embarrassed to be canadian right now

[crazyfoo88]

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2004/WORLD/europe/10/05/canada.submarine.rescue/story.canada.sub.ap.jpg

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/05/canada.submarine.rescue/index.html

LONDON, England -- Britain has launched a rescue operation to recover the crew of a Canadian submarine after a fire on board the vessel, the UK Ministry of Defense has said.

The ministry said the British Coast Guard received a mayday call Tuesday morning from the HMCS Chicoutimi, a diesel-powered submarine, saying there was a fire on board.

Nine people have been injured, but not seriously, according to a Reuters news service report.

The fire has knocked out power from the diesel engines and the sub is drifting without power.

Three ships are on the way to the submarine, which is about 160 kilometers (100 miles) northwest of Ireland, to pick up the 48-member crew.

The vessel -- which was just purchased from the Royal Navy -- was on its way to Canada when the fire broke out.

A senior Canadian official, speaking at 2:10 p.m. Ottawa time (1810 GMT), said a British towing vessel would take between 12 to 14 hours to reach the submarine.

"The boat is without power and has only limited means of communicating at this time," Navy Commodore Tyrone Pyle told reporters in Halifax, saying winds in the area were greater than 30 knots (35 mph, 55 km/h).

"The seas are rough and with the submarine on the surface they (the crew) are going to have some discomfort from rolling and tossing," Reuters reports Pyle saying.

However Pyle answered "no" when asked whether there had been any danger of losing the craft.

Although the fire was quickly put out, the submarine had to surface to get rid of the smoke. Nine crew members suffered the effects of smoke inhalation.

The Chicoutimi is non-nuclear powered and carries no nuclear warheads. Canada does not have nuclear weapons.

The fire is the latest in a long line of problems to hit the submarines, which have been plagued by serious mechanical mishaps such as cracks in the diesel exhaust valves and a number of leaks. They are mostly confined to port.

Ottawa insists it got a good deal when it agreed to buy the second-hand submarines from Britain for C$750 million ($595 million) in 1998. But opposition legislators say the purchase reflects incompetence by the Liberal government.

"I do not believe we purchased substandard equipment ... the price was very attractive to Canada," Reuters reports Canadian Defense Minister Bill Graham saying.

Graham admitted that the fire was an "important problem."

"Other ships have had fires in the past and no doubt there will be fires on board ships in the future -- this is something that our professional mariners are capable of managing ... There are risks in being in our Navy," he told reporters.

Graham said the submarine would return to the Scottish port of Faslane for a detailed probe into the fire.

[Moppie]

I used to own a used British car, it also had cracks in the exhaust.


And at least the British are making a service call to honour the warrenty, I don't know many used boat dealers who would do that :)


In all seriousness though you should be glad the crew are ok, and not embarrased. Its not Canadas fault the Britsh sold you dodgy submarines.

[Belmondo]

It does raise an interesting question: Just where does one go to get a good deal on a clean, used submarine?

I had not heard about the incident, but share your relief that the crew is fine. I also agree that this in no way reflects badly on Canada or Canadians (who are some of my favorite people).

[Conk]

I can see how you guys would say this shouldn't cause embarrassment for Canada or Canadians but take it from us Canadians that this is an embarrassment. Our military is underfunded and poorly equipped. So to show that the government is putting money into the Canadian military, they plan on purchasing a few subs. Good move. Everyone should be applauding because money is being spent. The only problem is they bought from a used lemon dealership.
Remember Desert Storm? Of course you do. Canadian soldiers were sent there wearing jungle greens. That's our government for you. To cheap to buy Desert Camo.

[jyrgen]

One should buy one's used submarines only from a reputable dealer, preferably in "LNIB", "mint" or "refurbished" condition 8)

[Moppie]

Canada has nothing to worry about.

NZ no longer has an airforce capable of launching offensive weapons. (unless you count a torpedo from an Orion).
Infact we have more airbourne firepower in the form of restored WWII fighters in private ownership than we do in the airforce.

Our Army is regarded as a specialist in jungle warfare, and due to our proximity to the pacisfic most of the peace keeping actions we are involved in are in Jungle type terrain. So to replace our second hand vietnam era M113s (which are very good in the jungle) someone decieded 8 wheeled LAVs from Canada designed for desert and open warfare would be perfect (we've since broken several on local terrain).
And just so you know how powerful we are, the New York Police Force has more frontline staff,more staff over all, more weapons and probably more combat experiance.

Our Navy is our only real hope, however it consists of 2 old out dated Frigates and two new Frigates that no one knows how to use.
An old transport ship that spent most of its life leased to a company that used it to carry oranges, and the only useful ship we have and ocianic survey ship that needs replacing.

That is embarrasing.
But also, if you think about, a good thing. It means we no longer live in a world we our national bourders are threatened in such away that we need a large armed forces.
Instead we have some of the worlds best mobile medic units, an SAS unit that dates its history back to the formation of the SAS in WWII and has the skills to prove it.
And whats left of our airforce are several old yet very functional Hercules that have proved more than useful flying supplies to UN forces trapped in places larger aircraft could not get into.
We have progressed from an army of aggresion to an army of peace keepers.
Prehaps Canada is heading in the same direction, and prehaps we can all serve as an example to more aggresive nations.

[neil_r]

. Its not Canadas fault the Britsh sold you dodgy submarines.

Caviat Emptor :lol:

N

[CyberDyneSystems]

I am curious what possible purpose a Submarine can serve the Canadian Military?

I guess the embarasment may very well lie with that very question,.. the fact that ANY money was spent on such a task specific and hugely expensive weapon system (the expense going FAR FAR beyond the cost of purchase.. with training and personell etc..) ...

...it all seems to be such an odd use of resources.

The fact is that the only sensable uses for submarines in the modern age is a ballistic missle platform,. or covert/special operations to a MUCH lesser extent.

Are Canada's covert operations world wide so extensive that they require the use of such a vessel?

[stopbath]

...Are Canada's covert operations world wide so extensive that they require the use of such a vessel?
You know we can't answer that! ;)

[Belmondo]

...Are Canada's covert operations world wide so extensive that they require the use of such a vessel?
You know we can't answer that! ;)

Well, you can, but then you'd have to kill him. :lol:

[Jon]

Hey, CDS - if you look out your window, that's not a tin can floating in the Providence River. They've got their eye on you . . .

[PacAce]

I am curious what possible purpose a Submarine can serve the Canadian Military?

I guess the embarasment may very well lie with that very question,.. the fact that ANY money was spent on such a task specific and hugely expensive weapon system (the expense going FAR FAR beyond the cost of purchase.. with training and personell etc..) ...

...it all seems to be such an odd use of resources.

The fact is that the only sensable uses for submarines in the modern age is a ballistic missle platform,. or covert/special operations to a MUCH lesser extent.

Are Canada's covert operations world wide so extensive that they require the use of such a vessel?

What I heard, and this is from a very reliable source, is that they plan to cut several big square holes on the bottom and the sides of the sub and put in thick plexiglass windows. This is so that they can take paying tourists down into the sea to watch whales and other beautiful sea life found in the waters off the eastern and western coasts of Canada. The only secret here is the actual location of whales. :mrgreen: :lol: :mrgreen:

[Eastcoast]

Well as you might have noticed by now, we Canadians like to poke fun at ourselves.

Seriously, our government finds it easier to promise much and deliver little until the next time they need to promise much again. This is especially true for our military as the government of the day tried to collect on the so called "Peace Dividend" without paying much attention to the rest of the world (middle east) and the fact that it might be a good idea to keep your military current.

Anyway not to turn this into a big rant, here is a little tidbit in the form of a tune that one of our homegrown talents put together on our equivelant of the Delta Force. If you have a mind take a listen. It contains more than an element of truth.

http://www.toddbutler.com/audio.html Its the JTF2 Song (Joint Task Force 2) selection. You will need a sound card and speakers.

[crazyfoo88]

UPDATE

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/10/06/newhmcschicoutimi041006.html

RIP Sg. Saunders, you will not be forgotten :cry:

[IanD]

The only secret here is the actual location of whales. :mrgreen: :lol: :mrgreen:
I got a secret whale spot too :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Ships and embarrasing moments go hand in hand in Canada. Few years back we launched a new destroyer that was equipped with the latest in radar and sub detection equipment. She ran aground in Halifax Harbour on her maiden voyage, about 15 minutes after leaving dock. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

[CyberDyneSystems]

UPDATE

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/10/06/newhmcschicoutimi041006.html

RIP Sg. Saunders, you will not be forgotten :cry:

:cry: Ouch... so sad.

Sorry we all goofed off in this thread.. :(

[boomer1959]

This a sad day :(
Our government buys crap from the British and ends up killing one of our own. Then has the nerve to say "he died defending our country". He didn't die defending our country, He died tring to get that piece of crap over here.
Sorry just venting :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

[IanD]

:cry: :cry: :cry:

[stopbath]

This a sad day :(
...Then has the nerve to say "he died defending our country". ...
We couldn't believe they said that. Defending against WHAT? What part of bringing a sub to Canadian waters included defense? :shock:

It is sad when anybody dies, but lets not make it out more than it was. Accidents happen, even on new ships. Death happens in some accidents. Sgt. Saunders died as a result of an accident while serving his country. If he died due to his efforts helping to extinguish the fire, say so. Or was he just in the wrong place at the wrong time? Don't blow it out of proportion and make a mountain out of it. The truth is always better than some overblown tribute.

To the speech writer(s): :x
To the family of Sgt. Saunders and team mates: :cry:

[DC]

It appears the cause of the fire was not related to the state of the sub. In any event the exact cause is unknown at the moment.


Please, no Brit-bashing just yet :wink:

[marie]

http://www.pbase.com/image/19183654/original.jpg

[Eastcoast]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/eastcoast909/1039.jpg

Lt. Chris Saunders

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v335/eastcoast909/halfmast.jpg

[billhercus]

Perhaps someone can tell me what the connection is between this thread and photography?

Just curious - think I might have missed something .... :wink:

[Belmondo]

Perhaps someone can tell me what the connection is between this thread and photography?

Just curious - think I might have missed something .... :wink:

Occasionally we digress. When we do wander off topic, or when the topic has no relevance to photography in the first place, there are three possible ways to react:
1. Complain
2. Participate
3. Ignore it

This thread is a probably a good one to ignore if you don't feel there's any relevance.

EDIT...

That sounds a little cold....it's not meant to be. If a topic is sufficiently frivolous, a moderator will lock it or delete it altogether. On the scale of potential human misery, this is a relatively small disaster; even so, it is terribly sad to many Canadians, and they are deserving of a little moral support from any forum members who wish to extend it.

That's all.

[Eastcoast]

Thanks Belmondo.

Indeed we have wandered quite far from the intent of the forum now and Billhurcus does have a point. This thread really has very little to do with photography. At this point it is only about the common grief/sadness that is felt by a country at the loss of one of its sons.

Perhaps it has gone on long enough and deserves to be locked, but I do thank all who have offered their support at this time.

John

PO2 (ret'd)
Canadian Navy

[Belmondo]

I think you're right. Thanks for wrapping it up so well.

Tom