The UK will need to place additional Type 26 frigate orders after the government confirmed that build slots currently allocated to the Royal Navy are being transferred to Norway, leaving a gap that has not yet been addressed and which will be a consideration of the forthcoming Defence Investment Plan.
The detail emerged in a parliamentary answer from Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry Luke Pollard on 22 April, in which he confirmed that 13 frigates were ordered between 2010 and 2024 across the Type 26 and Type 31 programmes, adding that of the Type 26 slots “a number have been ceded as part of the Norwegian deal” and that “the delta is yet to be made up through additional orders, and this will be a consideration of the Defence Investment Plan.”
The transfer was first officially confirmed in February, when Pollard told parliament the UK was “working together with our Norwegian partners” and “assessing options for offering Type 26 build slots currently allocated to the Royal Navy to the Royal Norwegian Navy.” At that point Pollard also confirmed the Royal Navy’s total would not be reduced, stating “the Royal Navy will receive all eight Type 26 ships during the late 2020s and 2030s as planned”, and describing the intended outcome as a combined fleet of “eight British and at least five Norwegian” ships operating jointly in northern Europe where “the only difference between a Royal Navy Type 26 and a Norwegian Type 26 will be the language on the signs.”
The eight-ship commitment has nonetheless come under scrutiny, with Conservative MP Dr Andrew Murrison telling the Commons that “well-placed sources are suggesting that the number of Type 26 hulls on the order book may be reduced or transferred to our Norwegian allies”, and asking Pollard to confirm that the government would “proceed with a minimum of eight Type 26 frigates, particularly given the increase in Russian submarine activity” discussed earlier that week.
Pollard’s response was unequivocal, asked directly whether he could confirm a minimum of eight, he replied “I can indeed“, before going further and describing the Norway arrangement in some detail, saying the deal “sustains Type 26 production on the Clyde for many years to come and involves not only the eight British Royal Navy Type 26s but five Norwegian ones”, adding that “we are currently working with Norway on build slots” and that the result would be “a truly interoperable, interchangeable force” where “the only difference between a Royal Navy Type 26 and a Norwegian Type 26 will be the language on the signs.”
Pollard also said the Norway deal was “part of an agreement about how we can work more closely with our joint expeditionary force allies in northern Europe” and that he hoped it “can be expanded to other nations as we look to sell the Type 31 frigates to more of our partners.”
The commitment was also given previously in a written answer from Al Carns MP in March 2026, who confirmed that “the Type 26 programme will deliver eight anti-submarine warfare frigates for the Royal Navy, which are designed primarily for operations in the North Atlantic and will form a core component of the Atlantic Bastion concept”.
It is worth noting that because Norway is paying for the slots it receives, no money already committed to the Type 26 programme is necessarily lost, and the additional orders needed to get the Royal Navy back to eight ships are expected to be handled through the Defence Investment Plan as spending plans are recalculated, though the practical consequence either way is that the Royal Navy’s later Type 26s are likely to arrive later than originally planned, putting additional pressure on the retirement schedule of the Type 23 frigates they are intended to replace.
There is a broader argument that the flag on individual hulls matters less in the North Atlantic than the total number of capable anti-submarine warfare frigates operating together in that theatre, and the Lunna House Agreement signed in December 2025 is explicitly built around that logic, committing the Royal Navy and Royal Norwegian Navy to operate as a single interchangeable fleet where crews train together, share maintenance and operate virtually identical ships.
From a NATO perspective, a combined force of 13 identical frigates working as one coherent anti-submarine warfare capability across the GIUK gap and Norwegian Sea may represent a more meaningful contribution than eight purely national hulls operating alongside Norwegian ships of a different type, and the agreement has been welcomed by many in defence precisely because it moves beyond the kind of paper interoperability that characterises much of NATO’s surface fleet toward something closer to genuine integration.
The position as it stands is therefore that the Royal Navy’s eight-ship requirement is confirmed and has been stated repeatedly at ministerial level, that at least one hull already in build is expected to be reallocated to Norway to meet the Norwegian requirement for early delivery, and that the additional orders needed to replace those slots and get the UK back to eight have not yet been placed, with the Defence Investment Plan the stated vehicle for resolving that, a document that was originally expected last autumn and for which no publication date has yet been announced.
Just avoid giving the tabloids and Internet commentariat anything to get their teeth into, and confirm that they’ll be replaced. Because, they are being replaced, right?
*Just to avoid anyone going off at me – Pollard has confirmed as recently as last week that eight will be procured. Not sure why the language of ‘consideration’ needs to be used, then.
George is absolutely right to point out the significant change in semantics.
Those slight semantic changes are a very typical drafting trick to disguise
a policy pivot.
In the present defence media frenzy George pointing this out might
actually save the T26 program. Things really are that bad.
There is no point in sugar coating things. There isn’t remotely enough
money. No real uplifts have been given so damaging cuts continue.
