Future Solid Support Ship

Contains threads on Royal Navy equipment of the past, present and future.
Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Lord Jim »

Well if that comes about it will be good to see.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by SW1 »

And neither will be in post when such decisions are made.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2545
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by dmereifield »

SW1 wrote:And neither will be in post when such decisions are made.
Aren't those decisions being made and budgeted for now?

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2300
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Timmymagic »

Old RN wrote:What is interesting is that the commitment to three FSSS must be linked to the commitment to have two CVF deployed. That is surely linked to the to the need to go beyond 48 F35B (which would allow 24 normally on the single deployed CVF) to 60-80 which would allow two CVFs with 24 each?
Don't forget the 2 Fort Class that are due to be scrapped had one of their jobs as shifting ammunition for the Royal Marines....

Originally the MARS requirement was looking at Solid Stores Support Ships AND a ship or 2 configured to support Amphibious Operations with stores...I think the 3 FSS is to cover 1 carrier most of the time and the RM, with a bit of additional capacity to cover 2 carriers, but not all 3 jobs at once.

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Timmymagic wrote:...one of their jobs as shifting ammunition for the Royal Marines....
Surely MRSS will pick up this task eventually?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3031
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Tempest414 »

So over the last few years we have seen the LRG made up of

2018 Gulf = Albion , 2 x Bay class , 1 Point class and a Escort
2019 Baltic = Albion , 1 Bay class , Argus , 1 Point class and a escort
2020 Med = Albion , 1 Bay class , 1 escort
2021 Baltic = Albion , 1 Bay class , 1 escort

given this the addition of a Wave class would be enough

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Ron5 wrote:2 carriers concurrently deployed seems to be a real thing.
Not the persons but the underpinnings of any strategy (as per above quote) will be the drivers. As I expect the army to have all their new BCTs stood up and properly kitted out around 2029/30, so will we also know the target number for F-35s (to match the longer life cycle of the carriers... and before it becomes 'all' ;) Tempest, as for the monies)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Lord Jim »

Don't forget Dreadnought.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Absolutely.
I was cruising the 'Combat Air' budget line.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 551
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Jensy »

From Twitter:

NEWS | Fleet Solid Support Ship programme moves forward. MoD say that "contracts have been awarded to four consortia, all of which include significant UK involvement". https://t.co/5BSaPgr1us
Cont:
The four consortia in the running to build the three ships are:

- Larsen & Toubro, including UK company Leidos.
- Serco/Damen, including UK company Serco.
- Team Resolute, including UK companies Harland & Wolff, BMT.
- Team UK, including UK companies Babcock, BAE Systems.
The UK lead for Larsen & Toubro really caught my eye, were it not surprising enough to see an Indian firm bidding.

Leidos UK is a mid-size IT/managed services firm with scant direct defence experience. Even their US parent was a spin off from LockMart's IT division.

They've been involved with considerable M&A activity but this seem an ever bigger leap than Atlas Elektronik uk trying to build frigates. One suspects they might not be the most serious of bidders

Interesting to see 'Team Resolute' no longer directly mentioning Navantia (though that might be MoD spin).

Also first suggestion I've seen of Damen offering one of their auxillary designs:

Image

Gov link: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-e ... ompetition
The contracts will enable bidders to develop their design proposals and the next stage will seek details of how they would fulfil the wider delivery needs of the programme. Assessment of these proposals will lead to the selection of a preferred bidder and award of the manufacture contract.

The FSS competition remains on track to deliver the ships the Royal Fleet Auxiliary need to support the Royal Navy, whilst maximising the social value contribution shipbuilding can make in the UK, including encouraging investment in domestic shipyards, whilst balancing the need to deliver value for money.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6315
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Ron5 »

From the Telegraph today. The comments are a treat!
MoD accused of abandoning British shipyards in £1.5bn Navy contract

Several foreign firms are being considered to build a new generation of ships which will supply the Navy's aircraft carriers
By Alan Tovey, Industry Editor 2 September 2021 • 10:00am

The Ministry of Defence has been accused of abandoning Britain’s shipyards as a £1.5bn battle to build Royal Navy supply vessels intensifies.

Several foreign firms are being considered to build a new generation of ships which will supply the Navy's aircraft carriers, according to details published on Wednesday.

It prompted a backlash from trade union officials who said the Government risks squandering a chance to reinvigorate the UK shipbuilding industry.

The so-called “Fleet Solid Support” (FSS) vessels will provide the Navy’s aircraft carriers with equipment, ammunition and food so they can stay at sea for extended periods.

Experts had hoped work on the ships would go to British yards, helping to end a cycle of boom and bust.

But Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, has now announced that four consortia have been awarded £5m contracts to develop their bids for the FSS ships - and they include businesses based in India and the Netherlands.

Industry veteran Sir John Parker produced a national strategy in 2017 which recommended a “steady drumbeat” of orders divided up between yards to keep them operating.
P
Ian Waddell, general secretary of the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions, said: “Sir John Parker was very clear when he recommended in the national shipbuilding strategy that a UK-only competition should be considered for defence-funded vessels.

“Given that the Defence Secretary has categorised FSS as a warship it is unclear why overseas involvement continues to be encouraged in this programme. It is vital that the Government gets a grip and builds these ships in Britain.”

The MoD did not give full details of the make-up of the consortia, providing only their leading members or group names, and the involvement of British firms.

