![]() |
Ouch! HMCS Corner Brook Damage
|
Next to he Sea King fiasco, the purchase of these Victoria class Subs has to be one of the biggest debacles in Canadian military history.
|
At the very least, the boats have had about the worst luck possible!
|
Guess the Canadians didn't learn anything from USS San Francisco...
|
Its really sad since these (originally Upholder class) were well designed boats. However, the design never really translated into the build. The boats really never got the full "Royal Navy" treatment upon commissioning - literally - the bugs never got worked out. Then they get decommissioned, sit in mothballs and finally get "recommissioned" many years later...
Within 3 years - Ursula - now Corner Brook - needed a refit. Still a design with "bugs" - and no offense to our Northern allies - but Canada doesn't have quite the naval tradition or know-how that the British do - so a lot of problems never got found and fixed. 4 boats - one catches fire due to a hatch being left open (not a bright move by our Canuck friends), Windsor is undergoing a refit that looks to be taking 6 yrs (as of now). Victoria suffered massive damage when Canadian naval personnel hooked up a generator they shouldn't have. And now Corner Brook is out of action due to an avoidable accident. I have to say the Canadians seriously need to reconsider their desire to operate subs.... As of this point it doesn't look like the Canadians are properly trained to move on from the old Oberon Class - even though they are no longer in service. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Canada on the other hand does not have an ability to transport Expeditionary Forces on it's own. LHD's and LPD's would be perfect for this role. As it stands right now the DND is renting services from the Russians to get men and material in and out of Afghanistan via An's and Tu services. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
It's almost a guarantee that in any armed conflict with either of these nations that the US would guarantee the sovereignty and defence of Canada's coasts. Quote:
The Wasps or San Antonio's I speak of would be to transport our troops and equipment to and fro from 'x' region when need be. Quote:
|
Quote:
Regardless I don't see such war happening unless Washington decides to wage one. That is ofcourse just my opinion. Quote:
|
Original cost for four used diesel subs: 750 million.
Repair bill since purchase: 1 billion. Total estimated cost by 2016: 3 billion. Total number of boats currently in service: 0. Age of boats when all back in service in 2016: 30 years. As a Canadian tax payer I can only say this is one heck of a deal. What a country. :har: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
For that price they could have bought a couple of type 212's which would have suited them better.
Canada should has a good size fleet but it relys on the USA and UK to aid its defence weaknesses. A good fleet for canada imho would be. 2 x LPD much like the ocean or albion of the UK 6 x DDG nothing too brash or expencive along the lines of the Type 45 12 x FFG again the size and cost of british type 23's 10 x other units such as mine warfare and costal patrol craft 4 x SSK submarines like the type 212 as it would give atleast 25 years of service before needing replacement i didnt put a carrier down because theres no real need for canada to have one. |
Those ex-Oberon have certainly been unlucky for them :hmmm:
|
Quote:
Upholder/Victoria class http://www.military-today.com/navy/upholder.jpg Oberon class http://naval-museum.mb.ca/wp-content.../02/ojibwa.jpg Canadas Oberons were quite reliable, more so than the Upholders, sadly, but that's more to do with the fact that the Upholders were decommissioned virtually as soon as they were commissioned, and spent a good few years in mothballs. |
Quote:
:oops: :DL |
Quote:
Canada has a nice coastal patrol/MHC boat the Kingston class. Its multi-use and would be a nice base for a more advanced OPV. For Submarines I would almost say they would need none, but if they were dead set on buying some a small scale coastal boat like the new KSS 500A would be what they should invest in. Also since they are involved in lots of NATO support missions their Anphib capabilities should be more geared to delivering supplies to exiting ports not for landing on the beach (ships like the Lewis and Clark class would be ideal over a Albion) and they should procure more AORs. |
i could agree with that but it does depend on the type of role they wish to play, do they really want to go back to the 1920's or become more of a player or even sit on the fence.
The reason why i think canada needs SSK's is simple: The have a border which is on the artic ocean,it is known forign submarines transit canadian waters and in some places are inaccessible to FFG or DDG's so realy imho they do need atleast 4 subs to maintain a watch in that area atleast |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.