On 14 November 2024, Vanguard held its fifth annual underwater forum, Deep Blue Forum 2024, in Ottawa, with a theme of Transition: Preparing for the In-Country Support of a New Submarine. The day-long conference was hosted live and simultaneously streamed virtually, engaging international expertise from Germany, South Korea, Sweden, and the United States, as well as across Canada. A record number of people registered for Deep Blue 2024, with over 350 attending in person and 98 virtually, spanning both government and industry.  

The conference opened with a keynote speech by Rear Admiral Christopher Robinson, the Commander Maritime Forces Pacific, where he stressed the strategic importance of the submarine and challenged some myths, while underscoring sustainment and the need for a balanced fleet. The recent defence policy update, Our North Strong and Free, articulates a strong commitment to replace the Victoria-class submarines, as they are old and expensive to maintain. His primary concern with the future Canadian Patrol Submarine (CPS) is achieving the highest possible operational readiness with a reliable capability, with the first submarine delivered by 2035. This date is not arbitrary – it is driven by the end of life of the Victoria-class submarines.  

Moreover, because the Arctic is a pristine environment, enhanced environmental compliance is important in the CPS. Contrary to popular myths, submarines don’t punch through ice, which allows SSNs to be ruled out because Air Independent Power/Propulsion (AIP) can provide options for operating in the Arctic. Notably, Robinson stressed, the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) must adapt to the selected design (avoid Canadianization) as well as the criticality of having infrastructure and a highly trained workforce in place from Day One – done by Canadians in Canada.  He was very clear that Canada must get sustainment right, as working in the submarine sustainment industry is not all about the submarine – it is the supporting infrastructure. 

Robinson’s address was followed by a panel discussion, moderated by Commander Ashley Hunt, Project Manager Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP), on In-Service Support (ISS). The panel members, representing Seaspan Victoria, SERCO, Thales and Babcock Canada, opined that submarine ISS is a difficult endeavour, as submarines are complex systems.  

In fact, it is harder than acquisition, as budget, supply chain, vendors, and obsolescence issues are underpinned by the workforce itself. The key element to success is to constantly recruit and train to ensure a continuous flow of workforce. It was also stressed that this is a partnership: Navy, government, and industry all working together as a unified team. Notably, the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) has an enduring role in ISS for the life of the platform – a major lesson learned from the Victoria class, which is simply not working.  

In the subsequent question period, the following key points were emphasized: 

  • People for workforce (needs to be Canadian)  
  • Supply chain (needs to be Canadian)  
  • Infrastructure – it takes decades to build  
  • A steady flow of work is needed to maintain the workforce 
  • Steady funding is required to maintain capability 

Focus on Infrastructure  

The morning then proceeded with a second panel discussion on Infrastructure, moderated by Peter Hammerschmidt – ADM Infrastructure and Environment, Department of National Defence. The panel representing the Royal Canadian Navy, Defence Construction Canada, DND Infrastructure & Environment, and Defence Research and Development Canada, discussed the expected submarine fleet size (eight to 12), the need for supporting infrastructure on two coasts, and the challenge of space in the existing HMC Dockyards. These factors are not unique to the CPSP, as all DND major crown projects are requiring similar infrastructure and are facing an acute shortfall in tradespersons to do the work.  

Moreover, in understanding the platform’s operational requirements, DND is facing a similar paradigm shift to that currently being seen by RCAF in the level of complexity of modern supporting infrastructure. This all takes time due to the need to conduct environmental studies and address Indigenous issues. Commodore Armstrong, continuing his quest for maximum industry engagement, stated these issues have been recognized, in that infrastructure is a High Level Mandatory Requirement (HLMR) and 15% of the project is currently allocated for infrastructure. While exact funding is not known at this time there is clearly some legacy infrastructure that needs to be replaced, including jetties and warehousing. They are anticipating a 50% metric in total project costs.  

In-Support Service Keynote 

Following a luncheon break, where delegates had an opportunity to visit display booths, Anthony March, VP Marine & Mission Systems, Babcock Canada, delivered the afternoon keynote address. He gave an informed brief on what defines submarine In-Service Support. He started by asking how availability is defined between the operators and the maintainers – there is a need for a clear measurable strategic requirement with measurable strategic outcomes. To generate submarine availability, the enterprise must “plan the demand,” whereby preventative maintenance becomes critical.  

Moreover, by leveraging information, the right maintenance at the right time can result in less maintenance. This, of course, is supported by the need for trained and experienced people throughout the enterprise, of which March noted we currently have a core capability in Canada. He followed on with a discussion on digital twinning and how it has evolved – it is all about dynamic data, which starts at construction. The data then becomes dynamic as you build and then operate the submarine. His takeaway points were: 

  • Define availability – what outcomes do you want? 
  • Align funding – “fund the plan” 
  • Maximize data availability 
  • Gain alignment between OEM and ISS to obtain the right information at the right time 

Arctic Experience 

The afternoon continued with a presentation on U.S. Navy experience in Arctic submarine operations by Howard Reese, Director U.S. Navy Arctic Submarine Laboratory. This was followed by the third panel discussion of the day on operations in the Arctic, moderated by Commander Martin Byrne, Director Naval Maritime Crown Projects – Submarines.  

The panel, representing the U.S. Navy Arctic Submarine Laboratory, as well as retired Commander Corey Gleason – former Commanding Officer HMCS Harry DeWolf – started by acknowledging the importance of the Arctic to the CPSP, as three of the 15 High Level Mandatory Requirements were Arctic-related. Furthermore, Commander Byrne stressed the CPS will not be hardened to surface through ice, as the Concept of Operations is to operate near ice in the marginal ice zone. Also, there will be no Arctic support hub as part of CPSP.  

The discussion then explored USN submarine pre-deployment training and the RCN recent Arctic experience of leveraging other government departments and Allies, notably the Canadian Coast Guard and Denmark. For submarine-specific operations, the U.S. Navy underscored the fact there is no punching through ice and the predominant concern when surfacing is to minimize damage by ice.  

They concluded that there is a clear role for a conventional submarine in the Arctic, as it is a great asset for the continental defence of North America. As to environmental concerns (MARPOL regulations) with CPS operations, the returns from the current CPSP Request for Information (RFI) will lead to one-on-one discussions with respondents, of which MARPOL will be an issue. 

Future-focused Fireside Chat 

The final event was a “fireside chat” on transition and planning for the future with retired Rear-Admiral Luc Cassivi, retired Rear-Admiral Chris Earl, and retired Commodore Jamie Clarke. Cassivi started with the acknowledgement of the Submarine Capability Life Extension (SCLE) project, which purchased the four ex-Upholder-class submarines as an interim submarine capability, resulted in a submarine that was not what was wanted. Now the CPSP has an opportunity to get what the RCN wants, and it all boils down to people. Day One is the day you sign the contract and start getting people trained, including the support infrastructure, not just the crews. 

As to sustainment, Earl reminisced that in the years leading up to the Upholder purchase in 1998 there was a lot of talk about sustainment. However, with subsequent trade-offs and decisions, a lot of sustainment and funding issues were forgotten. Critically, for CPSP he asked, who is going to make the decisions to support, sustain, and deploy, and how are those decisions going to be made, as it is all about availability. Lessons identified from the introduction of the Victoria-class included that they were not just new Oberons, the RCN did not have the Intellectual Property (IP) rights, and they adopted policies and processes that were not fully understood.  

Moreover, the people implications of adopting SUBSAFE had a huge implication on schedule. In short, Canada was not ready for the first submarine on arrival. Also, as part of the transition process, there is a need to consider how legacy submarines will be supported as they transition to a new submarine. Finally, a submarine capability is not about a platform – it is about the entire enterprise. 

Jamie Clarke opined that by forcing North America’s adversaries to go underwater, it makes a Canadian submarine capability very important. His top two points were: reliability and training – reinforced by the fact Canada didn’t get it right with the Victoria-class submarines. There is a requirement for a clearly defined end-state, understanding that the SUBSAFE pillars will drive it all. SUBSAFE is linked to the design of the platform, therefore there must be an understanding of the parent design, and this may change how Canada does SUBSAFE. In the quest to build a cadre of competent submariners, schedule comes second only to safety. It will always be challenging. Make everyone risk-aware and decision-making must be clear. 

In the closing segment of Deep Blue 2024, the eloquent Master of Ceremonies, Jake Jacobson, Strategic Adviser, Babcock Canada, summed transition up neatly when he said the devil is in the details and the worst-case scenario would be to underplay/under-fund the transition to CPSP. He reminded the audience that Canada has only a decade to get this right, and it will need significant resources to be successful. 

Summary 

Deep Blue 2024 was a natural continuation from the previous four conferences, which  exploited the opportunity afforded by the recent CPSP RFI to explore issues encompassing the entire submarine enterprise. Regardless of which submarine design is eventually selected, what does transition to a new submarine entail for Canada? With a stated requirement for delivery of the first submarine in 10 years, there is much to do to prepare for its arrival.  

As the conference proceedings made abundantly clear, submarine infrastructure and In-Service Support are quite difficult and require significant resources to be in place prior to the arrival of the first submarine – notably a trained and experienced workforce. Hopefully the frank interchange during the Deep Blue Forum 2024 will facilitate greater discussion between the RCN, government, and industry, as only with a team effort by all participants will the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project succeed.