• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian River Class Destroyer Megathread

I don't disagree, but I thought one of the design principles for the first batch of 3 was to use mature and in-service systems to reduce risk as much as possible?
NULKA is becoming an older system that while still capable, is being left behind by the incoming LEED system on US warships. They do want to utilize mature and in-service systems to reduce risk however, items as important as decoys and the electronic warfare suite cannot afford to be second class or otherwise outdated given the increasingly dangerous threat environments the RCN is facing. The fact that they are putting them aboard in such seemingly large numbers signifies to me how important this system is.

By the time that the first RCD comes into service in the early 2030's, LEED should already be proven and in service for a significant period of time.
 
Like as not the first Type 26s in the water will be sailed by Norwegian sailors.


"Disclosed on 27 March, the changes to the 2025-2036 defence plan – which was approved in 2024 – also see spending increased by NKr115 billion ($11.8 billion) over the period.

"Among several areas, that increase will be used to “accelerate the phasing in of new submarines and [the] procurement of the first two frigates”, the document states. “The frigates will be equipped with maritime helicopters with anti-submarine warfare capability as an integral part of the combat system.”

"Norway in August 2025 selected the BAE Systems-led bid, signalling its intention to acquire at least five Type 26 frigates, with the first delivery expected in 2030."

The RN expects its first to be commissioned in 2028. But Norway has the money. The RN needs the money.
 
And Norway is covering the RN's patch in the GIUK gap courtesy of the Lunna House agreement.

So even if the hulls don't go into RN service they will be doing their intended jobs.
 
The Type 26's most important weapons system?

1774803422601.jpeg

1774803377330.jpeg

The Rivers as Motherships conducting mine warfare from over the horizon?

1774803740121.jpeg

How many UxVs can be stowed in that space, in the Mission Bay, the Hangar, the TLS space and in containers on the flight deck?

7.2 m Rattler USVs - 400 mile range, 50 knots, 4 m waves, controlled from a shore station 500 miles away. 5 USVs escorted 2 warships/OPVs in Scottish waters in November.

8.4 m Kraken K3 Scout USVs - 650 NM at 25 kts, 55 kts, 30 days endurance, 600 kg payload. 2.5 tonnes

11.2 m ARCIM USV - 72 hr endurance, 40 kts, 3000 to 4000 kg payload, 6 tonnes

12 m Cetus XLUUV - 1000 NM range, several days on lithium batteries, 2x2x2m mission bay. Controllable in Britain from Australia. 19 tonnes

12 m Herne XLUUV - target of hydrogen fuel cell power, half the weight of the lithium powered Cetus, range of 5000 km, 45 days endurance, 3 kt cruise, 8 kt sprint, 2x2x2m mission bay. 9 tonnes

V-Bat MQ-35 VTUAV - >13 hr endurance, ~1000 km of flight, > 500 km control radius on MPU5, service ceiling of 15-20,000 ft, 3m wide 3-4 m long, 18 kg payload, MTOW of 73 kg

Camcopter S-100 VTUAV - 6 hr endurance, 1100 km of flight, control radius of 180 km, service ceiling of 18,000 ft, 3.4 m rotor diameter, 50 kg payload, MTOW of 200 kg

MQ-8c Firescout VTUAV - 15 hrs endurance, 3600 km of flight, control radius of ~250 km, service ceiling of 20,000 ft, 11. 2 m rotor diameter, 1338 kg payload, 2721 kg MTOW.

Proteus VTUAV - 1000 kg payload, MTOW 3000 kg, based on Kopter AW-09

....

And Loitering Munitions/One Way Attack Drones

Hero-120 - 60 min endurance, 60 km range, 24 kg weight, 4.5 kg warhead.
On deck or deployed from a remote USV.
 
The Multi-Mission Bay has been the Type 26's sleeved ace for quite sometime, but a lot of armchair admirals aren't interested in ship specifications unless they go fast or go boom.


It strikes me that that gantry system might also have application to RAS systems for the larger USVs. One of the USCNO's asks was a system for refueling the LUSVs (50-100 m OSVs/FCSs) at sea.

1774811635778.jpeg

If multi-axis stability sufficient to grab a Harrier out of the skies, or at least be contemplated, in the 1980s, then I can only suppose that similar technology could be applied to the RAS of uninhabited vessels might be possible today. The Mission Bay gantry system appears to have elements of the same system.

1774811704472.jpeg

 
Back
Top