Royal Norwegian Navy (RNoN) News and Discussion
- Thread starter Systems Adict
- Start date
The main focus is on ASW and integration with a close NATO ally... since that close NATO ally turned out to be the UK, T26 it is. Yes air defense is the weak spot of the T26. Norway is in any case too small to operate independently. We need deep integration with the UK, Denmark, and other NATO allies that can provide AAW. Because we will not have much to offer in that regard. Norwegian ASW however should be top notch.
Overall, a good choice, in spite of the severe air defense limitations. Hopefully there will be an upgrade on air defense real soon.
Nice summary by navalnews: Norway selects British Type 26 frigates - Naval News
BAE is already trying to increase their production drumbeat to 1 T26 per year by hull #5 (~2032 delivery). There does not appear to be any scope for them to go faster/sooner, so even with some help from Vard potentially building a few basic hull modules, the assembly & fit out bottleneck will remain in the UK (as Vard’s building dock isn’t big enough).
So with the 9th T26 most likely not coming before 2035 - that will be the first net new build - anything before that will just be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Which is doubly a problem because due to shortsighted design requirements neither is the T26 RN well suited to AAW upgrades (which would require replacing the entire skinny sensor mast with a much more massive and heavy radar structure), nor is the T31 suited to ASW sonar upgrades. So the RN is stuck with a diminished fleet of flawed and not very versatile escorts.
A possibility , of course, would be to keep Babcock’s warship building viable, which it won’t be after about 2030 without more orders. Perhaps a couple more T31, or maybe there is actually going to be a T32 in a reasonable time frame. Interesting time are a coming.
It can carry longer-range missiles in the Mk41. The limiting factor is probably radar performance. From what I've read, Artisan is reckoned to be good, but is small, with limited range, & is a single faced rotator. Ordering for early delivery probably prevents a new radar initially, but it could be done later.
Some of type 26's build rate is driven by how fast the customer (HMG) wants to spend money I think - now the production is in full swing, there may be scope for some shortening of the build cycle. This would be normal for serial production - the first hulls always take a bit longer than the subsequent ones as folk are trying to work out how best to plug stuff together.
A researcher at the Norwegian Naval Academy (Strømmen) is critizising the T26 selection, highlighting two issues; the weak air defense, and also the availability issues the RN has had the last 20 years. Since Norway is ordering 5 frigates (could be increased to 6) availability is very important. Hopefully increased UK defense budgets will help reduce this issue; I am also hoping that if Norway and the UK will have the same platform they will share costs to maintain and upgrade and hopefully this will also improve the situation.
Another Norwegian analyst is also concerned that selecting a frigate from a non-EU country will not help Norway in becoming more integrated with the EU defense ecosystem. Not sure how big of an issue this is; even if both UK and Norway are outside of EU, I think EU will appreciate close defense collaboration with both UK and Norway. After all, compared to China/Russia and the US, EU is very weak. Norway is tiny but has a strategic position and is a very important producer of Energy. And even if the UK armed forces have become disturbingly weak, the UK still can contribute significantly to European defense.
– Ikke det beste valget
Another Norwegian analyst is also concerned that selecting a frigate from a non-EU country will not help Norway in becoming more integrated with the EU defense ecosystem. Not sure how big of an issue this is; even if both UK and Norway are outside of EU, I think EU will appreciate close defense collaboration with both UK and Norway. After all, compared to China/Russia and the US, EU is very weak. Norway is tiny but has a strategic position and is a very important producer of Energy. And even if the UK armed forces have become disturbingly weak, the UK still can contribute significantly to European defense.
– Ikke det beste valget
But not everyone agrees - – Et klokt og fornuftig valg
Retired naval officer Jacob Børresen thinks that it's the best for ASW, & for Norway that's important. The frigates won't operate alone & in the defence of Norway should be protected by land based air defence (presumably aircraft: AFAIK Norway has no long range SAMs). The commander of the Norwegian frigate squadron, Daniel Thomassen, agrees it's a good choice. Both like the mission bay.
Retired naval officer Jacob Børresen thinks that it's the best for ASW, & for Norway that's important. The frigates won't operate alone & in the defence of Norway should be protected by land based air defence (presumably aircraft: AFAIK Norway has no long range SAMs). The commander of the Norwegian frigate squadron, Daniel Thomassen, agrees it's a good choice. Both like the mission bay.
Yes I agree it's the best choice for the ASW role. Also the mission bay is great.
Hopefully the UK and other allies will be able to provide AAW resources to protect our frigates against ballistics / hypersonics since the T26 cannot do it themselves, unless they are significantly upgraded. I am not sure if Norwegian F-35 will be able to fully provide such protection, we have a limited number of F-35 and they will be very busy with other tasks as well in a war. The low number of AAW frigates in European NATO navies is also a bit of concern, they will be very busy in a war, there are many high value targets that will need protection.
Hopefully the UK and other allies will be able to provide AAW resources to protect our frigates against ballistics / hypersonics since the T26 cannot do it themselves, unless they are significantly upgraded. I am not sure if Norwegian F-35 will be able to fully provide such protection, we have a limited number of F-35 and they will be very busy with other tasks as well in a war. The low number of AAW frigates in European NATO navies is also a bit of concern, they will be very busy in a war, there are many high value targets that will need protection.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Sounds like he could do with changing jobs, he's talking nonsense.
- The availability problems the Royal Navy has had was over the ageing Type 23s and the Type 45s having a new propulsion system that unfortunately had design flaws. The Type 26 doesn't have either of those problems.
- The Type 26 has more than sufficient air defence potential thanks to the huge space for VLS cells. Artisan worked fine in the Red Sea (Type 23 frigate) engaging incoming missiles. What does he think his navy is going to be doing, sending its frigates half way around the world to fight the Chinese Navy?
- The F127 "frigate" is a destroyer and probably much too large for what Norway wanted. It's also not under construction, so would have arrived too late.
- The FDI is worse than the Type 26 in terms of ASW and AAW. It is fitted with Sylver launchers and can't fit more than 32 cells. There's little point having 4D AESA radar if you don't have plenty of missiles to fire off.
- The UK not being in the EU is irrelevant, because NATO is Europe's military alliance. The UK is an integral part of NATO, and Europe needs us especially for our naval capabilities. Norway cooperating with the UK is vital for Europe's maritime security, because we control the North Sea between us. Operating the same class of anti-submarine frigate will be very useful.
BAE says ta
The Australians are fitting 32 Mk 41 cells.
BAE's latest factsheet on Artisan calls the current production version Artisan 300, & says it's AESA & a significant upgrade from the original model, as installed on Type 23.
The Australians are fitting 32 Mk 41 cells.
To my knowledge Type 23 frigates did not engage ballistic missiles. The main issue with Type 26 air defense is that with the current configuration it seems not suitable to engage ballistic/hypersonic missiles. Thus it cannot self-escort in all situations. This is possible to address of course, and as you point out there is room for VLS cells however I believe the radar and combat management system needs to be updated. In addition, questions have been raised as to how well Type 26 can cope with saturation attacks consisting of drones and cruise missiles, which seems to become a highly relevant threat scenario.
The number of anti-ship ballistic missile systems will proliferate in the future. Russia don't have any operational today but they can either develop this themselves, or obtain them from China, India, or Iran, they all have antiship ballistic missile systems operational today. Anti-ship ballistic missile - Wikipedia
F127 is large but actually the number of people required to operate it is surprisingly low.
I agree that UK being outside of EU is not an issue in the context of purchasing and operating frigates. Overall I think Type 26 is a good choice and closer collaboration with the UK is good. Nevertheless I hope the UK and Norway can together address the anti-ship ballistic threat.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
Correct, I was confusing that with the Type 45. The Type 23 shot down drones. The base-line CAAM can't engage a ballistic missile, although the newer versions might be able to.
A self-escorting Norweigan Type 26 on an anti-
The only thing I'd add is that the Type 23 was fitted with an older version of Artisan. The current version, Artisan 300, is more sophisticated. Whether it's a big improvement I don't know. But it should be sufficient for Norway's needs, even in anti-air warfare.
Last edited:
Not sure what you mean by "anti-warfare mission". I agree Type 26 will be used for anti-submarine missions if a major war breaks out. If that anti-submarine mission is part of an escort, either civilian ships or carrier escort then of course there will be AAW frigates/destroyers also present to protect the high-value target.
However another important anti-submarine mission will be to close down the GIUK gap and make sure no hostile submarines are getting through. In this case only T-26 are needed to perform the core mission (which is not escort but purely anti-submarine) however as already pointed out the current T-26 are not able to handle attacks by ballistic/hypersonic missiles, and thus should be escorted by AAW frigates also in such a mission. If the T26 could be upgraded to also handle ballistic missiles it would be able to perform that high priority mission without being escorted by AAW frigate since the T26 would be fully able to self-escort. My point is that the T26 will be a high-value target and the enemy will always look for weak spots so we should make sure there are as few weak spots as possible. Since the number of AAW frigates are quite limited, it would be helpful if we can avoid having them escort the T26 frigates "all the time". The enemy always gets a vote.
Musashi_kenshin
Well-Known Member
That was a mis-type - I have amended it.
I think you're over-estimating the risk to the Type 26. No frigate can withstand by itself a determined missile strike, as it will just run out of missiles. If Russia wanted to sink a Norweigan frigate operating by itself, it could. There would be nothing anyone could do to stop it.
But it would be a cost-risk benefit analysis. Would Russia really want to burn several dozen anti-ship missiles, including expensive hypersonic/ballistic missiles, to sink one frigate? I don't think so. If it could do that, it would signify that it had huge missile stocks, enough to sink every ship in Europe's navy.
I think you're over-estimating the risk to the Type 26. No frigate can withstand by itself a determined missile strike, as it will just run out of missiles. If Russia wanted to sink a Norweigan frigate operating by itself, it could. There would be nothing anyone could do to stop it.
But it would be a cost-risk benefit analysis. Would Russia really want to burn several dozen anti-ship missiles, including expensive hypersonic/ballistic missiles, to sink one frigate? I don't think so. If it could do that, it would signify that it had huge missile stocks, enough to sink every ship in Europe's navy.