Yes im not convince defence spending is invreasing this year if the mod was asked to find around 3 billion in savings. All very dissapointing and the current govt still getting away with not spending and not showing there hand in defence
SB, I’m not saying that George shouldn’t be using ‘consideration’ – he’s absolutely in the right to do that. I’m saying that Pollard shouldn’t be using it.
So our boys have to serve in ageing rust buckets for longer. Ps is Norway coming to our aid if we have an out of Nato emergency like the Falklands
I think the existing t23 us getting scrapped asap despite desperste shortage of ships. I think tge navy is do small mow that im not convinced a surface gleet to defend zfalklands is now practical. We have what about 4 frigste desyroyers in workong order and thsts about it
I’ve noticed George’s writing becoming more overtly critical over the past few weeks. I’d assumed he was holding back in order to retain the closeness to official sources, perhaps that doesn’t matter given that so much of industry has come out for increased spending?
Now that Robertson has broken cover and everyone else had piled in behind him there isn’t any wool left to pull over people’s eyes.
Maybe DIP will be an investment in more wool?
I wouldn’t frame it as criticism to be honest, my job isn’t to be positive or negative about anything, it’s just to accurately report what’s happening. If that comes across as critical, sometimes it’s because the facts are what they are, I don’t get to choose them. We do have a good relationship with official sources and I’d like to think that’s because we report fairly and accurately, including when it reflects badly on them. I think I’d actually be respected less if I didn’t do my job propoerly. Besides, they’re not paying our bills, the readers are. Would you read the site if it was just PR?
If it’s this Type 26 story you’re thinking of though, I’d push back a bit on that one. Every claim in it comes straight from a parliamentary answer or ministerial statement. Slots ceded, replacement orders not placed, Defence Investment Plan with no publication date etc etc, that’s all the government’s own words.
Now that there is official acknowledgment that there will be a third batch of 26’s perhaps we could have an article giving an update on the programme. Such as when Glasgow is expected to start trials, and when ship 3 is going to be rolled out. It will be a good day when we can see a photo of Glasgow anchored at Tail of the Bank, or better yet full out on the measured mile on Arran.
All fair and reasonable. .
About the Edit function, so we can do our “job propoerly” please?
I’m exhausted, I’m leaving that there as evidence that I’m crap at my job.
@George – you are doing exactly the right thing simply putting accurate verbatim quotes together into a coherent story.
It simply puts the onus on HMG to tell a more coherent story.
There is an old saying, ’XYZ was clearly stated in the press’ – nobody denied it so the clear deduction is that it is true.
Better crack on with batch 2 of the type 31 programme, they’ll need bow sonar, towed arrays potentially and a medium gun.
I don’t mind the type 26s going abroad as that has happened before with French and Italian frigates but the UK needs to order replacements pronto.
I would be happy just to see a second batch with the same fit as the first. Costs are well known and there will be commonality of spares and training. I think it is unlikely that Bae can crank up the output rate of 26’s so there will be a gap in service entry given that at least two of the second batch will go to Norway. No doubt the Treasury are rubbing their hands at the prospect of spinning out the spend on that programme but we will still need new hulls, particularly since the last 23’s won’t be operational much longer. And yes the 31 is not optimal for ASW but the gap has to be filled. Once the 26 class is more complete the first 31’s can always be sold, which I think was the intention.
Absolutely. An immediate order for a further 5 ship batch of upgraded Type 31s would both clear the bottleneck created by the Norwegian commitment on the Clyde, and allow some room for export opportunities of the Type 31 design. Babcock need something to occupy their military capacity when the initial 5 ship. order is completed. Either use it or lose it.
So basically delay an order for a tier one ASW T26 and instead buy a second rate ship and call that a strategy – Jesus
The RN is in no position to accept any delays to the T26 programme. Why can’t they just knock extra ships at the shipyard simultaneously? Why not expand the yard and take on more workers? Surely it is not beyond the British state to get this yard humming.
It does make you wonder if Babcock could be utilized to ease the bottle neck – it would hardly be the first time we have split a class over different yards perhaps?
If RN slots are being given up to Norway that means that the Norwegians will be paying for those ships. As the ships have already been ordered, then surely no new money is required from the DIP as funds had already been budgeted for those ships. The only downside surely will be the timescale in which the latter Type 26s are delivered to the RN. Or am I missing something?
The ‘theory’ goes, because this is a convenient delineation between two T26 batches, the MoD could use this to cut the remaining three frigates.
Purely a way of saving money.
Because Norway is paying for the slots it receives, no money already committed to the Type 26 programme is necessarily lost, and the additional orders needed to get the Royal Navy back to eight ships may require only a reallocation of funds rather than significant new expenditure. The more immediate concern is timing rather than cost.
Given the parlous state of the RF Northern Fleet, and the real time collapse of the RF sovereign wealth fund, that just sold 22 tonnes of Gold, isn’t delay for UK funding a good decision when Norway has NATO North Atlantic responsibility like the Royal Navy so that’s covered and the DIP can address short term needs such as UAV countermeasures while keeping 8 vessels in the medium term?
