NationStates Jolt Archive

We want our money back.

Sincerely,
The Canadian Navy.


http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/10/05/cansub041005.html

It DID come with more than a three day warrantee.... I HOPE!

mm.. thats has never happened on naval submarines in the british navy.. dunno what could have gone wrong

Well I hope you've still got your receipt.

And of course more seriously thoughts and prayers to the men down there.

So far, every single one of the subs we received has had serious deficiencies. Everything from leaks to faulty ventilation systems to control panels with electrical faults.....

We want a refund!

Canada has submarines? ;)

Canada has submarines? ;)

Yep. And our understanding is that they work great as long as they don't actually go in the water.....

Are you sure you read the manual right? If you smoke inside it voids the warranty!

Yep. And our understanding is that they work great as long as they don't actually go in the water.....

In that case, they aren't submarines, they're very cramped and expensively well-armed dingies. :D

Are you sure you read the manual right? If you smoke inside it voids the warranty!


Well, it's hard NOT to smoke when you're on fire.....

Incidentally: a brief list I just found of the combustability of British subs... (http://www.banthebomb.org/magazine/crackin2.htm)


63 VALIANT Barrow Fire in reactor compartment while under construction [1]

65 DREADNOUGHT Rosyth Fire in control room [2]

Sep 68 VALIANT Chatham Two small fires [3]

Aug 70 RESOLUTION Rosyth Fire in control room [4]

3 Jul 72 REPULSE Rosyth Fire onboard [5]

Jan 75 REPULSE Faslane Fire from equipment overheating [6]

Jul 75 COURAGEOUS Faslane Fire onboard [7]

76/77 REPULSE Fire causing 200,000 damage [8]

2 May 76 WARSPITE Liverpool Serious fire, 2 years to repair [9]

Mar 80 REVENGE Faslane Electrical fire, jetty cable [10]

18 Sep 83 CONQUEROR Devonp/t Fire [11]

Sep 85 REPULSE Rosyth Fire on jetty heating system [12]

86 SPLENDID Devonport Fire in generator [13]

26 Aug 87 CONQUEROR Devonport Fire during DED, engine room damage, burns casualties [14]

May 88 CONQUEROR Gibr/r Fire on board [15]

5 Aug 88 VALIANT Faslane Fire on board [16]

Feb 91 SWIFTSURE Devonport Fire in engine room [17]

20 Oct 91 SCEPTRE Faslane Fire on board; reactor checked after incident [18]

30 Apr 92 TURBULENT Devonport Explosion & Fire in switchroom 24 casualties from smoke [19].

-----

Hmmmmm.... what do you guys do? Use kerosene-soaked rags as wiring insulation in these things?

Any know about the frist 4 we bough from the brits? (in the decade anyway) 2 of them had leak and the other didn't work right. (when the removed the paint to find the leak, they found a big Nazi symbol of the side, the weren't Victoria class after all)

And there are mother nation to, well they must be getting senile in there later years. ( problay shouldn't say these cuz i'm in Birittian as we speak)

In that case, they aren't submarines, they're very cramped and expensively well-armed dingies. :D


I don't think they even qualify as dinghies in dry-dock... more like really expensive and uncomfortable berths for shore duty!

[QUOTE=Zeppistan]We want our money back.

Sincerely,
The Canadian Navy.

QUOTE]

Dear Canadian Navy

You want your money back or what?

Oh and that's £500,000 you owe us for the absolutely unforseen rescue mission aka "Operation Soggy Maple Leaf".

Cheers

GB

We want our money back.

Sincerely,
The Canadian Navy.


http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/10/05/cansub041005.html

It DID come with more than a three day warrantee.... I HOPE!

damn fuckin straight.

they'll be looking at a lawsuit presided over by the dutch soon enough,I suppose.

No offence,but they broke,so what you want us too do?

Hmmm....I've noticed that the most recent of these fires happened twelve years ago...
:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Zeppistan]We want our money back.

Sincerely,
The Canadian Navy.

QUOTE]

Dear Canadian Navy

You want your money back or what?

Oh and that's £500,000 you owe us for the absolutely unforseen rescue mission aka "Operation Soggy Maple Leaf".

Cheers

GB

you could say that you owed us for all the troops that died in Europe,but that wouldn't really be a valid claim,would it?But if it is,I guess the billions upon billions will help us pay for your operation,won't it?

You can't charge money for shit that makes no sense.

Canada has submarines? ;)

don't be smart,it doesn't suit you.

you could say that you owed us for all the troops that died in Europe,but that wouldn't really be a valid claim,would it?But if it is,I guess the billions upon billions will help us pay for your operation,won't it?

You can't charge money for shit that makes no sense.

Do you have a sense of humour?

For £2000 we could run a check...

Well, it's hard NOT to smoke when you're on fire.....

Incidentally: a brief list I just found of the combustability of British subs... (http://www.banthebomb.org/magazine/crackin2.htm)


63 VALIANT Barrow Fire in reactor compartment while under construction [1]

65 DREADNOUGHT Rosyth Fire in control room [2]

Sep 68 VALIANT Chatham Two small fires [3]

Aug 70 RESOLUTION Rosyth Fire in control room [4]

3 Jul 72 REPULSE Rosyth Fire onboard [5]

Jan 75 REPULSE Faslane Fire from equipment overheating [6]

Jul 75 COURAGEOUS Faslane Fire onboard [7]

76/77 REPULSE Fire causing 200,000 damage [8]

2 May 76 WARSPITE Liverpool Serious fire, 2 years to repair [9]

Mar 80 REVENGE Faslane Electrical fire, jetty cable [10]

18 Sep 83 CONQUEROR Devonp/t Fire [11]

Sep 85 REPULSE Rosyth Fire on jetty heating system [12]

86 SPLENDID Devonport Fire in generator [13]

26 Aug 87 CONQUEROR Devonport Fire during DED, engine room damage, burns casualties [14]

May 88 CONQUEROR Gibr/r Fire on board [15]

5 Aug 88 VALIANT Faslane Fire on board [16]

Feb 91 SWIFTSURE Devonport Fire in engine room [17]

20 Oct 91 SCEPTRE Faslane Fire on board; reactor checked after incident [18]

30 Apr 92 TURBULENT Devonport Explosion & Fire in switchroom 24 casualties from smoke [19].

-----

Hmmmmm.... what do you guys do? Use kerosene-soaked rags as wiring insulation in these things?


Sounds like Gremlins!

;)

I suggest you write to Blair as it's his fault we're in such a state with the "armed" forces. Hope you get a better answer out of him than the British public do!

Maybe you should buy American next time. ;)

Well, it's hard NOT to smoke when you're on fire.....

Incidentally: a brief list I just found of the combustability of British subs... (http://www.banthebomb.org/magazine/crackin2.htm)


63 VALIANT Barrow Fire in reactor compartment while under construction [1]

65 DREADNOUGHT Rosyth Fire in control room [2]

Sep 68 VALIANT Chatham Two small fires [3]

Aug 70 RESOLUTION Rosyth Fire in control room [4]

3 Jul 72 REPULSE Rosyth Fire onboard [5]

Jan 75 REPULSE Faslane Fire from equipment overheating [6]

Jul 75 COURAGEOUS Faslane Fire onboard [7]

76/77 REPULSE Fire causing 200,000 damage [8]

2 May 76 WARSPITE Liverpool Serious fire, 2 years to repair [9]

Mar 80 REVENGE Faslane Electrical fire, jetty cable [10]

18 Sep 83 CONQUEROR Devonp/t Fire [11]

Sep 85 REPULSE Rosyth Fire on jetty heating system [12]

86 SPLENDID Devonport Fire in generator [13]

26 Aug 87 CONQUEROR Devonport Fire during DED, engine room damage, burns casualties [14]

May 88 CONQUEROR Gibr/r Fire on board [15]

5 Aug 88 VALIANT Faslane Fire on board [16]

Feb 91 SWIFTSURE Devonport Fire in engine room [17]

20 Oct 91 SCEPTRE Faslane Fire on board; reactor checked after incident [18]

30 Apr 92 TURBULENT Devonport Explosion & Fire in switchroom 24 casualties from smoke [19].

-----

Hmmmmm.... what do you guys do? Use kerosene-soaked rags as wiring insulation in these things?Erm, are you sure you're allowed to know that infomation?

