The Government of Canada has awarded a contract to Irving Shipbuilding Inc. (ISI) for the construction of the River-class destroyers, a new fleet of warships based on the UK’s Type 26 design.
The deal, worth an initial $8 billion, will fund the construction of the first three ships, with a total estimated programme cost of $22.2 billion.
The River-class destroyers will replace the ageing Halifax-class frigates and the long-retired Iroquois-class destroyers, providing the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) with a multi-role combat vessel capable of high-intensity warfare, intelligence and surveillance, counter-piracy, counter-terrorism, and humanitarian assistance.
Based on the BAE Systems Type 26 Global Combat Ship, the River-class destroyer follows in the footsteps of the Royal Navy’s City-class frigates and Australia’s Hunter-class vessels. However, Canada’s version will include enhanced underwater sensors, state-of-the-art radar, and modern weapons systems to meet the country’s unique operational needs.
“By investing in our own industry, Canadian workers are helping to build the fleet of the future, equipping the Navy and our members in uniform with the modern and versatile ships they need,” said Bill Blair, Minister of National Defence.
The first three ships will be named:
- HMCS Fraser (Pacific Ocean)
- HMCS Saint-Laurent (Atlantic Ocean)
- HMCS Mackenzie (Arctic Ocean)
The River-class programme represents Canada’s largest shipbuilding project since the Second World War and is expected to support over 5,250 jobs annually while contributing $719.3 million to the country’s GDP.
The construction will take place under Canada’s National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS), with Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding Inc. leading the project. Canada is also investing $871.7 million in shipyard infrastructure to support the new fleet’s long-term sustainment.
“This contract validates more than a decade of hard work by industry and government and provides stability for the men and women who design, build, and maintain Canada’s fleet,” said Dirk Lesko, President of Irving Shipbuilding Inc.
Give us a new HMCS Yukon please!
Looking at the River Class from WW2, I want an HMCS Coaticook, HMCS Outrement, and HMCS Magog.
Make extra profit every week… This is a great part-time job for everyone… Best part about it is that you can work from your home and earn from 100-2000 Dollars each week .….. Start today and have your first payment at the
end of the week….. 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
Come on Canada get more of these magnificent warships. Canada, Norway (hopefully), UK, Australia. These ships are fast becoming the standard NATO warships.
I think FREMM and AB beat out the number of T-26’s by a considerable margin tbh.
FREMM isn’t a reference ASW design. It is OK at it.
AB is very average at ASW and a T23 is in a different league.
The hard threat in theatre is in the ASW domain.
Mr Bell said “These ships are fast becoming the standard NATO warships.” Nobody was talking about ASW.
OK I accept the hair splitting – they are fast becoming the NATO reference design du jour anyway!
FREMM absolutely is equivalent or superior to the Type 23. In fact, they use the same towed-array sonar, the CAPTAS-4.
No it isn’t.
It doesn’t have the fully quietened propulsion system.
The ASW version of the FREMM has a fully quiet hull, and a full electric propulsion up to 15kns allows for virtual silent running with controlled pitch props. What the Italian ASW FREMMs have over UK boats is essentially the same radar as and AAW sensor set up as a horizon AAW destroyer and Aster 30 as well as 2 76mm guns with Dart guided rounds, Milas ASW missiles with a range of 35km and they can carry 2 small ship flights so an NH90 and a AW101. They are profoundly effective frigates and the most important bit is they came in at around 600 million pounds each…so France is getting 8 with full quieting and tails and 4 GP. What is really gutting is the Italians are now having all their PPA as essentially full fat ASW and AAW frigates with electric drives, quite hulls towed sonar.. so that’s 14 ASW electric drive, towed array frigates that are all equipped with ASTER 30 or NT and a good long range area defence set of sensors…
I’d be careful of getting sucked into all Italian Naval developments good relative to UK mindset.
A lot of the Italian kit is OK and would be more than fine for toe to toe with Russia.
I’m going to be a bit controversial and Kay down that FREMM is a really good GP that can do ASW. There is a reason why in ASW circles T23 is the current Gold Standard. T26 will be much better.
This is the approach I wish the Royal Navy would take, a much more multi-purpose approach across the fleet.
I hope the Type 83 and Type 32 (if they don’t get cancelled) all have a decent secondary ASW capability, even if it’s not quite as good as a Type 26, if it’s an 80% solution it would still be incredibly useful to have a 50% increase in ASW capable ships.
As you mentioned cost isn’t really the issue here, many other nations take this approach.
T23 the gold standard? in 90’s and begin of 2000’s. FREMM is much better.
Hi Supportive..the problem is mass is also important and with the T45 and T26 programmes the RN has struggled with that.. essentially the Italians have been able to buy 4 FREMMs for the cost of 1 T45 and 1 T26… and in reality are 4 good ships that can do effective ASW and effective AAW better that 2 highly specialised exquisite platforms…the answer is yes because of a a simple question of time and space…
In terms of orders in the last 10 years?
2 new Fremm-EVO
5 UK T26, 3 CAN T26 and future 6 AUS T26
Unsure how many Burkes, but they are all used by a single navy.
There are 20 active FREMM and a total of 59 will be built including the 20 US ones.
Let’s see how the US FREMM program goes?
It doesn’t smell too good ATM – it is way behind and it is surrounded by the usual ship building politics in the US. Where money is spent is controlled by the ‘pork barrel’ so some pretty dubious decisions get made to keep various people onside.
If the AUS Hunter is a relative of T26 then the Consternation Class is a very distant relative of FREMM. If you can spot any similarity please let us know….
Which is a wonderful testament to the excellence of British engineering and pragmatism.
Such an incredible turn around is also a testament to the NSBS and the two frigate shed investments.
Still hoping the UK will increase it’s T26 build… I know it’s a vain hope but it’s the best design we’ve had for ages and we have such a small navy we can’t afford to not have all the ships we can put to sea as good as we can get…. Although if they get on with the T83 I’ll be happy….
Maybes a T26 Mk2 would be the hope, a few years after the last current planned T26 is built.
One would think that it could even remain the basis for its own replacement unless something fundamental or unexpected happens in ship design. Why reinvent the wheel, pretty safe on that one as I won’t be around to be proved wrong. 💨
ATM it will be a choice between more T31 or T26 with the budget lines already stretched.
It all depends if it is hull numbers or ASW specialists that we need?
Also need to look at the work load of each yard..BAE will need to keep the T26 line open until the T83 is ready…a lot of costs come because of the years where no escorts are being built.
So maybe 2 more T26 and another batch of 5 T31 and that then gives 20 frigates which is what the 98 defence review said the RN should alway has had..then all the need is an order of 10 AAW ships in the late 2030s ( maybe 4 large 13,000-14,000 ton cutting edge heavy destroyers..as the Italians are building and 6 more modest 6000-7000 ton direct T45 replacements)
Hmmm…wonder whether The Donald intends to await the results of the RCN River Class programme before annexing Canada? Certainly would be a novel approach to resolve any issues w/ USN Consternation Class program. 🤔😉
Perhaps mildly circumvented by having to sink any Canadian River Class that sail against the USN or the ships sailing to Europe and continuing the fight from it’s Article V allies ports?
Certainly would make the US and Europe all but at war Im sure. After Greenland I presume they would want Iceland too then the Faeroes, and then Shetland, will that be enough for these new pirates to se urge their sense ‘self preservation’ and will they meet Russia coming the other way? Meanwhile China is already putting out the message that if you can no longer trust America as a friend and protector we are happy to do a deal. What wacky times we are entering. I expect many who were reluctant now taking up the offer, even one they can’t refuse if the US indeed starts on that war of Imperialism.
Given that I referenced Europe being Article V allies of Canada I thought that Europe and America being at war was pretty evident?
Remember the iconic line from the movie the Godfather: “[We’re] gonna make [them] an offer [they] can’t refuse”? The Donald could be cast as an understudy of Marlin Brando in the role of Don Vito Corleone. 🤔😳😉
Reasonably certain The Donald has designs to franchise his golf courses in the UK. Probably should prepare to become the 52nd state in due course. Would appreciate the RN (including RM) being shipshape and Bristol fashion before annexation. BA and RAF will become projects in progress. 😂😁😉
These are probably roughly equivalent (if a little inferior in capacity) to our current-configuration Type 45 destroyers in the AAW domain – they’ll have the newest AEGIS baseline and SPY-series radars, and a 24-cell VLS likely holding a mix of quad-packed ESSM (32 in 8 cells) and SM-2 Block IIIC (16), as well as a pair of 21-cell RAM modules. They’ll carry an equal amount of Naval Strike Missiles, as well.
