My personal "we should choose this" for subs is so go in for some Canadianized version of the German type 212CD fuel cell AIP subs. Reasons are its extremely good stealth, the under-ice possibilities that are second only to nuclear, the possible multi-role uses, the NATO interoperability already factored in, and the domestic industrial side of it. The industrial arguments are that Canada has an advanced fuel cell industry already, so a partnership with the German ones is possible. plus Canada can also produce clean hydrogen from our abundant hydroelectric power (in NL, Quebec, BC) for the supply of such vessels' H2 needs on both coasts. That means that we would have more innate capability to maintain our own subs without having to reach across an ocean to do it. The South Korean AIP sub idea should get some consideration though; Canada can benefit there if we are smart about it. (Plus if we can negotiate a major repair capability here, it can act as a backup facility for South Korea if NK or China interfere with theirs.) Some people like to talk about getting nuclear subs, but I really think that would be much greater expense & complexity, and a much tougher sell politically. However, if we did go nuclear, maybe consider the French Baracuda? France would be a good partner for Canada, and might not demand as much political puppet strings as others.
there is a strategic opportunity for us to strengthen relations with s. korea. canada had been looking at establishing a 'mini' military base there and that should be looked at. in addition to submarines, we should look at their dokdo class light aircraft carrier. we could procure two of them for under USD 1 billion dollars. this will also align with our indo pacific strategic
Canada made a big strategic & economic mistake by gutting its own shipbuilding industry. It's not just military and coast guard projects; there are civilian shipbuilding needs too (like BC Ferries), that should should have the capability right here in Canada. The key is matching the shipbuilding capability to what we need, and avoiding some boom/bust cycle for the companies. Considering the long time scale of any project (literally decades top plan and build things), it should be clear what we need is long term planning of both aspects. There will always be those "taxpayers federation" types who take a "dollar store" approach to procurement, just wanting cheap foreign-made everything and mentally downgrading anything Canadian-built. They would gladly dismantle Canada's manufacturing and self-reliance to make Canada into nothing but a cheap resource supplier for others to profit from. However, this is shortsighted ideology (not to mention servile & demeaning). Being at the mercy of other nations for your own needs is a weakness not a strength; having crucial supply chains stretching world wide can endanger your citizens when there is a crisis. Obviously anything military is the most expensive type of project, but more could be saved by keeping very strong financial and ethical oversight in place, and not allowing decisions to go through "development hell".
Is there now any regret in mothballing the largest ship building facility in the world in saint john creating jobs and building bigger ships and fleets for USA and other nato allies if tooling and skills Canada was once great at was preserved and not sent west to oil fields or south to usa
My personal "we should choose this" for subs is so go in for some Canadianized version of the German type 212CD fuel cell AIP subs.
Reasons are its extremely good stealth, the under-ice possibilities that are second only to nuclear, the possible multi-role uses, the NATO interoperability already factored in, and the domestic industrial side of it. The industrial arguments are that Canada has an advanced fuel cell industry already, so a partnership with the German ones is possible. plus Canada can also produce clean hydrogen from our abundant hydroelectric power (in NL, Quebec, BC) for the supply of such vessels' H2 needs on both coasts. That means that we would have more innate capability to maintain our own subs without having to reach across an ocean to do it.
The South Korean AIP sub idea should get some consideration though; Canada can benefit there if we are smart about it. (Plus if we can negotiate a major repair capability here, it can act as a backup facility for South Korea if NK or China interfere with theirs.)
Some people like to talk about getting nuclear subs, but I really think that would be much greater expense & complexity, and a much tougher sell politically. However, if we did go nuclear, maybe consider the French Baracuda? France would be a good partner for Canada, and might not demand as much political puppet strings as others.
there is a strategic opportunity for us to strengthen relations with s. korea. canada had been looking at establishing a 'mini' military base there and that should be looked at. in addition to submarines, we should look at their dokdo class light aircraft carrier. we could procure two of them for under USD 1 billion dollars. this will also align with our indo pacific strategic
Canada made a big strategic & economic mistake by gutting its own shipbuilding industry. It's not just military and coast guard projects; there are civilian shipbuilding needs too (like BC Ferries), that should should have the capability right here in Canada. The key is matching the shipbuilding capability to what we need, and avoiding some boom/bust cycle for the companies. Considering the long time scale of any project (literally decades top plan and build things), it should be clear what we need is long term planning of both aspects.
There will always be those "taxpayers federation" types who take a "dollar store" approach to procurement, just wanting cheap foreign-made everything and mentally downgrading anything Canadian-built. They would gladly dismantle Canada's manufacturing and self-reliance to make Canada into nothing but a cheap resource supplier for others to profit from. However, this is shortsighted ideology (not to mention servile & demeaning). Being at the mercy of other nations for your own needs is a weakness not a strength; having crucial supply chains stretching world wide can endanger your citizens when there is a crisis.
Obviously anything military is the most expensive type of project, but more could be saved by keeping very strong financial and ethical oversight in place, and not allowing decisions to go through "development hell".
South Korea has vast options for not only the RCN but the other two services as well. Amphibious ships, IFV’s , fighter jets, missiles etc.
Is there now any regret in mothballing the largest ship building facility in the world in saint john creating jobs and building bigger ships and fleets for USA and other nato allies if tooling and skills Canada was once great at was preserved and not sent west to oil fields or south to usa