Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Submarines Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Selling Virginia-class SSNs to Canada
Clouded Leopard    10/26/2011 1:52:22 AM
Given Canada's need to defend the Arctic, and current woes with SSKs, what would be the (unlikely) feasibility of selling Virginia-class SSNs to Canada? Pros: A highly capable submarine, exports for the US. Cons: High cost, maintenance and expertise (although all maintenance could be done by agreement in the USA.)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Thomas       10/26/2011 7:32:19 AM




Pros: A highly capable submarine, exports for the US.

Cons: High cost, maintenance and expertise (although all maintenance could be done by agreement in the USA.)
To be quite honest - I don't think there is any chance, that the US will let nuclear power technology be wrested from their dead cold fingers.
I think the submarine defence will concentrate om keeping the russians bottled up in Murmansk - with an occational excursion into the Atlantic west of Jan Mayen and east of Iceland.
 
Quote    Reply

mcfadden    RE: Selling Virginia-class SSNs to Canada   1/4/2012 1:43:29 PM
I agree with the other poster, given all the sensitive technologies present in Virginia class SSNs it is extremely unlikely that the US will sell them to anyone; however, Canada could buy or lease some of the our Los Angeles class SSNs as they go out of service with the US Navy.  These boats are as quiet or quieter than anything the Russians and Chinese are using today and have a proven track record of reliability and performance.  They also could be acquired for a fraction of the cost of acquiring Virginia Class SSNs.  While these old LA Class boats will likely need to be refueled with fresh enriched uranium (they are 25 years old), this will give Canada the opportunity to gain expertise in SSNs as well as experience with maintaining nuclear powered boats.  Additionally, the refueling process will afford the opportunity or refit and replace some of the older systems on the boats.
 
Quote    Reply

LB       1/4/2012 8:16:56 PM
There are a lot of issues to go through before picking the specific platform.  First does Canada have a requirement for new submarines, do they have the budget, and how much of a political issue might there be by going "nuclear"?  Certainly for the Arctic an SSN brings a lot to the table but it's at all clear Canada has identified the requirement and is willing to pay the financial and possible political cost.
 
If they did get this far in the process it might be fair to suggest that a Virginia class is overkill for them and that the large weapons load is both unneeded and results in a boat more expensive than required.  Frankly they might be better served buying from France or the UK which during the 1980's they had planned to do with a purchase of 10 SSN's but that program died with the end of the Cold War.
 
It doesn't appear Canada, at this time, has a formal requirement to replace the four Victoria's.  What probably happens is either they rebuild them or purchase new diesel subs.  Before they even consider SSN's it will be interesting to see if they even see the need for more than 4 subs.
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    The Arctic Ocean is a SHALLOW sea.   1/4/2012 10:28:21 PM
Playing tag under the pack ice is no job for amateurs.
 
H.
 
Quote    Reply

HeavyD       4/13/2012 10:45:36 PM
Canada would be crazy to spend the billions to buy and maintain a Virginia.
 
Air Independent Propulsion systems give diesel boats a month-plus under water.  Sure, not at 25 knots, but then again Canada isn't the world's sheriff who needs the fastest horse in the West to be able to zoom off around the world on a moment's notice.
 
Call the Germans.  They seem to have it wired with the 212/214.  Plus you don't have to recruit, train, retain and feed 2 x 140 man crews per boat.
 
Quote    Reply

albywan    Lease option for Australia   4/18/2012 8:29:52 PM
Could Australia also be a potential lease customer? The recent initiatives around having USMC stationed in the north could be supplemented with basing facilities for us subs, and this could coincide with a contract for the RAN to operate Virginia Class subs.
 
Quote    Reply

LB       4/19/2012 4:47:12 AM
If GF still reads these boards he could give you a very informed comment on Australian sub requirements.  My far less informed opinion would be Australia isn't interested in paying the price for SSN's either in terms of dollars or political fallout.  Also for exactly what Australia wants their subs to do an SSK does the job quite well with less expense.
 
Certainly they've had issues with them as well as issues with the Australian contractor.  There also was at one point manning issues.  That said the 6 boats are very capable and one of the best SSK's operating today.  They're 3,000 tons and pack a lot of capability including the same combat control systems as US SSN's.  Most SSK's are half the size with less capability, offhand the only other class that seems similar is the Soryu. 
 
Australia has a plan in place to replace these 6 with a new class of 12.  I believe, but could be wrong, that SSN's were ruled out for among other reasons lack of nuclear support infrastructure within Australia.  The new class will also be designed as well as built in Australia which would also seem to rule out purchasing Virginia's where most of the contract dollars go to the US as well as the support issues.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics