The Type 26 Global Combat Ship has been officially chosen as the design for the Canadian Surface Combatant despite a legal challenge from a rival bidder, with the contract having now been awarded.

Canada follows Australia in selecting the Type 26 Frigate.

Irving Shipbuilding  is the Canadian Surface Combatant Prime Contractor to the Canadian Government for the build  of all 15 ships at its Halifax Shipyard.

This comes after Alion Canada, the company that pitched the Dutch-designed De Zeven Provincien class frigate for the competition, had asked for a judicial review of the tendering process that saw the Type 26 Frigate win the Canadian frigate competition, according to local media.

According to local media, the defence firm asked the court to set aside an October decision to select Lockheed Martin Canada the preferred bidder and to prevent the Canadian government from entering into negotiations with the company, which has offered up the BAE Systems designed Type 26 frigate.

Alion argued that the winning bid was “incapable of meeting three critical mandatory requirements” of the design tender. Specifically, they say the Type 26 cannot meet the mandatory speed requirements set out by the Royal Canadian Navy.

The challenge by Alion was rejected at the end of last month. An official statement read:

“The Canadian International Trade Tribunal has determined that Alion Science and Technology Canada Corporation and Alion Science and Technology Corporation did not have standing to file a complaint before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal.”

BAE Systems, CAE, L3 Technologies, MDA and Ultra Electronics have partnered with Lockheed Martin Canada in a successful offering to the Royal Canadian Navy of one of the most advanced and modern anti-submarine warships in the world.

The design is based upon the Type 26 Global Combat Ship with GLASGOW, first in class, currently in build for the Royal Navy at BAE Systems’ shipyard in Glasgow.

Andrew Wolstenholme, Group Managing Director, BAE Systems Maritime and Land UK, said:

“The selection of the Type 26 design for the Canadian Surface Combatant reinforces its position as one of the world’s most advanced anti-submarine warships and showcases the strength of British innovation on the global stage.

This is great news for the company, the sector and our Naval Ships business and continues to build on our recent success in Australia for the Hunter Class Frigate programme. It provides solid foundations within the export market and demonstrates the excellent design of the Global Combat Ship.”

BAE say that the Type 26 Global Combat Ship is a globally deployable multi-role warship that meets the distinctive mission requirements of the Royal Canadian Navy.

International Trade Secretary, Dr Liam Fox MP, said:

“It is fantastic that the Canadian Government has selected Lockheed Martin Canada, using BAE Systems’ innovative Type 26 Global Combat Ship design. I am aware that this has been a very competitive process, and this outcome is testament to the importance of the deep UK-Canada defence and security relationship.

The announcement will bring further prosperity to both nations and is another demonstration of the success of BAE Systems’ Type 26 Global Combat Ship design, after it was recently chosen as the winning design for a contract with the Royal Australian Navy.”

Defence Secretary, Gavin Williamson, said:

“Canada’s selection of our cutting-edge Type 26 Global Combat Ship design for their future frigate programme shows that Britain remains a world leader in maritime design and technology.

As a valued NATO and Five Eyes partner, Canada’s decision demonstrates our close and historic relationship, and this news will ensure our defence partnership continues to thrive for generations to come.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

55 COMMENTS

  3. Not unrelated. I read on defense news website that the even though competitive design process in under way for the USN FFGX, BAe may still be invited to enter. If so its good news to have the T26 considered by the USN. One other interesting point was that the Navy had started with a sticker price of $950m per unit but industry has told them it can be done for $800m, so holding a competition is working well for the USN. The down side for BAe is producing a T26 for $800m is probably a non starter.

      • Not necessarily. The budget for each FFG X is what, around $900mn each I think? Produced in bulk, with standardised US equipment, it’s feasible that a T26 derivative could come in at the high end of the price bracket.

        Bear in mind that the USN has expressed a desire in the past for a standardised frigate between its closest allies (or at least a standardised template like the Dutch and Germans did). Lower running costs and improved logistics of a class of around 50 are a big tick in the T26s favour

        • The 26 is not far short of a Burke in terms of size and weight so I don’t think its what they want which is a lower end combatant to compliment the Destroyer,Cruiser force.Their type 31 in effect but much better armed with a realistic budget.I have seen a number of podcasts by US admirals talking about this and its an LCS plus they are interested in.

      • From what I’ve read, the FFGX program is partially to replace their remaining Ticonderoga class Cruisers. They do want something big for future growth of capabilities. They also would like something like 30 knots out of the FFGX to keep up with their aircraft carriers. The T26 may actually have an edge as it has already been chosen by 3 for the five eyes countries.

  4. Canada will have one of the best frigate fleets on earth or possibly the best. But will it be a mix of air defence frigates and anti submarine roles for them?

      • Out of curiosity does any one know the range of the air defence of the three different variants? I know the Hunter class with the CEAFAR2 is meant to be loaded with a mix of ESSM Block II’s and SM-2’s so would indicate a radar range of give or take 150km, What about the British and Canadians?

