I am sorry, but as far as I am concerned: Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! and Wrong!
Well, not quite. I agree that they should be capable of handling moderate sea states.
These are tier one training vessels for young officers who are going to sea for the first time more or less on their own on a training mission that seeks to integrate classroom and simulator acquired knowledge and consolidate it (all of this is from instructional design theory - if you don't know, ask a TDO). No operational duties such as surveillance, patrol or maritime security.
A single overarching aim: navigation and basic bridgemanship training, Period, end of statement.
If you try and get a platform that can do these other things, it will be stolen by the RCN command to actually do these other missions and deprive VENTURE from getting the sea time it needs to fulfill its training duties.
That’s a very narrow and outdated view of what a modern naval training vessel should be. Yes, navigation and basic bridgemanship are central to VENTURE’s purpose, but the world and the RCN have evolved their thinking. “Training only” vessels are a luxury we can no longer afford, especially when fiscal and operational realities demand flexibility. Really we're only talking about the capability if we need to use it.
The current Orca-class have already proven that a training platform can also contribute meaningfully to secondary duties: fleet familiarization, coastal surveillance, support to MIO and RHIB training, and even limited tasking with MCDVs or AOPS during exercises. The notion that any added capability would somehow “steal” the ships away from VENTURE misunderstands how force generation and tasking actually work. Sea Training, Fleet School, and MARPAC have long managed that balance successfully.
Moreover, if we’re replacing the Orcas, we’d be negligent not to future-proof the design. That means a platform capable of operating safely on both coasts, in real sea states, with proper endurance and seakeeping. Adding light armament mounts and the structural provisions for operational sensors isn’t about turning them into corvettes, it’s about ensuring that if Canada needs hulls for sovereignty patrols, presence missions, or emergency contingencies, these ships aren’t confined to the harbour approaches. As mentioned as long as we procure enough hulls over and above what the training establishment needs, those hulls could be used leaving the Hornblower wannabes to train to their hearts content.
Every major navy now designs its training ships with dual-use capability, look at the UK’s Tamar-class, France’s Garonne, or Australia’s Arafura-class (which itself grew from a training and patrol concept). If our next generation can’t at least match that flexibility, we’re setting ourselves up for obsolescence before the keel is even laid.
Training is the primary mission, absolutely, but designing for potential utility is just good stewardship. The RCN has learned that lesson the hard way before.
