Replacing the Subs

[Czech_pivo]

I would agree with especially the last sentence. We in Canada live in this schizophrenic world of justifying how we are NOT in any need to defend Canada because of our moral purity and not being American. All the while not too deep in our hearts and minds is the thought of Defending Canada being " thats what the Yanks do "

I wonder what Mr Biden will quietly ask for before the end of March

I wonder what Mr Biden will quietly ask for tell us to do before the end of March

Fixed it for you.

I'd love to be invisible and at these meetings.
1) Will Freeland be sucking up to any and every Sr. person on Biden's team in trying to sell herself for the NATO role or whatever non-CDN position she's vying for.
2) Will Anita be trying to look and act tough and playing ball with the Americans in hopes for gaining their approval for her potential leadership play if JT is pushed onto a sword or someone puts one or more in his back.
3) Does JT wear socks of many colours in order to try and dazzle and confuse Biden in order to get him off his game and stop asking JT to spend more on defence
4) Will poutine be on the menu at any of the lunch/dinner events and are the Americans 'forced' to eat this unique CDN culinary dish.

Only time will time which of these 4 items will turn out to be correct or off the mark.

 

[Underway]

Look, don't bother NWOs with your "physics".

You are literally describing the reason my entire trade exists.

 

[Underway]

2) Will Anita be trying to look and act tough and playing ball with the Americans in hopes for gaining their approval for her potential leadership play if JT is pushed onto a sword or someone puts one or more in his back.

I have some serious respect for the current defence minister.

She's putting in a lot of hours to get that new Defence Policy worked out and even more hours to ensure that every person in DND feels safe to come to work. Given the revelations the last few years that's an admirable and legitimate goal.

Give it a few months and we'll see what she's really made of publically. I think people will be surprised.

 

[dimsum]

I legitimately have some serious respect for the current defence minister.

She's putting in a lot of hours to get that new Defence Policy worked out and even more hours to ensure that every person in DND feels safe to come to work. Given the revelations the last few years that's an admirable goal and legitimate goal.

Give it a few months and we'll see what she's really made of publically. I think people will be surprised.

Agreed.

 

[lenaitch]

our Arctic sovereignty is disputed by the United States,

No they don't. The reject our claim that the entirety of the Northwest Passage is Canadian internal waters, and there are disputing border proposals regarding the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which haven't been negotiated yet.

 

[JLB50]

I have some serious respect for the current defence minister.

She's putting in a lot of hours to get that new Defence Policy worked out and even more hours to ensure that every person in DND feels safe to come to work. Given the revelations the last few years that's an admirable and legitimate goal.

Give it a few months and we'll see what she's really made of publically. I think people will be surprised.

From what I’ve read about her, she offers at least some promise over her predecessor, Sajjan. She’s quite intelligent and hard-working. I think she’s trying to do a lot more for the CAF but is running into opposition from her peers and higher up (you know who!). If she can at least clean up some of the infamous bureaucracy in her department she will have my respect.

 

[Maxman1]

No they don't. The reject our claim that the entirety of the Northwest Passage is Canadian internal waters, and there are disputing border proposals regarding the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which haven't been negotiated yet.

In other words, you're saying:

They do dispute our claim to the Northwest Passage and border proposals, which is a key part of our Arctic sovereignty.

 

[RDBZ]

If Australia can think they can do it we can surely do it. Do we want to? Should we want to? In an unlimited defence budget I can make the case for nuclear subs the lack of power and range limitations are compelling. Does it mean that SSK's are not viable anymore? But the defence budget is limited not just for us but Australia as well. Australia has already abandoned 2 submarine plans one with Japan and one with France. This plan is much more complex and lengthy with many bumps on the road

The Soryu class saga was more about media speculation and hype though, not an actual program.

I suspect the Aus DoD learned from the Attack class; hence the options for more Virginia class boats which no doubt will be exercised pretty quickly if the SSK-AUKUS program looks like imploding or running off the rails.

 

[RDBZ]

On the other hand we have Australia - a country that doesn't have a single nuclear power plant in it producing electricity (there is a minor one that produces medical isotopes) and currently has no plans to build any nuclear power plants. It would rather burn its low cost coal. A country that has no nuclear experience, no nuclear scientists, no nuclear technicians, no nuclear training facilities or nuclear instructors. But in spite of this, its decided that nuclear submarines (that they don't need for under ice purposes) are the way forward for them in protecting their citizens from potential enemies and to still relevant to their allies.