    • Cam Hunter: Yes, the 15 CSC Frigates will be a mixture of AAW/ASW Frigates. Probably the first 3 ships will be AAW orientated, with the other 12 being ASW ships just as the BAE Type 26 design will be. Some major weapons systems will be the same (think 5″ gun, 30mm and CIWS) however there may be changes to add more VLS Cells to accommodate more advanced Surface to Surface and BMD systems. The advanced radar systems may be different as well. Secondary radar systems will probably be the same. Most “systems” on board already come from the U.S. This is a fantastic day for not only Canada, but it vindicates the Type 26 for both Australia’s Hunter Class and the U.K.s City Class! Does this decision give more credence to a U.S Type 26 future FXX? Perhaps, but I would not count on it. Some people suggest that this decision was hastily made, but I believe it was time and past due! The RCN must be very happy today with this decision. I believe Irving Shipyard will start the first CSC build around early 2022.

  5. Do we have any idea of approximately how much equipment on board will be built in the UK? Will any of the ships training needs be from all 3 nations involved be based here to save money?

    • Gas turbine,gearbox,30 mm guns,stabilizers,not sure what else probably elements of the electrical systems, electric motors.Think the shaftlines come from France.Ironically the U.S. is probably the biggest supplier on this ship.

      • No Dysons on RN vessels.
        The RN favorite , complete with NATO stock number is a Henry the Hoover, complete with eyes and mouth stickers.
        It fits perfectly under the mess deck seat stowage.

        And its pretty much matelot proof which is another massive factor.

    • Anti-ship deep fat fryers, surface to air microwave ovens & my mums speciality: the anti-personnel toasted sandwich.

      But seriously, while it is great news that Canada will take our T26 design, we still only get less than half the ships that they plan. We really need a lot more than 8 top rank ASW ships as an Island trading nation.

  7. Are there any photos or other progress reports on how the build of Glasgow is coming on? I had thought that she might be close to launch by the end of this year, even given the leisurely timescale of the programme.

    • Due to be structurally complete at the end of this year but float out is not till sometime in 2021.Due to start trials in 2025 and in service 2027.Follow on ships 18 month’s behind to align with Type 23 retirements.

      • That’s a crazy slow time for a frigate to be built and operational! 8-9 years, they could be built 1 a year if we had the balls to do so and spend the money that the navy needs.

        • fwiw back in the day we built the Polaris SSBN boats in half that time, average around 4.5 years, which shows what we can do if there is some sense of urgency. And I rather doubt you can cite increased complexity of the T26 versus an SSBN.

        • There is a reason for this. Gives time to learn lessons, fix any mistakes and modify the design if needed. Cheaper and easier to do during the build rather then complete then find and issue and have to bring it back and strip it back down to fix. Also should be noted the size of the RN much smaller then back then so they need to spread the builds out to keep it continuous which keeps the work force employed which keeps the skill and knowledge in place so that if s*** ever does hit the fan you have the industry in place to ramp production up. Its the same as what Canada is planning to do and what Australia is in the process of implementing. Build them all 1 year after another and you end up with a decade long period of no ship production for surface combatants (which are far different from submarines and support ships) which means you lose that skill base that you have to rebuild a decade later at a much larger cost.

    • Nick, You took the Words out of my mouth. It’s really quiet on the net regarding Build and no Pictures at all, I’m getting worried We’ve all been Hoodwinked.

      • If only. A lot of lip service is paid to those considerations, but for reality look at what is happening right now: Babcock are making people redundant as the carrier build winds up, at the same time the new RFA vessels are both delayed and open to foreign yards. Plus, T31 making haste slowly whilst Appledore closes due to lack of orders.
        The reality is that decisions are Treasury driven and employment and skill retention are well down the list.

      • That is the reasoning for it. What the UK and many other nations in similar situations lack is forward planning by government in which while building one class they already should be planning the replacement of the next class ie: While production of Type 26 underway they should be starting the process into designing the replacement for the Type 45, When Type 45 replacement build starts they should start designing replacement for the Type 26 etc etc. The lack of that is what is causing the closure and current lay off’s in the UK.

  8. It’s slow progress. I have started writing to Councillors in shipbuilding area’s. Best response has been from Apple does worst from around Cammell Laird. 8 volts no one signed. Can but try

    • Not to damper your enthusiasm Sir, but the Type 26 is way too big for the RNZN, and too expensive for NZ. They would be better off with smaller Corvette or OPV ships with ASW capabilities, and a lot more of them.

      • Us Kiwi’s are currently building a $500 million 26000 tonne AOR twice the size of the Endeavour it will replace and have ordered four P-8A’s costing $2 billion, with its most recent Defence White Paper explicitly stating the need for high end frigates to replace their two Anzacs, which are currently having a $600m upgrade project underway in Vancouver. The Type 26 is well and truly on the RNZN’s radar with the selection by the RAN and RCN.

