• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Replacing the Subs

LoboCanada

Member
Reaction score
2
Points
230
Another thought would be if we did get rid of a sub-surface capability and instead boosted another capability, what would even come close???

1) A large order for P8s for the RCAF?
2) An all-in approach on XLUUV development or Five-Eye collab on existing projects?
3) Expeditionary/Amphibious capability (1 or 2 LPD/LPH)?
4) Intact or slightly larger Fighter replacement (120+ aircraft)?
5) Intact or slightly larger CSC order? (18 CSCs or two new 2 destroyers)?
6) Half-mashed up mix of the above.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
141
Points
630
Another thought would be if we did get rid of a sub-surface capability and instead boosted another capability, what would even come close???

1) A large order for P8s for the RCAF?
2) An all-in approach on XLUUV development or Five-Eye collab on existing projects?
3) Expeditionary/Amphibious capability (1 or 2 LPD/LPH)?
4) Intact or slightly larger Fighter replacement (120+ aircraft)?
5) Intact or slightly larger CSC order? (18 CSCs or two new 2 destroyers)?
6) Half-mashed up mix of the above.
IF we cut our subsurface capability and replaced with an enhanced capability from the above list - personnel problems would still remain.

IF the government was smart, they would realize the small crew & fairly affordable operating costs of a sub is probably the cheapest out of all of those options. (I say operating costs for a submarine fleet conducting routine operations and maintenance -- our current class hasn't been a great example of this with repairs, overhauls, lengthy upgrades, then more repairs, etc etc.)

BUT... playing with the list above...


I would say a full replacement of P8's, to replace the Auroras. Fix the input issues in regards to pilot training, perhaps look at modifications to recruiting standards (I'm not suggesting lowering standards) - and I imagine we can find enough folks to fly & operate a solid fleet of P8's, especially if they are replacing aircraft currently in service.

A larger CSC order could be good too, as it would give us some depth in regards to international committments. (Let's forget manning them for now, for the sake of this topic.)


If the next government just purchases 4 to 6 conventionally powered subs from a proven submarine manufacturer, it really shouldn't be that big of a deal. Not any more expensive than the CSC, less crew, and operating costs would be pretty nominal since we aren't essentially rebuilding the hulls.

0.02
 

stoker dave

Jr. Member
Reaction score
20
Points
80
Per today's Globe and Mail: "Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland is set to unveil a pandemic budget that includes an extension of wage and rent subsidies through to September, $100-billion of new stimulus money for housing, transit and green technology, and sets the stage for a national $10-a-day child-care program.......Ms. Freeland’s Fall Economic Statement revealed how the pandemic has altered those forecasts dramatically. That document estimated that the 2020-21 deficit could approach $400-billion, followed by deficits of $121-billion and $51-billion."

Do you see money for defence spending in that?
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
690
Points
860
Based on just those few lines and the pandemic, I can immediately think of three areas of interest to Defence:


Stimulus for green infra - as DND is the biggest landowner with the biggest real property portfolio in the Government.

Child care - expansion of what MFRCs offer / new model ?

Pandemic preparedness - invest in stockpiles of medicines and equipment, both PHAC and DND. Also possibility of investment in new facility / facilities to replace CMED in Petawawa, likely in conjunction with PHAC.
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
437
Points
980
You know it’s called ‘virtue signaling’ not ‘concrete signaling” right? 😉
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
70
Points
530
I would say a full replacement of P8's, to replace the Auroras. Fix the input issues in regards to pilot training, perhaps look at modifications to recruiting standards (I'm not suggesting lowering standards) - and I imagine we can find enough folks to fly & operate a solid fleet of P8's, especially if they are replacing aircraft currently in service.

Just to note...ASW aircraft are not a great replacement for replacing a capility that submarines bring. The best piece of ASW kit is a serviceable sub, with a well-trained and motivated crew. Small as it is, I am a full supporter of maintaining a submarine service inside the RCN. The UK let their MPA fleet go...and it was a huge mistake. I think we'd make a similar mistake to let our submarine fleet go.

Block 4 Aurora is just starting to flush out. I think you'll see those airframes burning thru YFR until at least 2035. As the MH, Fighter, etc etc have shown us...that date is probably generous. I am CRA in 2030...I wouldn't be surprised if I'm 70 when they fly the last 140 mission.

I'd say we'll be in a good position to start purchasing used P8s when we replace the Aurora. ;)
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
141
Points
630
Just to note...ASW aircraft are not a great replacement for replacing a capility that submarines bring. The best piece of ASW kit is a serviceable sub, with a well-trained and motivated crew. Small as it is, I am a full supporter of maintaining a submarine service inside the RCN. The UK let their MPA fleet go...and it was a huge mistake. I think we'd make a similar mistake to let our submarine fleet go.

Block 4 Aurora is just starting to flush out. I think you'll see those airframes burning thru YFR until at least 2035. As the MH, Fighter, etc etc have shown us...that date is probably generous. I am CRA in 2030...I wouldn't be surprised if I'm 70 when they fly the last 140 mission.

I'd say we'll be in a good position to start purchasing used P8s when we replace the Aurora. ;)
I am actually - not kidding - making an effort to avoid reality today. <Closing my eyes and plugging my ears, singing to myself as I walk out of the room> 😅 :confused:

I hate the fact that you are probably right!
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
145
Points
780
Just to note...ASW aircraft are not a great replacement for replacing a capility that submarines bring. The best piece of ASW kit is a serviceable sub, with a well-trained and motivated crew. Small as it is, I am a full supporter of maintaining a submarine service inside the RCN. The UK let their MPA fleet go...and it was a huge mistake. I think we'd make a similar mistake to let our submarine fleet go.

