Canada Navy Canada SSK program

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Submarines are always going to be a contentious issue in Canada especially the bad press the Victoria class has received over the years. Canada in its procurement will ultimately in my opinion go with a blue water design able to transit the Atlantic and Arctic in a traditional cold war role, additionally they will have to be able to transit the Pacific. Any design will have to take into account both warm and cold weather operations, currently the Victoria class built for the cold North Atlantic and Nordic regions have had difficulty operating in temperate waters. This is all common sense based on current doctrine and conuse for submarines in Canada and previous use of this type of platform by Canada.

Any submarine we buy will more than likely not have AIP but will leverage lithium battery technology. The shortfin Barracuda that AUS is building has no plans for AIP. AIP is normally for coastal submarines, and the technology which reaches back into the 30's haven't advanced enough to in endurance for the needs of Canada. AIP only allows a submarine to go at slow speeds, useful for coastal submarines but not so much for open ocean transits. Additionally any new submarine for Canada that is expected to operate in the Arctic under the ice will need the power to surface at will in case of emergency, conventual submarines and even AIP cannot do that. We know the Arctic is melting and these submarines will not be built or be operational in the next decade at least. Under the ice operations will become less and less important and that is going to work in our advantage as this opens newer designs to the RCN on the drawing board and given the bad press the Victoria class has received any procurement will be done in a slow and deliberate manner.

We never had more than four submarines ever in the history of the Canadian submarine service, the RCN in my opinion will more than likely order a max of six and those will be hard enough to crew given the RCN is short 1200 sailors on the east coast alone. Six will allow one to be at high readiness on each coast, one on each coast at lower readiness, and one on each coast in maintenance. More than likely the design will take into account a lower crew size and greater automation. The senate defence committee has recommended twelve and not saying that twelve is not a better number but realistically not achievable with the resources we currently have available. Keep in mind the senate defence committee is usually not listened to and recommend all kinds of unrealistic things.
 
Last edited:

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
8,664
Reactions
52 17,316
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Submarines are always going to be a contentious issue in Canada especially the bad press the Victoria class has received over the years. Canada in its procurement will ultimately in my opinion go with a blue water design able to transit the Atlantic and Arctic in a traditional cold war role, additionally they will have to be able to transit the Pacific. Any design will have to take into account both warm and cold weather operations, currently the Victoria class built for the cold North Atlantic and Nordic regions have had difficulty operating in temperate waters. This is all common sense based on current doctrine and conuse for submarines in Canada and previous use of this type of platform by Canada.

Any submarine we buy will more than likely not have AIP but will leverage lithium battery technology. The shortfin Barracuda that AUS is building has no plans for AIP. AIP is normally for coastal submarines, and the technology which reaches back into the 30's haven't advanced enough to in endurance for the needs of Canada. AIP only allows a submarine to go at slow speeds, useful for coastal submarines but not so much for open ocean transits. Additionally any new submarine for Canada that is expected to operate in the Arctic under the ice will need the power to surface at will in case of emergency, conventual submarines and even AIP cannot do that. We know the Arctic is melting and these submarines will not be built or be operational in the next decade at least. Under the ice operations will become less and less important and that is going to work in our advantage as this opens newer designs to the RCN on the drawing board and given the bad press the Victoria class has received any procurement will be done in a slow and deliberate manner.

We never had more than four submarines ever in the history of the Canadian submarine service, the RCN in my opinion will more than likely order a max of six and those will be hard enough to crew given the RCN is short 1200 sailors on the east coast alone. Six will allow one to be at high readiness on each coast, one on each coast at lower readiness, and one on each coast in maintenance. More than likely the design will take into account a lower crew size and greater automation. The senate defence committee has recommended twelve and not saying that twelve is not a better number but realistically not achievable with the resources we currently have available. Keep in mind the senate defence committee is usually not listened to and recommend all kinds of unrealistic things.

Lithium ion would be even better than AIP in my estimation.