        • I understand that the latest NZ Defence White Paper was tabled in 2016. Whilst acknowledging that the 2x ANZAC frigates will be give half-life upgrades, there is only a reference to considering the options for their replacement in the future. I understand that this decision will be in 2023, when the threat profile, together with S&R and constablary roles will be challenged and (re)defined.

          Its all ahead of us, but it would surprise me that the NZ Govt would want to upscale to the Type 26 from the ANZAC (Miko) size. Possibly they would consider Type 23s, or more OPVs/Corvettes giving the RNZN greater humanitarian presence and capacity in the South Pacific.

          Just to also note that the new RNZN Endeavour AOR is being built in South Korea.

          • Also very likely that Australia will subsidize some of the cost for NZ for Australian built Type 26’s. Was done to some extent with the Anzac’s. For Australian government and military it would give an ally on our flank a capable asset while supporting Australian industry so they would be open to such an arrangement. As for Type 23’s NZ wouldnt even bother. By 2023 your youngest in fleet Type 23 will be 32 years old. NZ would still have to pay a few hundred million fora refit to get a hand full of years out of her, Waste of money.

  10. Cam Hunter: Yes, the 15 CSC Frigates will be a mixture of AAW/ASW Frigates. Probably the first 3 ships will be AAW orientated, with the other 12 being ASW ships just as the BAE Type 26 design will be. Some major weapons systems will be the same (think 5″ gun, 30mm and CIWS) however there may be changes to add more VLS Cells to accommodate more advanced Surface to Surface and BMD systems. The advanced radar systems may be different as well. Secondary radar systems will probably be the same. Most “systems” on board already come from the U.S. This is a fantastic day for not only Canada, but it vindicates the Type 26 for both Australia’s Hunter Class and the U.K.s City Class! Does this decision give more credence to a U.S Type 26 future FXX? Perhaps, but I would not count on it. Some people suggest that this decision was hastily made, but I believe it was time and past due! The RCN must be very happy today with this decision. I believe Irving Shipyard will start the first CSC build around early 2022.

    • Shed loads, but you can bet your bottom that it will in no way be used to offset any costs to the British taxpayers in the development or purchase of our type 26s.

    • Thanks for the info Mate, I agree that it’s a great day for Canada OZ and the UK. We should collaborate more in future with our surface fleets, obviously Canada and OZ don’t want nuclear submarines but the UK should invest in some cheaper conventionally powered submarines to go with the Astute’s and Drednoughts

      • Not sure conventional boats would suit the UK, Only so much budget and manpower so any addition of conventional boats would be at the expense of the nuke fleet. Be better off assisting Canada in rebuilding her submarine fleet ideally with same or similar submarines Australia is acquiring.

    • The CSC will support RAM (SeaRAM), ESSM, SM2-MR, SM6, Tomahawk, and an unknown anti-ship missile (like Harpoon). It will have at least 32 mk41 VLS cells (possibly 40 on the first three), will use the Aegis CMS, most likely with the Canadian-developed CMS (CMS330) as the interface, and an advanced four-panel AESA radar (unknown at this point). It will carry the CH-148 Cyclone, which is probably the most advanced maritime helicopter in the world, and an advanced suite of sonars (bow-mounted and towed-array). It will also have an anti-torpedo system, most likely the locally developed Sea Spider. This will probably be the most capable T26 variant.

      • Hi Seven Seas. Love your thinking. I would however give the first 3 or 4 Type 26’s at least 48 MK 41 VLS Cells and don’t forget about a BMD capability for the first AAW ones as well. I would also bet on the SPY 1(D) radar as a minimum with perhaps some sort of future Laser weapons system along with some sort of “Harpoonski”. Don’t forget that the SM-6 has an SSM mode as well.

  12. No. Built in Canada by a Canadian company. The only American involvement was LM being contracted to select the design to be used.

  13. Nothing really to stop these being a full spectrum asset, it has enough silo’s to provide Ballistic AAW, and a hull to be the best ASW asset on the planet. It’s a good size and really good fit out.

    Realistically, swapping the sea captor VLS for more Mk41 will really be the defining change as an additional 48 mk41 would really make this a very capable asset, as it would for the UK.

    Even with 48 Sea Ceptor and 24 Mk41 strike this is a very good load out.

    Really think the uk should order 13 T26 in total, upgrade the radar and VLS and make it the T45 replacement. By the time they are finished the first batch T45 will be end of life. Time to really be strategic here and place a forward order.

  14. I can see Glasgow being built in Govan, looks impressive although it looks like it’s split into 2 blocks and hidden in the big shed over there.

  15. It will be similar to the contract for the Aussie T26 buy. It will be built in Canada by Lockheed Martin Canada at their Halifax shipyards. The Prime Contractor is Irving Shipyards of Canada. BAE will be providing the design and will be the prime subcontractor to Lockheed Martin Canada.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here