Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,595
- Points
- 1,160
Is it the aircraft or do they suffer from parts and maintainer shortages? We already fly a similar type in the Cormorant, so we could do a inhouse comparison.
Replacing the Subs
- Thread starter Spencer100
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1,097
- Points
- 1,060
As part of the Comorant upgrade program we are going to be using our spares to keep initial costs down
- Reaction score
- 7,615
- Points
- 1,160
Is this a case where reality intrudes?
We may want 90% availability rates but if Best Available Technology can only supply 30% availability, and the capability is an essential capability, then so be it. You need three units to guarantee one.
That is the cost of doing business.
- Reaction score
- 13,768
- Points
- 1,010
Cormorants are maintained by contractors from IMP- not military.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,595
- Points
- 1,160
So how is that working out?
- Reaction score
- 13,768
- Points
- 1,010
Honestly, you would have to ask somebody in the SAR world. I actually don’t know.
- Reaction score
- 17,755
- Points
- 1,260
I actually posted 2022 US Aviation availability rates on a thread somewhere here.
The MH-60R’s have a 86%+ rate.
The older SH-60’s have mostly been replaced now, and MH-60G’s are being replaced.
Worst rate of availability is the CV/MV-22 Osprey
CBO’s rating is IMHO a little flawed as it counts availability as at a unit and mission ready.
But there is a 2001-2019 set of data based on that here.
Availability and Use of Aircraft in the Air Force and Navy
At a Glance In this report, the Congressional Budget Office analyzes patterns in the availability and use of military aircraft by the Air Force and the Department of the Navy (DoN, which encompasses both the Navy and the Marine Corps). CBO looks at availability—a measure of the percentage of...
www.cbo.gov
Which hurts fleets that are doing upgrades etc as airframes being upgraded are taken against the fleet availability rate.
- Reaction score
- 1,316
- Points
- 1,140
Yet another article saying the subs needed are ones that are Arctic capable.
“Canada urgently needs to enhance its ability to detect underwater threats,” the Senate report said. It also called for Ottawa to acquire underwater sensing technology.
Canada’s existing four submarines are refurbished models originally built by Britain in the 1980s.
Daniel Le Bouthillier, head of media relations at the Department of National Defence, said only one of Canada’s submarines is operational right now, meaning able to go on operations or exercises.
The Senate committee’s work builds on earlier analysis of Canada’s defence shortcomings in the Arctic, including a 2022 report by the Auditor-General that found Ottawa lacks a complete picture of who is entering or traversing Arctic waters and warned of significant gaps in this country’s ability to detect foreign or domestic ships in the Arctic. This means Canada can’t stay on top of threats to national security, illegal fishing or pollution from ships entering the region.
“Look at the number of icebreakers that are being built by the Chinese, by Russia, and even the fact that the Americans operate up there, with their nuclear powered submarines, and Canada has no year-round surveillance and defence capabilities against adversary submarines in the Arctic,” he said.
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/R6F27IYNZZNQDONHUMIJHJKQRQ.jpg)
www.theglobeandmail.com
Canada urged to buy new submarines capable of operating in the Arctic
“Canada urgently needs to enhance its ability to detect underwater threats,” the Senate report said. It also called for Ottawa to acquire underwater sensing technology.
Canada’s existing four submarines are refurbished models originally built by Britain in the 1980s.
Daniel Le Bouthillier, head of media relations at the Department of National Defence, said only one of Canada’s submarines is operational right now, meaning able to go on operations or exercises.
The Senate committee’s work builds on earlier analysis of Canada’s defence shortcomings in the Arctic, including a 2022 report by the Auditor-General that found Ottawa lacks a complete picture of who is entering or traversing Arctic waters and warned of significant gaps in this country’s ability to detect foreign or domestic ships in the Arctic. This means Canada can’t stay on top of threats to national security, illegal fishing or pollution from ships entering the region.
“Look at the number of icebreakers that are being built by the Chinese, by Russia, and even the fact that the Americans operate up there, with their nuclear powered submarines, and Canada has no year-round surveillance and defence capabilities against adversary submarines in the Arctic,” he said.
Canada urged to buy new submarines capable of operating in the Arctic
With the Canadian Navy’s aging submarines unable to operate under Arctic ice, Ottawa is being urged to replace them with new models that can operate in the North
www.theglobeandmail.com
- Reaction score
- 1,316
- Points
- 1,140
Then there's this article - which is less flattering.
There’s only one answer, says University of Calgary professor David Bercuson, a leading expert on security and military history.
“We dial 1-800-IVAN.”
Yes, call Russia. Only the Russians have the necessary ships and equipment to do that job, Bercuson says.
The three territorial premiers who met in Whistler on Tuesday were all worried about sovereignty and security. They feel exposed and defenceless. Threats could come from the Russians and, increasingly, the Chinese.
Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai recalled that fighter jets shot down an unidentified object over his territory on Feb. 11, during the security frenzy that followed the Americans destroying a Chinese balloon.
He happened to be in Ottawa and at first wasn’t taken seriously. “They thought our imagination was getting the best of us,” he said. Two days later, fighter jets roared north to shoot down the object.
“The conversation has changed a lot,” Pillai said. “Our neighbours and our allies who are part of NATO in the circumpolar north know it’s important.”
Canada lacks basic equipment. Our four submarines run on diesel and can’t work under ice, a necessity in the Arctic, which still freezes in winter.
The Chinese worry Bercuson most. They now claim status as a sub-Arctic country. He fears that tactics they employ in the South China Sea could simply shift northward.
Canada claims sovereignty of the archipelago islands, the waters around them and an adjacent economic zone, with no means to convince other countries it’s anything but words.
Northern leaders are deeply worried by threats to Canada's sovereignty
What happens if a cruise ship runs aground in Canada’s Arctic waters?There’s only one answer, says University of Calgary professor David Bercuson, a leading expert on security and military history.
“We dial 1-800-IVAN.”
Yes, call Russia. Only the Russians have the necessary ships and equipment to do that job, Bercuson says.
The three territorial premiers who met in Whistler on Tuesday were all worried about sovereignty and security. They feel exposed and defenceless. Threats could come from the Russians and, increasingly, the Chinese.
Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai recalled that fighter jets shot down an unidentified object over his territory on Feb. 11, during the security frenzy that followed the Americans destroying a Chinese balloon.
He happened to be in Ottawa and at first wasn’t taken seriously. “They thought our imagination was getting the best of us,” he said. Two days later, fighter jets roared north to shoot down the object.
“The conversation has changed a lot,” Pillai said. “Our neighbours and our allies who are part of NATO in the circumpolar north know it’s important.”
Canada lacks basic equipment. Our four submarines run on diesel and can’t work under ice, a necessity in the Arctic, which still freezes in winter.
The Chinese worry Bercuson most. They now claim status as a sub-Arctic country. He fears that tactics they employ in the South China Sea could simply shift northward.
Canada claims sovereignty of the archipelago islands, the waters around them and an adjacent economic zone, with no means to convince other countries it’s anything but words.
- Reaction score
- 7,615
- Points
- 1,160
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,595
- Points
- 1,160
In WWI, the BC Premier bought subs, so there are options......
- Reaction score
- 17,755
- Points
- 1,260
All Hail BC the first Canadian Nuclear Provincial Power…
Because everyone with a Nuclear Sub cares right?
Does West Edmonton Mall still have submarines?
armrdsoul77
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 368
- Points
- 930
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,595
- Points
- 1,160
212CD is currently paperware
Happy Guy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 587
- Points
- 810
Concerns about Canada's northern sovereignty has been on-going since 1953 when the federal gov't moved inuit families from northern Québec to Ellesmere Island and Cornwallis Island.
As I can recall, staffs at CANADA COMMAND and CANOSCOM wrote about military options to enhance Canadian prescence in the arctic. All options were noted for two major common challenges: (1) significant fiscal expenditures were required for personnel, installations, equipment to support any of the options; and (2) enormous geographical area for surveillance.
Questions:
What constitutes as sovereignty and how is it to be performed?
Permanent presence (civilian, police, military?) on the ground?
Temporary presence - summer only?
