Canada NEW SUBMARINES FOR CANADA

[DAVEBLOGGINS]

By David Dunlop, 2 October 2025

I recently read an interesting article by Michael J. Lalonde called ‘Which Submarines Should Canada Buy?” This article offers a unique perspective from an informed, professional and Canadian author. Some of his main points are the following:

• The first step is to assess what the government’s objectives are for the new submarine fleet and what capabilities it will need to achieve these objectives. The government has outlined objectives and provided an extensive list of what capabilities it wants.
• After discussing the objectives and the list of desired capabilities, Lalonde then goes through the characteristics of the German/Norwegian TKMS Type 212CD submarine vs Hanwha Ocean’s KSS-II Batch 2 submarine.
• He discusses what the two designs would mean for Canadian operations, keeping in mind the distances and unique characteristics of Canadian Arctic operations. He states that “In short, the German boat brings exceptional stealth shaping, a mature NATO sensor and combat-system ecosystem, and superb choke-point lethality. The Korean boat brings greater weapons volume through VLS, lithium-ion energy for blue-water persistence, more space and automation for crews on long legs, and a vendor-proposed delivery pace that could compress Canada’s transition off Victoria-class.”
• Lalonde's own recommendation is, in short, “The KSS-III is the only conventional submarine that can meet all of Canada’s requirements.”

In my opinion, the author presents a clear, fair and concise opinion on both sides and I totally agree with his recommendation for Canada to acquire 12 of the South Korean-Hanwha Ocean KSS-III Batch 2 submarines. The Canadian government must make a decision on this before the end of 2025. The full article and the author’s biography can be viewed on Mr. Lalonde’s web page at:"

https://www.michaeljlalonde.com/2025/09/15/which-submarine-should-canada-buy/

WHICH SUBMARINE SHOULD Canada BUY - Suchen Videos

www.bing.com

 

[NEKO]

View attachment 77652

By David Dunlop, 2 October 2025

I recently read an interesting article by Michael J. Lalonde called ‘Which Submarines Should Canada Buy?” This article offers a unique perspective from an informed, professional and Canadian author. Some of his main points are the following:

• The first step is to assess what the government’s objectives are for the new submarine fleet and what capabilities it will need to achieve these objectives. The government has outlined objectives and provided an extensive list of what capabilities it wants.
• After discussing the objectives and the list of desired capabilities, Lalonde then goes through the characteristics of the German/Norwegian TKMS Type 212CD submarine vs Hanwha Ocean’s KSS-II Batch 2 submarine.
• He discusses what the two designs would mean for Canadian operations, keeping in mind the distances and unique characteristics of Canadian Arctic operations. He states that “In short, the German boat brings exceptional stealth shaping, a mature NATO sensor and combat-system ecosystem, and superb choke-point lethality. The Korean boat brings greater weapons volume through VLS, lithium-ion energy for blue-water persistence, more space and automation for crews on long legs, and a vendor-proposed delivery pace that could compress Canada’s transition off Victoria-class.”
• Lalonde's own recommendation is, in short, “The KSS-III is the only conventional submarine that can meet all of Canada’s requirements.”

In my opinion, the author presents a clear, fair and concise opinion on both sides and I totally agree with his recommendation for Canada to acquire 12 of the South Korean-Hanwha Ocean KSS-III Batch 2 submarines. The Canadian government must make a decision on this before the end of 2025. The full article and the author’s biography can be viewed on Mr. Lalonde’s web page at:"

https://www.michaeljlalonde.com/2025/09/15/which-submarine-should-canada-buy/

WHICH SUBMARINE SHOULD Canada BUY - Suchen Videos

www.bing.com

Why not nuclear submarines? Has Canada not considered them?
Australia is getting nuclear subs, but Canada seems uninterested. Wouldn’t nuclear submarines be a better choice, especially given Canada’s Arctic territory? Nuclear subs have the endurance to remain submerged for months and can operate effectively under sea ice, without needing to surface.

By contrast, conventional submarines — even with AIP or lithium-ion batteries — still have limited endurance. Once their electricity or AIP fuel runs out, they must snorkel or surface to recharge with diesel. In winter, with large areas of the Arctic covered by sea ice, this becomes a serious limitation.

*Edit
Oh, i see. Only limited to conventional sub.

 

[DAVEBLOGGINS]

Why not nuclear submarines? Has Canada not considered them?
Australia is getting nuclear subs, but Canada seems uninterested. Wouldn’t nuclear submarines be a better choice, especially given Canada’s Arctic territory? Nuclear subs have the endurance to remain submerged for months and can operate effectively under sea ice, without needing to surface.

By contrast, conventional submarines — even with AIP or lithium-ion batteries — still have limited endurance. Once their electricity or AIP fuel runs out, they must snorkel or surface to recharge with diesel. In winter, with large areas of the Arctic covered by sea ice, this becomes a serious limitation.

*Edit
Oh, i see. Only limited to conventional sub.

Hello NEKO. The Nuclear debate has gone on in Canada for decades and decades now. Twice before Canada tried to go nuclear and twice before we were either "shunned" by the Americans to purchase them or Canadian governments in the past were just too afraid of the costs involved. A majority of Canadians now do support Nuclear submarines for the RCN but again governments have turned that idea aside (for now anyway). Cheers!

 

[NEKO]

Hello NEKO. The Nuclear debate has gone on in Canada for decades and decades now. Twice before Canada tried to go nuclear and twice before we were either "shunned" by the Americans to purchase them or Canadian governments in the past were just too afraid of the costs involved. A majority of Canadians now do support Nuclear submarines for the RCN but again governments have turned that idea aside (for now anyway). Cheers!

Oh, I see. But that was in the past, before the AUKUS submarines. Now that Australia is getting nuclear subs, maybe the opportunity is also open for Canada. The UK and US are already allowing close allies to acquire this technology, so I thought that if Australia can, then maybe Canada can too.

Currently, Australia, Canada, and the UK are already cooperating to build the Type 26 frigate together, so it might also be possible for Canada to join the AUKUS submarine program and build them as well. That way, Canada, the UK, and Australia wouldn’t just be building the same frigate, but also nuclear submarines.

Even though Canada is currently looking at conventional submarines, I wouldn’t be surprised if it eventually decides to drop the South Korean or German options and go for nuclear subs—just like how Australia dropped the Barracuda program.

By the way, if that happens, it’ll be CAUKUS

 

[Century]

View attachment 77652

By David Dunlop, 2 October 2025

I recently read an interesting article by Michael J. Lalonde called ‘Which Submarines Should Canada Buy?” This article offers a unique perspective from an informed, professional and Canadian author. Some of his main points are the following:

• The first step is to assess what the government’s objectives are for the new submarine fleet and what capabilities it will need to achieve these objectives. The government has outlined objectives and provided an extensive list of what capabilities it wants.
• After discussing the objectives and the list of desired capabilities, Lalonde then goes through the characteristics of the German/Norwegian TKMS Type 212CD submarine vs Hanwha Ocean’s KSS-II Batch 2 submarine.
• He discusses what the two designs would mean for Canadian operations, keeping in mind the distances and unique characteristics of Canadian Arctic operations. He states that “In short, the German boat brings exceptional stealth shaping, a mature NATO sensor and combat-system ecosystem, and superb choke-point lethality. The Korean boat brings greater weapons volume through VLS, lithium-ion energy for blue-water persistence, more space and automation for crews on long legs, and a vendor-proposed delivery pace that could compress Canada’s transition off Victoria-class.”
• Lalonde's own recommendation is, in short, “The KSS-III is the only conventional submarine that can meet all of Canada’s requirements.”

In my opinion, the author presents a clear, fair and concise opinion on both sides and I totally agree with his recommendation for Canada to acquire 12 of the South Korean-Hanwha Ocean KSS-III Batch 2 submarines. The Canadian government must make a decision on this before the end of 2025. The full article and the author’s biography can be viewed on Mr. Lalonde’s web page at:"

https://www.michaeljlalonde.com/2025/09/15/which-submarine-should-canada-buy/

WHICH SUBMARINE SHOULD Canada BUY - Suchen Videos

www.bing.com

Good post. I read that Lalonde piece too and I agree. The KSS-III just makes way more sense for Canada. We need long range, endurance and real blue-water punch, not some small Euro sub built for the Baltic. The Korean design has VLS, lithium batteries and room for long Arctic patrols. And that’s what we need if we’re serious about defending our own waters.
Time for Ottawa to stop dragging its feet and actually invest in a proper navy.