Military Review

Canadian Submarine Crashes and British Shipbuilding Reputation

28
The Indian submarine fire raised an interesting question about how accidents and catastrophes affect the reputation of the manufacturer’s country. Using the example of UK submarines sold to Canada, I propose to show that:
1) Accidents and catastrophes inherent in the production technology of the leading NATO country

2) Accidents and disasters happen during navy advanced country of NATO
3) The impact of accidents and disasters on the reputation of the manufacturer’s country depends on successful public relations.
4) The hype rises every time something happens. How to calm her down is a matter of politicians, traders.

So …

It is difficult to say which boats are more alert, and where in the fleet there is more mess. But the fact that many facts around the world are silenced is true. In this case, the situation around English submarines of the class Apholder bought by Canadians is very indicative. Upholder boats are very similar in terms of their basic characteristics to the 08773 project.



Canadian Submarine Crashes and British Shipbuilding Reputation


Canadians bought them in 2000 year to replace their reliable, but already old Oberons. But the acquisition of 4 second-hand Upholder diesel-electric submarines from the UK did not bring any positive results. And the problems began almost from the moment of signing the contract. Currently, 2,5 billion dollars has been spent on four submarines, but none of the boats are operational.

Upholder class podlok began service in the 1990 year, but all 4 were withdrawn from the operation of the Royal Navy in the 1994 year. Canada paid about C $ 750 million for their initial purchase, and the submarines were delivered to Canada between the 2000-2004 years.

Canadians have no difficulties with finances (well, or not like in Russia or among Hindus), the system is stable, the sailors are all “professionals”, and the equipment made by the “most” ruler of the seas. It would seem that there will be no problems. Ho, with the 1 case, Canadians found that ALL welds needed to be redone, one dent on the body needed to be fixed, diesel exhaust valves needed to be replaced, and the fuel tanks were completely corroded. Also, Canadians had to redo the boats for their MK48 torpedoes and install new weapons control systems from the destroyed Oberon class. The cost of refitting exceeded the purchase price. Plus Harpoons. But the most interesting thing started later. Brief история these boats. As they say, no comment.



MCS Victoria, SSK 876: in service since 2000. Fire in 2004 year. Burnt out the entire electrical system. By the 2018 year, Canadians hope that the submarine will have 4, fully operational, 6 - partial, and 8 years in the dock. Total 174 day at sea for a career.



HMCS Windsor, SSK 877: in service with 2003, without serious accidents, but the diesel generator needs to be replaced. Last 1.5 of the year at the wall / at the dock. Total 146 days at sea for a career.



HMCS Corner Brook, SSK 878: in the ranks with 2003. A serious accident at the beginning of a career - the boat scored 1500 liters of water in a submerged position. Recently, another serious accident is a alleged blow to the bottom due to a failure of the electrical system .. Now - at the wall / at the dock. It will be combat in 2016 year. In total 463 day at sea for a career.



HMCS Chicoutimi, SSK 879: in the ranks with 2004. 5 October 2004 of the year on the transition from Scotland to Canada on the boat there was a fire and flow. 1 sailor died, 2 badly burned. I almost drowned. The boat was rescued and transported to Canada in the dock. Now still at the dock in Escamultt (Canada). Maybe it will be repaired to 2016. Not a single day at sea for a career.

The bottom line is that Canadians bought Four submarines from the Britons. None is not combat ready. Everyone had problems. One was saved by a miracle - I think so due to the coordinated work of the crew, and one because of the correct work of the firefighters.

In principle - a wild scandal.

And who heard about it except in Canada? In principle, this case was very well commented on and reviewed there. But - outside of Canada, no one cares. Nobody screams - "Do not buy British - this is a catastrophic scrap!".

That's it.

Publications are a great thing.

And to live with wolves - howl like a wolf. So in order not to flinch from Indian accidents, one must be able to learn from the experience of reacting to such situations so that they are quickly forgotten in the minds of potential buyers.

