However, I don't like the lack of helo capability (both flight deck and hangar), as there's no telling how big future VTUAVs will become and no ability to act as a lilypad for land-based or ship-based helicopters. More generally, Vigilance is a little too barebones and defensive-minded for my liking. With that kind of sensor and weapons suite I would prefer a stealthier, more combat minded hull that could also have a clear forward deployed role (e.g. Red Sea escort, South China sea patrol) and that could also escort slower task force assets in wartime (e.g. amphibs, supply ships etc).
Agreed, I'd want a helo deck on an OPV, at least a place to land and refuel. Hangar strongly preferred but not required.

The entirety of noncombat missions of an OPV are greatly enhanced by having either a VTUAV or a manned helo/tiltrotor available, with the advantage going to the manned VTOL for search-and-rescue and medevac. Plus, fisheries patrol etc is easier with a helo that most fishing boats don't have a way to track!
 
These ships are supposed to be operating in the high Arctic.

Where are the other BMD radars up there?

There are BMD radars facing the Artic in Thule, Greenland and Clear, Alaska. And in a scenario where they were sending BMD armed patrol ships up there, I'd also expect the Sea-Based X-band Radar and maybe a THAAD TPY-2 radar to be oriented that direction.
 
Vigilance looks interesting... probably 1,500 tons or a little more (see Vard's 85m OPVs for New Zealand, which displace 1,900 tons).

The barebones modular approach is very reminiscent of the RN Black Swan sloop concept of a decade ago:

However, I don't like the lack of helo capability (both flight deck and hangar), as there's no telling how big future VTUAVs will become and no ability to act as a lilypad for land-based or ship-based helicopters. More generally, Vigilance is a little too barebones and defensive-minded for my liking. With that kind of sensor and weapons suite I would prefer a stealthier, more combat minded hull that could also have a clear forward deployed role (e.g. Red Sea escort, South China sea patrol) and that could also escort slower task force assets in wartime (e.g. amphibs, supply ships etc).

Here's an alternative 1,900 ton / 90m patrol corvette concept I drew up by mashing up the 1,500 ton Gowind Adroit OPV design (with an additional 6m midships hull plug) with the new 2,400 ton Italian PPX OPV. The long & thin hull allows for a proper midships mission bay, with a second mission bay at the stern under the flight deck. This would be more capable than Vigilance while still allowing for 16 strike length VLS (located midships, as on Russian missile corvettes), towed sonar, RHIBs etc.
The lack of helicopter capability is an intentional design decision given the issues facing the RCAF fleet and the design constraints required to fit a hanger/flight deck aboard such a small vessel. The only maritime helicopter operated by Canada (CH-148) is quite large (nearly Merlin sized) and is only procured in few numbers (27 aircraft split between two coasts, three squadrons, 12 frigates and land use as well). In order to even land such a helicopter, you would need a substantial flight deck aft and an even more substantial hanger/shipborne infrastructure if you would want to organically carry one. These assets are very valuable and in short supply, they would not be deployed to this sort of vessel.

The RCAF will not be likely procuring another type of helicopter as well considering the logistics and costs required. The inclusion of a small UAV capable hanger and flight deck is a far more realistic option considering that the Navy can procure and operate these systems themselves, and they can provide some capability of a manned helicopter with far, far less of a footprint.

Vigilance is the way it is for a reason, primarily to cut down on costs and manpower requirements as much as humanly possible. Both of these aspects are key for the RCN going forward, who is facing a widespread manpower crisis and potentially a budget crunch in the future. The more that these vessels resemble a proper frigate, the more likely that this program could put the River class destroyer program at risk in the eyes of politicians. I am fairly sure the cost per unit and manpower requirements are fairly minimal for Vigilance, partially due to the use of civilian construction standards where possible and the lack of many of the described "combat focused" elements such as you describe.

The primary selling point of a design like Vigilance is the substantial mission deck on the aft of the vessel to take on modular cargos, a boat launching system within the stern and a modular mission bay amidships does not offer the same amount of flexibility and carrying capacity as Vigilance's system. These vessels will also be taking over mine countermeasures duties from the currently serving Kingston class, alongside drug interdiction, sovereignty patrols, fisheries patrols, humanitarian aid missions, etc. Such a VLS arrangement amidships would fundamentally limit the usefulness of the mission bay while also likely requiring the vessel to keep its VLS aboard at all times, something that isn't especially required for many of the missions Canada is looking for.

There is also a hard tonnage ceiling on this general type of warship for the RCN, as any vessels above 1,000t would require renegotiation of the National Shipbuilding Strategy or some funky bit of rejigging between the shipyards.
 
