[Newsbot]

Title: Troubled submarines to be used until 2030
Category: Military
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2012-02-27 20:47:19
Canadian

[chuky]

here is a wild thought,how about buy brand new subs,not2nd hand crap

[DrCaleb]

Shouldn't that read "Will be in drydock until 2030"?

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Shouldn't that read "Will be in drydock until 2030"?

You beat me to it!

[saturn_656]

$1:

Subs running total at $1.75 billion
The Chretien government bought the submarines from Britain in 1998 at a cost of $750 million, but since then National Defence has pumped over $1 billion into repairing and converting them to Canadian use.

Just want to point out that the unit cost for a zero mile Type 214 from Germany is somewhere in the range of 330 million to 450 million dollars per sub. Costs for a Type 212 are likely similar.

We could have bought four brand new German SSK for what we have dumped into these second hand rust buckets so far.

Let that sink in.

[Scape]

Not according to the Greeks

$1:

July 2/09: ThyssenKrupp Marine receives a EUR 2.5 billion contract with Greece’s rival Turkey for 6 U-214 submarines, supplemented with Air-Independent Propulsion technology. They will be built at the military-owned Golcuk Shipyard near Izmit, using pre-built sections and equipment supplied by HDW, as well as Turkish electronics and items. Delivery is expected in 2015. Read DID’s “Turkey Subs” for more.

2,500,000,000.00 EUR = 3,339,248,541.17 CAD

Or

556 541 424

[saturn_656]

Scape Scape:

Not according to the Greeks

$1:

July 2/09: ThyssenKrupp Marine receives a EUR 2.5 billion contract with Greece’s rival Turkey for 6 U-214 submarines, supplemented with Air-Independent Propulsion technology. They will be built at the military-owned Golcuk Shipyard near Izmit, using pre-built sections and equipment supplied by HDW, as well as Turkish electronics and items. Delivery is expected in 2015. Read DID’s “Turkey Subs” for more.

2,500,000,000.00 EUR = 3,339,248,541.17 CAD

Or

556 541 424

Taking your numbers as gospel for the price Canada would pay (Portugal got theirs for less than $500 million USD http://www.janes.com/products/janes/def ... 1065927684 ), we could still have bought three zero mile Type 212/214 subs for same or less than what we spent on four hand me downs which still do not function properly ten years later.

Three new subs that work versus four that don't?

The choice is obvious.

[bootlegga]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Scape Scape:

Not according to the Greeks

$1:

July 2/09: ThyssenKrupp Marine receives a EUR 2.5 billion contract with Greece’s rival Turkey for 6 U-214 submarines, supplemented with Air-Independent Propulsion technology. They will be built at the military-owned Golcuk Shipyard near Izmit, using pre-built sections and equipment supplied by HDW, as well as Turkish electronics and items. Delivery is expected in 2015. Read DID’s “Turkey Subs” for more.

2,500,000,000.00 EUR = 3,339,248,541.17 CAD

Or

556 541 424

Taking your numbers as gospel for the price Canada would pay (Portugal got theirs for less than $500 million USD http://www.janes.com/products/janes/def ... 1065927684 ), we could still have bought three zero mile Type 212/214 subs for same or less than what we spent on four hand me downs which still do not function properly ten years later.

Three new subs that work versus four that don't?

The choice is obvious.

At the time, the deal seemed like a way to keep a vital capability when there was no funding for it. It has turned into a colossal boondoggle, but based on the experts opinions at the time (DND and RN), the costs were never expected to be this high.

A similar argument could be made for Canada not spending 10s of billions of dollars maintaining thousands of troops in Germany for more than four decades during the Cold War. That war never happened, and it is highly unlikely that the USSR was going to be deterred by our relatively small commitment in Europe, so we could have just kept your troops here in Canada and saved billions.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

[Gunnair]

bootlegga bootlegga:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Taking your numbers as gospel for the price Canada would pay (Portugal got theirs for less than $500 million USD http://www.janes.com/products/janes/def ... 1065927684 ), we could still have bought three zero mile Type 212/214 subs for same or less than what we spent on four hand me downs which still do not function properly ten years later.

Three new subs that work versus four that don't?

The choice is obvious.

At the time, the deal seemed like a way to keep a vital capability when there was no funding for it. It has turned into a colossal boondoggle, but based on the experts opinions at the time (DND and RN), the costs were never expected to be this high.

A similar argument could be made for Canada not spending 10s of billions of dollars maintaining thousands of troops in Germany for more than four decades during the Cold War. That war never happened, and it is highly unlikely that the USSR was going to be deterred by our relatively small commitment in Europe, so we could have just kept your troops here in Canada and saved billions.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

It was a good deal at the time. Frankly, in the froth to blame the UK, who's at fault when you buy a used car? The car lot that doesn't tell you everything or the buyer who doesn't take the vehicle to an independent mechanic for a thorough check up?

Canada shit the bed on this one, no question. All the problems we've encountered with these (at least those not caused ourselves or by accident) suggest we did not kick the tires very hard. Shame on us. Now we have to suck it up.

[BartSimpson]

I still think you folks should buy a couple of our mothballed Ohio class and convert them to missile and torpedo attack subs. Canada with four of these behemoths would make even Mr. Putin nervous.

[Scape]

You also have to take into account buying in bulk and the shipyard costs. And even then you are still looking at the earliest 6 years to make the subs.

We were given a better rate and UK Gurkha engineers also upgraded our bases in exchange for UK troops being able to use our land for training. Something Germany would have no use for but our UK ally did.

So for almost the same amount of time we got three times the amount of subs. Germany would only offer 1 sub for what we bought the 3 UK diesel's and we got renovations to boot. Either way we still would have been behind because we have badly neglected shipyards.

[mentalfloss]

Why don't they just sell them and not use any subs?

[BartSimpson]

Scape Scape:

...we have badly neglected shipyards.

I concur. I have not seen Halifax, but Esquimalt is in sore shape with way too much rust to be observed.

[BartSimpson]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

Why don't they just sell them and not use any subs?

Because it's a bugger to patrol under the ice in a kayak.

[EyeBrock]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

Why don't they just sell them and not use any subs?

Yea, we should just sell all that nasty bang-bang stuff. Who needs a military eh?