Canada Navy Surface Combatant (CSC) Program

[oldcpu]

A system like Raven needs to be used in conjunction with a chaff/IR system such as Rheinmetall MASS (deployable chaff/IR), where I note the River Class also does not have a system such as Rheimetall MASS planned, from what I have read. The River Class instead has adopted the very expensive, disposable Nulka approach, which while hopefully highly effective, also makes me think not sustainable for weeks in the type of scenario we observed in the Red Sea/Gulf of Aden. One may run low on Nulka after some time, and that 'running low' could adversely affect command decisions.

I note Australia, with their Type-26 frigates (Hunter class) are planning to procure both Nulka and MASS Omnitrap (which has many different types of ECM munitions possible).

As I note in the above quote, I would like to see the RCN also procure a chaff dispensing system such as MASS, where chaff is relatively inexpensive.

Hence I read a recent article, which suggested the RCN may be procuring the LEED (Long Endurance Electronic Decoy) system for the River Class - where LEED is an USA under development (still ??? ) drone decoy ECM system (sort of like a long life Nulka). While Nulka only lasts for minutes, purportedly LEED is to intended stay airborne for a longer period of time, and LEED will communicate with the launching warship such that (presumably) its ECM transmissions can be varied and tuned even after launch. However LEED is disposable (not recoverable), from what I read - and assuming I have that correct, then I still believe chaff could be useful in a long duration conflict, as chaff is relatively inexpensive and a LOT of chaff can be carried on board.

A question i asked myself is would LEED replace Nulka ?? ... and my own view is that the two do have differences and both could be embarked. Nulka can be fired in seconds for immediate deployment upon missile homer detection, while I have not read anything yet that suggests LEED would also provide such an immediate deployment capability. Rather possibly < I am unsure > LEED may need to be deployed in advance of such missile detection.

Here is a link to an 'old' article on LEED : https://www.twz.com/news-features/m...missiles-think-its-a-warship-on-navy-wishlist

 

[oldcpu]

I note that the The L3Harris spec sheet ( https://www.l3harris.com/sites/default/files/2025-07/L3Harris-SPEIR-SPATIAL-sell-sheet-hr.pdf ) notes the SPEIR has these key elements:
- Wide Field Sensor Subsystem ((WFSS) - implementation of WFOV (Wide Field of View) EOSS) ,
- Narrow Field Sensor Subsystem ((NFSS) - implementation of NFOV (Narrow Field of View) EOSS).

The RCN for the River Class destroyer is purportely procuring the MK20 EOSS as part of a shift to the BAE Mk45 127mm gun, where I speculate the Mk20 EOSS could provide some (all ? ) of the NFSS functionality.

It is not clear to me what equipment the RCN is procuring to fullfill the WFSS role as part of SPEIR/SPATIAL for the River Class destroyer.

On speculative idea I had (speculation is the 'operative word' ) is the WFOV (wide angle field of view) EOSS could be the AN/SAY-3 I-Stalker, or a derivative of that (if such a derivative is available).

And I speculate that the Mk20 could be the NFOV.

As noted, I am speculating.

I also wonder if MDA (who are to provide a laser warning and optical surveillance system) have any involvement in this regard. I am putting 'straws' together here, so I could be wrong.