There has been considerable discussion by submarine commentators (here and here) over the very long term Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP). The Canadian competition is to replace Canada’s Victoria-class with new subs commissioned in 15 to 25 years time. Canada needs a large submarine design to meet its under ice and oceanic long range, long endurance needs. Twelve conventional subs are envisaged, valued at around US$62 Billion (presumably including subs, training, spares and many other add-ons).
There has just been an announcement that two South Korean (SK) shipbuilding companies, Hanwha Ocean (was DSME) and HD HHI, are competing for the future Canadian order. Apparently both SK companies signed a technical cooperation agreement with British defence firm Babcock on June 7, 2023 to strengthen their future bids.
Mention of SK companies boosts expectations that KSS-3s might become contenders. KSS-3 Batch 2s offer AIP and LIBs for longer deep submergence. Important for Canada they should also offer longer and safer under ice performance. Japan’s two Soryu Mark
2s (see Oryu and Toryu at Table here) with AIP and LIBs also might be a future contender type. Japan's Taigei-class with its higher tonnage of
LIBs also might be a contender. Long snorting range of these large SK and Japanese
subs also might be important for Canada’s three ocean needs.
Canada might take 5 to 10
years to select a winning design, so it is early days yet. If Canada joins AUKUS
even (US permitting) the UK SSN-AUKUS design might be a contender for Canada in about 10 years
time.
In part anticipating a multi-year gap between the withdrawal of the Victoria-class and introduction of a new class Canada is also developing an XLUUV undersea drone capability.
Canada might also be interested
in the (likely 3,000+ tonne) winner of the Netherlands’ Walrus replacement
competition. For that competition Germany is
building large Type 212CDs, France is offering a conventional Barracuda “Shortfin”
design and Sweden is offering a large “Oceanic Extended Range” A26 design . These large Euro-sub contenders are waiting for a Dutch decision in
the mid-late 2020s.
However SK and Japan still
have the advantage of operating at sea AIP and LIBs in large submarines. Italy’s
AIP and LIBs Type 212NFS suffers from its small size and might need TKMS approval for any export to a
third country.
Canada’s future submarine competition is yet another long term project that SubMatts periodically will return to.
7 comments:
Hi Pete,
I was going to mention to you that Naval News interviewed Hanwa Ocean, HHI and Babcock at MADEX '23, and there are two key mature technologies the South Koreans have - AIP and K-VLS.
https://youtu.be/JGSHtCMJ-yc
India may already have plans to fit its own submarine VLS system for BrahMos in the Project-75I class, but for Canada, a VLS system for land-attack/anti-ship cruise missiles may be attractive.
I did jokingly mention Canada to you when AUKUS was announced - CAUKUS, but there's also rumbles of New Zealand joining as a Tier II partner. For both Canada and New Zealand - they have their own political agendas, but they are also 'hampered' in their international relationship with China because of Five Eyes - the various issues with Huawei and the Canadian extradition case against Meng Wanzhou are major examples.
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/06/new-zealand-in-aukus-the-political-kiwi-conundrum-over-pillar-2-membership/
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/05/new-zealand-five-eyes-issues-alert-warning-of-china-state-actor-engaging-in-malicious-cyber-activity.html
Hello from Spain!
I think that the best solution for Canada is to join AUKUS and the SSN deal:
A SSN solution is expensive, but a SSK is expensive, as well. The good point here is that CANADA already has a national nuclear industry, so the support and tech workforce are not an issue (as in Australia scenario).
Furthermore, a SSN solution would need (IMHO) far less boats, probably 6 units would be enough (but with double crew system, yes...)
The question is "from which country?" Because I believe that in the CAnada case the french SSN alternative would be on the table...
Hi Shawn C at 6/13/2023 7:05 PM
I looked a bit more at Canadian Victoria-class's existing armament and it is torpedoes only, not even Harpoon ASMs. “During the refit for Canadian service, the Sub-Harpoon and mine capabilities were removed" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upholder/Victoria-class_submarine#Armament
This may suggest Canada would not see VLS to be a high priority. Canada might expect a nuclear missile response if it fired land attack missiles at China or Russia. Then ASM or Land Attack missiles might be overkill for Canada’s submarine mission to monitor Latin American drug smuggling.
