Re: Future Solid Support Ship
Posted: 24 May 2021, 13:47
Well if that comes about it will be good to see.
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
Aren't those decisions being made and budgeted for now?SW1 wrote:And neither will be in post when such decisions are made.
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....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?
Surely MRSS will pick up this task eventually?Timmymagic wrote:...one of their jobs as shifting ammunition for the Royal Marines....
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)Ron5 wrote:2 carriers concurrently deployed seems to be a real thing.
Cont: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
The UK lead for Larsen & Toubro really caught my eye, were it not surprising enough to see an Indian firm bidding.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 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.
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.”
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.Larsen & Toubro, an Indian-based conglomerate with a shipbuilding arm, working with Leidos Innovations, a UK-based IT business;
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.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.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?Ron5 wrote:Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
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.Poiuytrewq wrote:Ron5 wrote:
Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?
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 otherwiseRichardIC 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.Poiuytrewq wrote:Ron5 wrote:
Creating no future capability to bid for follow on UK work.
In practical terms what do you mean by that?
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.
Most of design in Spain. Most of assembly in Spain. This is Team Espana.SW1 wrote:A uk design being assembled in uk yards seems gd to me.
Your hypothesis or fact?RichardIC wrote:Most of design in Spain. Most of assembly in Spain. This is Team Espana.SW1 wrote:A uk design being assembled in uk yards seems gd to me.
My hypothesis. Obvs. I don't know the facts and neither do you.SW1 wrote:Your hypothesis or fact?
So what is the realistic alternative?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.