You are spot on about your last two lines. It is why for most part I observe. I have grown weary of expecting pragmatic defence policy sustained in parliament and bureaucracy.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Lithium ion would be even better than AIP in my estimation.

You are spot on about your last two lines. It is why for most part I observe. I have grown weary of expecting pragmatic defence policy sustained in parliament and bureaucracy.
Agree, even motor technology is improving to where the storage capacity of a lithium ion powered submarine will be even more efficient.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
8,664
Reactions
52 17,316
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
@DAVEBLOGGINS et al.


The Royal Canadian Navy is making a pitch for the purchase of up to 12 new submarines at a cost of $60 billion, say National Defence and industry sources.


The navy is pushing for the acquisition of the submarines to be included in the Liberal government’s Defence Policy Update. Last month at a defence conference in Ottawa, Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre acknowledged he was advocating on behalf of the navy for submarines.



The navy has a team examining the replacement of the current Victoria-class submarine fleet and there have been initial discussions with industry officials, sources said.



Asked about the navy’s new submarine proposal, National Defence spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier stated that, “the Defence Policy Update is currently underway, with public consultations ongoing, and we look forward to releasing the DPU in due course.”



The navy has created the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, or CPSP. “The CPSP is examining all conventional options available, gathering information, and conducting an analysis of potential submarines capable of meeting the Royal Canadian Navy’s requirements,” said Le Bouthillier.


But he noted the work on the submarine project is part of the navy’s routine analysis. “The CPSP does not commit the government to any specific course of action, but is intended to facilitate an informed decision when required,” Le Bouthillier added.



Canadian defence industry sources say the cost of the new subs would be around $60 billion but that price tag could climb to $100 billion as military equipment procurement programs are rarely on budget. Industry representatives pointed to the program to build 15 new surface combatants for the Canadian navy. The cost for those vessels has climbed from $25 billion to more than $80 billion.



In 2016, Australia had a project to build 12 conventional-powered submarines at a cost of more than $50 billion. But it withdrew from that and instead entered into a new plan to buy at least eight nuclear submarines with help from the U.S. and Britain. The Australian government has estimated that program will cost between $260 billion to $360 billion over 30 years.


There are hurdles to the Royal Canadian Navy’s proposal to buy new subs. In the past, the navy has had trouble training enough submariners to crew its current fleet of four boats, let alone 12.



The other hurdle is whether the federal government wants to fund such a massive naval project at a time when Canadians are more concerned about the lack of health care system and affordable housing, inflation and increasing costs for basic necessities such as food.



The four Victoria-class boats, originally known as the Upholder-class, were purchased second-hand from the Royal Navy and delivered between 2000 and 2004.



But the latest data provided to this newspaper by National Defence shows the submarines have had limited use since 2017. HMCS Corner Brook has not been to sea over the last five years.


From 2017 to April 2023, the Canadian Forces has spent $1.9 billion on submarine maintenance with three boats totaling 529 days at sea. In 2019 and 2020, no submarine operations were conducted at all by Canada, according to National Defence.



Victoria-class submarines were recognized in the Liberal government’s 2017 defence policy, Strong Secure Engaged, as key contributors to national defence. The Liberal government has committed to modernizing the subs so they can continue to operate until the mid-2030s.



While the Canadian Armed Forces has suggested it could take 15 years for a new submarine to be eventually acquired, National Defence documents obtained by this newspaper through the Access to Information law warn the process could take much longer. “The procurement timeline from project establishment to contract award is highly specific to the project but staff analysis has shown that the procurement of a new submarine class will take a minimum of 15 years total from project establishment to first delivery and could exceed 25 years depending on the adopted procurement strategy,” National Defence and military officials told then-Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan in a Jan. 6, 2021 briefing note.


