Do you think the canadains might be interested in something like the LCS? Having a larger amount would really bring down the cost if done wisely. They could get a contract to build some in canadian yard.
I mean to me it seems like a good idea. They have ALOT of coastline and few ships to patrol it all. Plus a ship like the independence would provide a great amphib support ship.
It is difficult to say. Canada does indeed have a great deal of coastline (longest in the world?) and as the environment changes further, that could become a much greater issue. However, most of the population is concentrated within the first 300 km of the southern border with the US, something like 90% lives within that band. IIRC ~80% of the population actually lives within 160 km of the US border.
The means much of the traffic to and from Canada would be concentrated off the west coast around BC and in the east along the maritime provinces. As the Northwest Passage heats up and becomes ice free for longer stretches of time, that too will require patrolling.
Complicating the issue is the relatively small population base that Canada has to draw upon, vs. the sheer size of Canada and the EEZ.
Now various suggests have been made about frigates being "inappropriate" and suggesting corvettes or something similar for Canada. IMO corvettes are very inappropriate for Canada, and uprating frigates would likely be amongst the best options available.
Within what I expect is the Canadian naval conops, a vessel like a corvette would not really work. Corvettes can vary somewhat in size, displacement, and loadout. With some of the best equipped and largest examples (like the German K130) being essentially smaller versions frigates or destroyers. Given that much of the cost of a warship rests with its systems, a very well fitted-out corvette could cost almost as much as a larger vessel with the same fitout. What this can lead to is a small vessel, with potentially short endurance, which might not handle so well is rough seas, that can pack a considerable 'punch'. Given Canada's position, any naval vessel could have to be operating in either the northern Atlantic or Pacific Oceans in winter. As such, having a vessel that does not fare to well in such situations does not seem like a good idea. In point of fact, AFAIK one of the reasons why the
Kingston-class patrol/MCM vessels are being essentially withdrawn is that while they can operate in rough seas, it is very wearing on the crew.
This suggests that any extended patrolling (i.e. not inshore patrolling) would need to be large enough to operate reasonably well in frequent bad weather, and again given Canada's position, some ice strenthening would likely be a plus. This would likely put the lower limit on what would be reasonable into the large OPV/frigate/destroyer scale of vessel. Something that is likely 2,500+ t displacement and 100+ m in length. My suspicions would be that the better options would likely be in the 3,500+ t displacement and 120+ m in length. Given the potential for extended patrolling, it is likely that Canadian surface vessels would often be operating on their own, which would then suggest a General Purpose fitout, able to meet an individual ship's own needs in terms of ASuW, Air Defence and ASW ops, and also able to 'slot in' and contribute to a combined taskforce as needed.
The vessel which comes to mind for something like this would be an upgraded RAN Anzac FFH. Now I do not suggest that Canada choose that particular vessel (MEKO 200) to use, but rather select a vessel that can provide similar capabilities and have additional room for future developments. In the case of the RAN Anzacs, once the CEA-FAR and/or AusPAR get fitted, the design will likely have reached its upper limit in terms of upgrades and development.
I would also recommend that the Canadian maritime force also have a second, likely larger surface combatant which can provide all the same basic capabilities I covered above, but also be suitable to escort important vessels and act as a taskforce leader. In this case, I have something like an Australian AWD, or USN Arleigh Burke (but with additional space for command staff/functions), but a RN Type 45/
Daring-class with room for a command staff would also do well.
in terms of vessel numbers, I would tend to disagree with earlier posts by Sea Toby which seemsed to suggest cuts to the number of vessels. Given the vast areas needing coverage, as well as the current and increasing potential for future conflict, then a dozen general vessels and 3-4 command vessels does seem appropriate. A futher consideration, Canada would likely need to have vessels organized into two fleets, one based on the East Coast and the other based on the West Coast. That is part of the driver for numbers, since the separate fleets need sufficient resources to meet their defence and patrolling obligations independently due to issues that are encountered in rotating vessels between the East and West coasts.
Incidentally, I would also recommend replacement of the
Victoria/Upholder-class submarines sooner rather than latter. Given issues encountered following their purchase and refit from the UK, IIRC only one is currently available for deployment out of four, with one of them still not having seen deployment following an onboard fire during transit to Canada from the UK. Given similar service needs in terms of fleet submarine ops, I would suggest that Canada partner with Australia and/or Japan for a replacement submarine. That or potentially get out of submarine operations altogether and have an arrangement with the US to provide USN attack subs when needed for training, exercises or escorts.
-Cheers
