Type 26 Frigate

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
So lots of redesign work to fit different systems, a process which was such a success with their submarines (and our Chinooks).
 
So lots of redesign work to fit different systems, a process which was such a success with their submarines (and our Chinooks).

The design was designed from the ground up as a systems agnostic platform with all the players getting a say in the design process.
 
So not an export
Designs exported and possibly a fair chunk of the Canadian specific design work plus certification of Canadian mods

In terms of profit the actual build isn't that significant - of course if the UK can secure build orders whilst it may not make Bae much money it is work for the shipyards etc
 
So not an export
Of course it is. License production will involve significant revenue being accrued in the UK via the licensing as well as actual production of systems and sub-components for the Canadian shipyards.

Likewise, the Hawk was exported to India via licensed production and has earned £Bs for the UK.

Regards,
MM
 
Designs exported and possibly a fair chunk of the Canadian specific design work plus certification of Canadian mods

In terms of profit the actual build isn't that significant - of course if the UK can secure build orders whilst it may not make Bae much money it is work for the shipyards etc
And jobs
 
Without me going back over 200 pages, has the design been anywhere near finalised for T26?
 
Of course it is. License production will involve significant revenue being accrued in the UK via the licensing as well as actual production of systems and sub-components for the Canadian shipyards. (...)
  • UK companies will have their components designed in already, and that includes after sales parts and service as well as the original build.
  • BAE will be doing engineering work to equip the ship to Canada's specifications.
  • BAE will be getting a large payment for the use of their design, and that money supports engineering design jobs in the UK.
  • The larger user base will lower cost as the fixed costs of R&D and design are spread over a larger number of ships.
  • The ship will gain more credibility in other export markets now that the ship has been chosen by three advanced navies.
  • The first three ships are supposed to be an air defence/command version, something that was planned for but which the UK has not bought for themselves. This contract will get that version fully developed and added to the BAE sales portfolio for other markets.
To put this in another perspective, any advanced industrial country which is going to buy twice as many ships as the UK is going to build for themselves is probably going to build them in their own yard one way or another. Every credible western alternative was bidding on this contract, but it was won by a UK ship design.
 
But, aren't they all her majesty's ships in the end? :smile:
Yes but they provide jobs for Canadian admirals not British ones, and imagine the possibility that, since they provided most of the ships the UK ones had to be commanded by a Canadian admiral. Nelson would be rolling in his grave.
 
The long and the short of it is though is that the Canadian decision should be taken as another vote of confidence in the T-26 design. This follows the similar Australian decision. In Canada the T-26 was up against the best ships from France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark, and the Netherlands and came out on top. The US had nothing remotely credible to even offer.

This should be kept in mind when people are whinging and moaning about the cost and BAE and how much cheaper they think an Ivar Huitfeld would have been, etc. Canada and Australia each evaluated all of the viable alternatives and both came to the conclusion that the T-26 was the best on the market with respect to cost and capability.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top