Royal Canadian Navy Discussions and updates

[shadow99]

There is realistically no appetite for nuclear submarines in Canada...

Agreed. At least in the current designs of SSN.

However there is much development in Small Modular Reactors currently. While less powerful than its larger brothers, much can be said if a SSK has a 5MW reactor plug inserted, enabling continuous low speed cruising indefinitely. Joining Koreas program, sharing costs and research would reduce risk, save money and speed up development. Not a true SSN, but more of a hybrid design. Diesels for high speed to operating area, SMR while on patrol, and battery for burst speeds and additional power.

Batch 1 subs using current design KSS 3. (Just getting subs is paramount)
Batch 2 subs technological upgrades + SMR plug

Rant
That being said, I'm tired of hearing Bill Blairs Defense speech's over and over. "Blah, blah, trying, blah, blah trying blah..."

i.e. low recruitment numbers, year in year out for how long now? What ever they are "trying" to do to increase recruitment hasn't worked!
Accept that something radically different is needed. Training takes time and limited spaces needs to be increased to accommodate larger recruitment numbers that are needed.

My suggestion is to stop trying and start "doing". Times run out for trying.

The world is changing fast and I'm afraid our Pollies are just too slow to keep up. Glaciers comes to mind and too many needed projects piling up fast.
End Rant

Hats off to those working behind the scenes doing the best with what their given.

 

[John Fedup]

SMRs for subs...not likely because of cost to modify and fit to subs. As for recruitment, better kit, better housing, and maybe salaries as well would help, especially the first two. This is true for most Western nations....well except for the US, Trump and praying to Jesus will fix all.

 

[CorvetteCrunch]

Agreed. At least in the current designs of SSN.

However there is much development in Small Modular Reactors currently. While less powerful than its larger brothers, much can be said if a SSK has a 5MW reactor plug inserted, enabling continuous low speed cruising indefinitely. Joining Koreas program, sharing costs and research would reduce risk, save money and speed up development. Not a true SSN, but more of a hybrid design. Diesels for high speed to operating area, SMR while on patrol, and battery for burst speeds and additional power.

Batch 1 subs using current design KSS 3. (Just getting subs is paramount)
Batch 2 subs technological upgrades + SMR plug

Putting a SMR into a conventional submarine has been considered by Canada in the past as a retrofit for our Oberon class submarines however, it was never acted upon as the idea was sub-optimal. You end up with the worst of both worlds, a submarine that has a nuclear reactor and requires all of the care/logistics/personnel/expenses that a nuclear submarine would require, but gives you very few of the benefits of a proper nuclear powered vessel. Complexity and cost alone would be prohibitive, given the provided capability over a modern SSK.

Buy an SSK or buy an SSN, these halfway designs are poor and hence why they never caught on.

 

[John Fedup]

Putting a SMR into a conventional submarine has been considered by Canada in the past as a retrofit for our Oberon class submarines however, it was never acted upon as the idea was sub-optimal. You end up with the worst of both worlds, a submarine that has a nuclear reactor and requires all of the care/logistics/personnel/expenses that a nuclear submarine would require, but gives you very few of the benefits of a proper nuclear powered vessel. Complexity and cost alone would be prohibitive, given the provided capability over a modern SSK.

Buy an SSK or buy an SSN, these halfway designs are poor and hence why they never caught on.

IIRC, it was a slowpoke reactor that was proposed. It would have been a waste of time and money.

 

[shadow99]

Putting a SMR into a conventional submarine has been considered by Canada in the past as a retrofit for our Oberon class submarines however, it was never acted upon as the idea was sub-optimal. You end up with the worst of both worlds, a submarine that has a nuclear reactor and requires all of the care/logistics/personnel/expenses that a nuclear submarine would require, but gives you very few of the benefits of a proper nuclear powered vessel. Complexity and cost alone would be prohibitive, given the provided capability over a modern SSK.

Buy an SSK or buy an SSN, these halfway designs are poor and hence why they never caught on.

I understand where you are coming from, given the cost and complexity for a program back in the 60's?

Today, large corps such as Westinghouse are already developing SMR's in the 5 MW range.
There is a large movement across many nations right now developing SMR's for commercial use.

A feasibility study is necessary to validate the Naval SMR concept for cost and merit.
The benefit if successful provides unlimited range.

A Naval SMR program across several like minded nations sharing cost, research, development and manufacturing again reduces risk and costs.

Canada already has a robust nuclear infrastructure in place.
Take a look at this company BWXT Canada BWX Technologies, Inc. | People Strong, Innovation Driven

"BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT) offers a complete range of nuclear components and services, including the manufacturing of nuclear reactor components for U.S. Naval submarines and aircraft carriers and other nuclear and non-nuclear research and development and component production.