The Canadian Patrol Submarine Project office would start out small but will be incrementally augmented with “hand-selected submariners, engineers and procurement professionals,” Sajjan was told. The staff will follow the normal project activities leading to departmental government boards, an independent review panel for defence acquisition, and eventual approval by Treasury Board for the project to proceed.



In its 2021 briefing to the then-defence minister, the Royal Canadian Navy noted submarines are a key element of the Canadian Armed Forces continental defence and are critical to the detection of foreign submarines. “Given that submarine technology is being exploited by non-state actors (e.g. Caribbean drug cartels) the significance of sub-surface MDA (maritime domain awareness)/maritime undersea surveillance is an important capability to retain and grow pursuant to recent departmental discussions,” Sajjan was told.


The current Defence Minister Anita Anand also received a similar briefing on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project.


The Conservative party has supported an immediate replacement program for the Victoria-class submarines.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
So it appears things are moving towards the selection of a design for the next class of submarines for the RCN which will succeed the Victoria Class. Later this month members of the submarine replacement project will travel to Japan and Korea to look at the Korean KSS-III and presumably the Sōryū-class. Both classes leverage the lithium battery technology and AIP. While not powerful enough to surface or operate exclusively under the ice would give the RCN certainly ice edge capability. Any variants would have to be heavily modified to operate combat systems the RCN would want to acquire and modify the boats to operate in the Arctic. This is good news however realistically any new class is over 15 years away.
344472509_6145656355525865_570350312767499683_n.jpg
 

DAVEBLOGGINS

Committed member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
189
Reactions
2 296
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
So it appears things are moving towards the selection of a design for the next class of submarines for the RCN which will succeed the Victoria Class. Later this month members of the submarine replacement project will travel to Japan and Korea to look at the Korean KSS-III and presumably the Sōryū-class. Both classes leverage the lithium battery technology and AIP. While not powerful enough to surface or operate exclusively under the ice would give the RCN certainly ice edge capability. Any variants would have to be heavily modified to operate combat systems the RCN would want to acquire and modify the boats to operate in the Arctic. This is good news however realistically any new class is over 15 years away. View attachment 57166
Good to see the RCN is thinking in the right way Ted. The Submarine Replacement Project team should visit all sub contenders IOT give the government all potential candidates a "fair shake". The ROC KSS-III is a good option along with the Japanese Sōryū-class. I would however want the team to also think of the Japanese Taipei class LIB boats or it's follow-on class from Japan as another very good options. Let's also not forget the German Type 212 CD E class or the Type 216 class as well. There are also other classes like the Spanish S 80, the Swedish repacement subs or what the Dutch are going to buy as well.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada


Home»Event News»MADEX 2023»Babcock and HHI Sign a Technical Cooperation Agreement for the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project
Leonardo
Babcock and HHI CPSP
Babcock has signed a Technical Cooperation Agreement with HD HHI to collaborate on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP).

Babcock And HHI Sign A Technical Cooperation Agreement For The Canadian Patrol Submarine Project​

Babcock Canada (Babcock), a world leader in submarine support, has signed a Technical Cooperation Agreement with HD Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd (HD HHI) to collaborate on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP).​

Naval News Staff 07 Jun 2023

Babcock press release


HD HHI will leverage its world-class construction capabilities, while Babcock will contribute its expertise in providing in-service support and sustainment of Canada’s Victoria Class submarines, which it has been doing since 2008.
John Howie, Babcock’s Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, signed the agreement alongside Young-seuk Han, Vice Chairman & CEO of HD HHI, at the International Maritime and Defence Exhibition (MADEX) in Busan, South Korea.
John Howie said: “As a world leader in submarine sustainment, this agreement enables Babcock to build on our longstanding relationship with HD HHI and combine both organisations’ extensive experience on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project.”
Young-seuk Han said: “Through close collaboration between leading companies in Canada and South Korea in shipbuilding and defense industry, we will propose the optimal submarine to the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, equipped with the latest technology in both Canada and South Korea.”
The agreement cements Babcock’s commitment to supporting the Royal Canadian Navy’s current and future Maritime programmes.
 

