Type 26 Frigate (City Class) (RN) [News Only]

[SDL]

Good point

[CameronPerson]

Announcement on what frigate the RAN will go for is due next week.. I know we don’t know what they’ll chose yet, but I highly doubt that the fiasco that has been HMG’s procurement of the T26s has done much to help BAE’s bid.. The author’s penning their bet on Navantia but we shall wait and see.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 4zfgg.html

[RetroSicotte]

Could be any of them, honestly. They each have a stake of potential in there, and each have a notable drawback. So the odds are minority, but possible.

[Timmymagic]

Announcement on what frigate the RAN will go for is due next week.. I know we don’t know what they’ll chose yet, but I highly doubt that the fiasco that has been HMG’s procurement of the T26s has done much to help BAE’s bid.. The author’s penning their bet on Navantia but we shall wait and see.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... 4zfgg.html

Navantia are definitely the front runner, but the author has clearly written it based on Navantia's press briefings. The points about the T26's ability in warmer waters or the fact that it wasn't entered in the US Frigate competition are genuinely bizarre, as is the point about Australia picking a non BAE offering for its MIV competition (the Boxer) and somehow linking that to the UK's decision on Boxer, whilst failing to note that the UK had been intimately involved in the development of it. He then goes on to imply that the UK might cancel T26...utterly bizarre.

The Australians will probably choose the Navantia design, because of the AWD and Juan Carlos decisions. It will deliver an inferior capability just as the AWD did over similarly priced offers (they could have had Burkes for less money). If they were serious about ASW it would be the T26...

[CameronPerson]

Navantia are definitely the front runner, but the author has clearly written it based on Navantia's press briefings. The points about the T26's ability in warmer waters or the fact that it wasn't entered in the US Frigate competition are genuinely bizarre

He seems to have confused Type 45 issues with T26, but you’re right it’s no way his only mistake. I agree with your prediction that Navantia will get it, I think a BAE win would be brilliant for both the RAN and BAE but to me it just seems unlikely at this point.

[Tempest414]

I have my fingers crossed for type 26 as it would great to see a Commonwealth task group with 6 type 26s in it 2 x RAN 2 x RCN 2 x RN

[inch]

Think you are going tohave to be happy just to see 2 rn type 26 in that task group tempest414 ,maybe 2 canadian. Well at least more chance than australian t26 .as ive said in australian thread ,australia tend not to go for uk kit like india ,more european and american big ticket items tbh .like a few on here its not happening folks its prob navantia with outside chance fremm ,thats the choice think

[shark bait]

Who the hell is paying off that author? I guarantee the T26 produces more power than FREMM in hot environments, and some how he's claiming its the slowest. Pffffftt!

Plus the T26 has 72 vertical launched missile silos, more than the others. The last 2 paragraphs are full of bollocks.

I'll say its a race between Navantia and BAE.

[Roaringdragon]

72 VLS tubes? Just to clarify, it's 24 Mk41 Strike Length VLS Tubes and 48 SeaCeptor VLS tubes. The Australians though, I think, aren't procuring Sea Ceptor and instead, will be exclusively Mk41 VLS only. I imagine this would reduce the total capacity to a total of 36 Mk41 VLS tubes overall.

[Timmymagic]

I imagine this would reduce the total capacity to a total of 36 Mk41 VLS tubes overall.

Only if they were looking for Strike Length only. If they retained 24 Strike Length there's no reason they couldn't go for 48 mk.42 just for ESSM.

[Roaringdragon]

But that's not quite the same as it merely means that the ESSM are quad-packed into a single VLS Tube.

[matt00773]

Navantia are definitely the front runner, but the author has clearly written it based on Navantia's press briefings. The points about the T26's ability in warmer waters or the fact that it wasn't entered in the US Frigate competition are genuinely bizarre, as is the point about Australia picking a non BAE offering for its MIV competition (the Boxer) and somehow linking that to the UK's decision on Boxer, whilst failing to note that the UK had been intimately involved in the development of it. He then goes on to imply that the UK might cancel T26...utterly bizarre.

The Australians will probably choose the Navantia design, because of the AWD and Juan Carlos decisions. It will deliver an inferior capability just as the AWD did over similarly priced offers (they could have had Burkes for less money). If they were serious about ASW it would be the T26...

I'm not convinced Navantia are the front runner everyone is claiming them to be. When you read articles written by RAN officers, there's only the Type 26 which they talk about - it's the one they want. The Australian defence minster Pyne recently stated that the decision on SEA 5000 would all be based on the capability of the vessel, and that would align with the approach and decision on the submarine programme.

On the article, it's clearly a load of horse dung written by someone who lacks basic understanding on naval matters. The idea that you can simply drag a TAS out the back on any ship to have credible ASW capability is complete nonsense. The thrust of the F-5000 ASW capability argument seems to be based on this false premise.

One other thing to mention is the announcements of MOUs between SEA 5000 bidders and Australian industry partners. There was another one announced yesterday between RR and Marland on the MT30 engine. If you look back over the last several weeks, these type of announcements from Navantia have dried up and there are only now general statements to the Australian government - one of them a full page newspaper ad. I'm one to read between the lines and I think this tells us something.

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/marit ... -major-oem

Whatever happens this is all very exciting. I just happen to be in Australia at the moment and will be looking forward to the announcement.

[Luke jones]

Has the date for the Aussie announcement been confirmed yet?

[Gabriele]

As early as tuesday/Wednesday next week, according to some reports.

