• 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

JMCanada

Member
Reaction score
6
Points
180
Both Japan and south Korea are good examples of planning  and continuous production, both for warships and subs. Long times between batches make loss of design and know-how capabilities.

These are to make a case study.

Back to korean boats...
https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/madex-2019/2019/10/madex-2019-dsme-on-track-with-kss-iii-batch-2-submarine-program-for-rok-navy/

... with 4 x 150 kW fuel cells plus LIBs, should be able to sail at 8 knots just on FC and use the batteries for sprints. Will be able to recharge quickly the batteries with the AIP (FC). 600 kW more than doubles the FC power of the U-212 boats (240kW)...
if my data are correct.

 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
120
Points
680
Colin P said:
The timeframe works for us as well, as they near the end of production we can tap in to it and start replacing our subs, where we have gotten benefits from the latest upgrade and they are beyond economical repair. Plus the Canadian mods (weapons systems most likely) can be incorporated at the building phase and we would benefit from their learning curve and any upgrades they do. The same applies to both the Japanese and planned Aussie sub

I found this interesting:

The Sōryū class is relatively young: the first sub was launched in 2009, and in many navies it’s difficult to imagine work already proceeding on a replacement. Japan however typically keeps its submarines in service for just twenty years, a relatively short time for modern warships. So it’s not exactly surprising that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, one of Japan’s top submarine builders, has already unveiled the country’s next-generation submarine design, designated 29SS. The sub due in the late-2020s. (The designation “29SS” is derived from the 29th year of the reign of Emperor Akihito, otherwise known to everyone else as 2017, and SS is the international shorthand for non-nuclear attack submarine.)

from https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a28184939/29ss-japan-submarine/

Japan doesn't seem to build large numbers of the same ship class.  It seems more like they build four or five and then a new ship class is produced.Very interesting how they work.  But hey, worlds second most powerful navy can do what they want.  It works for them.
 

Spencer100

Sr. Member
Reaction score
8
Points
180
French are having problems too

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/16/french-submarine-burns-in-unbelievably-fierce-fire-for-14-hours/

Maybe a total loss. 

 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
107
Points
680
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/06/navy-awards-10-billion-contract-for-next-generation-columbia-class-submarine-made-by-electric-boat/?utm_source=militarymemes&utm_campaign=alt&utm_medium=facebook

In related news, US signs for 2 new next gen Columbia class SSBN. Maybe we can get a few and make them SSGN's?
 

Gorgo

Full Member
Reaction score
8
Points
230
Oh, wouldn't that be nice.  And convert our SSGNs into ABM platforms launching the enhanced Standards instead?

Ah, it's such a great dream, isn't it...?
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
55
Points
530
And a dream is all it will stay: Think about the money spent and the cost of changing the torpedoes on the VICTORIA's - and that was just to replace tube and handling systems from Tigerfish to Mk 48's.

How much more complex do you think it would be to modify a SSBN meant to fire ICBM's so they carry and fire the much much smaller diameter  SM-3? Moreover, where on earth do you put all the associated radar work you need to do ABM on a submarine? Finally, do you know what is required to adapt a missile so it is possible to fire it from underwater?

Some dreams are just that, sorry.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
247
Points
680
Not to mention: does anyone seriously think that the USN will let any foreigner near their newest strategic asset, much less sell them to Canada.

What else do you want: the Starship Enterprise? It is the same level of reality involved in these “dreams”.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
322
Points
880
We restarted our sub arm by leasing US boats. I wonder if another country would lease us subs, perhaps placing the Vics on one coast and the leased boats on another.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
40
Points
530
Fred Herriot said:
Oh, wouldn't that be nice.  And convert our SSGNs into ABM platforms launching the enhanced Standards instead?

Ah, it's such a great dream, isn't it...?

Uhh... ?
 

Uzlu

Full Member
Reaction score
21
Points
180
The Advanced Thinking Behind Sweden’s New A-26 Submarine

The Swedish Navy’s submarines are famous for their stealth. This was amply demonstrated in 2006 when Sweden loaned one of its subs, HMS Gotland, to the U.S. Navy. The AIP (Air Independent Power) equipped submarine repeatedly avoided detection. And it was able to score notable ‘victories’ against an Aircraft Carrier during exercises.

Sweden's next type of submarine, the A-26 Blekinge Class, promises to take stealth to another level. And not just by even quieter AIP. One of its secret ingredients will be uncrewed underwater vehicles (UUVs). These are basically robot submarines that can allow the submarine to remain hidden while taking the fight to the enemy.

The UUVs can perform many missions traditionally done by the submarine itself. And also missions which a full-size submarine could be used. The first set of missions assigned to these robots is likely to be ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance). For example the UUV might swim ahead of the submarine and use a electro-optical mast (like a modern periscope) to observe an enemy port. It can then discretely report back to the submariner which can move into a firing position. Other roles might include acting as off-board ears to listen for enemy submarines. Or acting as a decoy.

The use of the submarine's own UUVs could significantly enhance its military utility. Speaking at Saab’s 2020 Submarine Seminar, the chief of the Swedish Navy, Rear Admiral Ewa Ann-Sofi Skoog Haslum, emphasized this. She pointed out that the incorporation of more capable UUVs will transform the way submarines are used. Historically submarines operated in two modes. They were even staying hidden and listening, or were shooting torpedoes. If a submarine fires its torpedoes, then it is generally detected and loses its stealth. So there were very few options in between.

This resonates with the ways submarines are used in other navies and is a basic truth of submarine warfare for the past 50 years. But the Swedish concept sees UUVs as part of the answer to this conundrum. The UUVs can act as the submarine’s eyes and ears, and be much closer to the target than the submarine. They can, for example, use active sonar which would normally give the submarine away. It might give the UUV away, but the submarine can remain hidden, quietly launching torpedoes at the targets reported by the UUV.

The A-26 design is not just for the Swedish Navy. Unlike the nuclear powered submarines built in the U.S and Britain, Swedish conventional subs are available on the export market. This has been baked in to the design, with the modular. This approach allows tailoring to a specific nations needs. The A-26 design comes in a range of sizes, from very small to the extended range version with cruise missile tubes added.

In terms of a market outlook, Lars Brännström the Chief Marketing Officer at Saab Kockums, hinted towards Canada. This is would be particularly interesting as the Canadian Navy will need to replace its Victoria Class submarines. The Netherlands is known to be considering the A-26 to replace its Walrus Class boats. And there will be other natural opportunities in the coming years. Brännström also mentioned that some navies who do not currently have submarines are talking to Saab about gaining that capability.

So the A-26 submarines in't only advanced in terms of its equipment. There is advanced thinking behind the way it can be used. As bystanders we can fall into a trap of seeing submarines in terms of technical specifications. But to navies, it is really about how they can be used.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2020/09/04/the-advanced-thinking-behind-swedens-new-a-26-submarine/#5a136d153760
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
107
Points
680
The million dollar question is, is the company lobbying the Canadian government to buy subs from them? Or is the company just saying that they have identified canada as a potential market.

The A-26 seems to be a vary capable sub if we got it in the right configuration. If we really wanted to get in the strategic capability, its reported the Oceanic Extended range configuration can house a 18 tube VLS for cruise missiles. Not that we could afford a capability like that, but one can dream.
 

Spencer100

Sr. Member
Reaction score
8
Points
180
MilEME09 said:
The million dollar question is, is the company lobbying the Canadian government to buy subs from them? Or is the company just saying that they have identified canada as a potential market.

The A-26 seems to be a vary capable sub if we got it in the right configuration. If we really wanted to get in the strategic capability, its reported the Oceanic Extended range configuration can house a 18 tube VLS for cruise missiles. Not that we could afford a capability like that, but one can dream.

I don't think Canada would even think about VLS tubes even if money was not a problem.  I do not see the Government (and especially this gov but not exclusively)  wanting to have a capability that is so offensive in nature.  And we have no real strategic weapon systems.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
322
Points
880
Well our CSC are getting VLS capability from what I can tell and having it in our subs as well would make sense. The combination of the CSC's, new subs with VLS and other tech, along with new AOR's makes the RCN a small but potent force.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
53
Points
530
Colin P said:
Well our CSC are getting VLS capability from what I can tell and having it in our subs as well would make sense. The combination of the CSC's, new subs with VLS and other tech, along with new AOR's makes the RCN a small but potent force.

There is a difference, when you think of sub launched missiles you thing of nukes or conventional cruise missiles and a sub can silently approach the coast and launch, offensive in nature. When you think of a VLS for a CSC Anti Aircraft/defensive comes to mind. Canada will never have cruise missiles.
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
2
Points
180
Fair bit of options out there for subs. It will be interesting to see what gets offered for the Dutch replacement. If they didn't like the Navantia/S-80 offering its hard to see Naval Group making the cut. Is the A-26 Oceanic ER just 20m longer? And can you just do that with subs and keep extending them or do they get too long and narrow from an acoustic or propulsion perspective?
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
322
Points
880
Chief Engineer said:
There is a difference, when you think of sub launched missiles you thing of nukes or conventional cruise missiles and a sub can silently approach the coast and launch, offensive in nature. When you think of a VLS for a CSC Anti Aircraft/defensive comes to mind. Canada will never have cruise missiles.

Under our current government absolutely, but events in the next 20-30 years are hard to predict and I would rather have capability built in and not used, than not to have it. Plus technology is rapidly changing, there may be a lot of uses for VLS other than cruise missiles including a reconnaissance capability. 
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
53
Points
530
Colin P said:
Under our current government absolutely, but events in the next 20-30 years are hard to predict and I would rather have capability built in and not used, than not to have it. Plus technology is rapidly changing, there may be a lot of uses for VLS other than cruise missiles including a reconnaissance capability.

Unfortunately the government doesn't think that way.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
322
Points
880
But maybe if we gave the crew and captain funky looking socks they can pose with, they might change their mind?  ;D
 
Top