Pick a nuc, any nuc

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by aaken

Come on, give them some credit. I'm sure the akula has it's functions. Plenty of weapons, fast boat, the improved and II's are as quiet as most of the subs built at that time, great looking boat, with a price tag of less than half of the Virginia's, what more do you ask for?

I never said it wasn't capable, just that I am convinced the designers in Russia have an eye for good looks too!

[LoBlo]

Originally Posted by aaken

Don't know what Drebbel meant but I think he meant a completely electric boat, since also a nuclear-electric power plant has a steam engine. It has synchronous electric generators instead of the reduction gear but the steam turbines are still there.

Slightly OT: it is often stated that the Virginia is able to perform missions in a littoral environment. But isn't it a little too long to be a good littoral boat? I mean it can eventually go in a coastal environment but then would not be able to manouver that much due to its length. Plus it has a pumpjet which is a machine with high dynamic inertia compared to an unshrouded propeller, so it has higher response times to changes of speed. Is it sufficient to have good sensors to qualify a boat as coastal?

Actually Littoral missions are exactly what the VA was intended for. Spying off coastlines and SoF insertions. But its not going to be doing somersaults while its in shallow water no.

[LoBlo]

So from the looks of this poll... ...

I can't believe that the Astute beat out the Virginia... BAE couldn't even complete their project without Electric Boats help...
And most people went ahead and shelled out the 3billioin dollar apiece for the SW over the VA as well...
Akulas still reign supreme as the best back for buck (as far as nukes go), and that was my choice as well.

[P_Funk]

Scandium put his finger on it.

We, the Canauckians, don't need some world record running sub that can put deadly firepower outside the port of our worst enemy within a day. Actually right now the place we need seapower more than anywhere else, ironically, is within our own borders (sea borders ). Our northern passage through our arctic waters is an important route that shipping can take and is also right now being violated constantly by many nationalities without our consent. See the recent report of an American Nuclear sub that stationed itself without any real purpose inside Canadian waters. How's that for a slap in the face? No I think my original idea of that one that the Germans have got is better for us given our realistic Naval and political needs. We need to guard our borders and if anything have a recognizable presense in our less than recognized" waters. There is a precedent in international law that says if a sea lane is used for a certain period of time by other nationalities and is not policed by the nation which claims right over said area it becomes international waters and the entitled nation loses all rights to it (including whatever might be sitting underneath the sea bed). So that's the biggest threat to Canada's sovereignty. Oh and our good buddies the USA are doing their best to try and rob us of our entitled borders, once again. It's not 1812 but it still bugs the hell out of me.

I'll take a modern U-boat anyday. maybe we should call the first one the HMCS Kretschmer.:rotfl:

PS> Oh and its nice to seea thread where I can pull my weight as a Canuck. Arguing about the US can be rather tiresome.

[Kapitan]

I know for fact akulas dive below 600 meters and go faster than 33knots which is deeper and faster than the 688 and 688i it houses more weapons than them two submarines and also the virginia its capible of launching more weapons at once than any other submarine on earth.

Its cheap reliable and easy to maintain.

[Takeda Shingen]

I'd go with the Han. Or maybe an old November.

In seriousness, I think the Virginia would be the best option. Having 20 years on the Akula design, they will give you more 'bang for your buck', as they will remain technologically competitive longer than any Cold War design.

I agree that there is nothing that can touch the SSN-21 class, but the US only built three of them If anyone needs a fleet, this is not an option.

[Kapitan]

there was ment to be 10 SSN-21's wasnt there? that would have worked out super expencive!

[Takeda Shingen]

There were indeed intended to be ten of them, but the 21's were quite the runaway project. New bell and whistles were piled upon each other, which did greatly enhance the boats, but Congress' collective jaw hit the floor when the bill came along. Yes, the SSN-21 was the ultimate submarine. In fact, it was a little too ultimate.

[Subnuts]

I'd take an Akula with Virginia sensors, a Seawolf propulsion plant and weapons from an Astute.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

Scandium put his finger on it.

We, the Canauckians, don't need some world record running sub that can put deadly firepower outside the port of our worst enemy within a day. Actually right now the place we need seapower more than anywhere else, ironically, is within our own borders (sea borders ). Our northern passage through our arctic waters is an important route that shipping can take and is also right now being violated constantly by many nationalities without our consent. See the recent report of an American Nuclear sub that stationed itself without any real purpose inside Canadian waters. How's that for a slap in the face? No I think my original idea of that one that the Germans have got is better for us given our realistic Naval and political needs. We need to guard our borders and if anything have a recognizable presense in our less than recognized" waters. There is a precedent in international law that says if a sea lane is used for a certain period of time by other nationalities and is not policed by the nation which claims right over said area it becomes international waters and the entitled nation loses all rights to it (including whatever might be sitting underneath the sea bed). So that's the biggest threat to Canada's sovereignty. Oh and our good buddies the USA are doing their best to try and rob us of our entitled borders, once again. It's not 1812 but it still bugs the hell out of me.