In other words the timing works in UK favour while the Northern Fleet decays through corruption, incompetence and no funding…
I belive only batch one ( first 4) have been paid for Iain….
I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest, if the remaining 3 arn’t ordered with this useless government.
Great answer that answers nothing, agrees to nothing and its the stanard MOD press release under this Government of big words and saying a lot about nothing.
RN currently has 6 ASW and 1 GP Type 23 on the books. The 5 T31 replace the 5 GP we had. 8 T26 replace the remainder.
If the T31 don’t get going soon the Rivers, which are doing a sterling job, will start dropping too if we are not careful.
We need BOTH the T26 and T31 to be in service before any more “cups in the cupboard” get broken, so there is no point in splitting the manufacture for one over the other.
I’d rather Norway got 1 or 2 T26 before 2031 if they have trained crews ready to go.
Just build with whatever effectors we have ordered and accelerate the effort. The only hold up is the staged payments from HMG surely?
Not unexpected news.
Remember what this is all about. It’s about providing a robust ASW deterrent against Russia by having a force of 13 identical Type 26 Frigates, operated by two of the closest allies in NATO. There are lots to look forward to.
UKDJ, why do you print this stuff?
It is nonsense, you know it, we know it.
We print it because it’s directly sourced from ministerial parliamentary answers and confirmed by multiple written questions over the past month. The story is straightforward: the government has confirmed in parliament that Type 26 build slots allocated to the Royal Navy are being transferred to Norway, that the delta has not yet been made up through additional orders, and that this will be a consideration of the Defence Investment Plan. That is not speculation or analysis, it is what the minister told parliament. If you have a specific factual objection we are genuinely happy to look at it, but ‘it is nonsense’ without any supporting argument is not something we can engage with constructively, is it?
My supporting argument is that I am now retired and have far too much time to fester over this STUFF.
When I have finished this bottle of splendid white port I will probably not come back with another cutting reposte.
Another cutting riposte? Where was the first one?
Don’t start, I am chilling my next bottle.
My wife has “retired” I am “allowed”
Frankly this talk of “slots ceded” is Treasury double-speak The MOD has a contract for 8. Restructuring the delivery schedule does not change 8 to 6. Therefore there does not need to be any additional order.
What the minister is implying is that 2 ships will be sold by the MOD directly to Norway out of the RN fleet in a government to government deal. That’s not “ceding a slot” that’s flogging off two brand new ships
Pollard was explicit in the parliamentary answer that ‘the delta is yet to be made up through additional orders’ so regardless of the commercial mechanics of how the Norwegian transfer is structured, the minister himself has confirmed that the existing contract for eight ships will not deliver eight Royal Navy ships without further orders being placed.
I don’t doubt it and a great bit of reporting. Just saying it’s a cut by stealth that’s been snuck in under the radar, and obviously Treasury driven. You don’t need to reduce the order to meet Norway’s requirements, just tweak the schedule
It’s obvious what will happen from here – there are barely 6 T23s active, so the MOD will say “Here you go – like for like transition to 6 T26s”
I thought we needed the new T26 ships asap to replace the aging RN fleet. Surely supplying Norway with some of the earlier build T26 will delay the supply of the new T26 ships to the RN and exacerbate the aging fleet issue further.
Here’s an idea since we have already cut the steel of the 5th and last Type 31, we could order a couple more from Babcock to cover the gap then sell them to Brazil for £4.99 when we get all our Type 26’s in service?
Madness.
Here we go. I posted a few weeks ago that we would end up selling off part of our order and got critisized. Now, that is exactly what we are doing. Batch 1, if it can be called that, was scheduled for the early to mid 30’s and that was far too late. So what is the timescale now? 2040 perhaps. We will get 3/4 T26 in 5/7 years time. All the T23’s will be clapped out by then so we will have only four ASW frigates. Starmer, Reeves and their cronies are a disgrace to the country.
I think its NATO first now, and no distractions with far eastern cruises, it’s North Atlantic. So they will hope an identical Norwegian crewed ship does the ASW role regardless. The French have a newer fleet and seem happy to sweep for our ever lengthening Trident patrols. Both Norway and German P8s will be flying from Scotland when needed and the carriers will be focused North.
Trump looking at Greenland will prompt The Dutch and Danes to get more sea time.
Another T45 rejoins the fleet with CAMM at the end of the year and Daring will appear soon.
It’s interesting to see Germany order 8 sets of Spy-6 for it’s new airdefence ships which should add a much greater boost to the Northern flank after 2030 along with a much more modernised Northern NATO SSK fleet
Yes it’s too slow to build and the SSN availability needs sorting but our flank is probably one area that will get lots of attention.
A second batch of T31 would be a boost, particularly with drones that can deploy and process sonar buoys and maybe a sea krait array from its boats.