New Submarines: Carney vs Poilievre

[I am Groot]

19 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The US will decommission more ships than in the entire Canadian Navy, and build more too.

I would think so. They're a helluva lot bigger and have a lot more worldwide interests to protect. But they're not doing it fast enough, and the Chinese are hugely outpacing them.

https://rmcglobal.com/shortfalls-in-u-s-naval-shipbuilding-capability/

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, I am Groot said:

I would think so. They're a helluva lot bigger and have a lot more worldwide interests to protect. But they're not doing it fast enough, and the Chinese are hugely outpacing them.

 

All the more reason why Canada should be building or buying ships/submarines as well.  Three coasts to protect in addition to NATO commitments.

China is still only a regional power at sea, and cannot project force around the world, despite having more ships than the U.S.

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

All the more reason why Canada should be building or buying ships/submarines as well.  Three coasts to protect in addition to NATO commitments.

China is still only a regional power at sea, and cannot project force around the world, despite having more ships than the U.S.

They're pretty good at exporting paranoia around the world, something we've gotten really good at importing.

Quid pro quo.

 

[Army Guy]

21 hours ago, herbie said:

No we're not. There's no requirement for that and only nuclear subs can do that. MOF I like August questton the need for subs when it's 2025 and satellites, sensors, missiles and drones can do that job for defence. 

Ya they are, have you even looked at the specs for those boats i guess not, have you watched the Commander of the NAVY talk about these subs....he states exactly what they are being purchases one of the specs the navy insisted on was to be able to transit the artic...

If we could track SUBs by sat, why does the American fleet tail Russian subs, i mean if they know where they are going to be you could destroy them at will...The greatest threat to surface ves is Subs.... You should have a talk to Bush- Cheney he was a submariner on US attack Subs...

We did not buy enough drones to rely on just there coverage...i mean come on do some research...Ya that's what i do rely on some guy on the forum for all my info...

https://ottawacitizen.com/public-service/defence-watch/everything-you-need-to-know-canada-new-submarines
 

Quote

 

“The combination of its AIP system and lithium-ion batteries allows for extended submerged operations exceeding three weeks, while its 7,000-plus nautical mile range enables transoceanic missions without surfacing.

 

https://canadiandefencereview.com/kss-iii-cleared-for-launch-hanwha-ocean-cover-story/

[John Stone]

On 11/1/2025 at 4:24 PM, Army Guy said:

I agree, Canadians had sticker shock with the F-35 purchase, this project is going to cause heart attacks.......Navy Commander did propose a mix fleet solution because they need subs yesterday...Carney does not want a split contract to much work and not enough off sets.......

And to be honest Canada does not have one idea on how to make subs...it requires more skill than building surface ships....Besides this is a politic al decision now, Military has already shared their opinion and Carney will pick the one that has the most votes tied to it....

arguably Canada will design and build it's own fighter a/c before it does same re: subs! Hilarious! Out of all the military platforms warships are the most difficult and subs are in a class by themselves in terms of complexity. 

[herbie]

Contrary to the title of this thread. I have never heard nor seen anty statement from PP on the purchase of submarines.

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, herbie said:

Contrary to the title of this thread. I have never heard nor seen anty statement from PP on the purchase of submarines.

It didn't even show up in the budget. It would appear that we're a long way away from actually buying any submarines. I imagine he'll comment when there's something to comment on but right now it's a whole lot of nothing

[herbie]

35 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It didn't even show up in the budget

Because we won't be paying for any in 2026. More than likely still yapping about it.

[CdnFox]

38 minutes ago, herbie said:

Because we won't be paying for any in 2026. More than likely still yapping about it.

And it's tradition to put a deposit down if you're going to order one. And it is very common for procurements to be in the budget if they're anticipated in the next year or two even if they don't get bought in the next year. The money is set aside

Can you think of a time when that hasn't happened? I don't remember time when a military procurement of any size wasn't in the budget before the year the check was due. It's not like they're going to build them for us and hope we pay them everything at the end, there will be an upfront and then regular payments to be made as progress is completed.

So it would seem that they have no intention of even considering making a decision in the next year or two.

 

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It didn't even show up in the budget. It would appear that we're a long way away from actually buying any submarines. I imagine he'll comment when there's something to comment on but right now it's a whole lot of nothing

 

This is consistent with Canada's DND procurement planning and actual underspending of the past, discussed here many times over the years.  There is no way that Canada will actually procure all 12 (new) diesel-electric submarines, if only because the allocations will not survive future budgets, being "re-profiled" instead.

Contracts that yield domestic jobs (in the usual provinces) and/or offsets have the best survival rate.   Canadian Forces have learned not to expect anything substantial from the Ottawa circus.   

There is an occasional surprise, like PM Harper and the four CC-177 Globemaster IIIs which were procured in record time (2006-2008) without competitive bidding and red tape. Production was at Boeing's Long Beach, California facility.   A fifth CC-177 was added at the tail end of the production run (2015).   Reports are that the RCAF loves them.

 

Quote

AI Overview

Yes, the Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) has a history of underspending its budget, with a cumulative capital spending shortfall of $18.5 billion from 2017-18 to 2023-24 under the "Strong, Secure, Engaged" policy. This consistent pattern is attributed to a dysfunctional procurement system, characterized by slow decision-making and unclear communication, which delays projects and leads to funds being re-profiled to future years. 

 

[I am Groot]

On 11/4/2025 at 8:41 PM, Army Guy said:

We did not buy enough drones to rely on just there coverage...i mean come on do some research..

Because we bought hugely expensive American drones instead of the cheapy suicide drones the Russians and Ukrainians are throwing back and forth at each other by the tens of thousands.

Maybe we should buy some of those too? 

[taxme]

On 10/31/2025 at 6:16 PM, August1991 said:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-submarines-carney-south-korea-9.6959659

No doubt what to do.

What the hell does Canada need a submarine for? Can you tell me or anyone else here as to why Canada needs a new submarine costing the Canadian taxpayer's billions of their tax dollars? Are we soon to be invaded by communist China or North Korea? 

Anyway, it sure looks to me like Carnage has just taken another one of his many expensive Canadian taxpayer's vacation trips around the world for himself since he became the Dictator PM of Canada and travelled to South Korea. And his world travelling continues at our Canadian taxpayer's tax dollar expense. While the Marxist dictator in Ottawa travels around the world, Canada and Canadians struggle to try and eat and stay alive.

Canada has never had a PM that ever gave a shit about Canada or Canadians. These sleazy lying corrupt traitorous politicians that we keep ending up with all the time just want to show us all of their contempt that they have for we the Canadian suckers. Gawd i am really starting to hate and despise this WEF globalist Marxist country. Just my opinion. 

[taxme]

20 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It didn't even show up in the budget. It would appear that we're a long way away from actually buying any submarines. I imagine he'll comment when there's something to comment on but right now it's a whole lot of nothing

No one here seems to show any lack of concern for the cost of buying a new submarine. With all of the poverty and of the hunger going on here in la-la land called Canada and Canadians losing their jobs by the thousands in Canada, our illustrious and glorious dear leader politicians in Canada thinks that we need to buy a submarine and wanting to blow billions of our tax dollars on their toy submarine that Canada and Canadians do not need at this time. Maybe, if we do buy a new submarine, we can use it to take Canadians on submarine tours far out in the ocean. Hopefully, that will they put lots of sturdy windows in the sub so we can watch all of the big and little fishy's swim by. Hey, it's just a suggestion. LOL.

[CdnFox]

17 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

This is consistent with Canada's DND procurement planning and actual underspending of the past, discussed here many times over the years.  There is no way that Canada will actually procure all 12 (new) diesel-electric submarines, if only because the allocations will not survive future budgets, being "re-profiled" instead.

Contracts that yield domestic jobs (in the usual provinces) and/or offsets have the best survival rate.   Canadian Forces have learned not to expect anything substantial from the Ottawa circus.   

There is an occasional surprise, like PM Harper and the four CC-177 Globemaster IIIs which were procured in record time (2006-2008) without competitive bidding and red tape. Production was at Boeing's Long Beach, California facility.   A fifth CC-177 was added at the tail end of the production run (2015).   Reports are that the RCAF loves them.

 

 

I actually tried to explain that this was going to happen when carney began making some of his announcements to some of the people here on the board. Announcing military spending is not the same as making military spending'

I do notice that carney is planning on having up to 300,000 civil servants qualify as a special reserve force by making them take a one-week course once a year and then becoming reservists essentially. He's creating a new bureaucracy for this which will have dozens and dozens and dozens of new bureaucratic managers all getting paid what will now be labeled as defense spending. He's also paying $800,000 a year to the guy who will be in charge of procurement as well as giving him a special ministry and there's not really much money to procure new items in the budget. So what are we paying that guy for? But he'll count towards military spending.

At least I hope, that the serving military guys will get a pay increase. I expect efforts for recruitment will also go up. But most of the capital spending that some were hoping would translate into extensive military equipment probably won't make it to the books anytime in the near future

[August1991]

1 hour ago, taxme said:

What the hell does Canada need a submarine for? Can you tell me or anyone else here as to why Canada needs a new submarine costing the Canadian taxpayer's billions of their tax dollars?

...

I agree.

Arctic Ocean? WTF?

=====

Harper wisely bought a few costly C-17s. This is Canada: When needed, fly in to fix the problem.

=====

Carney is doing what Trump wants - spend zillions on useless nonsense hardawre.

 

[August1991]

On 11/4/2025 at 1:34 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

...

All the more reason why Canada should be building or buying ships/submarines as well.  Three coasts to protect in addition to NATO commitments.

China is still only a regional power at sea, and cannot project force around the world, despite having more ships than the U.S.

Bush/Cheney American view.

Give it a break.

====

Kennedy/Nixon/Reagan won. The Soviet Union is no more. 

[Army Guy]

5 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Because we bought hugely expensive American drones instead of the cheapy suicide drones the Russians and Ukrainians are throwing back and forth at each other by the tens of thousands.

Maybe we should buy some of those too? 

The units have been testing all kinds of drones mostly for ground recce, Arty but it will take some time before they do finally make a mass buy....I have not seen any fiber op drones yet...

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

The units have been testing all kinds of drones mostly for ground recce, Arty but it will take some time before they do finally make a mass buy....I have not seen any fiber op drones yet...

Potentially better question is why aren't we looking at making our own? I mean I'm sure we could buy some tech or advice or plans from Ukraine and look at our own improvements for their own military industry. There might be value in expensive drones but there's clearly some value in the cheaper ones too

[I am Groot]

2 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

The units have been testing all kinds of drones mostly for ground recce, Arty but it will take some time before they do finally make a mass buy....I have not seen any fiber op drones yet...

Yeah but what about the drones that blow people up? I guess those are too... militaristic?

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, August1991 said:

I agree.

Arctic Ocean? WTF?

=====

Harper wisely bought a few costly C-17s. This is Canada: When needed, fly in to fix the problem.

=====

Carney is doing what Trump wants - spend zillions on useless nonsense hardawre.

 

When you have a leak in your plumbing do you you rely on your wife's advice to fix it, or call a professional....The Head of the NAVY has spent years of training and experience to know what it takes to defend the nation...And if he says we need subs, i would say we need subs....Now not sure what experience you or taxme has, but I'm sure you can't compete with the Naval commander....

It may sound useless to you, but i would remind you, these guys are the ones that will be defending the country if it comes to that, it will be their lives on the line, not yours....you should have a little more faith in their choices...And maybe one day it will be your sons or daughters grand sons or grand daughters, that are strapping into that equipment wouldn't it be nice that they had a fighting chance to come back to their families.......Instead of having their names engraved on some cenotaph or read aloud on NOV 11...

[Army Guy]

7 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Yeah but what about the drones that blow people up? I guess those are too... militaristic?

Suicide drones, i have not heard of anything just yet, Drone doctrine has not really been established in NATO or Canada just yet they are working with the problem, experimenting with different equipment......that and the tech is evolving at lightning speed...just last year drones were free flight, now they are fiber op to prevent jamming....and with our procurement we would be buying the wrong stuff anyways it would be obsolete before it gets used.......

Today, as soon as you find something with a drone in less than a couple of minutes you can call in for fires, be it 155MM arty rounds, soon to be Rockets for MLRS, or air strike....if they are available...The guy on the ground life span just got that much shorter...

I think for now NATO is sticking with large maneuver groups made up with combined ops in depth in mind, while in Ukraine it is most part static.. and most units critical short on equipment and manpower...

[Army Guy]

18 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Potentially better question is why aren't we looking at making our own? I mean I'm sure we could buy some tech or advice or plans from Ukraine and look at our own improvements for their own military industry. There might be value in expensive drones but there's clearly some value in the cheaper ones too

They are already good Canadian companies providing samples to our ground forces, ...There are just to many out there and the tech is so new no one really knows what will work or not...hence why they are testing so many brands...My son tells me some are just junk, to light to fragile, but each has its own merits, IE light drones are much quitter able to sneak up on bad guys other are away to big, but loud... some as small as a dragon fly, others could carry 100 lbs of ordnance or sensors..

[CdnFox]

25 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

They are already good Canadian companies providing samples to our ground forces, ...There are just to many out there and the tech is so new no one really knows what will work or not...hence why they are testing so many brands...My son tells me some are just junk, to light to fragile, but each has its own merits, IE light drones are much quitter able to sneak up on bad guys other are away to big, but loud... some as small as a dragon fly, others could carry 100 lbs of ordnance or sensors..

Well at least we're thinking about it. We may not be able to manufacture our own fighter jets or tanks but it felt like drones should have been within our wheelhouse

[August1991]

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

When you have a leak in your plumbing do you you rely on your wife's advice to fix it, or call a professional....The Head of the NAVY has spent years of training and experience to know what it takes to defend the nation....

Canada does not need submarines. They are a waste of money. Full stop. 

Carney wants them because he thinks that it will appease Trump.

====

We Canadians are greater than that.

[August1991]

On 11/4/2025 at 1:34 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

All the more reason why Canada should be building or buying ships/submarines as well.  Three coasts to protect in addition to NATO commitments.

China is still only a regional power at sea, and cannot project force around the world, despite having more ships than the U.S.

All the more reason to avoid wasting money on building a larger dreadnought.