Canadian subs fire first torpedo - Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History

Willy · #1 16 Mar 12, 21:27

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...a-torpedo.html

First torpedo after eight years in service! My question is why would we decide to alter the subs to fire a different torpedo than they were designed for? Was it for greater interoperability with US forces perhaps? The whole Canadian submarine saga seems to just be one big sad and depressing mess.

strathnaver · #2 20 Mar 12, 15:54

at least they are working

Bow · #3 21 Mar 12, 09:24

When I lived in Victoria I had a good view of the navel ship yard and never,ever saw the two subs there go to sea.......guess the admirels wanted some toys to play with the Big Boys.....along the same lines as our Airforce Generals want F35,s.....well at least the a/c wont be second hand UK junk....

Destroyer25 · #4 21 Mar 12, 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bow

When I lived in Victoria I had a good view of the navel ship yard and never,ever saw the two subs there go to sea.......guess the admirels wanted some toys to play with the Big Boys.....along the same lines as our Airforce Generals want F35,s.....well at least the a/c wont be second hand UK junk....

Agreed. We should have never bought that trash. Perhaps we oughta work on some indigenous designs or buy American.

surfinbird · #5 14 Apr 12, 17:52

Garbage. And Americans, i beleive, don't make diesel submarines. The best choice would be German U-Boats. Heck, we've had first-hand experience that German subs are the best, why not cash in on that.

I would personally give Harper my tax money, cash, if he was to buy Dolphin AIP subs.

TacCovert4 · #6 15 Apr 12, 10:18

Subs are a good force multiplier for a small Navy. But I agree, as small as your forces are, you don't need to waste resources on 2nd hand stuff. Your force needs to be absolutely 1st rate for its size. With your US relations, and ability to make decent-sized orders, maybe 2-4 stretched Dolphins, the stretch giving them more fuel capacity or spec-ops load and VLS for cruise missiles....making it a "Mini-Virginia" (getting any electronics upgrades you need from the US). I would build the rest of your navy out of 2-4 proper DDGs, and then a raft of 'dual purpose' cutter/corvettes armed with a 40-50mm gun, RAM and SM2s for Air/Surface defense, and capacity for a special-operations team/boarding crew and a couple of RIBs under the helipad (utility helo optional)

andrewza · #7 15 Apr 12, 10:42

Get Germain subs We have 209. I have all ways wondered how a nation with Canada coast has such a small navy. I agree with tacCovert4 but would had a LPD/LHD plus 2 combat support ships. make 2 DDG and 6 to 8 FSG plus a number of helicopter supporting OPV's and a 76mm over 40/50mm maybe a 40mm close in weapon though since you a ally of the USA you get the 20mm instead.

TacCovert4 · #8 15 Apr 12, 11:07

I would hold off of any sort of Amphib group in lieu of more defensive ships. Canada doesn't need force projection worldwide, they need the ability to defend their coastline, and project a small force, say regiment size tops, away from their coasts. At most I'd go for something along the lines of a "Helicopter Destroyer" or LHD optimized for heliborne operations rather than amphibs.

andrewza · #9 15 Apr 12, 11:17

Agree no need for a wasp. But a small LHD (6 to 12 medium helicopters) would be of use. It would be of great help in any natrual disaerter has it could act has a hospital ship a comand center and launch rescue missions. In war it could provid for a large force of ASW helicopters and carry troops for a landing.

KICK · #10 15 Apr 12, 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willy

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...a-torpedo.html

First torpedo after eight years in service! My question is why would we decide to alter the subs to fire a different torpedo than they were designed for? Was it for greater interoperability with US forces perhaps? The whole Canadian submarine saga seems to just be one big sad and depressing mess.

piss poor planning on the CanNavy's part.

...

johnbryan · #11 03 May 12, 12:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willy

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...a-torpedo.html

First torpedo after eight years in service! My question is why would we decide to alter the subs to fire a different torpedo than they were designed for? Was it for greater interoperability with US forces perhaps? The whole Canadian submarine saga seems to just be one big sad and depressing mess.

The US made that mistake of not holding any live fire exercises of their torpedoes in the Pacific between World Wars 1 and 2 and later paid for it during the first three years of WWII there.

nikolas93TS · #12 03 May 12, 13:36

Mind you,Canada by 1945 was world third allied navy which contributed so much to victory in battle of Atlantic.It is sad in some way that they today have only one working submarine.Damn bureaucratization or whatever...

johnbryan · #13 03 May 12, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikolas93TS

Mind you,Canada by 1945 was world third allied navy which contributed so much to victory in battle of Atlantic.It is sad in some way that they today have only one working submarine.Damn bureaucratization or whatever...

The Canadian Navy was the third largest navy in the world in 1945.

PacificSentinel · #14 03 May 12, 20:37

Canada refunded £2m for 'dead duck' subs

Asked by Portsmouth MP Mike Hancock about the sale of the boats, defence equipment minister Peter Luff said that the Canadian government asked for compensation in 2002 and 2004 "due to concerns about their condition and ability to meet the Canadian requirements".

"The Ministry of Defence did not pay any compensation; however, an amendment to the contract was agreed where the cost of the final submarine was reduced by £2m as an act of good faith and without liability.

"The MoD holds annual meetings with the Canadian Department of National Defence to discuss any issues of mutual interest arising from the operation of the Victoria Class submarines," said Luff.

"Outside these meetings, requests for information or assistance, in the form of technical advice on through life support, are occasionally received from either the Canadian government or Babcock International Ltd, the contractor that maintains the submarines. Both the annual meetings and individual requests are handled as routine business under a bilateral Memorandum of Understanding for the exchange of technical information."

After receiving the response, Hancock told Canada's CBC News the incident showed "how badly Canada was shafted" by the sale.

"They flog you some dead ducks of submarines and won't give you compensation and then give you £2 million to go away and be quiet," he said.

Link

andrewza · #15 04 May 12, 05:45

Some heads need rolling in Canada. I mean every time the media says something about SA have one sub out the water for so long some Admiral or retired Admiral says. "At least we better than Canada and Australia" in more diplomatic speech though.