Allan said: SAL, which submarine is best for
Canada, the European or Korean model?
SAL-9000 said: Hello, Allan. Short answer: There is no
single “best” submarine...
it depends on what Canada cares about most!
But we can compare the two real finalists in Canada’s Canadian
Patrol Submarine Project:
European option: German/Norwegian Type 212CD.
Korean option: Hanwha KSS-III.
Let’s break it down the way you usually like—with Arctic strategy, NATO
role, and Canadian industry in mind.
1. The Two Finalists:
European Option – Type 212CD.
Builder: ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems. (Germany/Norway)
Strengths:
Extremely quiet. (top NATO
diesel-electric expertise)
Designed for Arctic and shallow-water operations.
Fully NATO-integrated logistics and doctrine.
Proven European submarine ecosystem.
Hydrogen fuel-cell AIP propulsion.
Strategic advantage for Canada:
👉 Seamless NATO interoperability.
👉 Arctic patrol design experience.
Germany already supplies a large share of NATO’s conventional submarine
fleet.
***
Korean Option – KSS-III.
Builder: Hanwha Ocean (South Korea)
Strengths:
Larger submarine.
(~3,600-3,700 t)
Longer range. (~10,000
nm)
Lithium-ion batteries. + AIP
Active production line. → faster delivery
Big industrial offset offers.
KSS-III is designed for long-range patrol, ISR, and strike
missions.
***
2. What Canada Actually Needs!
Remember, Allan, Canada’s needs are unique:
✔ Arctic patrol under ice.
✔ Three-ocean coverage.
✔ NATO Atlantic operations.
✔ Long-range Pacific patrols.
✔ Canadian industrial build.
Canada plans to replace the Victoria class with up to 12 submarines.
So the real question becomes:
👉 Arctic stealth vs global endurance.
👉 NATO integration vs industrial speed.
3. Which Is Better for Canada?
If Canada prioritizes Arctic stealth + NATO ops
➡ Type 212CD wins.
Reasons:
Smaller = quieter in shallow Arctic waters.
NATO supply chain and training.
Joint Norway partnership → Arctic doctrine.
This fits your idea of Canada operating closely with NATO fleets while
protecting the North.
If Canada prioritizes range + speed of delivery + industry.
➡ KSS-III wins
Reasons:
Bigger boats → longer patrols.
Faster production timeline.
Large tech-transfer promises.
Strong Canadian job offers.
This matches your idea of building a strong domestic defence industry.
4. The Hidden Question: Nuclear Subs?
You’ve said before:
“Wouldn’t Canada need nuclear subs for Arctic patrols?”
Honestly—that’s still true!
Neither KSS-III nor 212CD can stay under ice for months like a nuclear
boat.
But Canada specified diesel-electric subs for cost and
infrastructure reasons.
So we’re choosing the best compromise!
5. SAL-9000’s Straight Answer!
For Canada specifically:
👉 Type 212CD is the safer strategic choice!
(Norway/Germany)
👉 KSS-III is the faster industrial choice.
(S. Korea)
If your priority is Arctic sovereignty + NATO integration, go
European.
If your priority is jobs + faster fleet + Pacific reach, go Korean.
6. What I Think You Would Prefer?
Knowing your past thinking about:
Arctic patrols.
Mixed fleets. (Gripen + F-35 logic)
NATO alignment.
You’d probably lean toward:
👉 Type 212CD for Arctic fleet
👉 plus maybe long-range Korean-style design later
Same logic as your Gripen-for-Arctic idea!
***
🇨🇦 Canada Arctic Submarine Patrol Map
1. Main Arctic Patrol Routes... 5!
These are the five critical patrol corridors Canada would use.
Route A — Beaufort Sea Patrol.
Location: Alaska–Yukon coast.
Purpose:
Watch Russian Pacific subs entering the Arctic.
Monitor U.S. traffic near Alaska.
Protect Arctic oil/gas exploration.
Best Submarine Type.
👉 Long-range KSS-III. Advantage (S. Korea)
***
Route B — Northwest Passage Inner Route.
Location: Through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.
Example choke points:
Lancaster Sound.
Viscount Melville Sound.
McClure Strait.
Purpose:
Sovereignty patrols.
Track foreign ships.
Under-ice intelligence.
Canada already runs joint Arctic patrol exercises like Operation
Nanook along this route.
Best Submarine Type
👉 Small, quiet subs Type 212CD. (Advantage
Norway/Germany.)
Route C — Baffin Bay / Greenland Gap!
Location: Between Nunavut and Greenland.
Purpose:
Watch the Russian Northern Fleet.
NATO Atlantic defence.
Monitor Chinese research ships.
This is Canada’s equivalent of the UK-Iceland-Greenland GIUK gap.
Best Submarine Type:
👉 NATO-integrated stealth subs. (Norway/Germany.)
Route D — Labrador Sea / Atlantic Gateway.
Location: Newfoundland–Greenland corridor.
Purpose:
Protect Atlantic shipping.
NATO anti-submarine warfare.
Escort convoys.
Route E — Pacific Arctic Entry.
Location: From BC → Bering Strait.
Purpose:
Chinese or Russian Pacific fleet monitoring.
Pacific-Arctic transit.
Joint ops with the U.S. Navy.
Best Submarine Type.
👉 Large range subs. (KSS-III advantage)
***
1. Canada needs subs in the Atlantic, Pacific,
and Arctic simultaneously, which is why they plan up to 12
submarines.
2. Real Patrol Bases.
Canada would operate from:
Halifax.
Esquimalt.
Nanisivik Arctic facility.
But Arctic support infrastructure is still minimal.
So... subs must be self-sufficient for long missions.
3. Why Submarines Matter Most in the Arctic?
Because:
Satellites can’t see under ice.
Surface ships can’t patrol year-round.
Aircraft can’t stay long.
Submarines are the only platform that can monitor Arctic waters
continuously and covertly.
That’s why Canada insists on under-ice capable submarines.
4. Which Submarine Fits Each RouteThis is exactly like your Gripen + F-35 idea:
👉 Mixed submarine fleet makes strategic sense.
5. The Big Truth About Arctic Patrols.
Even the best diesel sub:
Must surface periodically.
Has limited under-ice endurance.
Only nuclear subs can stay under ice indefinitely.
So Canada’s real options are:
Diesel fleet. (current plan)
Nuclear fleet. (better Arctic control)
Mixed fleet. (best long-term solution)
6. SAL-9000 Strategic Take:
If Canada wants true Arctic control:
👉 4 small ultra-quiet subs for inner Arctic.
👉 4 large long-range subs for Pacific/Atlantic.
👉 4 NATO-support subs.
That’s the realistic 12-submarine model.
***
Exactly how Canada should think about a three-ocean navy.
🔵 Patrol Routes by Submarine Type.
1. Type 212CD. (Small
Ultra-Quiet Arctic Subs)
👉 Best for inner Arctic sovereignty patrols.
Routes
A. Northwest Passage Inner Route.
Baffin Bay → Lancaster Sound → Parry Channel → Beaufort Sea
This is the main east-west Arctic corridor.
Purpose
✔ Track
foreign ships.
✔ Under-ice surveillance.
✔ Assert sovereignty.
These passages run through thousands of islands in the Canadian Arctic
Archipelago.
B. Baffin Bay / Greenland Gap.
Between Nunavut and Greenland.
Purpose
✔ Watch the
Russian Northern Fleet.
✔ NATO Atlantic defence.
Example choke points:
Nares Strait between Ellesmere Island and Greenland.
C. Labrador Sea Gateway
Greenland → Newfoundland corridor.
Purpose:
✔ NATO
convoy protection.
✔ Track subs entering Atlantic.
👉 Why 212CD here!
Extremely quiet.
Good in shallow ice-filled passages.
Designed for NATO Arctic operations.
🔴 Patrol Routes for KSS-III. (Large Long-Range
Subs)
👉 Best for outer Arctic & Pacific routes.
D. Beaufort Sea Patrol.
Alaska → Yukon → Northwest Territories coast
Purpose
✔ Track
Russian Pacific Fleet.
✔ Monitor U.S. Arctic activity.
E. Pacific Arctic Entry.
BC → Bering Strait → Arctic Ocean.
Purpose
✔ Monitor
China/Russia Pacific subs.
✔ Long-range ISR.
The Beaufort Sea and Bering Strait form key Arctic shipping
approaches.
👉 Why KSS-III here?
Longer range. (~10,000 nm)
Larger sensors.
Better endurance.
🟡 Strategic Insight. (Your Gripen-style Mixed Fleet
Idea)
Exactly like Gripen + F-35:
Canada’s Arctic geography requires different patrol types due to narrow
straits, heavy ice, and shallow waters!
🧭 Real Patrol Base Locations:
Likely support hubs:
Halifax.
Esquimalt.
Nanisivik Arctic port.
Subs must travel huge distances because Canada has three ocean fronts.
✔ SAL-9000 Strategic Conclusion.
If Canada buys one submarine type:
👉 Type 212CD fits Arctic sovereignty best.
If Canada buys two types. (your preferred strategy):
👉 212CD for the inner Arctic.
👉 KSS-III for Pacific + Atlantic approaches.
That gives real three-ocean control! ( 6 Norway/Germany for Arctic patrols! - 6 Korean for Pacific/Atlantic long range patrols! )
THIS IS WHAT A CANADIAN DEFENCE POSTURE WILL LOOK LIKE AFTER WE ABSORB ALASKA AND GREENLAND! AND SINCE WE ARE CANADIANS, THE AMALGAMATION WILL BE BY REFERENDUM IN BOTH ALASKA AND GREENLAND!
(MAINE AND MINNESOTA HAVE ALREADY SAID THEY WANT TO JOIN!)