Last edited:
The lack of helicopter capability is an intentional design decision given the issues facing the RCAF fleet and the design constraints required to fit a hanger/flight deck aboard such a small vessel. The only maritime helicopter operated by Canada (CH-148) is quite large (nearly Merlin sized) and is only procured in few numbers (27 aircraft split between two coasts, three squadrons, 12 frigates and land use as well). In order to even land such a helicopter, you would need a substantial flight deck aft and an even more substantial hanger/shipborne infrastructure if you would want to organically carry one. These assets are very valuable and in short supply, they would not be deployed to this sort of vessel.

The RCAF will not be likely procuring another type of helicopter as well considering the logistics and costs required. The inclusion of a small UAV capable hanger and flight deck is a far more realistic option considering that the Navy can procure and operate these systems themselves, and they can provide some capability of a manned helicopter with far, far less of a footprint.
Understand reasoning, but it's really bad reasoning to not at least give a helo deck to lily pad those CH-148s from. You realize that they're all of 1m longer than an H60, right? And that's all in the rotors.

Again, probably 90% of the missions a Patrol Vessel do are greatly enhanced by the presence of a helicopter.

TL;DR: RCAF needs to suck it up and buy another ~10 helos to support the RCN missions.
 
Understand reasoning, but it's really bad reasoning to not at least give a helo deck to lily pad those CH-148s from. You realize that they're all of 1m longer than an H60, right? And that's all in the rotors.

Again, probably 90% of the missions a Patrol Vessel do are greatly enhanced by the presence of a helicopter.

TL;DR: RCAF needs to suck it up and buy another ~10 helos to support the RCN missions.
It makes no sense to lily pad CH-148's off these vessels given what I've explained above, it especially doesn't make sense given the design tradeoffs that having a flight deck and refueling gear to properly do this would require. The RCN is very interested in a variety of drone platforms that can fulfill the missions likely required for aviation on this type of vessels on a drastically lower footprint.

The RCAF won't be buying any more helicopters in all likelihood, so it's best to design and procure vessels that will operate within our reality.
 
It makes no sense to lily pad CH-148's off these vessels given what I've explained above, it especially doesn't make sense given the design tradeoffs that having a flight deck and refueling gear to properly do this would require. The RCN is very interested in a variety of drone platforms that can fulfill the missions likely required for aviation on this type of vessels on a drastically lower footprint.

The RCAF won't be buying any more helicopters in all likelihood, so it's best to design and procure vessels that will operate within our reality.
Then you are crippling a Patrol Vessel.

The 1100 ton US Coast Guard Reliance-class cutters have a helipad, FFS.

RCN Commodore needs to twist the arm of the RCAF Air Marshall until he supports buying another squadron of helos. It really is that important.
 
The Kingstons are being paid off by 2029.
There is a new replacement project for a multi-mission corvette (still early stage) dubbed "CMC", to enter service in the "mid 2030s".
Seems quite ambitious... they're talking SM-3 capability (!).
  • "A capable warship, part of the order of battle, which bridges the gap between our constabulary Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships and high-end warfighters like the Halifax and River class"
  • "Around 1,000 tonnes, but probably a little heavier"
  • "105 meters long or less" (due to berthing constraints at Halifax)
  • "Organic sensors : air search radar, sonar (hull mounted or towed array)"
  • "Able to detect and defend itself against modern threats"
  • "Able to contribute to North American continental defense - that likely means strike length VLS"
  • "2 or 3 ships could go out, link with NORAD, provide radar coverage off the coast and also engage threats - ballistic missile threats, potentially hostile satellites"
  • 40 sailors
Very comprehensive Canadian naval update here:
View: https://youtu.be/bPen3RhNHFw

Thanks very much for this, H_K; I have watched Captain Graham's recent unclassified PowerPoint presentation that you link to, which is interesting in itself and very relevant to this thread. Captain Graham is Director of the prospective Canadian Multi-Mission Corvette program, which as he says "needs to be much more" than the existing Kingston class. It's not mentioned in his presentation, so I have emailed Captain Graham asking whether the CMCs are planned to have ice-strengthened hulls, specially heated accommodation, and other needed adaptations for Arctic use.
 
Understand reasoning, but it's really bad reasoning to not at least give a helo deck to lily pad those CH-148s from. You realize that they're all of 1m longer than an H60, right? And that's all in the rotors.
Again, probably 90% of the missions a Patrol Vessel do are greatly enhanced by the presence of a helicopter.
TL;DR: RCAF needs to suck it up and buy another ~10 helos to support the RCN missions.
Then you are crippling a Patrol Vessel.
The 1100 ton US Coast Guard Reliance-class cutters have a helipad, FFS.
RCN Commodore needs to twist the arm of the RCAF Air Marshall until he supports buying another squadron of helos. It really is that important.

Shipborne helicopters are flown by the Royal Canadian Air Force rather than by Navy personnel (everybody is unified "Canadian Forces"). My prized old Arco/Salamander book An Illustrated Guide to Modern Warships stated that Canada "has always used larger helicopters in relation to ship size than other navies", and that trend continues today with the hefty Sikorsky H-92 (CH-148 Cyclone) and AW101 Merlin (CH-149 Cormorant). The unarmed Canadian Coast Guard deploys two dozen smaller Bell helicopters, with landing platforms on some of its larger ships.

Rainbow1910 and Apophenia said that Canada is no longer capable of designing a large warship like it had done with the St Laurent or Iroquois or Halifax classes, and indeed the planned 8kt River-class destroyers are a variation of the UK's Type 26, although DWG tells us the RCN ships will bear different sensors and weapon fits. But at a bit over 1000 tonnes displacement (not specified whether full load, or normal, or standard, or other) and an overall length between 75 and 100m, it seems the prospective Canadian Multi-Mission Corvette as described by Captain Graham could be an in-house design. A ship of such size with a pad usable by a CH-148 or CH-149, plus vertically-launched 1.5-ton SM-3 missiles, plus sonar and an ASW weapon, plus greater speed than the plodding 15-knot Kingstons, sounds like a design challenge. Even discarding anything above a navigation radar in favor of state-of-the-art lightweight datalinks to larger RCN warships, shore, and satellites, it's tough to get a quart into a pint pot.
 
Vigilance looks interesting... probably 1,500 tons or a little more (see Vard's 85m OPVs for New Zealand, which displace 1,900 tons).
The barebones modular approach is very reminiscent of the RN Black Swan sloop concept of a decade ago:
However, I don't like the lack of helo capability (both flight deck and hangar), as there's no telling how big future VTUAVs will become and no ability to act as a lilypad for land-based or ship-based helicopters. More generally, Vigilance is a little too barebones and defensive-minded for my liking. With that kind of sensor and weapons suite I would prefer a stealthier, more combat minded hull that could also have a clear forward deployed role (e.g. Red Sea escort, South China sea patrol) and that could also escort slower task force assets in wartime (e.g. amphibs, supply ships etc).
Here's an alternative 1,900 ton / 90m patrol corvette concept I drew up by mashing up the 1,500 ton Gowind Adroit OPV design (with an additional 6m midships hull plug) with the new 2,400 ton Italian PPX OPV. The long & thin hull allows for a proper midships mission bay, with a second mission bay at the stern under the flight deck. This would be more capable than Vigilance while still allowing for 16 strike length VLS (located midships, as on Russian missile corvettes), towed sonar, RHIBs etc.

The heavier concept you have drawn up looks capable, H_K, with more room to hangar a CH-148 or CH-149 helicopter out of rough weather than the Canadian Multi-Mission Corvette could do, as you and Scott Kenny prefer. But Rainbow1910 points out that there would be political problems inside Canada for such a big jump in displacement. And phew, that is one ugly snout.
 
The heavier concept you have drawn up looks capable, H_K, with more room to hangar a CH-148 or CH-149 helicopter out of rough weather than the Canadian Multi-Mission Corvette could do, as you and Scott Kenny prefer. But Rainbow1910 points out that there would be political problems inside Canada for such a big jump in displacement. And phew, that is one ugly snout

With these requirements, I don’t see any design working under 80 meters length and 1,500 tons (full load), which would be 1,100 - 1,200 tons lightship.

I can already see the arguments that steel is cheap and air is free so why not make CMC a little longer and wider, say 95m / 2,500t. Which would bring a big jump in capability, sea keeping etc. That could well be true and I wouldn’t be surprised if the cost difference from adding 1,000 tons displacement was only 10% or 15%.

The design I picked is somewhere in the middle at 90m / 1,900t. Mainly I kept it fairly small because that made it more of a design challenge and interesting thought exercise. I also wanted something that is directly comparable to other small designs (K130, Sigma 9113, River Batch 2, Otago class OPV etc).

A small CH-149 compatible flight deck won’t necessarily take up much extra space - for example the River Batch 2’s have a 22m long, Merlin capable flight deck. Surprisingly it’s no bigger than standard NATO flight decks for NH90. I wonder if this small size comes with operational restrictions (eg. daytime only, sea state etc), but I definitely wouldn’t exclude the ability to land CH-148/CH-149. The hangar could be smaller though, mainly designed for large UAVs.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom