Replacing the Subs

[SeaKingTacco]

With the CFP's likely to self-divest before the CSC arrive, replacing the Victoria's with KS-III Batch 2's would ensure the RCN has striking power during that surface fleet gap. Once we have 4 KS-III, we could offer the Victoria's to Australia as a stop gap sub to supplement their Collin's Class till their sub program starts.

What makes you think the Aussies would be stupid enough to take that deal?

 

[GR66]

No need. There are a lot of Canadian Koreans in the RCN, particularly in the engineering trades. I've sailed with a least 6 officers who were Canadian Korean's, and a bunch of techs. Also my last CO spoke proficient Korean as he was AdC for the Canadian Korea liason officer. Not Korean himself but its a relatively straight forward language to speak and read.

Worst case we hire a translator that speaks Korean...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

What makes you think the Aussies would be stupid enough to take that deal?

Well they bought into the French deal, so I figure we can sell them cheap to them when they realize their new sub deal is not going well and they desperately need more subs, but can't buy the KS-III as that will scupper the Nuke deal.

 

[Kirkhill]

Given how few realistic and viable options remain alongside the blistering pace of the program, a sole source contract seems inevitable.

If we take the subs on sole source, and are looking for a speedy delivery, does that suggest we take them "as is" complete with the Korean weapons suite?

 

[GR66]

Hypothetically if the SSN option were to come back on the table I guess we'd be looking at the French Suffren-class.

 

[deepblue202]

Hypothetically if the SSN option were to come back on the table I guess we'd be looking at the French Suffren-class.

If you read down to the chart that shows the laid down to commissioning it takes 11 years for them to build a Suffren class submarine. I don't think that is an option for us but if we get the K-III with the vertical launch maybe we can get them to modify to allow French missiles that would have a nuclear warhead.

 

[suffolkowner]

Hypothetically if the SSN option were to come back on the table I guess we'd be looking at the French Suffren-class.

theres no reactors to power more subs

 

[suffolkowner]

If we take the subs on sole source, and are looking for a speedy delivery, does that suggest we take them "as is" complete with the Korean weapons suite?

thats what the CRCN said we would do. SK has said they can do it in three years too. Can they integrate some changes? Do we need them too?

 

[Kirkhill]

thats what the CRCN said we would do. SK has said they can do it in three years too. Can they integrate some changes? Do we need them too?

Buy them without the changes, or lease them, or even pay the Koreans to patrol our shores with joint crews and figure out what can be done with the kit available.

Then modify or have new hulls built to suit.

 

[suffolkowner]

Do we care if we use SK systems and munitions? Why?

Buy them without the changes, or lease them, or even pay the Koreans to patrol our shores with joint crews and figure out what can be done with the kit available.

Then modify or have new hulls built to suit.

 

[lenaitch]

Buy them without the changes, or lease them, or even pay the Koreans to patrol our shores with joint crews and figure out what can be done with the kit available.

Then modify or have new hulls built to suit.

But how would the crew read the gauges?

 

[Kirkhill]

KSS III Armament

Batch-I:- 6 × 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes LIG Nex1 K761 Tiger Shark heavyweight torpedoes[19] 6 × K-VLS cells 6 × Hyunmoo 4-4 submarine-launched ballistic missile[20][21] Batch-II:- 10 × K-VLS cells 10 × Hyunmoo 4-4 submarine-launched ballistic missile Chonryong land attack cruise missile[22]

[td]Armament[/td]

Tiger Shark Torpedo

Hyunmoo 4-4 is a 500-800 km missile with 1000 (???) kg payload
Chonryong (Hyunmoo 3C) is a 1500 km missile with a 500 kg payload

 

[Kirkhill]

But how would the crew read the gauges?

It's a good question. But is it insurmountable?

 

[Kirkhill]

Do we care if we use SK systems and munitions? Why?

I don't know. Modify if necessary.

 

[GR66]

Do we care if we use SK systems and munitions? Why?

I think the argument has typically been "for interoperability with our US partners".

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The Brits use the spearfish as their standard torpedo, even though they are "inter-operable" with the US Navy. The Spearfish is superior to the Mk48 in all respects, as is the Tiger Shark of the SK Navy. I say stick with what is better.

 

[GR66]

The Brits use the spearfish as their standard torpedo, even though they are "inter-operable" with the US Navy. The Spearfish is superior to the Mk48 in all respects, as is the Tiger Shark of the SK Navy. I say stick with what is better produced by a country that isn't threatening to annex us.

FTFY

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I think the argument has typically been "for interoperability with our US partners".

Typically.

Maybe not this week.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

FTFY

I stand by my original post: The Spearfish and Tiger Shark ARE superior to the US' Mk48 ... and only the Americans are too bigoted to see it.