Royal Canadian Navy Is Going To Buy British Type-26 Frigates To Hunt Russian Subs In Arctic

Donate

Royal Canadian Navy Is Going To Buy British Type-26 Frigates To Hunt Russian Subs In Arctic

A rendering of the Canadian Type 26, on track to win Canada’s frigate competition. Source: Lockheed Martin

Canada is reportedly preparing to counter Russian presence in the arctic.

The Royal Canadian Navy is choosing Britain’s Type-26 frigate design, a multimission ship which is mostly designed as a submarine hunter, as well as to defend from hostile missiles and aircraft.

The Canadian government gave the announcement in mid-October that a team led by Lockheed Martin Canada was selected as the “preferred designer.” As reported by Defense News, the team was offering up British defense firm BAE Systems’ Type-26 design.

It is rather surprising, because Britain began working on its first ever Type-26 frigate in Summer 2017 and there is high chance for cost overruns and delays. According to Defense World, however, the choice of a purpose-built submarine hunter shows that the country “is willing to accept those risks because of the strategic threat Russia poses to Canada’s interests at the rapidly thawing top of the world.”

“For the Canadians, anti-submarine warfare is a big deal,” said Bryan Clark, a retired U.S. submarine officer and analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “If you are worried about the Russian sub threat and the air threat, then, yeah, the Type 26 makes sense.”

BAE executives said that the Type-26 was designed with hunting submarines in mind.

“That was a huge discriminator for us,” Anne Healey, a vice president with BAE Systems, told a roundtable of reporters at the Euronaval conference. “We are extremely quiet, and we are probably the world’s most advanced frigate … and that’s a key element of what sets us apart and what’s valued by the Canadian Navy.”

Gary Fudge, a vice president with Lockheed Martin Canada said that the shift towards anti-submarine warfare is an industry trend.

“For the last 15 years, most allied navies have put their efforts into anti-air warfare, whereas the threat that has emerged in the last 15 years is largely in submarine technologies,” Fudge said. “So, we wake up 15 years later finding that the focus has gone into anti-air, but the real threat is in submarines. The number of submarines produced in the 15 years is phenomenal, and now the world has woken up and it doesn’t have the same ASW capability anymore and it hasn’t kept pace with the anti-air warfare technology. So, Canada is very interested in getting back on track.”

All told, Canada wants to buy up to 15 frigates with a notional total program cost of $60 billion all in. The deal is not final. According to Canadian Broadcast Corporation the decision of whether the deal will be concluded should come at some point during winter.

Furthermore, following the announcement of the INF treaty withdrawal by the US, on October 26th the US military had successfully intercepted medium-range missiles in a test of capability.

The Aegis system used in the latest test was fitted with a Standard Missile 3 Block IIA (SM-3 IIA) interceptor. It was the second successful intercept in a row for the SM-3 IIA and will give the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) more confidence that it has resolved design flaws that previously caused intercept failures, anonymous US officials said.

MDA Director Lieutenant General Sam Greaves described the test as “a superb accomplishment and key milestone.”

Riki Ellison, chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, a non-profit organization that seeks to promote testing and development of missile defense systems, said that the successful test would also keep plans to deploy the Aegis system to Poland on track.

The Poland deployment plan is supposedly aimed at defending from an attack by Iran, but it is also condemned by Russia.

The Aegis system can potentially be repurposed to offensively launch nuclear missiles.

In the test, the intercepting missile was launched from the USS John Finn in the Pacific after radar on the destroyer detected and tracked the medium-range ballistic target missile. The target missile was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Kauai, Hawaii, the MDA said.

An anonymous US official said that in the coming months there would be tests to intercept an intermediate-range missile in the coming months.

This all comes in addition to the beginning of Trident Juncture 2018, the largest NATO drill since the Cold War, which began on October 25th and will continue through November 23rd. The exercise will play out an invasion of an allied country, in this case of Norway.

On October 29th, Germany began exercises off the Finnish coast involving 3,600 sailors and troops, 40 ships and 30 aircraft from more than a dozen countries. The maneuvers will focus on keeping crucial sea routes open in times of conflict.

In addition to that, over the entire month of October the US Ramstein Airbase in Germany received its biggest ammo shipment for almost 20 years. The last time the airbase received such a large shipment was prior to Operation Allied Force in 1999, during which the US Air Force conducted some 900 air raids against then Yugoslavia.

On October 26th, Russian Foreign Ministry Department of Nonproliferation and Arms Control Deputy Director Andrey Belousov said his country is preparing for war with the West, but only to defend itself against American aggression. He spoke to the UN after Russia lost a vote at the UN to gather support from other nations for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Reduction Treaty.

“At a recent meeting, the US stated that Russia is preparing for war. Yes, Russia is preparing for war, I can confirm it. We are preparing to defend our homeland, our territorial integrity, our principles, our values, our people.”

Tensions are rising high and it is no secret that a new Cold War is already taking place.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Concrete Mike

    So we spent billions of dollars upgrading shipyards in halifax( i was there for it) , maybe out west too im not sure, and then the government turns around and buys the british ship?

    Is it being built here or abroad?

    Im also not a fan of spending money on military when we need more healthcare funding. Hospitals are understaffed and were a hypochondriac population. Its a bad combo.

    I especially dont want my tax dollars padding up lockheed martin’s executives retirement funds.

    • grumpy_carpenter

      “Is it being built here or abroad?”

