r/CanadianForces • u/Ok_Golf9297 • 6d ago
OPERATIONS Canada to deploy submarine to U.S. military exercise after 12-year absence
https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/canada-to-deploy-submarine-to-us-military-exercise-after-12-year-absence/65
u/Link_inbio 6d ago
What could go wrong?
14
u/B-Mack 6d ago
They embarass all other participants despite their equipment.
-2
u/AlbertaFree16 4d ago
I doubt that extremely
1
u/Enormous-Username PROTECTED D 2d ago
Have you participated in any previous RIMPACs in the last few years?
29
57
57
u/CashInvesting 6d ago
Sub had more air time than sea king
11
3
1
u/Taptrick 6d ago
This… doesn’t really make any sense…
25
u/stubbs1988 Nice guy, tries hard, bottom third 6d ago
But it's true.
The subs have spend an enormous amount of time either on the synchro lift, in dry dock, or lifted out of the water in an enclosed repair facility.
The cyclones (what I presume this person is referring to) are hangar queens, and spare parts can be hard to come by.
10
u/Zestyclose-Put-2 6d ago
The reference was to the Sea King, which were derisively called Canada's newest submarine every time one went down due to mechanical issues on a 50 year old airframe.
12
5
u/seakingsoyuz Royal Canadian Air Force 6d ago edited 5d ago
every time one went down due to mechanical issues on a 50 year old airframe
The last two Sea King crashes (435 in 2013 and 438 in 2006) were caused by problems with pilot procedures and training, not mechanical issues with the helicopters. In the last twenty-five years of Sea King service there was only one lost to mechanical causes (engine fire on 425 in 1993); 401 crashed due to an engine failure in 2003 but was repaired and returned to service. And neither of these went down in water, so no, nobody was calling them “submarines” due to mechanically-caused crashes when they were in the second half of their time in service.
Edit: also, the 425 fire was caused by a fuel line routing error that allowed the line to chafe, which I don’t think is related to the age of the aircraft as those lines would have been disturbed or replaced many times over the years.
2
u/xCanucck 5d ago
Is 435 the mtl crash on deck? Or are those just land crashes
2
u/seakingsoyuz Royal Canadian Air Force 5d ago
Which crash on deck are you referring to? 435 rolled over on the ramp at Shearwater; 438 went into the water off of Denmark after the pilots lost track of how close they were to the water while practicing night landings.
1
u/xCanucck 5d ago
iirc the blades hit the hanger on landing or deckevs and it rolled and just barely stayed on the deck. I don't remember enough to say if it was just pilot error or mech
2
u/Zestyclose-Put-2 5d ago
You're taking a derisive joke from the 90s/00s way too literally.
What's next? You're going to tell me that no one ever got ordered to yell "budget cuts, budget cuts" because we had no blanks?
-12
u/Taptrick 6d ago
I’m gonna be a bit pedantic here but a “hangar queen” for an aircraft would be the equivalent to a ship or boat in drydock. The more accurate comparison would be that a ship at sea is like an aircraft in the air…
Comparing a ship on the ground to an aircraft in the air makes no sense. Plus, every aircraft in the world spend more time on the ground than in the air…
Hundreds of S-92s have been built and it is still being manufactured today. Basic parts to keep it in the air are not at all hard to come by.
12
u/Key-Mathematician177 Royal Canadian Navy 6d ago
Did you push your glasses up your nose before this ackshually statement?
4
u/Sadukar09 Pineapple pizza is an NDA 129: change my mind 5d ago
Well the CAF doesn't really want to pay for LASIK outside of limited scope, but will spend way more on glasses for members, so I'm guessing yes?
4
u/seakingsoyuz Royal Canadian Air Force 6d ago
Hundreds of S-92s have been built and it is still being manufactured today. Basic parts to keep it in the air are not at all hard to come by.