However the AIP and LIBs in large South Korean and Japanese submarines might be of particular interest to Canada. This is for Canadian subs in month long fully submerged monitoring of Russia, China landmasses, of enemy subs and of the Latin American drug trade.
India, for BrahMos SLCMs or K-15 small SLBMs, is likely to value K-VLS highly.
Turning to AUKUS issues you raise:
Perhaps the US and UK could interact with Canada and NZ on the topics in AUKUS Pillar 2 “Advanced Capabilities” outside of the AUKUS structure. This is probably happening anyway in AI, UUVs and other topics. On Pillar 2 components see https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/03/might-advanced-capabilities-make-subs.html .
NZ’s well known and longstanding Green-Leftwing disdain for “nuclear ships” including SSNs, might well muddy the whole AUKUS pact if NZ was let in.
See SSNs and Canada in my response to Spanish Anonymous below.
Regards Pete
Hi Spanish Anonymous at 6/13/2023 9:25 PM
Yes at a price SSNs would be a good fit for Canada.
Canada has always been aware of the limited under ice capability of SSKs. This makes it logical to choose SSNs, especially on safety grounds.
High cost is always an SSN problem but the Canadian Navy has a need to cover huge coastal and oceanic distances quickly. This is something only nuclear subs rather than SSKs can do.
Canada was frustrated by US opposition in the 1980s to Canada having SSNs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada-class_submarine#American_opposition . This US opposition might remain.
The US can block Canada having SSNs if there is US tech in them. Naturally including US made SSNs and even UK SSNs have large amounts of US tech, eg. in the combat system and reactor.
But this probably might not preclude France offering Barracuda SSNs to Canada.
Your point about Canada’s developed civilian nuclear industry is another key reason Canada may want to look to France. A major reason that France uses LEU reactors in its nuclear subs is cost saving low enrichment compatibility with France’s civilian nuclear industry. Canada could also apply that French approach.
Canada, initially with French instruction, might attain the nuclear know-how to refuel Barracuda reactors – something required every 10 years.
Also Canada is officially English-French bilingual, which would aid training, inter-operating, and eventually building Barracuda SSNs in Canada https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada#Languages .
As well 6 SSNs being adequate for Canada I’m hearing rumours Australia might see 6 SSNs (with one or two crews each) as much more economical and sensible than the current 8 SSN aspiration of the RAN.
Regards Pete
My gut feeling is that Canada will not go into an adventure like SSN acquisition.
They need less defence procurement drama after the troubled Victoria Class SSK, T25 frigates, F-35 fighter jets…
I tend to agree Shawn.
Canada has been prepared to field only minimal numbers of subs just 3 Oberons then 4 Victorias (and with the latter long periods laid up).
I think it more likely Canada will see SSKs and/or higly developed XLUUVs as adequate as mobile sensors against Russian and Chinese subs and for Canada's Latin America anti-drug smuggling missions. XLUUVs could operate under ice for long periods without crews being risked.
Also cost and US opposition to Canada acquiring French Barracuda SSNs might be compelling.
Also Canada seems to rate largish numbers of frigates as more viable ASW and multi-task weapons than subs.
Regards Pete
Thanks Gessler
For https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-14/us-military-granted-unimpeded-access-to-key-png-facilities/102480288 Its very useful.
Good news that "US military [has been] granted unimpeded access to key Papua New Guinea defence facilities in new security agreement"
The closer PNG's relations with the US and Australia the better.
The joint PNG, US, Australian Lombrum Naval Base on PNG's Manus Island is especially important https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-18/us-pushes-further-into-pacific-with-png-manus-naval-base-deal/10508354
Meanwhile the issue of China's security agreement with the Solomons is now largely absent from the Australian media. It is as if Australia's Albanese Government has given up on the Solomons.
I'm well and hope you are too.
Cheers Pete
Post a Comment