Since this a domestic issue should it not be a Canadian Coast Guard and RCMP problem?
Can't surveillance be done just by satellites and any infringement by another nation be brought up through the political system? Does the Coast Guard, CAF, RCMP, Canadian Rangers need to be on the ground to detain the trespasser?
How will the Coast Guard, CAF, RCMP, Canadian Ranger be trained and equipped to handle potential threats?
What about Command, Control, Communications (C3)? CJOC, NORAD, RCMP, Coast Guard
For any air incursion, can the USAF interdict the flight if the RCAF cannot send up aircraft?
Should be Canadian Coast Guard operate like the US Coast Guard?
What happened to the Arctic base/port?
Can the F35 operate in the arctic?
Should the RCN have and operate heavy ice breakers in the arctic?
Should the RCAF operate more surveillance flights in the arctic?
Should the RCAF/CA have permanent bases in the arctic? Where? How big?
Should be RCN be equipped with SSNs?
My point is that there are lots of questions and lack of federal political direction and will because of $$$$$$$.
As I can recall, staffs at CANADA COMMAND and CANOSCOM wrote about military options to enhance Canadian prescence in the arctic. All options were noted for two major common challenges: (1) significant fiscal expenditures were required for personnel, installations, equipment to support any of the options; and (2) enormous geographical area for surveillance.
Questions:
What constitutes as sovereignty and how is it to be performed?
Permanent presence (civilian, police, military?) on the ground?
Temporary presence - summer only?
Since this a domestic issue should it not be a Canadian Coast Guard and RCMP problem?
Can't surveillance be done just by satellites and any infringement by another nation be brought up through the political system? Does the Coast Guard, CAF, RCMP, Canadian Rangers need to be on the ground to detain the trespasser?
How will the Coast Guard, CAF, RCMP, Canadian Ranger be trained and equipped to handle potential threats?
What about Command, Control, Communications (C3)? CJOC, NORAD, RCMP, Coast Guard
For any air incursion, can the USAF interdict the flight if the RCAF cannot send up aircraft?
Should be Canadian Coast Guard operate like the US Coast Guard?
What happened to the Arctic base/port?
Can the F35 operate in the arctic?
Should the RCN have and operate heavy ice breakers in the arctic?
Should the RCAF operate more surveillance flights in the arctic?
Should the RCAF/CA have permanent bases in the arctic? Where? How big?
Should be RCN be equipped with SSNs?
My point is that there are lots of questions and lack of federal political direction and will because of $$$$$$$.
- Reaction score
- 4,715
- Points
- 1,040
Given the current information that I've seen/heard the new defence policy has submarines in it.
They will be MOTS. There are 6 submarine building programs that are underway with allies right now. Only three of them have production lines in operation. Korea, Japan, Spain. I would suggest looking at those programs to see what's on offer. I expect the RCN will have new submarines before we have the CSC in the water.
For the arctic, we only need submarines at the choke points on entry to and exit of the NWP during relatively ice free times. Nuke boats cannot transit the NWP in winter as the ice often goes all the way to the bottom (scraping it). That's hyper dangerous. Nuke boats go deep water arctic ocean for that reason. We don't need to be there.
They will be MOTS. There are 6 submarine building programs that are underway with allies right now. Only three of them have production lines in operation. Korea, Japan, Spain. I would suggest looking at those programs to see what's on offer. I expect the RCN will have new submarines before we have the CSC in the water.
For the arctic, we only need submarines at the choke points on entry to and exit of the NWP during relatively ice free times. Nuke boats cannot transit the NWP in winter as the ice often goes all the way to the bottom (scraping it). That's hyper dangerous. Nuke boats go deep water arctic ocean for that reason. We don't need to be there.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,961
- Points
- 1,140
That is a super good point. Not being a navy guy but a fan of naval stuff I can understand that.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,595
- Points
- 1,160
The new boats would be a significant leap forward in technology for us, mostly on the propulsion and stealth side.
IT isn't the dollars, it is the will do do something. The people who control the liberal party make lots of money from the status quo. The orders from on high are to obfuscate, delay, cover-up and if all else fails, to lie but don't do anything to change the way things are now
Similar threads