Information sources:
www.defenseindustrydaily.com
www.cbc.ca
Author:
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Zhenya
    Zhenya 21 August 2013 07: 27 New
    +9
    Yeah, it seems to me that British weapons are bought only by British colonies.
  2. Son
    Son 21 August 2013 08: 12 New
    -6
    Judging by the focus of the article, the fire on the "Indian" is our puncture ...
    1. Su-9
      21 August 2013 08: 23 New
      +3
      Yes, no, I would not say that there is such an idea. An article before the Indian case was written.
      1. Son
        Son 21 August 2013 08: 29 New
        +1
        Guilty, not penetrated ...
    2. fedorovith
      fedorovith 21 August 2013 20: 02 New
      0
      Where such conclusions come from? It would be interesting to read ..
  3. mirag2
    mirag2 21 August 2013 09: 09 New
    +4
    I really don’t like the exculpatory articles that not only our boats are sinking, not only our planes are falling — firstly, it gives it to the clear past, and secondly it shouldn’t be so. Articles should appear that problems are found, resolved and more this will not happen, and during their elimination invaluable experience has been gained. And similar articles that “... this happens in prosperous Canada ...” - look pathetic.
    1. Zerstorer
      Zerstorer 21 August 2013 09: 43 New
      0
      Quote: mirag2
      that problems are found, resolved and more will not happen,

      Well, about what problems have been identified and what has been fixed, no one will write to us - at least confidential information.

      Quote: mirag2
      "... this is happening in prosperous Canada ..."

      The article says that we don’t need to sprinkle ash on our heads, but we need to solve the technical problems that have arisen. And the loud statements of many media outlets need to be put in the basket.
      1. sub307
        sub307 21 August 2013 13: 57 New
        0
        Absolutely right.
    2. Su-9
      21 August 2013 09: 49 New
      +1
      I think that disasters and accidents will happen everywhere and with everyone. It’s just that you need to react correctly to them (including influencing public opinion) and, of course, understand the reasons. The main message was - do not rush into a panic if something happened to the equipment produced in our country.
      And judging by the many comments about the Indian accident, many (not you) rush to this extreme.
      1. sub307
        sub307 21 August 2013 13: 58 New
        0
        Just my thoughts outlined.
  4. Kovrovsky
    Kovrovsky 21 August 2013 09: 43 New
    +1
    Why should litter be taken out of arrogant-Saxon hut? Quietly, family-friendly, all problems will be solved.
  5. alex20081308
    alex20081308 21 August 2013 10: 13 New
    +1
    More Canadians are to blame here. It was necessary to take the goods in principle. Well, they decided that the British are their friends and everything will be ok. suckers
  6. Delta
    Delta 21 August 2013 10: 53 New
    +2
    and how sideways did the photograph of the smashed San Francisco slip into it? for solidity?
    1. Foamas
      Foamas 21 August 2013 13: 12 New
      +1
      Corner Brook (SSK-878), after grounding
      1. Delta
        Delta 21 August 2013 13: 30 New
        -1
        So what about the San Francisco nuclear submarine? in the penultimate (and title) photograph, it is she.
        1. Delta
          Delta 21 August 2013 13: 33 New
          -1
          and she, with the same injuries (2005)
          1. Foamas
            Foamas 21 August 2013 13: 59 New
            0
            Quote: Delta
            "San Francisco" here why?

