed to be ripped out and replaced. I cannot recall whether the specific issues with the wiring was due to substandard (pun intended...) wiring being used initially, or that the proper wiring had been used but not mothballed correctly so that it had degraded, or something else entirely. The end result being that Australia found the condition of the ex-RN Upholder-class subs too poor for them to be worthwhile additions to the RAN as replacements for the RAN Oberon-class subs.

 

[Todjaeger]

Sure

The Attack will be an order of magnitude more complicated than Collins, with a lot of new and untested technology. Therefore,

1. The lead ship will be delayed, due to teething pains, and costs will rise as a result

2. The $50 Billion budget will prove to be too little

3. The politicians will get up in arms, and there will be "inquiries"

4. The general public will lose patience, with the Collins issues still fresh in mind (if they have forgotten about Collins, ABC will be quick to remind them)

5. The project will be curtailed, or possibly even cancelled.

This does not even take into account the inevitable scope creep, or questions of manning, to name a few. And to claim that the issues with Collins were all on Kockums is blatantly wrong, as is described here: Australia’s Collins-Class Submarines Enter a 20th Year of Trouble To paraphrase: "An Australian audit reported that the entire program was beset with poor planning, lack of client-shipyard coordination, lack of performance vision, and poor craftsmanship from the builder Kockums."

From an outsiders perspective Attack seems like Collins all over again, except on an even larger scale. I admire the sheer ballsy nature of the project, and hope it succeeds, and if so, that Canada buys some as well, but a hell of a lot of things will need to execute perfectly for this to happen, and history would suggest that for Australia this will be a very difficult project to see to completion. This is not a criticism or an attack, just an observation, however, and I am happy to be proven wrong.

I understand where you are coming from, though I do disagree on a number of points that you seem to project or expect will happen. Nothing that you list though is historical, as they are what you project will happen in the future to the RAN's Attack-class sub programme. This does then leave a rather glaring lack of an explanation on how the RAN's sub procurement history is worse than the RCN's...

One thing I do wish to point out on your list is item #2, with a projected budget of AUD$50 bil. What most people do not realize regarding Australian defence projects is that the cost projections are for the whole service life of the project. So that AUD$50 bil. covers the dozen subs to be acquired, plus the operational costs during their service lives, and then projected costs for the subs deep docking cycles and MLU. Australia is not expecting to spend AUD$50 bil. all at once for the subs, but portions of that total will be getting spent over a period from the 2020's through the 2050's.

 

[Long range]

Was listening to a podcast on CGAI the conservative defense critic said that if they get elected they will purchase another Davie AOR and replace the Victoria class he didn't say how many subs would be purchased or what type they would be He also mentioned putting a parlimentary committee in charge of military procurement similar to what Australia and the Americans have it might all be BS to try and get reelected but the conservatives are the only party so far to mention any specifics about national defense

 

[John Fedup]

Just a bunch of BS. A parliamentary committee, WTF will that do for procurement? It is composed of pollies who couldn’t agree that nighttime has no sunshine. Easy to promise stuff when you won’t be forming the next government. A shame but junior will still be PM although with a minority so defence will really take a beating.

 

[Redlands18]

Just a bunch of BS. A parliamentary committee, WTF will that do for procurement? It is composed of pollies who couldn’t agree that nighttime has no sunshine. Easy to promise stuff when you won’t be forming the next government. A shame but junior will still be PM although with a minority so defence will really take a beating.

Don’t be to certain about Junior being re-elected, here in Australia the sitting PM was being written off right up to election night. I have noticed in recent years that polls are becoming less and less reliable.

 

[ngatimozart]

Just a bunch of BS. A parliamentary committee, WTF will that do for procurement? It is composed of pollies who couldn’t agree that nighttime has no sunshine. Easy to promise stuff when you won’t be forming the next government. A shame but junior will still be PM although with a minority so defence will really take a beating.

Don’t be to certain about Junior being re-elected, here in Australia the sitting PM was being written off right up to election night. I have noticed in recent years that polls are becoming less and less reliable.

And in NZ the opposition were written off but managed to grab the baubles of office, albeit under a different system.