Canada Navy Surface Combatant (CSC) Program

oldcpu

Committed member
Messages
166
Reactions
12 289
Nation of residence
Thailand
Nation of origin
Canada
Some speculation here ...

Canada’s formal participation in the EU's Security Action For Europe (SAFE) program, effective as of February 14, 2026, has opened a new opportunity for Canadian defense industry involvement. Under the SAFE program, EU-backed low-interest loans are available to support the purchase and integration of European-origin military equipment.

For the Royal Canadian Navy’s (RCN) River-Class (Canadian Surface Combatant) procurement, this agreement could provide tangible benefits. The program’s provisional application, triggered by the signing on February 14, opens a direct pathway for Canadian firms to potentially access financing for their work on European-sourced systems already planned for these vessels. They may also be eligible to provide parts for selective European SAFE procurement programs.

There are a couple European-origin systems, slated for the River-Class Destroyer, that could potentially benefit from SAFE financing. These are Leonardo’s 127mm naval gun, and 30mm Lionfish, all of which are European-made. If Leonardo products are chosen for the River-Class, Canadian industry could qualify for low-interest financing to assist with the integration, maintenance, and support of these systems. Canada could also potentially join larger procurements of these weapons from other participating SAFE countries

The 80% Canadian content implementation within the SAFE framework could also open up opportunities for Canadian firms to participate in other European defense projects, further extending the potential benefits.

If a future River Class Destroyer should decide to add MASS ECM (which I concede is a pit of a pet desire of mine), that too may potentially benefit from SAFE.

So this could be another aspect in our discussion of a Leonardo 127mm vs a BAE 5-inch, where the cost of integrating the Leonardo 127mm (and subsequent maintenance parts synergy and munitions procurement) could ultimately have further benefit from SAFE.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
115
Reactions
2 131
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Some speculation here ...

Canada’s formal participation in the EU's Security Action For Europe (SAFE) program, effective as of February 14, 2026, has opened a new opportunity for Canadian defense industry involvement. Under the SAFE program, EU-backed low-interest loans are available to support the purchase and integration of European-origin military equipment.

For the Royal Canadian Navy’s (RCN) River-Class (Canadian Surface Combatant) procurement, this agreement could provide tangible benefits. The program’s provisional application, triggered by the signing on February 14, opens a direct pathway for Canadian firms to potentially access financing for their work on European-sourced systems already planned for these vessels. They may also be eligible to provide parts for selective European SAFE procurement programs.

There are a couple European-origin systems, slated for the River-Class Destroyer, that could potentially benefit from SAFE financing. These are Leonardo’s 127mm naval gun, and 30mm Lionfish, all of which are European-made. If Leonardo products are chosen for the River-Class, Canadian industry could qualify for low-interest financing to assist with the integration, maintenance, and support of these systems. Canada could also potentially join larger procurements of these weapons from other participating SAFE countries

The 80% Canadian content implementation within the SAFE framework could also open up opportunities for Canadian firms to participate in other European defense projects, further extending the potential benefits.

If a future River Class Destroyer should decide to add MASS ECM (which I concede is a pit of a pet desire of mine), that too may potentially benefit from SAFE.

So this could be another aspect in our discussion of a Leonardo 127mm vs a BAE 5-inch, where the cost of integrating the Leonardo 127mm (and subsequent maintenance parts synergy and munitions procurement) could ultimately have further benefit from SAFE.
No, other than the main gun nothing should be changing.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
115
Reactions
2 131
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
A new model for the River Class. Note the changes.
  • Vulcano and Lionfish are out, replaced by the Mk.45 gun and Mk.38 respectively
  • The Leonardo suite (including NA-30S Mk.2) appears to be fully removed
  • AN/SLQ-32(V)6 EW suite is now included
  • RAM placement is finally confirmed – but only one launcher, not two
  • ExLS is gone, confirming it’s no longer part of the design
  • Still sitting at 24 VLS cells
  • NSM placement has changed again
  • New unidentified launcher system showing up on the model (still unclear what it is)

Overall, this model confirms a lot of what’s been expected over the past year—simplification, more standard NATO systems, and fewer experimental additions.


Still some mysteries, but we’re likely getting closer to the final configuration as the program moves toward CDR.

Picture and commentary courtesy of NOAH.



