Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sub has no torpedoes [Canada, and none until 2006, NOT humor]
CNEWS ^ | September 29, 2004 | JEFFREY SIMPSON

Posted on 09/30/2004 9:40:58 PM PDT by Mike Fieschko

HMCS Windsor will be without torpedoes until 2006, a high-ranking Canadian naval officer says.

"That's probably right," Capt. Dean McFadden, who commands Atlantic operations, told reporters on board the submarine as it conducted exercises off the coast of Nova Scotia.

The Halifax-based submarine, which was originally supposed to be ready for operations in July 2001, began a year of testing last spring.

While the sub is not yet armed with torpedoes, which will be its only external weapons, it has embarked on several official missions.

"This submarine has been engaged in domestic operational patrols, not exercises, since the spring," Capt. McFadden said.

Earlier this year, HMCS Windsor operated on the Grand Banks off Newfoundland, conducting surveillance and gathering information for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans while remaining undetected, Capt. McFadden said.

"That's commonly how we're tasked," he said. "We also do operations in support of the RCMP."

He declined to elaborate on details of the operations, in case the evidence gathered has to be used in court.

Canada's customs and immigration officials will also probably make use of the country's recently acquired submarines for their work, which doesn't require that the boats have external weapons, he said.

The submarine's ability to operate while remaining undetected for long periods of time and over great distances makes it an attractive addition to any naval force, he said. The sub is covered with special tiles to reduce its detection by sonar.

HMCS Windsor's counterpart on the West Coast, HMCS Victoria, is undergoing trials and working on preparing its weapons systems, Capt. McFadden said.

"So they're carrying the lion's share of that development," he said.

HMCS Windsor is developing its navigation and surveillance skills first and will integrate its weapons systems later.

HMCS Windsor is one of four diesel-electric-powered Victoria-class subs that were built in the late 1980s and early 1990s for the British navy, which mothballed them in 1994 when it decided to concentrate on a nuclear fleet.

Buying new subs would have cost $3 billion to $5 billion, and the Canadian navy figures it got a bargain by paying about $900 million.

"It's certainly more than my mortgage but a pittance compared to the cost of many defence resources," Capt. McFadden said. "We got them at an exceptional price."

The subs ran about three years behind schedule because of a series of technical glitches.

When the British brought them out of storage, they found cracks in some key valves. Repairs and tests to certify them safe to dive took longer than expected, with delivery of a remaining sub, still in England, expected next month.

All this delayed the process of installing Canadian equipment in the submarines, which usually last for about 30 years, he said.

"The capability that is going to be delivered will be delivered at a bargain-basement price compared to anybody else's ability to deliver," Capt. McFadden said.

Although the role of submarines has shifted since the Cold War, they will still have an important military presence, Capt. McFadden said.

"But every bit as important, Sept. 11 came along and our focus shifted to Apollo, to sending task forces to the Arabian Gulf," he said.

Cmdr. Dermot Mulholland said submarines, which the country has operated since 1914, are essential to keeping Canada safe.

"We just keep proving it over and over again," he said. "It adds a third dimension to our navy, which is essential for a medium-power navy like ours. "

HMCS Windsor carries a maximum of 59 people. Its top speed while submerged is just over 37 kilometres per hour, and it can dive to 200 metres.

Its diesel generators are used to charge the two main batteries, and it is usually quieter than a nuclear submarine, Capt. McFadden said.



TOPICS: Canada; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: canuckistan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: Mike Fieschko

No torpedos but is has a nice screen door...LOL


21 posted on 09/30/2004 10:59:42 PM PDT by Rain-maker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dk/coro
The Canadian Forces brass are in a state of collective denial. Shame!!

Canada used to be a nation of proud and brave men.

However, those men died at Vimy Ridge, Dieppe and Normandy. They are no more.


22 posted on 09/30/2004 11:12:46 PM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KellyAdmirer
Did they really have to spend $900 million for a vessel that needs a crew of 59 to conduct "domestic operational patrols"?

It is difficult to tell from this story, but that price may be for the whole set.

Even then, they would be overpriced. as the Germans are selling new Dolphin class subs for $375 million each. "Over the last year, industry sources said, HDW has reduced its price of the Dolphin for Israel from $610 million to $375 million per submarine. Officials said this has reflected slumping HDW sales as well as a decision to continue production in Germany." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1231688/posts

23 posted on 10/01/2004 5:35:37 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Polybius

We still have them. But, the libs (and their media) don't want to acknowledge them.


24 posted on 10/01/2004 5:39:21 AM PDT by NorthOf45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
I wonder what these guys would think of your ... insight?


25 posted on 10/01/2004 5:44:15 AM PDT by NorthOf45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NorthOf45

They're probably wondering the same thing I am... why does Canada bother to have a military they won't use?


26 posted on 10/01/2004 5:45:38 AM PDT by thoughtomator ("With 64 days left, John Kerry still has time to change his mind 4 or 5 more times" - Rudy Giuliani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko

I'm surprised they would arm the subs at all, being that it might be "offensive" to the enemy.

Isn't Canada;s goal to project "soft power?"

If you simply talk and reason with the enemy, they will do what you want.


27 posted on 10/01/2004 5:48:50 AM PDT by Guillermo (It's tough being a Miami Dolphins fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NorthOf45

Tough-looking bunch of troops.

It's really sad what the liberal gov't has done to such fine men and women...sending them aloft in 40-year old junk helicopters, denying them the tools they need,...

Despicable.


28 posted on 10/01/2004 5:49:00 AM PDT by Levante
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko

Just think, after less than a generation of prescription drugs, our military will be like this too!


29 posted on 10/01/2004 5:50:35 AM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

They have great snipers. Since they are being mistreated in Canada, I wish we could bring 'em here. I'm sure the US Armed Forces would show 'em the respect they deserve.


30 posted on 10/01/2004 5:53:19 AM PDT by Little Ray (John Ffing sKerry: Just a gigolo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko

This torpedoe issue isn't the only problem with these subs. They've been a headache since day one. What a waste of taxpayers money and the military's time.


31 posted on 10/01/2004 5:53:22 AM PDT by NorthOf45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganez
My Tissot Seastar can dive to 300 meters and I only paid $300. Hah!

Can I have it after they drag you back up?

32 posted on 10/01/2004 5:53:34 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Pay no attention to the Nattering Newbies of Negativism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Levante

You know what pisses me off? The libs have the gall (sp?) to claim that we provide our soldiers with the best equipment available. They may be fooling themselves, but not us.


33 posted on 10/01/2004 5:55:11 AM PDT by NorthOf45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Guillermo

Wait a second, are you liberal? You just preached their whole military mindset.

Just kidding of course ... about you being liberal at least. LOL


34 posted on 10/01/2004 5:56:41 AM PDT by NorthOf45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko

What do you expect of a mostly socialist country? Of course,
they expect the good old "capitalist" U. S. to defend them.


35 posted on 10/01/2004 8:07:03 AM PDT by upcountryhorseman (An old fashioned conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko
Cmdr. Dermot Mulholland said submarines, which the country has operated since 1914, are essential to keeping Canada safe.

Have they been operating the same submarines since 1914?
36 posted on 10/01/2004 8:23:00 AM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike Fieschko
>>>>>HMCS Windsor will be without torpedoes until 2006, a high-ranking Canadian naval officer says.<<<<

Canadian role model

37 posted on 10/01/2004 10:48:09 AM PDT by DTA (Proud Pajamista)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson