Back to news

January 23, 2019 | Local, Naval

Canadian navy pressing ahead on life extensions for submarines

By

OTTAWA — The Department of National Defence is pushing ahead with plans to extend the lives of Canada's submarine fleet, with the head of the navy hoping some work will start in the coming months.

The movement comes as countries around the world have stepped up investments in their submarine and anti-submarine fleets to protect their waters — and operate in waters not under their control.

Canada's four Victoria-class submarines have a troubled history since they were bought second-hand from Britain in 1998, with successive governments investing hundreds of millions of dollars in constant repairs and upgrades.

But in an interview with The Canadian Press, Royal Canadian Navy commander Vice-Admiral Ron Lloyd said the diesel-powered submarines — HMCS Chicoutimi, Victoria, Corner Brook and Windsor — have finally turned a corner.

Lloyd specifically pointed to HMCS Chicoutimi's having recently spent 197 days in the Pacific and Asia even as HMCS Windsor was patrolling the Mediterranean with NATO as proof the submarines are living up to their potential.

"The fact we had two boats concurrently deployed, if that doesn't speak to the success of the program, I don't know what does," said Lloyd, who will retire from the military later this year after three years as navy commander.

The clock has been ticking on the four vessels: without upgrades, the first of the submarines will reach the end of its life in 2022, according to documents obtained through access to information, while the last will retire in 2027.

But the Liberals' defence policy promised to extend the lives of the vessels and Lloyd said defence officials are now working through the details to make sure they can continue to operate into the 2030s.

More extensive work is expected to start in about three or four years but Lloyd said efforts are underway to start implementing some minor upgrades by March.

Exactly how much upgrading all four submarines will cost remains uncertain, but Lloyd said the figure that officials are working with is about $2 billion.

Some experts have previously called for Canada to consider new submarines, rather than extending the lives of the ones it has, but the government has said upgrading the Victoria-class ships is more "prudent."

Other experts have said the country doesn't need such expensive vessels. But many other countries around the world are investing in submarine and antisubmarine fleets. NATO has specifically raised concerns about Russian submarines in the North Atlantic, while Canadian frigate commanders patrolling in the Atlantic and Mediterranean have reported more foreign submarines in recent years.

"The most proliferated weapon system right now on the planet are submarines," Lloyd said. "They by themselves can impact the outcome of a battle space. And so putting a submarine into a body of water instantly changes the calculus that are currently operating in those bodies of water."

Aside from upgrading its submarines, the Canadian military has started to return to its Cold War role as a leader in antisubmarine warfare in the North Atlantic by upgrading its frigates and maritime patrol planes and adding new maritime helicopters.

— Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter.

Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/01/22/canadian-navy-pressing-ahead-on-life-extensions-for-submarines/#.XEjDzVxKiUl

On the same subject

  • Royal Canadian Navy ships deploy to Indo-Pacific Region

    August 14, 2023 | Local, Naval

    Royal Canadian Navy ships deploy to Indo-Pacific Region

    Today, His Majesty’s Canadian Ships (HMCS) Ottawa and Vancouver, alongside Naval Replenishment Unit Motor Vessel (MV) Asterix, departed from Esquimalt for the Indo-Pacific Region. HMCS Ottawa and Vancouver are the second and third Royal Canadian Navy warships to deploy to the Indo-Pacific Region in 2023. This delivers on Canada’s commitment to increase the number of warships annually deployed to the Indo-Pacific Region from two to three, starting this year.

  • Frigate design decision challenged in Federal Court, putting $60B program in limbo

    November 23, 2018 | Local, Naval

    Frigate design decision challenged in Federal Court, putting $60B program in limbo

    Murray Brewster · CBC News Winning bid 'incapable of meeting three critical mandatory requirements,' says Alion Canada One of the losing bidders in the competition to design the navy's next generation of warships has asked the Federal Court to overturn the recent decision to award the contract to a group of companies led by Lockheed Martin Canada. Alion Science and Technology Corp. and its subsidiary, Alion Canada, asked for a judicial review on Friday — a challenge that could mean more delays to the $60 billion program. The company had pitched the Dutch-designed De Zeven Provinciën Air Defence and Command (LCF) frigate as their solution for the Canadian navy. It's asking the court to set aside an Oct. 19 decision to select Lockheed Martin Canada the preferred bidder and to prevent the federal government from entering into negotiations with the company, which has offered up the BAE Systems-designed Type 26 frigate. In their court filing, Alion officials argue that the winning bid was "incapable of meeting three critical mandatory requirements" of the design tender. Notably, they say the Type 26 cannot meet the mandatory speed requirements set out by the navy and that both Public Services and Procurement Canada and Irving Shipbuilding, the yard overseeing the construction, should have rejected the bid outright. Alion said it "submitted a fully-compliant and conforming bid at enormous expense" and argued it "has been denied the fair treatment (it was) owed." The court application also points out that the design tender was amended 88 times during the 22 months it was under consideration and that the changes "effectively diluted the [warship] requirements" and allowed the government and Irving to select "an unproven design platform." Rising cost estimates Over two years ago, the Liberal government said it wanted to select a "mature design" for the new frigates, rather than designing a warship from scratch. Former public works minister Judy Foote said it would be a faster, cheaper solution. Unlike its two competitors, the Type 26 has yet to enter service with the Royal Navy and competitors have privately knocked it as "paper ship." Navantia, a Spanish-based company, was the other failed bidder. It headed a team that included Saab and CEA Technologies and proposed the F-105 frigate design, a ship in service with the Spanish navy. The Liberal government plans to build 15 new warships and hoped to get construction underway in the early 2020s. The program, which has been beset with delays and rising cost estimates, is intended to replace the navy's aging Halifax-class frigates, the backbone of the nation's maritime fighting force. Federal procurement officials had hoped to nail down a complete design contract with Lockheed Martin by the winter. The court challenge now puts that timeline in doubt. It also has enormous implications for Irving, which has been concerned about a slowdown in warship production between the current Arctic Offshore Patrol Ship program and the frigate replacements, which are formally titled 'Canadian Surface Combatants'. No one at Public Works or Lockheed Martin was immediately available for comment on Wednesday. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/frigate-design-decision-challenged-in-federal-court-putting-60b-program-in-limbo-1.4915501

  • Russia’s Arctic Agenda and the Role of Canada

    April 16, 2020 | Local, Naval

    Russia’s Arctic Agenda and the Role of Canada

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 17 Issue: 51 By: Sergey Sukhankin April 15, 2020 05:24 PM Age: 14 mins New research (which includes two articles written by Russian experts) published by the prominent think tank the Canadian Global Affairs Institute has spurred interest and hopes in Russia's expert community about the possibility of normalizing ties between Russia and Canada through cooperation in the Arctic region (Russiancouncil.ru, April 3; Cgai.ca, accessed April 12). This cooperation could potentially be premised on two main pillars. First would be the mutual rejection of “internationalization” of the Arctic. Both Canada and Russia—for whom the Arctic region is an issue of foreign policy (Russiancouncil.ru, July 1, 2019) —feel ill at ease with the increasing involvement of non-Arctic states in the region, particularly, China. Russian information outlets noted the level of distress when the Chinese icebreaker Snow Dragon completed its first-ever voyage through the Arctic Ocean off the coast of Canada, accumulating “a wealth of experience for Chinese ships going through the Northwest Passage in the future” (Regnum, September 17, 2017; see EDM, October 3, 2017). Second, Moscow seeks to exploit regional frictions and disagreements between Canada and the United States (Pentagonus.ru, accessed April 10) to boost its own position/influence in the region. Russian sources recall the year 2010, when then–Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly challenged Canada's stance on the status of the Northwest Passage, which Ottawa considers part of Canadian territory (Foreignpolicy.ru, February 20, 2015). In the past, both the Russian tone and general assessment of Canada's role in the Arctic were denigrating, claiming Ottawa lacked agency. Perhaps the clearest expression of this sentiment came from the director of the Institute of Strategic Planning and Forecasting, Professor Alexander Gusev, who, in 2015, declared that “they [Canada] are only performing the role assigned by the US” (Odnako.org, March 30, 2015). After 2016, however, Russia dramatically changed its coverage of the US-Canadian dispute in the Arctic region, with Moscow increasingly employing reconciliatory rhetoric toward Ottawa and employing ever more assertive public diplomacy tools. One notable example of this new approach is Moscow's reliance on pro-Russian experts based in Canada. In 2016, speaking in Sochi, on the margins of that year's Valdai Club session, Professor Piotr Dutkiewicz (a former director of the Institute of European and Russian Studies at Carleton University, in Ottawa) stated, “[T]his area [the Arctic region] will be the first one where we will feel real changes in our relations... Arctic cooperation will become the focal point thanks to which our two sides [Canada and Russia] will be extending their areas of collaboration” (Izvestia, October 28, 2016). Moreover, as repeatedly stated by Federation Council member Igor Chernyshenko (a senator from Murmansk Oblast), the Arctic region could become a “bridge,” helping Canada and Russia overcome the existing difficulties in their bilateral ties. Last May, he announced, “[W]e invited them [the Canadian side] to return to a dialogue. We proposed holding a conference between Russian and Canadian universities in northwest Russia, maybe in Murmansk Oblast. They supported this idea” (TASS, May 25, 2019). Notably, the last such event was held in November 2014, in Canada, hosted by the aforementioned Carleton University. In addition to trying to foster bilateral academic ties, Russia's outreach to Canada on Arctic issues involves sustained information campaigns via RT and similar multi-language information outlets with international reach. In particular, Russian propaganda narratives routinely overemphasize the extent of current US-Canadian disagreements in the Arctic. At the same time, foreign-audience-facing Kremlin-linked media outlets underscore the allegedly negative role of President Donald Trump (and his policies toward Canada) in aggravating the existing disputes. RT widely claimed that “after Trump's inauguration, he began pressing Ottawa on economic issues and extended claims on Canadian possessions in the Arctic region.” It also highlighted US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo's remarks suggesting that “Russia is not the only country with illegitimate claims [in the Arctic] ...the US has a lasting dispute with Canada over its claims on sovereignty over the Northwest Passage. Finally, RT's propaganda reporting also relied on a statement by Pavel Feldman, the deputy director of the Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasts at the Moscow-based Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN). Feldman is quoted as saying, “[T]he US and Canada carry on a heated competition over the Arctic region; yet, publicly, these countries are trying to position themselves as partners” (RT, October 16, 2019). In recent months, this increasing Russian attention to Canada as an Arctic power and a key element of regional stability and order has started to be expressed at the highest levels in Moscow. Poignantly, President Vladimir Putin declared in a public address at the start of this year that Russia “is open to cooperation with Canada on the basis of mutual respect and consideration of each other's interest.” Putin added, “[O]ur countries are neighbors in the Arctic region and bear joint responsibility for the development of this vast region, for preservation of the traditional lifestyle of its native populations and the careful treatment of its brittle ecosystem” (Vzglyad, February 5, 2020). Such reconciliatory rhetoric should, however, be taken with a heavy dose of caution in Ottawa: from the earliest days of the Soviet Union, Moscow's stance on the Arctic region has been deliberately flexible and tightly premised on being able to demonstrate its military potential in the High North and to intimidate other regional players. The Russian Federation has increasingly undertaken the same policy course since 2014 (see EDM, April 9). Incidentally, on January 31, 2020, two Russian Tu-160 heavy strategic bombers approached Canadian airspace—maneuvers that the Russian Ministry of Defense explained away as “planned exercises” (Vpk.name, February 3). It is worth pointing out that the US North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is unable to identify and track Russian bombers of this type until they are close enough to launch missiles at targets on the continent. Furthermore, it is worth keeping in mind that, in fact, Russia (not the US) is Canada's direct competitor when it comes to territorial claims in the Arctic (the Lomonosov Ridge)—a point explicitly corroborated by Russia's Arktika 2007 expedition, which explored this disputed undersea area and famously planted a Russian flag at the North Pole, on the bottom of the Arctic Ocean (Izvestia, August 3, 2007). Lastly, it may be worth keeping an eye on one of the proposed amendments (soon to be officially adopted) to the Russian Constitution on the “prohibition of actions related to the alienation of Russian territory, or the propaganda thereof” (TASS, February 25). This amendment—reportedly drafted with predominantly Kaliningrad and Vladivostok in mind—is likely to also be applied to some Arctic territories that are of equally strategic interest to Canada. https://jamestown.org/program/russias-arctic-agenda-and-the-role-of-canada/

All news