If it works out, we can buy them later. We neither have the time (due to the failure of the LCS) nor the money (due to the Zumwalts) to spend on waiting for the Type 26 to hit the water and get the bugs worked out.
We also don’t need to find out that the Type 26 has a nasty Type-45-like surprise hidden away due to similar MoD silliness.
Agreed - it’s no good buying something that doesn’t have a track record.
If - if - another model fits all role requirements then there’s no sense in making the perfect the enemy of the good. Especially when the ‘perfect’ hasn’t been tested yet.
The only reason for holding out for a T26 is if no current ship fits the role and tender requirements.
To be fair, I think naval architecture and CAD and simulation has come along a lot since the Type 45 was designed in the 1990s. The QEC class carriers thus far haven’t had any major problems because the simulations used during the design process have been able to identify design flaws before they are actually built. The Type 26 is a cutting edge design and the others are older designs and most of them are more generalised than Anti submarine. If the US Navy wants to remain on the cutting edge of anti submarine warfare, it will need the Type 26. None of the others are as advanced.