Block 4 Aurora is just starting to flush out. I think you'll see those airframes burning thru YFR until at least 2035. As the MH, Fighter, etc etc have shown us...that date is probably generous. I am CRA in 2030...I wouldn't be surprised if I'm 70 when they fly the last 140 mission.

I'd say we'll be in a good position to start purchasing used P8s when we replace the Aurora. ;)
If only people understood the ranges, weapons and ISR capabilities of submarines vs surface ships, they might be more convinced. All I can say is when the next shooting war begins, a modern submarine will be by far the safest place to be on the ocean. Our Frigates will be sunk to the bottom before they even detected the bloody things.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
241
Points
680
If only people understood the ranges, weapons and ISR capabilities of submarines vs surface ships, they might be more convinced. All I can say is when the next shooting war begins, a modern submarine will be by far the safest place to be on the ocean. Our Frigates will be sunk to the bottom before they even detected the bloody things.
Counterpoint, our frigates may sink to the bottom of the ocean on their own regardless of the geopolitical situation, so they may inadvertently take out a sub by being an unmarked hazard to navigation.

Don't worry though, they have wifi, satelite tv and modernized weapons suite, so they will look sexy AF in the process. Structural integrity and sound mechanical systems are for losers!
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
145
Points
780
I think the last shooting war was against a bunch of guys who didn't even own socks (to quote Dunesbury).

Legitimate question: do you see the next shooting war involving a major power or some impoverished developing country?
Impossible to say. One thing I do think is that most/all of our tactics will probably be invalidated to a degree.

The big revolutions I see in Naval Warfare are going to come via automation. Right now Ships Combat Management Systems can basically fight themselves and the humans who press the buttons, more often then not, inject error in to the decision-making cycle and slow it down.

Any future Naval Action will be extremely quick and violent. It will also not play out how we imagined. This isn't new either and has been a factor in every Naval Engagement since the Age of Sail.

In both WWI and WWII none of the different classes of Ships ended up being used in the capacities they were originally designed for.
 

MTShaw

Jr. Member
Reaction score
6
Points
130
I think the last shooting war was against a bunch of guys who didn't even own socks (to quote Dunesbury).

Legitimate question: do you see the next shooting war involving a major power or some impoverished developing country?
It will likely be about oil and minerals, as always.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
184
Points
680
The big revolutions I see in Naval Warfare are going to come via automation. Right now Ships Combat Management Systems can basically fight themselves and the humans who press the buttons, more often then not, inject error in to the decision-making cycle and slow it down.

Any future Naval Action will be extremely quick and violent. It will also not play out how we imagined. This isn't new either and has been a factor in every Naval Engagement since the Age of Sail.

Totally agree. Modern naval warfare moves fast. In an environment where you are essentially tracking and shooting down each other's bullets speed is important.

Naval warfare is very much a come as you are situation. This is why you see navies focus on flexible GP classes, the Arleigh Burke being the most common. A loadout change for its VLS and a different helicopter/UAS embarked can completely change its role in a war.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
141
Points
630
I think the last shooting war was against a bunch of guys who didn't even own socks (to quote Dunesbury).

Legitimate question: do you see the next shooting war involving a major power or some impoverished developing country?
I think the next shooting level war many western countries will find themselves dragged into, whether they want to be or not, will be some sort of showdown, game of chicken, or extremely violent but limited engagement in the SCS, against China. Whether it is their large and well armed coast guard taking advantage of the new powers granted to it, resource conflicts such as oil or fishing, the PLA(N) arresting civilians during those disputes, illegally (for example, arresting Filipino or Japanese fishermen if there is a conflict over fishing rights) - or worst case scenario, they decide to invade Taiwan.

The smaller COIN operations & such happening now are much fewer in number now that Iraq and Afghanistan have both mostly wound down, and nobody from the west wants to get involved in any regional African problems. These are very much operations of choice.


Next big shooting war, outside of the usual Middle East nonsense? (SF against ISIS, SF against Taliban, etc) -- I'm thinking China. I'm thinking it's a matter of when, not if.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
184
Points
680
I think the next shooting level war many western countries will find themselves dragged into, whether they want to be or not, will be some sort of showdown, game of chicken, or extremely violent but limited engagement in the SCS, against China. Whether it is their large and well armed coast guard taking advantage of the new powers granted to it, resource conflicts such as oil or fishing, the PLA(N) arresting civilians during those disputes, illegally (for example, arresting Filipino or Japanese fishermen if there is a conflict over fishing rights) - or worst case scenario, they decide to invade Taiwan.

The smaller COIN operations & such happening now are much fewer in number now that Iraq and Afghanistan have both mostly wound down, and nobody from the west wants to get involved in any regional African problems. These are very much operations of choice.


Next big shooting war, outside of the usual Middle East nonsense? (SF against ISIS, SF against Taliban, etc) -- I'm thinking China. I'm thinking it's a matter of when, not if.
China vs Japan is stewing. I vote in favour of the Japanese. Their navy smacks. We always forget it but it could likely defeat the PLAN on its own.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
141
Points
630
China vs Japan is stewing. I vote in favour of the Japanese. Their navy smacks. We always forget it but it could likely defeat the PLAN on its own.
I would actually totally agree with you.

I 'quite arrogantly' immediately thought of 'what is the next shooting war we, as in the west, will be involved in?'

The Japanese really are formidable and an ally we often don't think much about, but who's capabilites are very impressive indeed.


With the sheer size of the Chinese navy, and their rapid modernization of ships, numerous submarines, etc etc -- it would be one hell of a fight. I'm obviously rooting for the Japanese, but like Stalin said - quantity has a quality all it's own.
 
Top