Today, BWXT reactors power the Navy’s Ohio, Virginia, Seawolf and Los Angeles-class submarines as well as its Nimitz and Ford-class aircraft carriers."

With the amount of nuclear skill and knowledge in Canada I would like to see a feasibility study to see if a Naval SMR program has merit.
Time's have changed drastically since the 60's, the technological advancements since then is incredible, perhaps another look is needed.

IIRC, it was a slowpoke reactor that was proposed. It would have been a waste of time and money.

There's a slowpoke in my hometown at RMC Kingston. Good for research but that's about it. Not sure if its even there anymore.

 

[Sender]

Slowpoke was never meant to provide enough power to propel the sub at speed, it was going to be used (in its AMPS form) to top up the batteries. There were some estimates that putting AMPS into an Oberon could have increased that sub class's underwater endurance by a factor of 4 (at slow speeds mind you, but still, significant). I have heard it is being looked at again for that same role, and that the Koreans are quite interested in the technology. If Canada buys the KSS 111, this would be a great opportunity to develop a unique Canadian capability. Think of it more as an AIP system than a nuclear propulsion system, and it starts to make more sense.

The AMPS 1000: An advanced reactor design for marine propulsion

It has long been recognized that a key determinant of the worth of a submarine is the extent to which it can undertake submerged operations with long endurance. Considerable progress has been made in the development of the family of low power nuclear reactor-based systems known as the Autonomous...

inis.iaea.org

 

[John Fedup]

Slowpoke was never meant to provide enough power to propel the sub at speed, it was going to be used (in its AMPS form) to top up the batteries. There were some estimates that putting AMPS into an Oberon could have increased that sub class's underwater endurance by a factor of 4 (at slow speeds mind you, but still, significant). I have heard it is being looked at again for that same role, and that the Koreans are quite interested in the technology. If Canada buys the KSS 111, this would be a great opportunity to develop a unique Canadian capability. Think of it more as an AIP system than a nuclear propulsion system, and it starts to make more sense.

The AMPS 1000: An advanced reactor design for marine propulsion

It has long been recognized that a key determinant of the worth of a submarine is the extent to which it can undertake submerged operations with long endurance. Considerable progress has been made in the development of the family of low power nuclear reactor-based systems known as the Autonomous...

inis.iaea.org

Yes, slowpoke was primarily a AIP alternative. Simply not feasible from a cost POV.

 

[John Fedup]

I understand where you are coming from, given the cost and complexity for a program back in the 60's?

Today, large corps such as Westinghouse are already developing SMR's in the 5 MW range.
There is a large movement across many nations right now developing SMR's for commercial use.

A feasibility study is necessary to validate the Naval SMR concept for cost and merit.
The benefit if successful provides unlimited range.

A Naval SMR program across several like minded nations sharing cost, research, development and manufacturing again reduces risk and costs.

Canada already has a robust nuclear infrastructure in place.
Take a look at this company BWXT Canada BWX Technologies, Inc. | People Strong, Innovation Driven

"BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT) offers a complete range of nuclear components and services, including the manufacturing of nuclear reactor components for U.S. Naval submarines and aircraft carriers and other nuclear and non-nuclear research and development and component production.

Today, BWXT reactors power the Navy’s Ohio, Virginia, Seawolf and Los Angeles-class submarines as well as its Nimitz and Ford-class aircraft carriers."

With the amount of nuclear skill and knowledge in Canada I would like to see a feasibility study to see if a Naval SMR program has merit.
Time's have changed drastically since the 60's, the technological advancements since then is incredible, perhaps another look is needed.



There's a slowpoke in my hometown at RMC Kingston. Good for research but that's about it. Not sure if its even there anymore.

SMR is absolutely an exciting development and certainly Canada has lots of nuclear expertise. For this reason, Canada could have been a valuable partner in AUKUS if we had a government that GAS about national defence and developing our MIC. WRT naval application of SMRs, a bridge to far, cost issues and a ton of work required to design a reactor to fit into even a Dreadnought sized hull. We could have been a useful partner for PWR3 manufacturing support.

 

[CorvetteCrunch]

I understand where you are coming from, given the cost and complexity for a program back in the 60's?

Today, large corps such as Westinghouse are already developing SMR's in the 5 MW range.
There is a large movement across many nations right now developing SMR's for commercial use.

A feasibility study is necessary to validate the Naval SMR concept for cost and merit.
The benefit if successful provides unlimited range.

A Naval SMR program across several like minded nations sharing cost, research, development and manufacturing again reduces risk and costs.

