Canadian Navy gets stuck with 4 lemons by Her Majesty's used submarine salesmen.

Canada bought four used British subs more than a decade ago and so far, it has spent an estimated $3 billion on the fleet.

Talk about a bunch of lemons and to boot not 1 submarine is capable of firing a torpedo,being Australian I cant talk as my govt has spent billions on the collins class subs and they are lemons to we also bought a rustbucket from the US that is useless why do our supposed Allies give us the privelage of buying their junk for billions
www.cbc.ca...
With friends like these...........

They come to the end of their life cycle, or are outdated / too expensive to run so they go up for sale...

I suppose it's the buyers fault, not the seller.

Originally posted by GeordieLegend
They come to the end of their life cycle, or are outdated / too expensive to run so they go up for sale...

I suppose it's the buyers fault, not the seller.

exactly. what's more worrying is why your government values your people so little that it buys substandard second hand subs to put your lads in. i'd be fuming.

reply to post by Bilder


Eh man it's up to your government to discern what to buy and what not to buy.

reply to post by GeordieLegend

I think the seller in this case bears some responsibility as they are an ally and if it came to a war situation do they want there backs covered by faulty equipment that they sold because it was useless

Originally posted by Bilder
reply to post by GeordieLegend

 

I think the seller in this case bears some responsibility as they are an ally and if it came to a war situation do they want there backs covered by faulty equipment that they sold because it was useless

So following that line of thought, I would question the motives of the seller yet again. Do they really have your back?

That is basically like your buddy selling you bad uh..um.. a bad auto, knowing that it will fail, or knowing that it will never smoke..wait I meant to say start.

It could be the fact that they're giving operating weapons to those who might actually potentially maybe use them at one point in future. Your not going to give monster truck to someone who swears by the moped if you catch my drift.

Originally posted by mileysubet

Originally posted by Bilder
reply to post by GeordieLegend

 

I think the seller in this case bears some responsibility as they are an ally and if it came to a war situation do they want there backs covered by faulty equipment that they sold because it was useless

So following that line of thought, I would question the motives of the seller yet again. Do they really have your back?

That is basically like your buddy selling you bad uh..um.. a bad auto, knowing that it will fail, or knowing that it will never smoke..wait I meant to say start.

I guess this is the point im trying to make,how good a friend are they and im sure there is some pressure on the lesser allies to make the purchase to stay in the good books

because canada is the clueless loser who want's to belong so bad it loses all self respect.

they are so naive it borders on pathetic.

you can go tell canada to meet you at the first tee at 9:00 am and you could show up at 3 in the afternoon and they'll still be standing there.

they're the pathetic puppy of the international community, who you can slap around, steal from, mistreat, abuse and they'll still want to be your friend.

and the prime minister harper, is the glen beck of canada. he's the worst pathetic form of geek. he's the kind of know it all geek who fails to realize how much of a loser he is.

reply to post by randomname


I can only presume that you're not a fan of Canada and Canadians then??!!

They aren't that bad. I've visited Canada and it's a lovely country with very welcoming, friendly people.

Perhaps it depends on how much was paid for the subs, and how much work is involved to bring them up to the buyers standard, the Brits buy Chinooks 'off the shelf' then spend two years refitting them to British standards, which is why the Brits are short of choppers in ashcanistan.

Originally posted by Bilder
reply to post by GeordieLegend

 

I think the seller in this case bears some responsibility as they are an ally and if it came to a war situation do they want there backs covered by faulty equipment that they sold because it was useless

I skimmed the article quickly as i'm at work but wasn't it human error which caused a lot of damage to tne of the subs?

And if you were going to spend as much money as what they did, do you not think they would have done pre checks on them? Or is this just a UK bashing thread? Where in the article does it mention it has something to do with the UK 'backstabbing' as it where? Sorry I just dont buy it that Canada would spend a fortune on subs having no idea about them. You appear to have taken this and twisted it IMHO.

reply to post by mileysubet

So following that line of thought, I would question the motives of the seller yet again. Do they really have your back?

Wait a minute here. Did you even look up the history of the boat?

The Brits put it in service in 90' and pulled it in 94'.
The Canuks put in service in 94' and drydocked it in 2012. That's twice as long as the Brits.

That amounts to buying a car with 50K on the odometer and then putting another 100K on it. Then complaining the suspension wobbles and you can't drive 65mph!

Plus the 3 billion includes the origional purchase price of the subs.
They only paid 750 million for 4 the subs!!

Get your attitude in line with reality. They got a terrific deal! They bought sub for half the price of a new 747.

reply to post by Bilder


Yay Harper!!!! Way to go budy! What a great move that was! A$$licking the Brits kind of backfired for ya. Yeah, you bring back the "Royal" in a PR coup and you still get screwed..oh! man, can't wait 'till you're out of office

reply to post by XLR8R


Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper can certainly be blamed for a number of things by his pundits but the purchase of the four "Victoria-Class" Submarines from the Royal British Navy is not one of them. The responsibility for this questionable deal lies at the feet of the Liberal Government of Jean Chretien.

This article, first published in the Halifax Herald (December 9th, 2002).illustrates some of the objections to the submarine purchase as well as pointing out some of the military and political reasoning behind the deal.

I can't believe Canada bought these lemons when she could have bought US Los Angeles class subs. They may have gotten fewer subs, but Canada would have had effective submarines.

Remind me of the joke:

How do you get a (insert nationality here) submarine to sink?

Answer: Put it in water.

Let's hope they make a wiser decision when purchasing their new SAR helicopters.

reply to post by benevolent tyrant


Yeah. I just finished reading the whole thing. I jumped the gun on that one. Sorry

reply to post by Bilder


Did you actually read the article at all?

They were not 'lemons' as you put it, but bloody bad operating of by the Canadian Navy.

The big problem my be that Canada does not have the expertise to repair and overhaul these subs.

In the US only a very few shipyards can even work on subs and for the most part they ether build subs or bring in outside specialist to supervise or do the work

You can not expect a VW mechanic to repair formula one race cars

What the hell are Canada doing with subs anyway?