Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into T212

Discussion in 'Submariners' started by Greenie_877, Oct 11, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Seadog

    Seadog War Hero Moderator

    Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    'Hello norman' springs to mind. But if I'm wrong, tell us what you think Greenie _877.
     
  2. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    Well I hate to say I was right but I was. Some of the fellas find that the platform just does not fit the need. And as the current government is not the party who made the purchase they can kill it and not get egg on there face and use it against the opposition. Politics seems to have been the driving factor overall. Unfortunately the community has suffered as a result. I would have to say that I am saddened.

    Greenie
     
  3. Contributor Mode

    BUYER BEWARE

    Reported by UK crews as excellent boats when first commissioned 30 years ago. Then left in the coener of some Northern Dockyard untouched by the people who had the maintainence contract. Then altered internally to put in RCN kit.

    Why did the RCN ever think it was anything but a cheap options that was going to cause tears in the end and great expense.

    Nutty


    Moderator Mode

    Is it Norma again? perhaps we should wait for Greenie 877 to give his own views on his three questions before to ensureit is not another Norman alias, so hold fire folks until grenie tells us what he thinks about the Cupholders.

    Nutty
     
  4. Great boats when we had them. Kicked 688s, UK SSNs and euro-diesels all over the ocean, performed top class ops in the Gulf and handled beautifully in shallow water plus had better periscopes than a T-boat. They were not designed for under-ice (what SSK is?). When the Canuks bought them they ripped out DCC (good system), ESM, canned Spearfish for Mk 48s which required extensive mods thus it is hardly surprising they are taking time to get them to sea. Stick with them, they are still excellent boats and v v v quiet (when handled proper like).
     
  5. Norma or norman?

    Sorry not to sure what you are referring to as this is my first time to this forum. I did not think by my alias I would be hard to figure out. Anyways I work on these boats and take the good and bad. My purpose was to bring to attention what the news article referred to as it was what I was looking for comment on. I am not looking for comment on the upholders I know what they are like and don't need another opinion on it as Canada runs them differently that the RN did. If you have not read the stories give them a read if still available. No trickery here just letting fellow bubble heads know whats on the go here in Canada. And for those Canadians lurking out. Submarines once...

    DBF
    Greenie
     
  6. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    I'll agree somewhat with the caveat "buyer beware", but even the most unapologetic used car salesman can have a conscience...

    We may have not kicked the tires good enough prior to signing for them, but as with any kind of machinery, if you don't do daily or even weekly maintenance, something will pull a "Murphy's Law" on you, so by allowing them to sit and rot, is well...wrong, especially if you were under the impression they were for sale as operational assets and not scrap.

    However this all goes back farther then that, back in the mid to late 80's we had a good group set up in Ottawa for a Submarine Acquisition project, the new frigates were in the pipe and Ottawa and Maritime Command realised that the O Boats were over reaching their usefulness..so for the new ASW assets we would still need a Submarine presence for training purposes, and at first we were looking at the Zwaardvis http://www.dutchsubmarines.com/ as a future replacement.

    But Perrin Beatty the Minister of Defense in 1987 declared that Canada would be in the process of potentially buying 10 Nuclear powered Submarines, no one knew where that came from so the project got scrapped and after the tree huggers caused an uproar he back pedaled on the 10 Nuclear Submarines, so that left us with no Acquisition project...

    Voila back to square one, meantime the O'Boats are putting on amazing kilometers and at some point due to diving restrictions would be limited to the surface....in steps politicians looking for a quick fix...hence the Upholders, now we can't buy them outright so why not make a bargain out of it and offer easy lease arrangements for training your troops and Airforce at Canadian bases that resemble Eastern European landscapes (Cold War still on), in return for a good deal on the Upholders.

    And so it goes, the idiots in Ottawa along with desk top Admirals gave the go ahead and here we sit, 3 boats alongside undergoing maintenance (I looked just two days ago, 2 on the synchrolift and one alongside the wall with scaffolding)...a real deal, and if they were so good why didn't you guys keep em...(I know why, you wanted a nuclear only club)

    Is the warranty still valid?

    Just my 0.02 Cdn (Worth more the the US now...Lol) :hockey:
     
  7. After SSE

    Think of it this way, you buy a Jaguar, and then get the garage to fit a peugot diesel engine in it because your best mate has one in his car, and you expect it still to have the same sparkling performance?
     
  8. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    lol...no I understand CANAVMODS very well, we had a lot done on the O Boats, something about our preference for all things solid state, or American compatability, I pretty much agreed we made the wrong decision, by forging ahead with the purchase, but you have to understand that if you leave your Jaguar in the garage without turning the engine over, after a period of time that engine may seize...so while I am readily admitting we didn't do enough research prior to buying you guys weren't exactly in any hurry to bring the boats back up to specs...and were all to eager to pawn them off onto us....which is why I agreed with Nutty's assertion of "buyer beware" :hockey:
     
  9. Well, they were all in different states. UPHOLDER had been in barrow for years, with UNSEEN and URSULA slightly less but UNICORN was brand spankers, 1 year out of build and had just completed a deployment. CAVEAT EMPTOR indeed - I think there were issues around Barrow getting them back up to 'just out of build spec' vice nice and tidy for 2nd hand sale plus the vickerlet welds caused a few probs. At the end of the day the Canuks have got a great hull and they have all got plenty of years in them yet.
     
  10. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    My CO in Ovens was an ex RNer, LDCR Mel Jones, a former CO of both Unicorn and Unseen. He gave us a very frank opinion of the Upholder class which was basically good in theory, piss poor in practice.
     
  11. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    I agree the hulls are good and we may yet get some useful years out of them, my argument as such is we should have practiced due diligence and without political pressure ensured they were in tip top condition before we signed on, if this meant that we would insist that the current owners do some required maintenance to ensure they were sea worthy to begin with then that's what should have been done, if it meant we would have to fork out money to make the necessary Canadian modifications there prior to bringing them across the pond, then we should have done so. We used to do our O boat refits over there, until a lot of the equipment had changed due to our requirements (US compatability in order to train with the Yanks type stuff) and eventually our own shipyards got the contracts to do the refits..

    Our current crews do like em, and are keen to get them up and running, but as you all are aware of, there is too much politicking going on and budget shuffling, so working on them has become a struggle.

    I think personally we should have purchased the blueprints (ownership) and built our own in Canada, we have the infrastructure to do this, and hindsight being 20-20, may have been more economical.. :hockey:
     
  12. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    Did no one read the news stories?
     
  13. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    I don't have to, I live here and by the titles of your links it basically sums up what I have been saying from the beginning...politicians again getting there asses in a twist and coming up with knee jerk solutions..without researching it to the fullest...it's called PR (public relations).

    IMHO...nothing will take place, we will continue to work on the Upholders and make do or "CANDO" it's been used before, we squeezed every extra day of life out of the O Boats, so I'm sure we will be using these boats for a long time to come... :money:
     
  14. Re: Canadians not happy with upholder purchase looking into

    Exactly as Nutty said. They were good boats but left in a corner of Barrow whilst being maintained in a very hit or miss fashion before being sold, sorry LEASED to the Canadians. Having worked on the Upholders when I was with VSEL in Bath working for the Canadians doing a whole set of feasibility studies on various aspects of the Canadians requirements it was obvious they were never going to be the same boats when they, the Canadian DoD, decided that the kit the boats were origanily fitted with was not going to be the kit the Canadians were to take to sea.
     

Share This Page