PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

[Bjays92]

If you tried to abolish currency, people would just invent new ones. Currency is a technology, and a very useful one at that.

This, there's no way to rid yourself of it, it's why it was invented in the first place. It's a way of putting valuation to things in order to accurately and fairly trade goods.

It's also far more flexible than trading two things of like value, because while the value maybe be similar its value to the individual who's acquiring it may not. Someone who lives in downtown Toronto would not want to trade in their luxury sports car for a tractor even if the value was fair.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The sub purchase gets slagged a lot. But it was a good deal.

If the RAN is getting SSNs maybe Canada can too? We share the same PLAN threat in the Pacific.

Biden Announces Defense Deal With Australia in a Bid to Counter China (Published 2021)

President Biden said the United States and Britain would help Australia to deploy nuclear-powered submarines, adding to the Western presence in the region.

www.nytimes.com

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration took a major step on Wednesday in challenging China’s broad territorial claims in the Pacific, announcing that the United States and Britain would help Australia to deploy nuclear-powered submarines, adding to the Western presence in the region.

 

[DSC]

If the RAN is getting SSNs maybe Canada can too? We share the same PLAN threat in the Pacific.

Biden Announces Defense Deal With Australia in a Bid to Counter China (Published 2021)

President Biden said the United States and Britain would help Australia to deploy nuclear-powered submarines, adding to the Western presence in the region.

www.nytimes.com

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration took a major step on Wednesday in challenging China’s broad territorial claims in the Pacific, announcing that the United States and Britain would help Australia to deploy nuclear-powered submarines, adding to the Western presence in the region.

Not to be anti-American but I have strong reservations about becoming too entwined with them as their recent actions have been quite self-serving and their allies have been hung out to dry. They abandoned the Kurds in Iraq, their NATO allies and the Afghan government and army in Afghanistan. Though I understand that threats can come from anywhere, it is probably better we concentrate on our immediate 'neighbourhood'' and god knows we have virtually no capacity in the Arctic.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Not to be anti-American but I have strong reservations about becoming too entwined with them as their recent actions have been quite self-serving and their allies have been hung out to dry. They abandoned the Kurds in Iraq, their NATO allies and the Afghan government and army in Afghanistan. Though I understand that threats can come from anywhere, it is probably better we concentrate on our immediate 'neighbourhood'' and god knows we have virtually no capacity in the Arctic.

That’s one of the reasons the US is helping the RAN to expand their capability, so that the US taxpayer and combatant isn’t carrying more than their fair share of the workload and cost. The RCN needs a sub-icepack capability, and SSNs are the best at this.

 

[kEiThZ]

If the RAN is getting SSNs maybe Canada can too? We share the same PLAN threat in the Pacific.

We should. We won't. We barely fund our current navy enough to ensure high readiness.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm not sold on the long-term viability or utility of manned subs.......

I think autonomous/remote controlled subs are the more likely future.

There may be utility in retaining some manned craft...............
But we have to consider the demonstrated operational utility and what can be accomplished by other means, at considerably lower operating cost and risk-profile.

I concede, the technology isn't quite there yet..............but its close; I'd rather invest that way.

 

[lenaitch]

I'm not sold on the long-term viability or utility of manned subs.......

I think autonomous/remote controlled subs are the more likely future.

There may be utility in retaining some manned craft...............
But we have to consider the demonstrated operational utility and what can be accomplished by other means, at considerably lower operating cost and risk-profile.

I concede, the technology isn't quite there yet..............but its close; I'd rather invest that way.

The problem with remote control of subsurface vehicles is failsafe high-data connectivity at depth and range. If the point of control has to be relatively close to the remote vehicle, little is gained in military terms. Even surface and airborne communications in the high arctic is a challenge.

Autonomy may be fine with surveillance/mapping and defensive roles - a lot of that already happens - but in military terms, if 'the balloons go up', you run up against machine accountability (there isn't any).

Technology is always advancing, but I'm not sure we're that close, particularly in terms of a long range, long life (as in months) power source that is reliable without human intervention

 

[Northern Light]

The problem with remote control of subsurface vehicles is failsafe high-data connectivity at depth and range. If the point of control has to be relatively close to the remote vehicle, little is gained in military terms. Even surface and airborne communications in the high arctic is a challenge.

Autonomy may be fine with surveillance/mapping and defensive roles - a lot of that already happens - but in military terms, if 'the balloons go up', you run up against machine accountability (there isn't any).

Technology is always advancing, but I'm not sure we're that close, particularly in terms of a long range, long life (as in months) power source that is reliable without human intervention

The thing is......... a manned sub fleet that would be remotely credible in its effectiveness, for purpose, in Canadian waters would need to be huge and well outside are price range for acquisition or operation.

Canada has vastly more coast line than any other country on the planet..........its not close.

What's a credible size allowing for spares, shore-leave, etc?

Suffice to say, I think we need to review credible alternatives.

 

[kEiThZ]

I think autonomous/remote controlled subs are the more likely future.

How many years have you served as a submariner or in a Maritime patrol squadron?

I assume your observation is based on your years of experience and deep depth of knowledge of the state of technology in those fields.

 

[Northern Light]

How many years have you served as a submariner or in a Maritime patrol squadron?

I assume your observation is based on your years of experience and deep depth of knowledge of the state of technology in those fields.

Why are you being silly and inflammatory?

I wasn't insulting to you or anyone else.

If you have a constructive critique, offer it..

 

[lenaitch]

The thing is......... a manned sub fleet that would be remotely credible in its effectiveness, for purpose, in Canadian waters would need to be huge and well outside are price range for acquisition or operation.

Canada has vastly more coast line than any other country on the planet..........its not close.

What's a credible size allowing for spares, shore-leave, etc?

Suffice to say, I think we need to review credible alternatives.

Way off topic and way out of my knowledge paygrade, but others I have read who seem knowledgeable take about 6-8. The length of our coastline, when considered in linear terms and eliminating internal waters such as the Great Lakes, Hudson's Bay, etc.is still large but not as large. The as-the-crow-flies coast of BC, from US to US, is about 800km, but it's total coastline is considered to be over 27,000km (I assume including Vancouver Is.)

 

[kEiThZ]

Why are you being silly and inflammatory?

Hardly. I'm responding to your usual dismissive arguments by pointing out that your argument is backed by neither fact nor experience on your part.

Find me a single country in the world that thinks it's a good idea to replace their submarine fleet with remotely piloted vessels. This is on par with those who have never sat in a jet arguing strenuously about why they think we should ditch our fighter fleet and buy drones. Informed, of course, by the same level of Wikipedia education, that makes them experts on everything from economics to pandemics.

 

[kEiThZ]

The length of our coastline, when considered in linear terms and eliminating internal waters such as the Great Lakes, Hudson's Bay, etc.is still large but not as large. The as-the-crow-flies coast of BC, from US to US, is about 800km, but it's total coastline is considered to be over 27,000km (I assume including Vancouver Is.)

Even then, our unique maritime geography would normally dictate a sizeable submarine fleet. As large or bigger than what the Australians doing. That is if we legitimately cared about our sovereignty and weren't completely giving in to our implied status as a US protectorate.

The Arctic in particular is a huge problem. On any given day, 5 of 6 nuclear powers have their subs up there. And I don't mean in international waters. I mean they routinely manoeuvre in the Canadian Arctic. And the only way to be taken seriously on this one is to have our own submarine capabilities. The Aussies don't even have an Arctic to monitor and defend and they get this.

Way off topic and way out of my knowledge paygrade, but others I have read who seem knowledgeable take about 6-8.

Rule of three. One deployed. One in work up. One on post-deployment. And that leaves no contingency or surge capacity at all. So with three oceans, our minimum would be nine and our ideal fleet would be closer to 12.

As to the arguments that this is all somehow unaffordable, we should recall that Australia has two thirds of our population and will be fielding half a dozen nuclear subs and currently has two amphibious carriers and twice the air force. We're a G7 country that can't even monitor most of our territory (or move most of our forces internally without help)....among many of the other things that we are uniquely lacking as a G7 country (high speed rail, universal school lunches, etc). The only thing that is truly unique about Canada, among the rich nations of the world, is that we are cheapskates. Try and imagine any other G7 country substantially outsourcing their national security to a neighbour. I'm honestly surprised the rest of the world still humours us and doesn't just boot us from these forums and replace us with more credible countries. In quite a few of these forums, the South Koreans, Australians or Spanish would make more sense.

 

[Admiral Beez]

How many years have you served as a submariner or in a Maritime patrol squadron?

Well asked. More likely in the balloon service, full of hot air.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The length of our coastline, when considered in linear terms and eliminating internal waters such as the Great Lakes, Hudson's Bay, etc.is still large but not as large. The as-the-crow-flies coast of BC, from US to US, is about 800km, but it's total coastline is considered to be over 27,000km (I assume including Vancouver Is.)

@kEiThZ correct me otherwise, but it’s the Arctic where we have the greatest deficit in monitoring our territorial waters. That’s where AIP subs are needed, ideally SSNs. The ice free Pacific and Atlantic coasts can be covered by ASW-capable surface warships?