I'll take a modern U-boat anyday. maybe we should call the first one the HMCS Kretschmer.:rotfl:

PS> Oh and its nice to seea thread where I can pull my weight as a Canuck. Arguing about the US can be rather tiresome.

Yep, exactly. We don't have the population or the desire to build and man a massive navy, we're not into nukes, and our modern history has been pretty peaceful (not quite Switzerland peaceful but peaceful none the less); also treaties and our major role in NATO and NORAD means we're not likely to be invaded anytime soon. BUT we still need to effectively patrol our massive coastlines, and corresonding territorial waters and only a few recent examples from history are enough to demonstrate we haven't been doing that.

P_Funk mentioned one especially relevant example with regard to the Northern Passage, and then there's the foreign overfishing - within our own territorial waters and in violation of our sovereignty - that helped destroy the Atlantic fishing industry even after we put a moratorium on domestic fishing.

Therefore I think what we most need, as far as seapower goes, are more small coastal PT boats (we have only a total of 12 altogether) along with another few frigates and destroyers. As far as subs go, an expanded fleet of diesal subs to keep tabs on things invisibly from below would be a boon too (right now we have only 4 problem riddled Victoria Class SSK subs).

The nice thing about smaller vessels is that you can blanket more coastline without requiring a big increase in budget or man power.

But for us nuke subs aren't the way to go. Too wasteful of resources that can be better allocated to our other naval needs.

[Edit] Also its worth mentioning that, aside from protecting the sovereignty of our coastal waters, the biggest threat we face (and the same in the US) is from Jihadists coming ashore by way of a small trawler and carrying a dirty bomb or other nasty chemical or bio weapon and a long range top of the line nuke sub won't do any good to protect against it, nor would a carrier group in the middle of the Altantic for that matter.

[LoBlo]

Fine, fine. I'm going to change the scenario to Brazil then :p

Yes its interesting to see the different roads the US and Canada have taken. The US has decided to become the worlds "policeman" sending its army and tax dollars into any and every hotspot on the globe... while Canada has pretty much stayed outta most conflicts.

To be honest, its nice having such a passive and productive neighbor to the north. Makes the neighborhood (N. America) a nicer place... never met a bad Canadian yet, usually good people.

I still wish someone would defend the choice of an Astute over a VA though ....

[P_Funk]

I was with Scandium all the way until he mentioned Jihadists on a little boat...

Imagine an army of extremists on a boat in the Canadian arctic with their beards all frozen, used to their hot climate.:rotfl: I think I'd rather face customs!

[Gorduz]

I'd go with the LA class subs. I bet you can get them quite cheap, and their TLAM ability is very nice.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

I was with Scandium all the way until he mentioned Jihadists on a little boat...

Imagine an army of extremists on a boat in the Canadian arctic with their beards all frozen, used to their hot climate.:rotfl: I think I'd rather face customs!

If they're coming through customs then they're either flying in from overseas or coming up from the US. In the former case they've already been vetted, while in the latter there's little incentive to risk customs.

My scenario is not as unlikely as it sounds, nor do they have to necessarily be Islamic extremists for that matter. I know you're on the west coast, I'm on the east coast here and there's a still a lot of inbound fishing trawlers from various parts of the world that tie up here every other day for refuel/resupply so we don't take that much notice of them. And these boats are small, innocous, ocean going, and suitable for any kind of (concealed) weaponized cargo that, once it hits the shore, can be transported anywhere.

And as to the risk, well as I pointed out before we couldn't even defend our waters from foreign overfishing; though don't get me wrong, I don't consider myself an alarmist nor do I lose sleep over such scenarios - but since the will is there now to beef up our military and since we've been trying to beef up security as well, then to me this is a good way to do it. Better transparent solutions like this that don't compromise liberty than draconian legislation or Big Brother surveillance IMHO.

[Sea Demon]

I vote Seawolf. The ultimate hunter/killer nuclear subs. I'd then budget in some VLS modifications to give it a deep strike warfare role. Very expensive option, but worth the costs. Astute or Virginia would be tied for second.