            then - why and photo "Scorpène" Article smile
            the author is poorly versed in identifying submarines
            1. sub307
              sub307 21 August 2013 14: 15 New
              +1
              In the 4th photo, it’s not really “Upholder”.
              1. Su-9
                21 August 2013 15: 54 New
                +3
                Honestly, not me. wink My first 3 photos - the rest admin / moderator added. I was even surprised.
  7. ed65b
    ed65b 21 August 2013 11: 04 New
    +2
    In Britain, they laughed for a long time at shaggy Canadians. Wasn't Browder involved in the sale? laughing
  8. Dart weyder
    Dart weyder 21 August 2013 12: 19 New
    0
    all the equipment breaks down - and the more complicated the equipment, the more complicated it can be accidents and breakdowns, + the human factor during operation or during construction ... it's a pity - but everything can happen, and even such a factor as Indians - technicians from them seem to be none ... ...
  9. Ka-52
    Ka-52 21 August 2013 13: 21 New
    0
    It is too early to draw any conclusions. There was no official assessment of the incident by the Hindus. Now, if there is, and they will blame us all, then we can talk.
    And yes, breakdowns are common to everyone, but the fact that the Canadians laughed is a fact.
  10. rudolff
    rudolff 21 August 2013 13: 40 New
    +4
    Canadians did not have a particular alternative. They did not build their ships of this class, the Oberons are hopelessly outdated, and here four relatively new boats at the "tribesmen" are idle at the pier. The project was initially not entirely successful, which is why the British abandoned the planned series, and the already built ones were almost immediately withdrawn from service. Canadians hoped to correct deficiencies during their repair and modernization. It didn’t turn out exactly as planned.
    Do not forget that formally the “head” of Canada is the Queen of Great Britain and it would be strange if the Canadians would buy boats from the Germans, French, Swedes (etc.).
    Shikutimi, this is a former upholder. Laid down in the 83rd, in the British fleet since the 90th. Bred at 93.
    Victoria, former Ansin. Laid in 87, adopted in 91, bred in 94.
    Corner Brooke, former Ursula. Mortgaged in 89, adopted in 92, bred 94.
    Windsor, former Unicorn. Laid in 90, adopted in 93, bred in 94.
    In the Canadian fleet, respectively, since 2004, since 2000, since 2003, since 2003.
  11. sub307
    sub307 21 August 2013 14: 11 New
    +2
    By the way, there’s another version about the explosion of the Sindurakshak submarine: “Private contractors, many of whom were low-skilled workers, were involved in warships in the Indian port of Mumbai, where the Sindurakshak submarine sank on August 14, India Today reports.
    According to a former shipyard employee, "unskilled workers are given access to high-tech weapons," which threatens the safety and technical integrity of Indian ships. Many military equipment from the port of Mumbai have repeatedly protested against attracting private owners to work with warships, but so far the state has not paid attention to this. According to the Indian military, after the incident with the Sindurakshak submarine, the government will refuse to attract private workers to carry out technical work on ships.
    Previously reported that the cause of the collapse of the submarine could be a human factor. According to Russian experts, the explosion at Sindurakshak could have been caused by non-compliance with safety precautions by submarine workers.
  12. Hitrovan07
    Hitrovan07 21 August 2013 14: 21 New
    +2
    Judging by the latest articles in Briatnia, things are not so smooth with production in general and the military in particular, given the decline in our industry - a worldwide decline after the fall of the USSR - everything is done in China (but there is only one-time use - but a lot). And the question is - kow it is necessary (according to the conspiracy theory it turns out that the green animal hunters or gray humanoids or .... request ).
  13. rudolff
    rudolff 21 August 2013 15: 22 New
    +3
    Sub307. Regarding the versions of the explosion (fire) on the square in Mumbai. Indian newspapers, according to the crew of the boat, write that the batteries were charged three days before the explosion. This was confirmed by the Chief of Staff of the Indian Navy, Admiral Devendra Kumar Joshi. No batteries were charged during the explosion. And this is a completely different calico.
  14. Axel
    Axel 21 August 2013 22: 03 New
    +1
    The bottom line is that Canadians bought Four submarines from the Britons. None is not combat ready. Everyone had problems. One was saved by a miracle - I think so due to the coordinated work of the crew, and one because of the correct work of the firefighters.
    This list lists all nuclear submarines that have sunk for one reason or another. In total, from 1955 to 2010, 8 atomic submarines sank: 4 Soviet, 2 Russian, 2 American. All of them died as a result of various accidents: three due to technical malfunctions, two due to fires, two due to armament problems, the cause of the death of one boat is not known for certain. Problems with a nuclear power plant were observed only in one case - on the K-27, they did not lead to the death of the ship, but eventually became the cause of flooding for disposal. K-141 "Kursk" was raised in 2001, the remaining 7 ships are at the bottom in varying degrees of safety. The list does not include the dead diesel-electric submarine K-129, which had nuclear weapons on board.
  15. jjj
    jjj 22 August 2013 01: 01 New
    0
    And the Americans have a lot of problems on boats. Only this is not widely spoken. There was a time when accident documents were printed. Compare. So, our boats looked quite good. True, now the requirements of sailors have begun to shift to increased comfort, so that "like on cruise ships."
    Now about the Indians. They are not sailors at all. Their division into castes and other groups leads to the fact that next to two of the various estates do not sit down. And how to communicate offline. There, only the cohesion of the crew, fraternal feelings - "be born of kinship in soul, not blood" - can lead to success. So, all Indian boats from Zvyozdochka were taken by our crews to Bombay so that the Indians would not drown them before the final transfer. So, it turned out - burned. According to some observations, all modern Asians are unimportant naval warriors. By the way, the Arabs, too. They can safely sell ships. They cannot harm us.