That "research" reactor program has been in existence since the 1950s though, and has operated without incident throughout that timeframe.

Going from "research" to naval reactors will certainly require a lot of effort, but going from civilian nuclear power production to naval reactors would have it own set of issues.

UNSW introduced a post graduate nuclear engineering program a few years ago, so the scaling up has already started.

 

[Lumber]

No they don't. The reject our claim that the entirety of the Northwest Passage is Canadian internal waters, and there are disputing border proposals regarding the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which haven't been negotiated yet.

They do, but they don't. The Americans are never going to completely give us the finger and do what they want in "our waters", but by refusing to officially acknowledge our position, they are able to maintain their position elsewhere in the world.

 

[OldSolduer]

I have some serious respect for the current defence minister.

As do I despite my limited knowledge and observations on how she handles herself in the media. The previous one, despite his military experience, was a dunderhead.

 

[RDBZ]

The Soryu class saga was more about media speculation and hype though, not an actual program.

I suspect the Aus DoD learned from the Attack class; hence the options for more Virginia class boats which no doubt will be exercised pretty quickly if the SSK-AUKUS program looks like imploding or running off the rails.

...SSN-AUKUS....

 

[lenaitch]

In other words, you're saying:

They do dispute our claim to the Northwest Passage and border proposals, which is a key part of our Arctic sovereignty.

They do, but they don't. The Americans are never going to completely give us the finger and do what they want in "our waters", but by refusing to officially acknowledge our position, they are able to maintain their position elsewhere in the world.

I don't interpret having a conflicting territorial position to ours as not respecting our sovereignty. They claim something - we claim something. Quite frankly, if they are exploiting a perceived weakness on our part for not exercising or enforcing our claim, I'm not sure I blame them.

I understand the US position on the NWP as recognition would impact their credibility to exercise freedom of the seas in other parts of the world. They are not signatory to a lot of international treaties and conventions so as to not limit their options.

 

[KevinB]

I don't interpret having a conflicting territorial position to ours as not respecting our sovereignty. They claim something - we claim something. Quite frankly, if they are exploiting a perceived weakness on our part for not exercising or enforcing our claim, I'm not sure I blame them.

I understand the US position on the NWP as recognition would impact their credibility to exercise freedom of the seas in other parts of the world. They are not signatory to a lot of international treaties and conventions so as to not limit their options.

Agreed.
We can unofficially recognize something from an Ally, and act like we do officially recognize it, while still not limiting ourselves elsewhere.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The US hands are tied in regards to our disputes with them. Maritime law regarding free navigation and boundaries is based on precedents and rolling over for us, weakens their position elsewhere.

 

[Maxman1]

Anyway, about those subs...

 

[stoker dave]

See this link for a letter written by Adm Rickover in 1953. It was true then and it is true today.

Admiral Rickover's 'Paper Reactor' memo

Rickover's famous speech about the distinction between academic (paper) reactors and practical reactors.

whatisnuclear.com

Here is an excerpt of the above:

a practical reactor plant can be distinguished by the following characteristics:

1. It is being built now.
2. It is behind schedule.
3. It is requiring an immense amount of development an apparently trivial items. Corrosion, in particular, is a problem.
4. It is very expensive.
5. It takes a long time to build because of the engineering development problems.
6. It is large.
7. It is heavy.
8. It is complicated.

.....

Unfortunately for those who must make far-reaching decisions without the benefit of an intimate knowledge of reactor technology and unfortunately for the interested public, it is much easier to get the academic side of an issue than the practical side. For a large part those involved with the academic reactors have more inclination and time to present their ideas in reports and orally to those who will listen. Since they are innocently unaware of the real but hidden difficulties of their plans, they speak with great facility and confidence. Those involved with practical reactors, humbled by their experiences, speak less and worry more.

 

[dapaterson]

Applicable to many procurements, not just reactors.

 

[GR66]

I can't find the article I read the other day but it was a news report saying that the US is categorically stating that it will not offer nuclear sub technology to any other US allies other than Australia.

 

[suffolkowner]

I can't find the article I read the other day but it was a news report saying that the US is categorically stating that it will not offer nuclear sub technology to any other US allies other than Australia.

Not when Trudeau is the PM