Ouch! HMCS Corner Brook Damage

02-13-12, 06:32 PM

Looks like the Navy kept the extent of the damage pretty much in house.

CBC News

sidmo001 · 02-13-12, 06:45 PM

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.

CCIP · 02-13-12, 06:49 PM

At the very least, the boats have had about the worst luck possible!

magicstix · 02-13-12, 07:05 PM

Guess the Canadians didn't learn anything from USS San Francisco...

CaptainHaplo · 02-13-12, 07:29 PM

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.

sidmo001 · 02-13-12, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

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.

I've always been a proponent of the Canadian Navy going after an LHD or LPD fleet. With the amount of money the DND has sunk in to these 4 subs, we could of purchased a couple of Wasp Class LHD's, or a San Antonio LPD.

magicstix · 02-13-12, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

I've always been a proponent of the Canadian Navy going after an LHD or LPD fleet. With the amount of money the DND has sunk in to these 4 subs, we could of purchased a couple of Wasp Class LHD's, or a San Antonio LPD.

LHD and LPD = submarine bait. That's probably why they didn't get them over subs.

sidmo001 · 02-13-12, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magicstix

LHD and LPD = submarine bait. That's probably why they didn't get them over subs.

Canada has the United States Navy and the Royal Navy as allies when it comes to having Subs and screening ships.

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.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 02-14-12, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

Canada has the United States Navy and the Royal Navy as allies when it comes to having Subs and screening ships.

I wouldn't count to Americans and Britons having enough vessels for helping you in time of need. Ofcourse it can be questionable if British Royal Navy even have missiles onboard their vessels then.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

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.

And for what it needs that capability? With couple of LHDs and/or LPDs you are not going to do forced entry to anywhere without someone elses protection. Without escort they are just high price torpedo practice targets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

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.

That is unlikely to change with ship purchase. Unless you buy some own heavy transport aircraft you are still going to need Russians in future.

sidmo001 · 02-14-12, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

I wouldn't count to Americans and Britons having enough vessels for helping you in time of need. Ofcourse it can be questionable if British Royal Navy even have missiles onboard their vessels then.

The only possible enemies of Canada in any type of armed conflict are likely Russia and China. Russia and China don't have the navies (even combined) to mount any type of serious threat to the East or Western North American coasts.

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:

And for what it needs that capability? With couple of LHDs and/or LPDs you are not going to do forced entry to anywhere without someone elses protection. Without escort they are just high price torpedo practice targets.

Canada doesn't need to do any forced entries, nor would we have any capability to do so anyway.

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:

That is unlikely to change with ship purchase. Unless you buy some own heavy transport aircraft you are still going to need Russians in future.

LPD's and LHD's would cut a significant amount of need for Russia's air transport services moving forward.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 02-14-12, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

The only possible enemies of Canada in any type of armed conflict are likely Russia and China. Russia and China don't have the navies (even combined) to mount any type of serious threat to the East or Western North American coasts.

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.

With current U.S. Navy and British Royal Navy (in lesser extent) I don't doubt that. However with U.S. somewhat "challenging" economical situation I wouldn't count on that to be true in future.

Regardless I don't see such war happening unless Washington decides to wage one. That is ofcourse just my opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sidmo001

Canada doesn't need to do any forced entries, nor would we have any capability to do so anyway.

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.

LPD's and LHD's would cut a significant amount of need for Russia's air transport services moving forward.

Then I would buy some Ro-Ro ferries for that purpose. LHD and LPD are (in my opinion) unnecessarily expensive to act as simple transports. If flight deck is absolutely necessary then installing hangar and helipad shouldn't be too expensive.

u crank · 02-14-12, 07:16 AM

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.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 02-14-12, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by u crank

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.

Well, its not dumb who asks, but who pays.

u crank · 02-14-12, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

Well, its not dumb who asks, but who pays.

Roger that. It's best not to think about it. Is it to early for a drink?

Kapitan · 02-14-12, 09:29 AM

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.

02-13-12, 06:32 PM	#1
Randomizer Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Ouch! HMCS Corner Brook Damage Looks like the Navy kept the extent of the damage pretty much in house. CBC News

02-13-12, 06:49 PM	#3
CCIP Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Waterloo, Canada Posts: 8,700 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 2	At the very least, the boats have had about the worst luck possible! __________________ There are only forty people in the world and five of them are hamburgers. -Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart)

02-13-12, 07:29 PM	#5
CaptainHaplo Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4,404 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 0	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. __________________ Good Hunting! Captain Haplo

02-14-12, 07:16 AM	#12
u crank Old enough to know better Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Prince Edward Island Posts: 11,747 Downloads: 136 Uploads: 0	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. __________________ “Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.” ― Arthur C. Clarke

02-14-12, 09:29 AM	#15
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	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. __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

02-13-12, 06:45 PM	#2
sidmo001 Sailor man Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 46 Downloads: 22 Uploads: 0	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.

02-13-12, 07:05 PM	#4
magicstix Captain Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Nuclear submarine under the North Pole Posts: 482 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	Guess the Canadians didn't learn anything from USS San Francisco...