      I read they were building them here, primarily at the Irving shipyard in hfx. I almost lost my lunch when I heard Lockmart was the leading contender for prime contractor but I guess the question is if not Lockmart then who? I used to work at the Irving Drydock in my youth back when it was in Saint John. Lots of expertise in building ships. Back in the 70’s we were building tankers and after my time they built frigates but not the weapons. Other than the infamous Make and Break one lunger we don’t make nautical propulsion systems in Canada either. The engines we used in the 1970 were made in japan and the thrusters were made in the USA. In light of this I can see why it would be far cheaper and easier to go outside the country for a proven design rather than trying to reinvent the wheel with other countries sh!t. both of which are ma so we have to go outside the country for the design / weapons …… I just wish it wasn’t to the USA especially after the last couple of years.

      • Concrete Mike

        Ok well at least they are being built in halifax, thanks.

      • Jens Holm

        Thats the dilemma. How usefull is is to reinvent things. But dont forget, You get know how as well and it sometimes can be used well for other purposes.

        High tech countries like Canada need high tech jobs of many kinds to be in the high end. By that You can regain innovation.

    • John Whitehot

      “I especially dont want my tax dollars padding up lockheed martin’s executives retirement funds”

      one way or another, it’s going to happen. Lockheed Martin, Boeing and co. are around the bottom of the sewer, it’s a given that every dollar spent on defense will eventually reach them.

      in the end, it’s the US people that has allowed them.

      • Concrete Mike

        Yeah…i hear ya, it just all seems like such a waste…

      • Sinbad2

        I once tried to find out who owns Lockheed, a lot of the shares seem to be held by private equity which in turn is controlled by other private equity firms, and the people who control the private equity, are predominantly Jewish.

        • John Whitehot

          why does this not surprise me in the slightest.

          • Jens Holm

            His last name is BAD.

        • Jens Holm

          Thats how stockmarkets often are.

          I am in a pension fond with several 100.000 others. When we pay in they buy shares for us and thry have for several billions of them, but we are anonyme just as people paying in and getting profit got it.

          We do not know if we have influence at all. We see pur fortune grow, but are we equal owners.

          I see no jews in that at all.

          • Sinbad2

            Private equity companies are not listed on the stock market, they are private, that’s why they are called private equity.

          • Jens Holm

            I just tell You, that big investors often also are private savings in pension foundings. They(we) invest a lot, but we dont behave as owners of big parts of fx lochead.

            We do have investors in fx windmill industry as well as big pharmasycompasnies like fx danish novo. They do have influence there, if the wish, but they dont enven they could get seats in the leadership at least as being heard all the time.

            Very much is like that and down to my few stockings having no inflence at all: But I do get profit almost every year.

            You can buy to and be a part of the western economy.

    • Sinbad2

      Basically it’s tribute payments to the empire.

    • Jens Holm

      Well try to propose something cheeper for at least parts of it. None says they have ordered all of them.

      I would say drones might replace parts of those many vessels, but i also will say, that canada is much bigger then You think and You have to protect fish and minerals there.

      We have Greenland and the same. We do need more, but not too much. Your Goverment should find a level. They might see the level better and the frigats dont have to be that advanced.

      I can suppoort You in homemade ones create jobs. We have the same dilemma here. Vessels are more specilaized then many think. At least they should ask the local shipyards as well.

  • Sakaramanga

    …as if there is a chance that Russia would attack Canada. Stupid expenditure.

    • Sakaramanga

      isn’t it a shame on all of us humans that our governments are not doing what is good for us who elect them but for the Elites!

      • Sinbad2

        The western world needs a good old fashioned revolution, hangem all.

        • Jens Holm

          Our systems seldom use Your way. We dont burn Goverment buildings because the newcommers use the same chairs. We dont use shooes as you do as well.

          Well, never say no – but our trations are not like yours.

    • Concrete Mike

      Yeah my feelings exacly…and its MY money too…grrrrr

      • Jens Holm

        Thats how it is. You probatly play at least 1 corvette Yourself and never gets anything from Your Goverment.

        Same here. If I did not pay tax, I was very rich.

  • Robert McMaster

    Canada has a ceremonial military. That is being generous. In reality, a few of this or that, here and there tags along on some U.S. military adventure. We Canadians love to waste our money giving it to foreign manufacturers who then pay off our politicians. We bought British submarines years back and none of them did a thing. As bad as Russias navy is Canada should just give up an settle for a decent coast guard.

    • Jens Holm

      Armed or not ?

      • Robert McMaster

        Wouldn’t matter.

  • Jens Holm

    The artic wil be more and more open water. therefore it can be a much more important part for all having land and sea there. Fish and other animals will grow faster and new specias can live there.

    You also can make transport shorter. The danisk maersk Line sailed along the Siberian coast this summer as a try. Russia wil, gain a lot. they now better and better can transport in and out from the big rivers there and take minerals cheeper in that.

    So its not about war but economic reasons which of course should be controlled and protected. For the canadians Hudson bay could be an important tranport route as well.

    • beypuutyina

      russia has no money for such fleet

      • skinner15

        Russia has the worlds largest fleet of ice breakers dumbo.

        How could you not know that?

        Because you are an idiot.

        • beypuutyina

          dumbo is the cock of your father.

          here is no talkj about icebreakers. just opposite! they are not needed. we talk about quite new trade fleet.

          so, you are the idiot. the bigegst aof yesterday :DDD

          • skinner15

            Your Mother would know all about dumb cocks.

            So you don’t think they need ice breakers in the Arctic, just trade ships?

            What a langer you are.

  • Papi1960R

    Rapidly melting North Polar regions???? Following 9 years of record ice formation, the Northern Ice pack is the largest and thickest in known history. Its time to stop playing that broken record.

    • beypuutyina

      i see, you live in another universe