rai456

Active member
Messages
68
Reactions
1 46
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Indonesia
The Canada-class submarine plans should be revived. SSNs would be much better suited for Canada with our requirements to cover large distances across two coasts and operate in the Arctic. I would be extremely disappointed if we did not take the opportunity to join AUKUS and acquire nuclear submaries.
If Australia can afford nuclear submaries then we should be able to as well. Canada has a larger population and economy than Australia. We also have a larger industrial sector and much more experience and expertise in operating nuclear reactors.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
The Canada-class submarine plans should be revived. SSNs would be much better suited for Canada with our requirements to cover large distances across two coasts and operate in the Arctic. I would be extremely disappointed if we did not take the opportunity to join AUKUS and acquire nuclear submaries.
If Australia can afford nuclear submaries then we should be able to as well. Canada has a larger population and economy than Australia. We also have a larger industrial sector and much more experience and expertise in operating nuclear reactors.
Its not about affording it, the current government has been very clear that acquiring nuclear submarines is unacceptable and its doubtful the public will accept it.
 

DAVEBLOGGINS

Committed member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
189
Reactions
2 296
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada


Home»Event News»MADEX 2023»Babcock and HHI Sign a Technical Cooperation Agreement for the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project
Leonardo
Babcock and HHI CPSP
Babcock has signed a Technical Cooperation Agreement with HD HHI to collaborate on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP).

Babcock And HHI Sign A Technical Cooperation Agreement For The Canadian Patrol Submarine Project​

Babcock Canada (Babcock), a world leader in submarine support, has signed a Technical Cooperation Agreement with HD Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd (HD HHI) to collaborate on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP).​

Naval News Staff 07 Jun 2023

Babcock press release


HD HHI will leverage its world-class construction capabilities, while Babcock will contribute its expertise in providing in-service support and sustainment of Canada’s Victoria Class submarines, which it has been doing since 2008.
John Howie, Babcock’s Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, signed the agreement alongside Young-seuk Han, Vice Chairman & CEO of HD HHI, at the International Maritime and Defence Exhibition (MADEX) in Busan, South Korea.
John Howie said: “As a world leader in submarine sustainment, this agreement enables Babcock to build on our longstanding relationship with HD HHI and combine both organisations’ extensive experience on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project.”
Young-seuk Han said: “Through close collaboration between leading companies in Canada and South Korea in shipbuilding and defense industry, we will propose the optimal submarine to the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, equipped with the latest technology in both Canada and South Korea.”
The agreement cements Babcock’s commitment to supporting the Royal Canadian Navy’s current and future Maritime programmes.
Hello Ted. let's not forget that this Technical Cooperation Agreement between two companies is just that; -an agreement between two companies (Babcock & HD HHI) and nothing more. The CPSP has just begun its search for replpacement proposals for the Next Generation Canadian Submarine Replacement of the Victoria class SSK. I anticipate the "team" will visit other "potential" candidates in other countries in the next several months to come and ultimately pare it down to the most acceptable candidates for the RCN with recommendations to Ottawa for the best option. Just because Babcock has the contract to keep the Victoria class going until a future submarine can be acquired, does not mean that Babcock and South Korea's KSS-III submarine is a "shoe-in" for this contract.
 

DAVEBLOGGINS

Committed member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
189
Reactions
2 296
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Its not about affording it, the current government has been very clear that acquiring nuclear submarines is unacceptable and its doubtful the public will accept it.
Let's not kill off the SSN option just yet Ted. Governments and attitudes towards SSNs may very well change. I believe all options are still on the table.
 

