Should Canada scrap its fleet of submarines?

UPDATE Feb. 21: Gen. Walt Natynczyk, Canada's chief of the defence staff, defended the sub fleet during undersea training exercises on board HMCS Victoria off Vancouver Island.

Natynczyk said the submarines are necessary elements of Canada's ability to protect sovereignty. He said the subs have stealth-like capabilities and pack formidable firepower.

Originally published Feb. 14:

When the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook hit the ocean floor in June, the navy was left with just one seaworthy sub, and even it is in partial disrepair.

The damage to HMCS Corner Brook was in the area in which sailors are quartered. (Obtained by CBC)Pictures obtained by CBC News show the extensive damage done to the Corner Brook when it hit the ocean floor off B.C. on June 4.

Rear-Admiral Mark Norman, deputy commander of the Royal Canadian Navy, insists the damage is not as bad as it looks.

Canada bought its four diesel-electric subs from the U.K. in 1998 for $750 million. Since then, it has spent an estimated $3 billion on repairs and refits to them.

One of the subs, HMCS Chicoutimi, saw just two days of active service. The sub caught fire during its maiden voyage under a Canadian flag from the U.K. on Oct. 5, 2004, killing one sailor.

HMCS Windsor has been dismantled in Halifax, where its refit is years behind schedule and millions of dollars over budget.

Only HMCS Victoria is currently seaworthy, but its dented hull keeps it from diving deep.

None of the four submarines is capable of firing torpedoes or patrolling under Arctic sea ice. Only nuclear submarines would be able to go under the ice, but they come with a price tag of about $3 billion apiece.

Should Canada scrap its submarine fleet? Why or why not? Does the Royal Canadian Navy need submarines at all? Let us know what you think.



(This survey is not scientific. Results are based on readers' responses.)

Related: Should Canada purchase nuclear submarines?