Vard Shows Off New Look At The Vigilance 105 Corvette (plus mini-cdc update)
Noah Note
I was wondering when we would see this! Vard has finally gotten around, it seems, to showing off the new video they have for the Vigilance 105 Corvette. This video was the same one that they were showcasing to us at CANSEC, for the most part, and aims to provide a detailed look at the company's newest iteration of the Vigilance Proposal.
Technically, the official name for it is the Vard 7 105 Continental Defence Corvette, which is a mouthful, so I am electing to call it the Vigilance 105 for simplicity. The Vigilance proposal has evolved considerably since first introduced, and the family now includes several models ranging from the Vigilance 55 up to the 105. That includes the OG Vigilance 75.
Vard and Vigilance have always stood as the benchmark for many when it comes to the Continental Defence Corvette program. For the longest time, they were the only concrete design that we could showcase as an example. Nowadays we have several, so that need has diminished, but Vard remains the most active on the scene regarding CDC and showcasing their proposal.
This is no exception. One I know many of you were waiting on. We talked about the Corvette during our CANSEC post, but now that they've reposted the video publicly, I feel the need to go back into it again and recap in a more official capacity what is being showcased.
The Vigilance 105 is Vard's proposal for the Continental Defence Corvette program. Coming in at 107.7x15.6m and ~3000t, she is fairly middle-ground in terms of size compared to others. She retains an >26 kn top speed and a 60-day endurance.
She is about as true a corvette as one can make it, and tries to keep close to the original 105m limit, which I should note is again no longer in consideration. Taking a look at her design itself, the original midship container space on the 105 has been replaced by two boat bays designed to accommodate both manned and autonomous surface vessels.
Vard very much advertised Vigilance to me as an Autonomous-First platform. While manned platforms can be accommodated, the layout and equipment intended to be installed on Vigilance are designed for the launch and recovery of various autonomous systems, such as the Thales Pathmaster MCM USV.
The 105 still retains her aft mission deck, which can accommodate up to four 20ft TEUs for modular payloads, such as the RCN's new Remote Minehunting and Disposal System, the future Containerized Onboard Relay Array system, or other autonomous systems like UUVs.
Her flight deck is designed to accommodate both manned and unmanned platforms, though her hangar is only designed to accommodate UAS. The debate for a flight deck has mostly leaned to retaining a full flight deck amongst most of the existing designs, though support for manned helicopters will remain limited as UAS take the primary focus.
The sensor suite will be provided by Thales. While the OG Vigilance had locked in NS100, STIR, and Scout Mk3, I was not told if those would remain the same here. I am assuming so, based off talking, but it was not outright confirmed if they would remain that way. She will also be equipped with CMS330.
She will have a hull-mounted sonar, which will have some sort of reinforcement to protect against potential ice impacts. Unlike some of the other designs, Vard is electing not to focus on an icebreaker-styled hull, instead looking for other ways to make up the ice-strengthening required, though admittedly bringing a platform up to PC 6 levels of icebreaking capability isn't terribly difficult or restrictive on design, especially if you ain't looking for the full rating but just something similar.
Armament consists, as proposed, of a 57mm Bofors, two 30mm RWS for anti-UxS protection, two 12.7mm guns, two four-pack NSM launchers, and a base-level 16-cell MK.41 system. This MK.41 has the space and capacity to be fitted with up to 32 cells if desired.
Crew is up to 144, which I was not able to get a good breakdown of. The Navy would like less than 100, very much so, so I will need to follow up. Vard has always hyped up the automation on Vigilance, as well as the blends of military and commercial standards present in the family. They have always aimed to have Vigilance as minimally manned as possible in their concepts, even the 105. So the number is something I wanna try and get a breakdown out of them eventually on.
As I know it, Vard has solidified this as, hopefully, the last Vigilance redesign! This is now the fourth or fifth since CDC started as the OPV project? Of course, requirements for CDC are still being finalized, and an RFI is supposed to release this year, but we'll see. RFIs can be tricky, eh?
As always, CDC remains unfunded, is not in the government's plans, and remains a middle-priority overall. We should not expect CDC to move quickly until such a time as the government demonstrates a desire to see it expedited, whether with dedicated funding or its inclusion in policy.
Some, like Irving, seem to be taking a wait-and-see approach, while Davie is taking things slow but teasing a bit. There is still hesitation in industry to jump on CDC as is. Reportedly, as I have heard, around 8 or 9 companies have shown off designs to the Navy? I do not know all of them. Kongsberg, Saab, Seaspan, Davie, and Vigilance have all showcased designs.
Someone mentioned Railotech or Rauma might have shown stuff off? Also, rumors Hyundai or Hanwha discussed stuff on the project? I know five, lol. Irving doesn't have a design yet to show off as I know it, so they're sitting there on the side. With the federal government's heavy preference for Canadian-Designed-Built-Equipped, I stand that it will be hard for foreign designers to jump in if credible Canadian designs exist, even if it's just a preference choice.
Similarly, there are active rumors that the Navy is considering splitting CDC into design and build contracts, which for folks like Team Vigilance, who have tried to build up a proper team and early supply chain, can be potentially really devastating, especially if we see sensors and such also separately contracted.
The primary driver here is the Navy considering multiple shipyards for constructing CDC. That's something I heard a few months ago, and I think teased? But at CANSEC was when I heard it a lot more. The concept would be to provide multiple yards with a common design and supply chain under 3- or 4-ship batches.
There are a few reasons, as I heard, for this. Building shipyard capacity across multiple yards, trying to speed up a potential delivery schedule by having multiple yards working on CDC at the same time, and some protection and redundancy.
If one yard can't deliver on-time or on-budget? They're only locked to a small batch and can be dropped. In the best case? We have multiple yards building capacity and delivering combatants through CDC. Each yard, I believe in an ideal case, would be given an 8-10 ship package assuming two yards, which isn't the worst package to throw at someone.
That's the Navy concept as I know it. That is how it has been explained to me. It is not an official plan, but one of the ideas being explored. They're also apparently looking at it for FASST-V, which makes a lot more sense out the gate. Although, again, CDC is still in a stage of fully figuring out what it wants.
This proposal, though, seems to have a lot more support among Navy leadership than others, like going beyond 16-cell VLS. Some people talk matching the Batch-I Rivers at 24, but I'm very hesitant to believe that honestly. By that point, they ain't Minifax anymore, lol. They're bloody Megafax off armament alone.
Pocket Frigates is another fun term I would love to revive. Light Frigate is boring. I know Pocket isn't official, but it is too fun to say, lol. Either way, Vigilance 105 represents a good look at the current requirements for CDC as the Navy desires.
CDC is still in a stage. I hope we see an RFI soon; we will see, but I hope we can see something soon!