DAVEBLOGGINS

Committed member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
189
Reactions
2 296
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
The Canada-class submarine plans should be revived. SSNs would be much better suited for Canada with our requirements to cover large distances across two coasts and operate in the Arctic. I would be extremely disappointed if we did not take the opportunity to join AUKUS and acquire nuclear submaries.
If Australia can afford nuclear submaries then we should be able to as well. Canada has a larger population and economy than Australia. We also have a larger industrial sector and much more experience and expertise in operating nuclear reactors.
Hello rai456. Unfortunately, for Canada, under the present government, Canada will never buy an SSN. Even if attitudes & governments were to change, it is going to be a long haul before we could join AUKUS (If the US would let us) however joining AUKUS Pillar 1, may be an option though. Although I personally would like to see a fleet of Canadian SSNs, the only way Canada gets to build and operate its own SSNs would be to develop our own SMR technology to be able to do that which both you and I may not be around to see in the future.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Hello Ted. let's not forget that this Technical Cooperation Agreement between two companies is just that; -an agreement between two companies (Babcock & HD HHI) and nothing more. The CPSP has just begun its search for replpacement proposals for the Next Generation Canadian Submarine Replacement of the Victoria class SSK. I anticipate the "team" will visit other "potential" candidates in other countries in the next several months to come and ultimately pare it down to the most acceptable candidates for the RCN with recommendations to Ottawa for the best option. Just because Babcock has the contract to keep the Victoria class going until a future submarine can be acquired, does not mean that Babcock and South Korea's KSS-III submarine is a "shoe-in" for this contract.
They already visited a number of counties including Japan and they have been looking for several years at options. KSS II is on the short list and very smart of them to get their foot in the door now, especially with the government leaning towards a deal with Korea.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
83
Reactions
1 88
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Let's not kill off the SSN option just yet Ted. Governments and attitudes towards SSNs may very well change. I believe all options are still on the table.
Well we should as it a waste of time. Even another government won't go that way as the sticker shock and public backlash would be too late. More than likely another minority government with the NDP pulling the Liberal or Conservatives chain.
 

Chocopie

Well-known member
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
390
Reactions
14 1,387
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
They already visited a number of counties including Japan and they have been looking for several years at options. KSS II is on the short list and very smart of them to get their foot in the door now, especially with the government leaning towards a deal with Korea.
Surely they‘ll also visit Naval Group and TKMS as well. Germany‘s Type 216 is an interesting design for Canada IMO: 4.000 tons surfaced displacement, double hull structure, 6x 533 mm tubes, diesel electric with fuel cell and methanol reformer AIP in combo with Li-Ion batteries, Vertical Multi Purpose Lock, highly automated with 34 minimum crew and max. 63 personnel etc. would be an excellent choice as well based on paper specs.

As others said: Nuclear subs like French Suffren-class suit Canadian requirements better. Albeit politically a tough sell.
 
Last edited:

DAVEBLOGGINS

Committed member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
189
Reactions
2 296
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Surely they‘ll also visit Naval Group and TKMS as well. Germany‘s Type 216 is an interesting design for Canada IMO: 4.000 tons surfaced displacement, double hull structure, 6x 533 mm tubes, diesel electric with fuel cell and methanol reformer AIP in combo with Li-Ion batteries, Vertical Multi Purpose Lock, highly automated with 34 minimum crew and max. 63 personnel etc. would be an excellent choice as well based on paper specs.

As others said: Nuclear subs like French Suffren-class suit Canadian requirements better. Albeit politically a tough sell.
Well said Chocopie! NG & TKMS build great submarines! Especially the Germans who make some of the best steel in the world for submarines. IMO the Type 212 CD & the Type 216 would be great AIP/SSK options for Canada!
 

Chocopie

Well-known member
South Korea Correspondent
Messages
390
Reactions
14 1,387
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
South Korea
Yes, the German-Norwegian Type 212 CD slipped my mind, less displacement than Type 216. Could Canada get onboard in this ongoing project? Downside of German sub shipyards is capacity and construction speed.

Koreans (HHI, DSME) practically learned building modern SSK (U209, U214) from HDW in development stages over the last decades. KSS-III itself is heavily influenced by German sub design philosophy.
Not gonna lie, as a Korean, would love to see our naval industry hitting a major sales jackpot with a NATO member like Canada.
 