What does the UK financially get out of this order? I’m guessing Irving have paid a heafty price to BAE to use there design which the government can tax? I’m also guessing that a lot of the internal components will be made in the UK which will be good for UK companies?
The gearbox and the MT30 motor. That’s about it.
Come on Chris are you being deliberately literalist there, the creative aspects like the engineering design, development, assistance and support services for the build are generally the most valuable aspects to take advantage of in almost any engineering project, just ask Ove Arup. Not only that but it returns a massive amount of added skills, knowledge and experience to help in future projects. I did have the estimated figures for the Australian build to Bae a while back, it was well worth effort shall we say. Metal bashing isn’t always or perhaps generally the profitable bit.
Also a lot more than just the gearbox and MT30 are UK built on Rivers.
Generators, Decoy Systems, Sonar, Mission Bay handling system, etc.
Quite a lot.
There is a certain purpose to make part XYZ if it is sufficiently chunky locally. If it isn’t then incorporating local parts moves further and further from the reference design.
If you move off the reference design the designers are off the design liability hook.
In reality anything of medium and small value needed in small numbers will be bought from UK suppliers where it is to reference specs.
Doing anything else negates the learning going on right now at Govan in debugging things.
Some high value items will be manufactured locally. Most high value items will be bought in that includes the drive train and its control systems and probably auxiliary systems such as fire fighting.
The main benefit is that the long term demand for certain parts is suddenly 3x RN’s needs so RN isn’t solely responsible for funding their onwards availability. Likewise the (re)certification of replacements and equivalents falls to wider shoulders. This is a massive onwards cost saving for all T26 users. If Noway joins then it is even better for RN’s cost maintenance curves.
Exactly one needs a certain level of lateral thinking to truly assess the value to the originator.
The first batch of the Arliegh Burke’s were only marginally larger than the Type-26/River-class, yet carried 90 VLS cells. These ships are not capable of sustained combat. The Polish variant with apparently 32 VLS cells amidship, isn’t much better. The FREMM/Constellation are lightly armed as well. Heck, the US Navy can’t seem to figure out how many the VLS cells they should have.
The Chinese seem to get it as their Type 052D, about the same size as the Type 26, is equipped with 64 VLS cell.
You’re comparing apples to oranges – the Burkes are guided missile destroyers, as are the 052Ds of the PLAN; the T26/Rivers, FREMM, Mieczniks, and Constellations are all frigates – by and large intended for wholly different roles (either anti-submarine warfare or “general purpose” as is the case for the Polish Mieczniks and a number of the FREMMs) rather than dedicated air defence platforms.
There is an argument to be had that specialized role platforms are not useful in a modern war. Things happen really fast now, you don’t have weeks to get the right ship in theater. It needs to do everything, because if it’s there, it’s probably all you have.
That was always an argument – right back to T82 and before that!
But I agree that more rounded ships are needed.
T26 is a well rounded design.
T31 could be a well rounded design with add ons
T45 could actually be very well rounded if, as I suspect will happen, a few changes are being made in the upgrades – given it is already IEP.
That would be the new 052D destroyer, which includes 64 mk41 equivalent VLS and, well, not much else? Even needed an extension to the design to allow it to carry Black Hawk sized helicopters. A pretty standard towed array fit, but CODAG propulsion so very noisy. Needs 280 crew to function, implying very low levels of automation and reduced crew comfort. CIWS limited to one Goalkeeper copy and one RAM copy.
As opposed to the T26 (River class), which includes the mission bay amidships for a whole range of different kit, at least 32 mk41 (+ExLS for RAM), probably the best hull quietening on any surface warship in the world, a full spec sonar setup, hangar for a Merlin with room to spare, and only needs 160 crew.
Using a single metric for the value of a warship is rarely a true measure of its capability.
And how many vertical launch missiles are there on an RN T26… answers on a postcard but I will give you a clue it’s 72….
virgins?
Flight llA are the first ones remotely comparable to a T-26 in anti submarine capability but with far inferior dedicated hull design and they are 9500 tons so larger than a T-45 so not marginally bigger than a T-26.
So how useful are those 90VLS on an Arleigh Burke against a submarine? If I had to face a submarine I’d choose the Type 26 over the Burke every time.
The Polish Armed variant? There isn’t a Polish Variant of the Type 26, but the UK Type 26 carries 72 missiles, so not far off an Arleigh Burke. (Also I suggest looking at what the missile launchers on the current Polish frigates are….)