If type 26 is chosen (if!), as our navy is ordering more hulls than RN (9 vs 8) will that make us have a bigger say in aspects such as final design, schedule priority or work share?
I would say the RAN would have significant input into the design and have had so, since its inception.
Key advantages of the Type 26 IMO:
- Its bigger. Its been steadily packing on volume and now seems to have more beam than a Burke. While slightly shorter than a Burke, theres not much in it, and in terms of growth room, its apparently over "8000+t" (which is getting close to type 45 size). Plenty of growth room.. It would be able to handle pretty massive radars located pretty high up. A very significant missile load out etc. Its wider and longer than a F-125 for example.
- Its more modern. F-100 series is ancient. FREMM is also pretty old. Type 26 crew at ~110, would indicate more automation over even a F-125. MT30 40MW GT, pool of diesels, it is arguably the most modern setup. The single more powerful GT will mean lower operating costs compared to twin GT (or quad) setups. The 4 diesels will mean lower costs (less gt), greater range, more electrical capacity. Electrical capacity will be miles more modern, suitable for ships of the future with high energy weapon and systems. Even for things like HVAC.
Operating costs ($'s, manpower, availability etc) are going to be quite difficult to beat. Particularly over a large fleet of say 9 ships.
The Type 26 is the dark horse in this race IMO. It would be worth looking at it hard. Something like this fitted with 64+VLS, full spec AUSPAR radar (and the electricity generation to support any sort of radar you wanted), all the assorted systems, would make for a very powerful "frigate". With all the other features we were looking for in a frigate. The money saved over the life of the ships would be massive.
Given the choice between an Type 26 and F-125, with the same level of risk, I can see why you might wait out for the Type 26.
Of course we would have a problem where our frigates are bigger (significantly), better armed and more capable than our destroyer, but I'm sure the RAN can deal with this. Perhaps name them a destroyer as well.
In the geopolitical environment at the moment, I personally would be getting the biggest, most capable and best equipment I can. Particularly if in the long run it will save money.
While the F-105 hull is the quickest and cheapest to procure, if we were to ditch it, ditch it for something much improved. I would probably look at building the F-105 successor on that type of hull. The type 26 you could build an AWD successor off that hull.