Canada already has a robust nuclear infrastructure in place.
Take a look at this company BWXT Canada BWX Technologies, Inc. | People Strong, Innovation Driven

"BWX Technologies, Inc. (BWXT) offers a complete range of nuclear components and services, including the manufacturing of nuclear reactor components for U.S. Naval submarines and aircraft carriers and other nuclear and non-nuclear research and development and component production.

Today, BWXT reactors power the Navy’s Ohio, Virginia, Seawolf and Los Angeles-class submarines as well as its Nimitz and Ford-class aircraft carriers."

With the amount of nuclear skill and knowledge in Canada I would like to see a feasibility study to see if a Naval SMR program has merit.
Time's have changed drastically since the 60's, the technological advancements since then is incredible, perhaps another look is needed.

The cost and complexity issues are not something that time realistically changes, there are fundamental factors that make these halfway house designs sub-optimal. One cannot just take a land based civilian reactor and drop it into a submarine, there is substantial differences between both types. Civilian reactors are typically designed for efficiency and cost effectiveness, while military naval propulsion reactors need to be designed with incredibly strict safety margins, including the potential of remaining operational/safe for long periods of time or under battle damage. Civilian reactors are stationary and aren't moving around in a three dimensional space, potentially being fired upon by enemy forces. Even a smaller SMR requires highly trained and specialist personnel aboard, these systems cannot be automated to the same degree as one does with typical marine propulsion systems.

You are looking at adding billions of tens of billions dollars worth of development, design, implementation, personnel training, requisite nuclear infrastructure, certification, regulation, lifetime operational costs, etc all for "unlimited slow speed operations". It won't change the fact that you are onboarding a good chunk of the costs and complexities of an SSN but effectively none of the capability. You still have an SSK sized hull, with an SSK sized magazine and SSK sized stores.

The Soviets actually implemented hybrid propulsion systems aboard multiple submarines in service and it was widely agreed that it was more trouble than its worth. Just get the large SSK's for Canada, we don't need this pie in the sky complexity in an already difficult program.

 

[Sender]

Steel has been cut on the Polar icebreaker being built by Seaspan. A very important milestone.

Seaspan Begins Construction on CCG's Heavy Polar Icebreaker - Canadian Defence Review

Seaspan Shipyards begins construction on the Canadian Coast Guard’s (CCG) new heavy polar icebreaker, the most capable ship.

canadiandefencereview.com

 

[CorvetteCrunch]

Steel has been cut on the Polar icebreaker being built by Seaspan. A very important milestone.

Seaspan Begins Construction on CCG's Heavy Polar Icebreaker - Canadian Defence Review

Seaspan Shipyards begins construction on the Canadian Coast Guard’s (CCG) new heavy polar icebreaker, the most capable ship.

canadiandefencereview.com

It is a shame that the Canadian Coast Guard is so often forgotten and looked down upon, because the CCGS Arpatuuq is truly a world class capability for Canada. She is rated to Polar Class 2(+), meaning she is set to 3.0m+ alongside additional strengthening in and above that official rating. This alone puts her among the most powerful icebreakers in the world, especially given her power generation from that monstrous powerplant. She is an impressively large vessel with tons of space for scientific missions, additional cargo and helicopters aboard for various work.

The Davie/Helsinki design variant is less capable than the Seaspan design, but she is still a potent vessel herself. Canada will definitely have a world class capability with these vessels.

 

[Underway]

Its interesting to see discussions on what NSS II is going to look like. Seaspan is stating that in the next 18 months they are going to need a new design to work on, as they've invested in quite the design team over the last 10 years. Without work they will lose that investment as those jobs will go elsewhere for work.

Therefore something is likely to come down the line from the Coast Guard or RCN to keep things going. There are lots of ideas out there. Canadian Multimission Corvette program, Arsenal ships, optionally manned surface vessels, arctic submarine tenders (my vote), other AOR's, two other large icebreakers and a bunch more stuff.

 

[John Fedup]

Its interesting to see discussions on what NSS II is going to look like. Seaspan is stating that in the next 18 months they are going to need a new design to work on, as they've invested in quite the design team over the last 10 years. Without work they will lose that investment as those jobs will go elsewhere for work.

Therefore something is likely to come down the line from the Coast Guard or RCN to keep things going. There are lots of ideas out there. Canadian Multimission Corvette program, Arsenal ships, optionally manned surface vessels, arctic submarine tenders (my vote), other AOR's, two other large icebreakers and a bunch more stuff.

Not sure if two additional heavy icebreakers makes sense given the likelihood the Arctic may be mostly ice free by 2050-60. Maybe one more or several smaller ones. Your multimission corvette suggestion would be in lieu of a OPV? Another AOR, yes that is needed if all 15 Rivers get built. A LHD could be useful.