Screenshot 2026-03-23 142344.png
 

oldcpu

Committed member
Messages
166
Reactions
12 289
Nation of residence
Thailand
Nation of origin
Canada
A new model for the River Class. Note the changes.
  • Vulcano and Lionfish are out, replaced by the Mk.45 gun and Mk.38 respectively
  • The Leonardo suite (including NA-30S Mk.2) appears to be fully removed
  • AN/SLQ-32(V)6 EW suite is now included
  • RAM placement is finally confirmed – but only one launcher, not two
  • ExLS is gone, confirming it’s no longer part of the design
  • Still sitting at 24 VLS cells
  • NSM placement has changed again
  • New unidentified launcher system showing up on the model (still unclear what it is)

Overall, this model confirms a lot of what’s been expected over the past year—simplification, more standard NATO systems, and fewer experimental additions.


The new model is definitely interesing, and as noted suggests there are indeed changes.

I note a model is just that - a model. Its degree of accuracy in depiction needs to be taken with some grains of salt. I believe more confirmation is appropriate to be certain, else we are still in the speculation stage.

The DND page for the River Class is very generic here: https://www.canada.ca/en/navy/corporate/fleet-units/surface/river-class-destroyer.html

It simply states a 127mm (which could be the Mk45 gun) and it states a 30mm.

Nominally the Mk.38 is NOT a 30mm.

However ....

I read there is a new version of the Mk.38 weapons system (Mk38 Mod-4) which has a 30mm Mk 44 Bushmaster II gun. So what NOAH suggests is credible, but confirmation is best..

For me, it also begs the question, ... what fire control would replace the NA-30S Mk2? Since we are speculating, possibly the AN/SPQ-9B associated with the Mk34 gun weapon system? Given the River Class plan to go with the AN/SPY-7 Aegis (instead of AN/SPY-6 with Aegis) I wonder if there will be development costs here (given AN/SPY-7 on River Class).

Also, i believe the 30mm Lionfish was capable of benefiting by the NA-30S Mk2 firecontrol radar. If instead, the Mk38 Mod4 30mm is chosen (instead of Lionfish), I speculate that the Mk38 Mod-4 30mm (which is a new Mk38 implementation) can benefit from the AN/SPQ-9B if chosen.

So that begs the question, if that model is accurate (and there is speculation there at present), is an AN/SPQ-9B to be used in place of a NA-30S Mk2 firecontrol radar?

Looking at the model, I am not comfortable on speculating further there.
.
 

Ted Barnes

Active member
Naval Specialist
Professional
Messages
115
Reactions
2 131
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
The new model is definitely interesing, and as noted suggests there are indeed changes.

I note a model is just that - a model. Its degree of accuracy in depiction needs to be taken with some grains of salt. I believe more confirmation is appropriate to be certain, else we are still in the speculation stage.

The DND page for the River Class is very generic here: https://www.canada.ca/en/navy/corporate/fleet-units/surface/river-class-destroyer.html

It simply states a 127mm (which could be the Mk45 gun) and it states a 30mm.

Nominally the Mk.38 is NOT a 30mm.

However ....

I read there is a new version of the Mk.38 weapons system (Mk38 Mod-4) which has a 30mm Mk 44 Bushmaster II gun. So what NOAH suggests is credible, but confirmation is best..

For me, it also begs the question, ... what fire control would replace the NA-30S Mk2? Since we are speculating, possibly the AN/SPQ-9B associated with the Mk34 gun weapon system? Given the River Class plan to go with the AN/SPY-7 Aegis (instead of AN/SPY-6 with Aegis) I wonder if there will be development costs here (given AN/SPY-7 on River Class).

Also, i believe the 30mm Lionfish was capable of benefiting by the NA-30S Mk2 firecontrol radar. If instead, the Mk38 Mod4 30mm is chosen (instead of Lionfish), I speculate that the Mk38 Mod-4 30mm (which is a new Mk38 implementation) can benefit from the AN/SPQ-9B if chosen.

So that begs the question, if that model is accurate (and there is speculation there at present), is an AN/SPQ-9B to be used in place of a NA-30S Mk2 firecontrol radar?

Looking at the model, I am not comfortable on speculating further there.
.
That's right I'm sure the model is wrong, especially the guns and the single RAM......
 
Top Bottom