Kanada erwirbt bis zu 12 U-Boote zum Schutz der Arktis

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/canada-takes-step-acquire-12-214217556.html

27 comments

  1. Conventionally powered means diesel electric which is a stupid choice for arctic operations because of the need to travel under the ice for long periods of time. The Canadian government needs to get serious about defense and quit making stupid decisions because of optics.

  2. > Citing global warming, Canada says the Arctic Ocean could become the most efficient shipping route between Europe and East Asia By 2050, thus raising the need to bolster maritime security.

    > “As the country with the longest coastline in the world, Canada needs a new fleet of submarines,” Defence Minister Bill Blair said in the statement.

    I sincerely hope the government doesn’t cheap out like they did on the last batch of subs we procured. We have to be able to protect our own sovereignty, we can’t keep relying on the Americans to do job for us.

  3. Oh Christ not the submarines again.

    Last time we bought submarines, they were useless, outdated rustbuckets that sat in the Halifax harbour forever until we finally got rid of them.

  4. Totally makes sense why Iran sent some boats to the arctic recently.

  5. Please say we’re attempting to buy them directly and not reassembling them like IKEA furniture

  6. Canadas going to buy some garbage that nobody else wants just like they always do

  8. They currently have four subs. I think it’s an understatement to say that tripling their submarine fleet will be costly, controversial, and difficult.

  9. Is this why I see frequent commercials in the US to hire ship builders?

  11. Norway and German just ordered a batch of German made 212CD’s at around €1bn each, delivered 2029 and onwards. I guess those prices are still representative for what Canada should expect

  12. as a Canadian, I think our government should be creating financial incentives for Canadians to relocate to northern territories. I think we need to strongly establish our presence in these areas.

  14. There are multiple reasons why Canada should get to *at least* 2%, but 2.5% would be better. If the US goes Trump in November, then Canada is on its own (everyone will be on their own), China will be able to take Taiwan, with no US support either Europe will have to send boots on the ground in Ukraine, or we lose Ukraine. North Korea might just start letting their rockets fall on Guam, Japan, etc. Even if the US doesn’t go Trump in November, Geopolitics is such right now that in order to support allies, you have to have something to give, and right now everything Canada has to give has a best before date that expired 1975. Except for the F18s, Canada hasn’t really spent much in defence since 1975. Everytime we go to even a small conflict, we have to quickly spend a few dollars (a few million) and retrofit old stuff with some new equipment. As the saying goes “The board is set, the pieces are moving”. All we have are pawns that look weak and tired.

  18. Mulroney and conservatives cancelled our arctic sub program in the 80s why?

  19. I think we need armed ice breakers. Like a cross between an ice breaker and a missile cruiser. Maybe even put some guns on it designed to break the ice.

  20. From who?

    Is there a sub marketplace ? Is it called Atlantis ?

  21. 12 subs to increase military spending so we don’t get kicked from nato

  22. “Will be capable of operating under ice” = they will be nuclear subs, which they should and need to be honestly. I just hope we don’t buy some dilapidated crap like we got the last time. Buy new, buy nuclear powered and do the job right for once.

    Edit: nm it appears they are looking at new but non nuclear which I think is a mistake.

  26. Good call Canada! Especially with Russian fascists in the area.

  27. Once again the Liberal Party of Canada government ignores the fact that the only submarines that can actually do the job for Canada would have to be nuclear powered. They instead want to cheap out with conventional submarines that while maybe having technology to extend range and time underwater, ignores the fact that even with such technology the subs have substantially reduced range because they cannot maintain adequate speed for long without depleting the stored power. Canada needs submarines that can stay under water, under ice, for substantial periods of time at cruising speed so that they can actually traverse the arctic waters in winter.

    The Liberal Party is once again forgoing addressing practical needs for political points and SJW posturing because they don’t want to be seen supporting nuclear powered anything. And they conflate nuclear power with nuclear weapons to justify this, ignoring the fact that conventional submarines can launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles with existing torpedo tubes. There are ‘boomers’, ballistic missile submarines that launch Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) vertically from built in silos, and cruise missiles from torpedo tubes; either of which can be nuclear armed or not. And then there are patrol/attack submarines that can enforce territorial integrity by tracking and if necessary engaging ships, land based targets (via torpedo tube launched cruise missiles), and even aircraft; but they do not have ICBMs. And both types of subs can be conventionally powered or nuclear. No nation operating under ice uses conventional powered subs, even with range enhancements, because they simply don’t have the endurance. Not having nuclear powered submarines in the Canadian Navy is simply daft and yet more wasted by the Trudeau government.

Leave a Reply