Winners of the contracts were:

Larsen & Toubro, an Indian-based conglomerate with a shipbuilding arm, working with Leidos Innovations, a UK-based IT business;
Netherlands-based shipbuilder Damen and Serco, the UK-listed outsourcer, which has contracts supporting the Royal Navy;
Team UK, whose leading members include British defence heavyweights Babcock and BAE Systems which have extensive domestic shipbuilding facilities;
Team Resolute, which includes British marine engineer and Belfast shipyard Harland & Wolff. Team Resolute has previously announced it also includes Spanish state-owned shipbuilding giant Navantia, though this was not originally mentioned by the MoD.

Revealing the contracts, Mr Wallace said he was "proud to see UK companies stepping up to the challenge of the FSS as we begin the next chapter of this British shipbuilding success story”.

He vowed that the contract will “deliver ships essential for the UK's security as well as vital jobs and skills". However, the MoD has refused to say how much of the work it will require to be carried out in the UK.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said the ships would "deliver the UK's security as well as vital jobs and skills"

Defence chiefs have previously said only that a significant proportion would have to be done domestically.

On Wednesday, the MoD added: “It is too early to confirm details of the build programme, including workshare arrangements. They will be agreed with industry as an outcome of the competition.

“A requirement for a significant proportion of the work to take place in the UK, including that the ships must be integrated in a UK shipyard.”

tomuk
Member
Posts: 334
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by tomuk »

Larsen & Toubro, an Indian-based conglomerate with a shipbuilding arm, working with Leidos Innovations, a UK-based IT business;
I wonder if this is another Navantia bid based on the Cantabria. L&T were partners with Navantia in failed bid for the Indian Supply Ship contract.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Lord Jim »

It does seem a lot like a case of Media s@%$ stirring. The ship with most likely be completed in the UK but will include components and sections manufactured else where. I doubt any of the submission with be 100% UK built or have a 100% UK content. The first priority should be getting the ships built for the RFA, sooner rather than later.

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by RichardIC »

Lord Jim wrote:It does seem a lot like a case of Media s@%$ stirring. The ship with most likely be completed in the UK but will include components and sections manufactured else where. I doubt any of the submission with be 100% UK built or have a 100% UK content. The first priority should be getting the ships built for the RFA, sooner rather than later.
I think it's fair to assume that if Navantia won (because that's what Team Resolute is, Navantia) the majority of the work would be done in Spain, as happened with the Australian LHDs. Navantia's owned by the Spanish Government and its principal job is keeping Spanish workers happy.

Harland & Wolff doesn't have the workforce and is owned by a parent company with a tiny turnover. It's not going to play more than a peripheral role in a £1.5 bn programme. There's been speculation it could be used to skid together blocks built in Spain.

But it's them or Team UK.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by SW1 »


Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6315
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Ron5 »

Three Brit puppets with Spanish hands pulling the strings. Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.

A hard no from me. Which will, no doubt, guarantee their selection :cry:

serge750
Member
Posts: 823
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by serge750 »

Even a model of the Crane at H&W :lol: :lol: :lol:

Trying to keep Europe/spain happy in a less obvious way me thinks....

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Poiuytrewq »

Ron5 wrote:Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by RichardIC »

Poiuytrewq wrote:Ron5 wrote:
Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?
It's very simple. You give a major order to a Navantia led "team" where Navantia do the vast majority of the work in Spain and H&W essentially provide a drydock for final assembly.

On contract completion the sub-contractors go home. Navantia move on to the next job, having kept Spanish workers busy with UK defence £££. Where does that leave H&W?

Pretty much where they are now. With a big drydock and a small workforce that can complete relatively minor maintenance jobs.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by SW1 »

RichardIC wrote:
Poiuytrewq wrote:Ron5 wrote:
Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?
It's very simple. You give a major order to a Navantia led "team" where Navantia do the the vast majority of the work in Spain and H&W essentially provide a drydock for final assembly.

On contract completion the sub-contractors go home. Navantia move on to the next job, having kept Spanish workers busy with UK defence £££. Where does that leave H&W?

Pretty much where they are now. With a big drydock and a small workforce that can complete relatively minor maintenance jobs.
A uk design being assembled in uk yards seems gd to me. Who says they don’t get follow on work on other things, military or otherwise

which major industrial company do u think doesn’t have a very large percentage of sub con workforce these day?

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by RichardIC »

SW1 wrote:A uk design being assembled in uk yards seems gd to me.
Most of design in Spain. Most of assembly in Spain. This is Team Espana.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2686
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by SW1 »

RichardIC wrote:
SW1 wrote:A uk design being assembled in uk yards seems gd to me.
Most of design in Spain. Most of assembly in Spain. This is Team Espana.
Your hypothesis or fact?

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by RichardIC »

SW1 wrote:Your hypothesis or fact?
My hypothesis. Obvs. I don't know the facts and neither do you.

But contrast and compare. This isn't a union of equals.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6241
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Lord Jim »

Isn't H&W one of the locations for future maintenance of the Carriers exactly because of their large Dry Dock. It could actually become the major maintenance facility for all the RN and RFA large vessels once it has been given a jump start by assembling the new SSS. Just out of interest how much work in the UK did the Tides require before being brought in to service? Surely this will be added to any block assembly?

User avatar
Poiuytrewq
Senior Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 10:25
United Kingdom

Re: Future Solid Support Ship

Post by Poiuytrewq »

RichardIC wrote:It's very simple. You give a major order to a Navantia led "team" where Navantia do the the vast majority of the work in Spain and H&W essentially provide a drydock for final assembly.

On contract completion the sub-contractors go home. Navantia move on to the next job, having kept Spanish workers busy with UK defence £££. Where does that leave H&W?

Pretty much where they are now. With a big drydock and a small workforce that can complete relatively minor maintenance jobs.
So what is the realistic alternative?

Post Reply