kEiThZ
Superstar
Good article on allies becoming impatient with Canada.
|
|
|
I don't think a lot of Canadians understand that the Russians can actually threaten our interests in the Arctic.
![]()
Russia's new combat icebreaker built for Arctic dominance - Asia Times
Russia's new combat icebreaker, known as the Project 23550 Ivan Papanin, has embarked on factory sea trials, signaling Russia’s intensified strategicasiatimes.com
It’s always best to post the paywall free version for those without a Globe sub, https://archive.is/0qiTKFrom the Globe:
![]()
Ottawa buys Arctic hangar next to NORAD base after Chinese, Russian interest
Arctic community of Inuvik has come under scrutiny for possible foreign espionage, reaching the interest of Canadian forces counterintelligence unit, records showwww.theglobeandmail.com
Doesn't anyone keep tabs on the comings and goings to a location as sensitive as this? Passenger lists should be auto-forwarded to RCMP/CSIS.
AoD
I wonder what the CAF (Canadian Armed Forces) would look like at 2% spend. I expect we could get moving on the submarine replacement program for one.Good article on allies becoming impatient with Canada.
I wonder what the CAF (Canadian Armed Forces) would look like at 2% spend. I expect we could get moving on the submarine replacement program for one.
Nice. This was probably held back until now to appease expected ribbing at the NATO summit.Good guess.
Canada launching process to acquire up to 12 conventionally-powered submarines - Canada.ca
Canada is the country with the largest coastline in the world – an underwater surveillance capability is crucial to our security and sovereignty.www.canada.ca
Now let's see if the Americans stop yelling. I don't think it's enough yet, given the years of talk with no results.
To get our spending to over 2% would require a nearly 50% increase in defence spending. We'd need either a serious revenue cut elsewhere or tax/deficit increase to cover that.
I'm trying to confirm which subs we will get, its not clear if that will be in the announcement. I believe we were leaning to the South Korean ones, but the Japanese also had a model we took a look at along with the Spanish Navantia.
It should be nuclear-powered SSNs. With the RAN getting SSNs, and everyone else including the Brazilians getting SSNs of some sort, the US opposition to RCN nuclear subs is off now.It's not much of a real project at all. The actual project office was a handful of officers doing some definition work and talking to various OEMs to see what is on the market. The reason they are making this announcement is because they need something to announce to take the heat off. So no, they don't have a submarine picked. And the very fact that it was announced in DC (vs Canada), should tell you how panicked of a move this was.
Timelines don't allow for nuclear submarines. The Victoria Class is going to be out of service middle of next decade. They need something immediately. SSN-AUKUS won't even enter Australian service till the 2040s.It should be nuclear-powered SSNs. With the RAN getting SSNs, and everyone else including the Brazilians getting SSNs of some sort, the US opposition to RCN nuclear subs is off now.
True. We should buy off the shelf AIP SSKs made offshore now to run until the late-2040s, and then have SSNs on order to enter service in the 2050s.Timelines don't allow for nuclear submarines.
taking the first step
launching the process to formally engage industry
currently in the process of meeting with manufacturers and potential partners
A formal Request for Information will be posted in fall 2024
'Scuz me if I hold my applause.
Replace the Victorias with AIP SSKs in the early 2030s and add SSNs in 2040.Timelines don't allow for nuclear submarines. …. If we genuinely want nuclear submarines, we could consider a split fleet for 2040 and beyond.