MI6 will be round to check on you shortly.

Yep. And our understanding is that they work great as long as they don't actually go in the water.....
Thats a fairly sensible attitude to take towards our technology. I think that the army bought some guns a couple of years ago which had a small defect. When you pulled the trigger, the end fell off.

Maybe you should buy American next time. ;)
Why would that help? They're both Made in Japan

Why would that help? They're both Made in Japan

Actually thats not the case....but I get the joke. ;) A few years ago Japan did make all the computer chips that went into the electronics of all our military equipment. It was realized that the Japanese could cut off the supply and we would be in real trouble. The DoD helped a small company out in the manufacturing of computer chips to stop the trend. What was the small company they helped? Intel. When was this? the late 1980's. We can thank the DoD for the chips in our computers. ;)

BTW, we weren't swindeling you. You got the best of British technology (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/08/01/narmy01.xml)

Another major piece of equipment - the mobile AS90 self-propelled gun - was rendered almost useless when plastic air filters melted in the heat, causing two guns to be withdrawn from the exercise.

Really? Its hot in the desert? Should the designers have accounted for this maybe? Oh wait...

The NAO said this was not a design fault since the original specifications called for thermal insulation. But these were changed when the gun came into service because it was expected to be used exclusively in Europe.

Ok, I know we're not keen on France, but do we really have military enemies in Europe these days?

To keep the gun operational, engineers had to rig up makeshift aluminium heat shields, but they worked only when the guns were stationary and movements had to be restricted to night time.

I'm almost expecting this to say that it was impossible to target these guns at night time or something.

Even then, one gun caught fire and is likely to be written off at a cost of £1 million.

You know what? I'm thinking we should give this equipment to the enemy.


The shortage of desert combat suits and boots affected morale. Normal Army boots melted in temperatures which regularly went over 45C (113F).

Yeah, I sorta remember them having this problem... about 150 years ago, with the first rubber boots. They solved it by inventing the process of vulcanisation, or so I had been lead to believe.

Maybe you should buy American next time. ;)


Yes - you guys tried to sell us on the Bradley.... fortunately we took a pass and built the Coyote instead. And the crap Iltis jeeps we got from Germany turned out so bad that we are actually leaving them behind in Afghanistan for the new Afghan army. They aren't worth bringing back....

The F-18s were nice though. Of course even then we had to make some changes to the avionics package. The ones we got sold had no in-flight safety lock on the button that ran the pre-flight control-surface tests. Nudge it accidentally during flight and die when your flaps, aelerons, and rudder started thrashing about on their own.....


Frankly, I think we should just build more of our own stuff - like we did with the new frigates. Might as well keep the money, the jobs, and any new technoloy here....

The NAO said this was not a design fault since the original specifications called for thermal insulation. But these were changed when the gun came into service because it was expected to be used exclusively in Europe.

Ok, I know we're not keen on France, but do we really have military enemies in Europe these days?
The time between the requirement being announced and the final produce arriving is insane: We started looking for 155mm guns (to meet the NATO standard) back in 1982, the AS90 wasn't ordered until 1989 - the Cold War was still the major factor in military planning back then.

The time between the requirement being announced and the final produce arriving is insane.

Yeh, just look at the Eurofighter. One flew over us today, not sure how long it is since the specifications were made, but it was definately decades ago.

Yes - you guys tried to sell us on the Bradley.... fortunately we took a pass and built the Coyote instead. And the crap Iltis jeeps we got from Germany turned out so bad that we are actually leaving them behind in Afghanistan for the new Afghan army. They aren't worth bringing back....

The F-18s were nice though. Of course even then we had to make some changes to the avionics package. The ones we got sold had no in-flight safety lock on the button that ran the pre-flight control-surface tests. Nudge it accidentally during flight and die when your flaps, aelerons, and rudder started thrashing about on their own.....


Frankly, I think we should just build more of our own stuff - like we did with the new frigates. Might as well keep the money, the jobs, and any new technoloy here....


Yeah, but the submarines are ok I guess....having never been in one. I have flown in F-16's, F-111E and every transport we currently have.

Eurofighters still aren't in service yet, a few are operational in evaluation squadrons but all front line units are still using Tornadoes.

Thing with the Eurofighter is the amount of arguing and political wrangling that goes on: A good way in to the project they had to stop because one of the countries wanted them to re-examine cheaper options. I'm not entirely sure how France manages to develop all it's equipment nationally, but they're doing something right.

Yeah, but the submarines are ok I guess....having never been in one. I have flown in F-16's, F-111E and every transport we currently have.

I don't think that we've built any military aircraft up here since the last CF-5 rolled off the production line, so we aren't likely to ever restart that. But we are selling a lot of variants of the Coyote's overseas, so APC's might wind up as a niche market for us.

http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml

:D

http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml

:D
There was a good laugh.... reminds me of this one...
Enterprise: Unidentified contact bearing 246 degrees, we appear to be on a colision course, please change your heading by 5 degrees starboard, to 119 degrees.

Unidentified contact: I would respectfully suggest you change your course.

Enterprise: This is the USS Enterprise, I say again, change your heading to 119 degrees.

Unidentified contact: I again suggest you change your course Enterprise.

Enterprise (incredulous): This is a 98,000 ton nuclear carrier in the United States Navy. Change your heading.

Unidentified contact: This is a lighthouse... your call.

http://www.satirewire.com/news/feb02/warship.shtml

:D

"You're kidding, right? Canada has a warship?" asked U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "Like for war?

"Does Canada know?" he added.

Excellent.....;)

Actually thats not the case....but I get the joke. ;) A few years ago Japan did make all the computer chips that went into the electronics of all our military equipment. It was realized that the Japanese could cut off the supply and we would be in real trouble. The DoD helped a small company out in the manufacturing of computer chips to stop the trend. What was the small company they helped? Intel. When was this? the late 1980's. We can thank the DoD for the chips in our computers. ;)
Military advances; brain surgery, radar, the internet, car engines (same techniques as boring holes for gun barrels), also M*A*S*H, which I think it would be a sad world without.

Well I hope you've still got your receipt.

.
Of course if you don't, we could give you gift vouchers worth the original price.

Thats a fairly sensible attitude to take towards our technology. I think that the army bought some guns a couple of years ago which had a small defect. When you pulled the trigger, the end fell off.
And don't forget about those [Apache?] helicopters, who's [Hellfire?] missile cannot be fired without damaging the aircraft

So far, every single one of the subs we received has had serious deficiencies. Everything from leaks to faulty ventilation systems to control panels with electrical faults.....

We want a refund!

Better bought the French nuclear ones (Triomphant class), each one of them is loaded to destroy a continent. But I guess that the US, France and other powers will never sell nucl. subs to another nation.

Perhaps the US sabotaged your boats since you're still a free country that doesn't listen to Tricky Dick and his cowboy puppet :)

You do know you bought those subs about 6 years ago? They're probably out of warranty.

duct tape

Sounds like our Collins Class submarines. My science teacher explained how they are helping save the whales. The whales get can't stand the sonar from boats and submarines, but the Collins subs are so noisy you don't need sonar at all. The combat system is terrible, "The sorts of things you can do by clicking your mouse on one icon of a personal computer at home can take 49 keystrokes on the current combat system" and we even bought torpedoes that don't fit.

Sounds like our Collins Class submarines. My science teacher explained how they are helping save the whales. The whales get can't stand the sonar from boats and submarines, but the Collins subs are so noisy you don't need sonar at all. The combat system is terrible, "The sorts of things you can do by clicking your mouse on one icon of a personal computer at home can take 49 keystrokes on the current combat system" and we even bought torpedoes that don't fit.

No - it was one of the Upholder-class subs.

You do know you bought those subs about 6 years ago? They're probably out of warranty.

You do know that we took delivery of that sub from you three days ago right? Of course, the fact that it took you guys six years to try and make it seaworthy might have been our first clue that it was a piece of crap...

Better bought the French nuclear ones (Triomphant class), each one of them is loaded to destroy a continent. But I guess that the US, France and other powers will never sell nucl. subs to another nation.

Perhaps the US sabotaged your boats since you're still a free country that doesn't listen to Tricky Dick and his cowboy puppet :)


Uhhh - for the record - Canada is rather renouned for making some of the most stable reactors going. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candu) If we wanted to build a nuclear fleet we could. The fact that we chose to purchase diesels over nuclear subs (either purchased or home-built) had more to do with our requirements and the costs involved than anything else.

So far, every single one of the subs we received has had serious deficiencies. Everything from leaks to faulty ventilation systems to control panels with electrical faults.....

We want a refund!

Well, stop buying English subs then.

Don't buy American ethier, you know everything from America is cheap and easily breaks.

Buy Russian. Wait, what was that about that sub accident a couple of years ago where everyone died? Damn.

Well, you will have to buy Chinese then since I haven't heard anything bad about their submarines, but then you'll have to face 2 problems:

1. One of the possible reasons why I haven't heard of any accidents is because China don't let much information out.
2. USA and England will attack you for working with terrorists. Of course, they won't deal with the terrorists themself or accept that their subs suck.

Well, stop buying English subs then.

Don't buy American ethier, you know everything from America is cheap and easily breaks.

Buy Russian. Wait, what was that about that sub accident a couple of years ago where everyone died? Damn.

Well, you will have to buy Chinese then since I haven't heard anything bad about their submarines, but then you'll have to face 2 problems:

1. One of the possible reasons why I haven't heard of any accidents is because China don't let much information out.
2. USA and England will attack you for working with terrorists. Of course, they won't deal with the terrorists themself or accept that their subs suck.


Actually, China has had their problems too - including the accident on one of their Ming-class boats that killed 70 sailors. But then - most of their equipment IS refitted Russian Romeo- and Kilo-class subs.

You do know that we took delivery of that sub from you three days ago right? Of course, the fact that it took you guys six years to try and make it seaworthy might have been our first clue that it was a piece of crap...

Yes. You should have known how bad it was though before you bought it, we mothballed the entire fleet in 1994...Ah well, you're money...
You know these 4 subs have cost you guys almost $1 billion don't you?

Quite simply, if you run a sub you will have fires. Even US Navy subs (the best fucking subs in the world) have fires aboard them.

Besides, it's your fault for not getting nuclear subs and getting diesels, which are more prone to fire.

Well I don't see why you are complaining. The Upholder class SSK is the best diesel sub ever built

Actually, China has had their problems too - including the accident on one of their Ming-class boats that killed 70 sailors. But then - most of their equipment IS refitted Russian Romeo- and Kilo-class subs.
they did build the Han SSN, but I think one of them sank.

they did build the Han SSN, but I think one of them sank.

I know - which is why I stated that most of their equipment was Soviet.

Yes. You should have known how bad it was though before you bought it, we mothballed the entire fleet in 1994...Ah well, you're money...
You know these 4 subs have cost you guys almost $1 billion don't you?

For starters, you mothballed them in order to standardize on the nuclear boat to realize support savings - not because of any deficiencies. These four represent our entire sub fleet - which is part of a totally non-nuclear naval fleet, so the cost saving associated with not having to also put in place the support and training for nuclear powerplant operators / service technicians was a large factor.

And while a Billion sounds like a lot - in terms of naval acquisitions it is peanuts. Consider that the US signed a deal last year worth $10.2 Billion with General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman for seven Virginia-class boats (1.45 billion per boat), and that doesn't include the GFE portion of the contract for onboard systems. And let's not forget that the 1Billion tag is in Canadian dollars - so doing the conversion we got four boats for 700Million US. In other words, four boats for half the price of one Virginia-class boat. Gee - wonder why we might have considered that a good price.... assuming that they were as seaworthy as advertized....

I know - which is why I stated that most of their equipment was Soviet.
I assumed you knew that, but what I posted is that the Chinese equipment stinks. There is now evidence that 2 Xia SSBNs exist, but one of them sank.

The Mings (converted Romeos) suck and are based on 1950's subs which in turn are based off of WWII German U-boats

I assumed you knew that, but what I posted is that the Chinese equipment stinks. There is now evidence that 2 Xia SSBNs exist, but one of them sank.

The Mings (converted Romeos) suck and are based on 1950's subs which in turn are based off of WWII German U-boats


in other words ... we seem to be arguing over how much we agree with each other regarding Chinese subs being crap! lol.