BAE Systems Maritime recently hosted Eirik Lie, President of Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace, along with his leadership team, at their Glasgow shipyard.
The visit centred on showcasing the Type 26 Global Combat Ship and exploring potential areas of collaboration between the two leading defence companies.
In a statement posted on social media, BAE Systems Maritime said:
“We were delighted to host Eirik Lie, President of Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace and their leadership team to our Glasgow shipyard last week. We showed them the Type 26 Global Combat Ship and discussed areas of collaboration for both companies going forward.”
The Type 26 Global Combat Ship, currently under construction at the Glasgow yard, represents a major advancement in naval technology. Designed primarily for anti-submarine warfare, the ship is equipped with multi-role capabilities, making it a key asset for modern naval forces.
BAE Systems’ programme has already gained international traction, with Australia and Canada adopting the design for their own fleets.
Kongsberg Vanguard in exchange for T26?
This is definitely something to do with the Norway offer, at least.
Good thought. Replace some or all of Enterprise, Echo, River1, Sterling Castle and Proteus with UK custom Vanguard.
I’d like to see the RN T26s have the option of 2×4 NSM mounts on above hangar deck like the Australian and Canadian T26s, even if FFBNW. It’ll free up the MK41s and compliment FCASW.
Always good to have options – if budgets support that.
Ultimately I see NSM on T31 and T45 but it could be that the control systems are on all RN escorts and that the box launchers are craned onto the ones being deployed.
So all you really need are cable routes, hard points to fix the racks to [with structural reinforcement] and fire fighting and suppression plumbed in.
Thing is that with 13 new frigates arriving over the next few years and getting all the T45s working again shortly [hooefully] it is engineering manpower that is the issue and
The Navy seemed to be talking about a more military than civil MRSS, something more fight adapted. I’m not sure Vangard is that. Wiki says it has no hangar, but I checked out a video that says it does. Any idea which is true?
There are different Versions proposed for different prime purposes. On their website Kongsberg show a version with a hanger.
I think the RN want 3x large LPDs for MRSS so we retain a significant expeditionary capability. If you design it carefully I can imagine a Vanguard which can combine patrol, mcmv mother ship and undersea cable protection roles. Build it to cheaper commercial standards ( rather than T31) and offshore the construction. Use UK shipbuilding to focus on combat ships: T26 and T31.
The original frigate spec from Norway was to take an identical design to one in service and have it built and maintained in an allied country. If you are right about this being something to do with the T26 candidacy (and that’s certainly where the mind goes) might this mean they now want to make it more Norwegian? I can’t see it being anything as prosaic as just NSM for T26.
It feels like a positive sign whatever it is.
I’d like to see the RN T26s have the option of 2×4 NSM mounts on above hangar deck like the Australian and Canadian T26s, even if FFBNW. It’ll free up the MK41s and compliment FCASW.
I’d rather invest in an ASROC than NSM for T26.
We already have FC/ASW for the anti ship role and the frigate is still limited in its ASW primary purpose in that it has no means of killing a sub beyond the Merlin on board.
With you SB, yes, 2×4 NSM on the upper deck and Asroc in the mk41s! Plus or just 8xFC/ASW…when it arrives.
Sorry for the duplication!
Bring back the County Class Destroyers like Devonshire, Hampshire, Kent, Glamorgan,etc. great ships with the provern ability to perform in action
Is that a joke?
You want 1960s destroyers firing radar beam guided Sea Slug?
T31 is a better air defence escort, whatever level of fitout the MoD give it.