[Roaringdragon]

I wouldn't hold my breath on that. It was originally March which then became April and I thought I had read somewhere that an announcement would not be until June or July now!

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[matt00773]

Has the date for the Aussie announcement been confirmed yet?

The situation is that the Australian defence committee will meet next Tuesday to discuss the SEA 5000 programme. If there's a clear competition winner then the committe will be expected to automatically approve the winning design - and perhaps be announced the next day. If the competition was close, then the committee may be asked to choose between the designs and this may take longer as they'll have to evaluate and prioritize aspects of the bids - this process could take any amount of time.

[Luke jones]

Has the date for the Aussie announcement been confirmed yet?

The situation is that the Australian defence committee will meet next Tuesday to discuss the SEA 5000 programme. If there's a clear competition winner then the committe will be expected to automatically approve the winning design - and perhaps be announced the next day. If the competition was close, then the committee may be asked to choose between the designs and this may take longer as they'll have to evaluate and prioritize aspects of the bids - this process could take any amount of time.

Thanks for the info

[matt00773]

Here's another article on the impending SEA 5000 decision, which also states that T26 is the front-runner - not sure how much truth there is to that:

http://www.afr.com/news/bae-frontrunner ... 518-h1084i

[jonas]

Here's another article on the impending SEA 5000 decision, which also states that T26 is the front-runner - not sure how much truth there is to that:

http://www.afr.com/news/bae-frontrunner ... 518-h1084i

I would say that if it was a decsion made by the RAN, then the T26 may well have its nose in front. However left to the politicians, then due to commonality, costs, and having experience of working with Navantia recently then I think they will have the edge.

[R686]

Here's another article on the impending SEA 5000 decision, which also states that T26 is the front-runner - not sure how much truth there is to that:

http://www.afr.com/news/bae-frontrunner ... 518-h1084i

I would say that if it was a decsion made by the RAN, then the T26 may well have its nose in front. However left to the politicians, then due to commonality, costs, and having experience of working with Navantia recently then I think they will have the edge.

Agree 100%, we saw that with the AWD RAN wanted Baby Burkes but got the Spanish ship and sold to RAN with the option of a 4th which as we know didn't eventuate.

[inch]

think its going to be navantia all the way r686/Jonas also ,not sure the politicians like in all countries really go with what there forces would go for ,its usually whats best for them

[R686]

think its going to be navantia all the way r686/Jonas also ,not sure the politicians like in all countries really go with what there forces would go for ,its usually whats best for them

I still think it can go either way, but unlike the Collins replacement this project goes to the heart of political perceptions in regards to shipbuilding narrative and jobs themselves in the short term, they want what's best for the RAN but the political landscape will cloud the decision making thought due to a federal election next year.

[jonas]

think its going to be navantia all the way r686/Jonas also ,not sure the politicians like in all countries really go with what there forces would go for ,its usually whats best for them

I still think it can go either way, but unlike the Collins replacement this project goes to the heart of political perceptions in regards to shipbuilding narrative and jobs themselves in the short term, they want what's best for the RAN but the political landscape will cloud the decision making thought due to a federal election next year.

Do you have any idea in regards to the author of this article, he certainly seems to be quite anti the BAE offering. Indeed some of his comments on the T26 are either completely straight forward bias, or he doesn't really have much idea of what he is talking about.:-

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal ... ginAction=[object%20Object]

[Timmymagic]

o you have any idea in regards to the author of this article, he certainly seems to be quite anti the BAE offering. Indeed some of his comments on the T26 are either completely straight forward bias, or he doesn't really have much idea of what he is talking about.:-

He must have been on the payroll, he's certainly been on a jolly with Fincantieri...the points about the T-26's performance in the Med in particular is garbage as is the question of why it wasn't entered in the USN's competition. He also somehow manages to avoid the Canadian competition of which the FREMM has already been excluded, a competition much closer to Australia's in intent, run by a Navy who take ASW as seriously as the RN..

[ArmChairCivvy]

That SMH article is the second one I have come across that grossly inflates the virtues of the Navantia offering (the first one did it by talking about things that were not within and/or primary in the RFP). But rather than putting the above linked article down to lobbying (like the first one), I think it is a circulation ploy - as the decision is imminent - and the article has been commissioned to be one sided. Just look at the leading-in sentence about becoming an "outstation". And in the comments (did not read them all), the "empire" strikes back, by Peter50:

"There a couple of points here that are contentious. Navantia is responsible for the LHD's and AWD's both of which were over budget and in the case of the LHD's will never perform as specified, by large margins. It would not be unfair to describe the LHDs as white elephants and the AWDs as money pits. Most of the problems can be laid at the door of Navantia's antiquated design and project management systems. These might work in a single yard where the designers talk to the builders every day and everyone understands the operating environment the ships will work in. They clearly have not worked on the other side of the world where the LHD propulsion system has turned out to be very unreliable and we are now on the 3rd attempt to build landing craft which will do the job the ship was supposed to do. In the case of the AWD's drawings and logistical messes delayed the project and local content numbers were only achieved because the labour content was 3-4 times what it should have been. Any rational assessment of their failures would have precluded Navantia from even bidding on this project.

Then there is the budget. The Italians are spending about A$1 b per ship on the FREMM. We are budgeting about $3.9 b.
We appear to be spending about $400 b on modernising the Adelaide shipyard when we have facilities in Victoria and Newcastle standing idle..."

So it is nice to see they debate the alternatives over there with the same passion as what is done over these pages