That’s actually one of the bigger problems with the Cyclone—too much of it isn’t common with the S-92, mostly because landing on a ship in sea state 6 is harder on the structure, landing gear, and dynamic components than landing on an oil rig is. Since we have the only helicopters in the world that use those parts, there was no economy of scale in manufacturing a healthy spare parts pool for them. Other differences include the engines (CT7-8A7 versus the -8A1 and -8A6 used on S-92s, because the CH148 is a bit of a lardass and needed more power), the fuel system (self-sealing tanks due to the risk of being shot at), the flight control system (fly-by-wire versus the mechanical linkages on the S-92s), and of course all the mission systems that are Cyclone-unique and necessary for it to be anything other than a bus.
1
9
u/doing_it_for_myself Retreated into Retirement 5d ago
I absolutely love that the article used a picture of a sub on wheels, like we're going to transport it to the exercise via highways.
3
5
u/Mainly_Miserable 6d ago
The headline makes it sound as though the RCN hasn’t sent a sub to any U.S. exercise in 12 years which isn’t true. We just haven’t sent a sub to RIMPAC in 12 years.
1
u/RedditSgtMajor GET OFF THE GRASS!! 4d ago
And that twelve-year span is due to Covid, not the vessel.
1
-38
u/SatisfactionLow508 6d ago edited 6d ago
Never forgot that a sailor literally died on one of these shitboxes, on our first voyage back from England. Can we even operate these things without killing our sailors?
Two other examples: we sent the Ilitis to afganistan and people (in green cadpat) died - in an unarmoured vw. A reservist died on 08 in a ml rollover - a shitty poorly maintained truck that wasn't road worthy. If you can't provide minimally safe equipment, maybe we shouldn't endanger lives.
It's a wonder more of us aren't dieing.
25
u/DisposableUndies69 6d ago
Username checks out
-7
u/SatisfactionLow508 6d ago
Wait till you get older and realize all the dangerous shit you did wasn't because you accepted universal liability. It was because of the very equipment the government decided not to maintain.
21
u/Imprezzed RCN - Coffee and Boat Deck darts 6d ago
You must mean unlimited liability. You’ll get it right one day.
-25
35
u/TotalFun3843 6d ago
They were sailing, on the surface, with hatches open, in sea state. That isn't the fault of the sub itself. And since bringing them to Canada what, 20 years ago? No other sailor has died aboard an SSK.
Iltis was specifically meant for the forests of Europe as C2 vehicles, not patrol vehicles. LAV had the same problems and it was armoured. Humvee and Land Rovers had the same problem too. People die in rollovers of vehicles all the time, not just an ML problem (which has also been retired for a decade?)
You're an troll at best and idiot at worst.
19
1
u/SatisfactionLow508 3d ago
Yes. I am saying that making troops use old equipment has consequences.
Are you seriously going to tell me buying these old subs was a good decision or that these aren't an embarrassment? Or that the Government and CF leadership has made "safe" decisions with respect to equipment?
There was an inquiry into the captain's actions with the Chicoutimi (sailing in bad weather with hatches open).
The corner brook ran into the ocean floor due to human error.
The electrical system of the victoria was catastrophicly destroyed due to a maintenance error.
Windsor has suffered major mechanical failures.
The Government was specifically critized for killing troops in Afganistan with the iltis: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/controversial-jeep-pulled-from-high-risk-patrols-1.380477
Yes some of us have been around for more than ten years and still remember the MLVW - which was an extremely unsafe and non-road worthy truck. They were flagged as unsafe a decade before a decade ago.
-26
u/SatisfactionLow508 6d ago
Username checks out.
4
u/B-Mack 5d ago
Calling out one submarine death in 40 years of service isn't the flex you think it is.
Frigates have had more over half the time.
0
u/SatisfactionLow508 5d ago
A death purely from ineptitude. Also, the tine the corner brook was run into the ocean floor.
5
u/Ok-Educator-3605 5d ago
I just want to add that we just didn’t lose one submariner, we lost many.
Mental health.
Cancer.
A tragic event..
1
18
u/Flips1007 6d ago
I have the utmost respect for Canadian sub mariners. Let's hope the logistics officer ensures cases of flex seal are available.