Admiral Beez
Superstar
I’d rather forget them both and get nuclear-powered attack submarines. That’s what we need for the Arctic.
|
|
|
- Thread starter kEiThZ
- Start date
kEiThZ
Superstar
We can't put one conventional sub to sea continuously and you think we can simply just jump to a whole fleet of nuclear powered attack subs? Nope. And I don't think our allies would even support us getting the capability given our current abilities.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
What we should have and what's feasible is not lining up, that I'd agree. I'm surprised that Brazil is building a SSN.
afransen
Senior Member
What you're suggesting would mean having zero subs for a couple of decades, given procurement timelines.
We could certainly entertain nuclear attack submarines but that seems like something to pursue later as a nice to have.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
You're right on both counts. I support the new AIP diesel subs because we must keep our skills and capabilities current. But we should also have a plan to replace or augment these boat with nuclear subs in the 2050s. If my son or daughter were in the RCN under the ice I would want them in a nuclear boat capable of operating for months if need be.
lenaitch
Senior Member
I am hearing concerns from naval personnel about the negative impact on readiness if they went with two fleets of six boats. Given various maintenance/refit levels, they figure the best they could get is one boat per coast. Also, no interoperability of maintenance, parts and crews.
Bojaxs
Senior Member
The Globe & Mail did a piece on the CANZUK proposal.
www.theglobeandmail.com
Opinion: We had CANZUK in my parents’ time. Why not today – and more?
European Union-like labour mobility was a key part of Canadian life in the past. It can be so again
www.theglobeandmail.com
kEiThZ
Superstar
This is a bit long. But it's a unique take and adversely reflects some of the actual discussions inside government. This is a very different take on foreign policy than we are used to. We could become the arsenal of democracy.
Full Metal Junkie
Senior Member
An interesting new poll from Nanos shows that willingness of Canadians to serve in CAF in case of a major armed conflict had doubled in the past year:
Towered
Superstar
Perhaps there would be a low level of insurgency after all in the worst case scenario of a US invasion...
Northern Light
Superstar
Not yet publicly confirmed, but the Globe is saying that Canada will host the new Defence, Security and Resilience Bank.
www.theglobeandmail.com
From the above:
If true, this has the potential to be a significant win for Canada on the Finance side, Defence and and in terms of high-paying employment.
Canada selected to host new multinational defence bank, sources say
Bank will provide long-term, low-cost financing for defence projects undertaken by participating countries
www.theglobeandmail.com
From the above:
If true, this has the potential to be a significant win for Canada on the Finance side, Defence and and in terms of high-paying employment.
taal
Senior Member
Yeah but I'm going to bet it goes to Montreal ...
kEiThZ
Superstar
My money is on Toronto.
lenaitch
Senior Member
Four of the six major chartered banks are headquartered in Toronto. NBC and BMO are in Montreal but I understand most of its 'head office' operations in Toronto. BOC is in Ottawa but I'm not sure it would play a major role.
kEiThZ
Superstar
It's not just the banks. There's substantial defence companies, research and academia in southern Ontario. There's an airport that connects to more commercial centres and NATO capitals than any other.
I'd say Montreal is probably second. Vancouver and Ottawa are the long shots.