By David Morse, 2 February 2025
In the past week, The Naval Association of Canada posted this update by Captain (N) Drew Graham, the Director of Naval Requirements. The video provides a broad view of new naval projects. The brief does not provide information of the existing River Class or Submarine projects but it does provide insight into the fleet concerns in the present environment. A major communications project is intended to ensure continuity of secure communications in the face of increasing disruptive technologies. An array of uncrewed systems, some of which will come into service in the next few years, are intended to provide above water and underwater surveillance in both the AOPS and Halifax classes. Interestingly and importantly this capability will be "organic" to the fleet with sailors operating and maintaining these uncrewed systems. An hour endurance UAV for the Halifax class will be a significant addition to capability. Other remote systems for mine warfare and long endurance underwater surveillance offer similar capability gains.
Perhaps the most interesting part of the presentation was the suggestion that the RCN is "aggressively" pursuing a corvette design to replace the Kingston class (the last of which seems to be scheduled for decommissioning in 2029). The corvette at around the 1,000 ton size is envisioned to have frigate-like capabilities in air and subsurface domains. As envisioned by DNR the corvette would have air search and missile capabilities allowing it to integrate in continental defence. This is an ambitious goal for a small and minimally crewed vessel.
An interesting talk but a significant gap was the lack of any info on the River class and the final design. Given recent developments around the world, it is surprising that there was no mention of directed energy weapons as a cheap counter to drones (air or sea borne). The use of million dollar missiles to counter a thousand dollar drone is simply not sustainable. Energy weapons could have a major impact on CSC design especially on the increased demand for power. It is probably too late for the present design but does this suggest a need for significant technology insertions at some point and some ships in the lengthy River class building project?
6 thoughts on “RCN Requirements Talk”
Perhaps the Navy should consider reducing the number of Type 26 River Class ships under the current design to 8 as a Block 1 version and consider a redesign of the Type 26 or another hull to accommodate energy weapons for the next 8 ships as a Block 2 version.
After the first flight of three, a redesign will occur to accommodate more VLS and the design was always intended to leverage new technology. I would say when the technology matures the RCN will field this tech.
An interesting update on certain RCN requirements, but as you say, no mention of the River-class, its final design, and possible contract signing.
A couple of possibilities suggest themselves. On the one hand, despite his assurances to the contrary, perhaps there was more to Dominic Leblanc’s mid-December 2024 visit to the Irving’s home than a personal reacquaintence with an old friend to celebrate the festive season.
On the other hand, what are the prospects for a contract signing in the current economic crisis over Trump’s tariffs and his seeming attempts to de-stabilize Canada both economically and politically? The much delayed delivery schedule for these destroyers would not seem to be enough to assuage Trump’s short-term political agenda, unclear as even that seems to be to most outside observers.
Moreover, a hefty price-tag for naval warships might be more than the current government might be willing and able to absorb at this time when large-scale compensatory tariff bail-outs are in the offing to many sectors of the Canadian economy. In addition, as some have pointed out, these warships currently contain many combat systems supplied by U.S. contractors.
Will the River-class become a victim of a prolonged trade war between Canada and the United States?
Speculation at best. Within the project management office, its full steam ahead with a contract signing this year. As you know now the tariffs are delayed 30 days and all indicators point to Canada will be able to reach a deal, this was a strategy by the President. We are too invested in this project and IF tariffs come, a carve out will come for these ships and systems.
Thanks for posting this, sir. I hope we can see more interesting presentations of this sort going forward.
At roughly 24:00 the speaker articulated the capability ambition for the Cdn Multi-mission Corvette (CMMC), which is to plug into and contribute to continental defence. It was further stated that the notional vessel would require strike-length missile tubes for BMD.
I have often wondered what the requirements/CONOP would be for a notional Kingston-class replacement. I admit to being surprised at the answer that question. The ship would need excellent connectivity and C2 to take down an adversary ballistic missile. Is this not a tall order at >1,000-tonnes? Or would the BMD task be led by a River-class destroyer, with two or more CMC sailing in consort, perhaps linked via some sort of co-operative engagement capability?
Despite my surprise, there may be a weird logic to this. Perhaps the CMMC project functions as a sort of unspoken hedging strategy should the costs of the full 15-ship RCD build prove prohibitive. Envisioning the CMMC as a useful minor warship may be a way of keeping up overall hull numbers if the fleet of major surface combatants shrinks any further. Some naval theorists believe in the concept of ‘distributed lethality’, whereby navies can opt not to concentrate combat power in just a handful of precious assets, but instead ‘spread the love’ across smaller and more numerous (even uncrewed) assets to increase offensive power while enhancing resilience.
But I’m still skeptical that you can pack enough sensor capability, connectivity, and long-range SAMs into such a small hull and keep station comfortably for any amount of time. And about that dearth of qualified technicians in the RCN….
IF the ship is funded or approved then it probably will be greater than a thousand tonnes. I say if because currently there is not enough public servants to take on this project. It’s not officially in the strategic planning as of yet and not funded. The halls of NDHQ are littered with projects like this. We are many years away from seeing anything.