Windchime

Well-known member
Moderator
Professional
South Korea Moderator
Messages
317
Reactions
12 919
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
South Korea
Hello Ted. let's not forget that this Technical Cooperation Agreement between two companies is just that; -an agreement between two companies (Babcock & HD HHI) and nothing more. The CPSP has just begun its search for replpacement proposals for the Next Generation Canadian Submarine Replacement of the Victoria class SSK. I anticipate the "team" will visit other "potential" candidates in other countries in the next several months to come and ultimately pare it down to the most acceptable candidates for the RCN with recommendations to Ottawa for the best option. Just because Babcock has the contract to keep the Victoria class going until a future submarine can be acquired, does not mean that Babcock and South Korea's KSS-III submarine is a "shoe-in" for this contract.
I don't think the article mentioned anything about Babcock taking the deal just because they are already operating in Canada supporting Victoria Class. They just made some PR statements and that's it. Of course Babcock Canada having Canadian operations (and RCN being familiar with them) and offering industrial benefits as a result of their capacity in Canada are a deal sweetner.
 

Windchime

Well-known member
Moderator
Professional
South Korea Moderator
Messages
317
Reactions
12 919
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
South Korea
Good to see the RCN is thinking in the right way Ted. The Submarine Replacement Project team should visit all sub contenders IOT give the government all potential candidates a "fair shake". The ROC KSS-III is a good option along with the Japanese Sōryū-class. I would however want the team to also think of the Japanese Taipei class LIB boats or it's follow-on class from Japan as another very good options. Let's also not forget the German Type 212 CD E class or the Type 216 class as well. There are also other classes like the Spanish S 80, the Swedish repacement subs or what the Dutch are going to buy as well.
Surely they‘ll also visit Naval Group and TKMS as well. Germany‘s Type 216 is an interesting design for Canada IMO: 4.000 tons surfaced displacement, double hull structure, 6x 533 mm tubes, diesel electric with fuel cell and methanol reformer AIP in combo with Li-Ion batteries, Vertical Multi Purpose Lock, highly automated with 34 minimum crew and max. 63 personnel etc. would be an excellent choice as well based on paper specs.

As others said: Nuclear subs like French Suffren-class suit Canadian requirements better. Albeit politically a tough sell.
Yes, the German-Norwegian Type 212 CD slipped my mind, less displacement than Type 216. Could Canada get onboard in this ongoing project? Downside of German sub shipyards is capacity and construction speed.

Koreans (HHI, DSME) practically learned building modern SSK (U209, U214) from HDW in development stages over the last decades. KSS-III itself is heavily influenced by German sub design philosophy.
Not gonna lie, as a Korean, would love to see our naval industry hitting a major sales jackpot with a NATO member like Canada.

Problem with Type 216 is that the actual design doesn't exist just yet. They need a first customer like what Greece was for Type 214. Then again the situation is even less ideal since Type 216 is almost an all-new design unlike Type 214 which leveraged design features from Type 209 and Type 212A. Type 212CD and Kokums A26 are unsuited for Canada considering what they are built for and where they will operate. They will most probably offer what they're trying to sell to India. Also just like what Chocopie said, there's the problem of capacity when it comes to TKMS since they've got a few ships to build for the German, Norweigean and Italian Navies. Dutch and Polish Navies could join the queue if they are to select 212CD as well.

Navantia should first get the S80+ sorted out if they want to sell that design abroad. The program was woefully managed since they've parted ways with the French.

So the competition is really between France, Korea and Japan. Naval Group can offer both the Scorpene with FC2G or Shortfin Barracuda depending on what the Canadian Navy wants. Mitsubishi will probably enter with Taigei and Hanwha only has KSS-III, and they'll probably offer a model based on batch II with Li-ion batteries.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom