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!)
