The new Multi-Role Ocean Support ship (MROS) being converted on Merseyside is receiving her new paint job, name and pennant number.
The former MV Topaz Tangaroa arrived on the Mersey on the 19th January and was taken straight into dry dock. She is now in the wet basin at Cammell Laird shipyard and is being re-painted in grey, has received the pennant number K60, and is named RFA Proteus.
Proteus will be dedicated to safeguarding critical seabed infrastructure and will act as a ‘mother ship’, operating remote and autonomous off-board systems for underwater surveillance and seabed warfare. The 6,000-tonne vessel was built in 2019 and was purchased by the MoD for £70 Million from Topaz Marine, a subsidiary of P&O Maritime.
Related articles
Photo essay: RFA Proteus puts to sea for the first time since conversion
Protecting seabed infrastructure – UK Multi-Role Ocean Surveillance Ship to be in service by 2023
Context and considerations – new multi-role research vessels for the UK
In-service date for seabed surveillance vessel RFA Proteus slips from summer to autumn
Funny to think this ship was seen as a luxury. If this new hull was a stop gap then yes. But it isn’t. We are where we are.
Is she still mining for diamonds off Namibia?
Last time I looked yes she was off Africa.
That ship was a total cluster fk and waste of money, could not even be used for what she was built for.
I don’t think so. YMMV.
I am used to off hand comments here from non-entities.
The ship was designed and built and deployed and used.
Are you really positing a clean sheet design was poor but a cheap second hand ship is better?
Bore off.
‘Reliable’ and detailed information says Mark is correct. There were stuff ups even during building and the final cost far exceeded a T45 destroyer
https://twitter.com/cloppa258/status/1362781326991126529?lang=en
Correction. T42 Destroyer HMS York
There is actually some pretty good evidence out there that showed many aspects of the design of the ships was significantly flawed and no one else every copied a lot of the design element…it also cost a fortune to build…. more than a SSN at the time, was significantly delayed during build and was decommissioned after only 6 years….the first compony that purchased the ship, never moved it out of dock and it was finally practically rebuilt for it present role.
I was by any measure a pretty appalling failure and did infact cost a fortune for effectively no return.
I think she was more a gold plated design. A cheap second hand ship can do most of the missions needed. In an ideal world all of the RNs ships would be gold plated built from scratch designs but we just don’t have the funds for that.
Read the Twitter account from Chris Sutton ex RN on the Challenger . It includes a 12 min video from RN on the work the vessel when it was operational.
It did some things that are very difficult and complex even today. Even had a ‘hyperbaric lifeboat’ if the divers under going decompression ( up to 300M down with the bell) had to abandon ship with rest of the crew – who used normal lifeboats.
I didnt realise that at the deep diving saturation mix of 4% O2 and 98% He, [varies] divers need salt water heating in their suits as they are very sensitive to small temperature changes
BMT Salvas would be a good buy, I don’t know how advanced the design is having only found it after poking around on their website. 2 of those would also replace Diligence.
My point was we identified a need, it suddenly wasn’t a need, and now it is a need once more.
Classic example of a ship designed by a committee – shocking waste of tax payers money.
Everything is designed by committee.
A need for seabed engineering was identified. That is what I was on about.
And all of a sudden that need disappeared. And now we are back again…..
Nott
That’s a big crane. And look at those propeller pods. £70m for a new ship to safeguard critical national infrastructure like oil and gas pipes and fibreoptics – bargain.
Not entirely sure why they’ve jetted/scraped the UW paint system in dock, but clearly not re-instated it.
The Fleet environmental officer will be whinging at them in short order about the additional fuel burn.
Indeed seems strange but possibly was omitted to save time. The ambition is to have MROS-1 operational by this Summer which is lightning speed by typical DE&S standards.
Perhaps as this is a bit of a rush job there wasn’t time to do all the underwater work in the first available dry dock period. Maybe we will see her going back in again either before she starts her trials and crew training or straight after.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder aparently, so will go with functional then!
Do they really need such a big crane to move some UUV’s about? Seems like overkill.
That’s not for UUV……
She could, potentially, do some of the roles Dilli used to do?
She would also be quite handy for recovering any F35B’s that went in the drink!
Better too big than too small. She could be in service for 20-30 years. The UUV’s she’ll be operating then aren’t even design drawings today.
It is I believe what she was built with. Plus it allows scope to do other things as well as launch and recovery of small drones.
Crane was used four subsea construction in the oil fields.
Seems like an absolute bargain for such a capable ship and well-named given its potential versatility.
the paint scheme is very (the colour), suitably as she was born there.
So, if I am keep track correctly, there is RFA Proteus ( MROSS1 ) , RFA stirling Castle, MROSS2, then funding secured for 3 out of 4 additional ships. Any news on what those said ships are? something around 4 additional ships for a similar role.
ignore this
The best thing about the National Flagship was the concepts. But MROSS is the far more sensible and correct choice Other image is Signal 140m concept, this is the vitruvius yachts concept.
Not quite, MROS-2 will be a new build ship coming in the late 2020s, possibly with hydrographic survey capability in addition to seabed warfare. RFA Stirling Castle is a mothership for autonomous mine-hunting boats.
Thanks. I believe you may have misunderstood, I meant them as separate ships. My mind just bundles up the MROSS, RFA Stirling castle and the 4 other miscellaneous ships i heard about once or twice into one pile.
Funding for 6? Where did that come from, I must have missed it. The minehunting support ships were mentioned in the shipbuilding strategy, but I don’t recall a number. I don’t know anything about the other 4 Castles other than what I read on Navy Lookout last week. If you have a source on funding or any other info, I’d love to know.
Heard it from somewhere, but dubious of source. Something in the same rough category as RFA Stirling castle.
Perhaps there’ll be something official in summer when the MOD publishes the new defence command paper.
Something that I can finally put a name to and not potentially be creating from thin air, I do hope
What ever happened to the defence study on the sub-frigate numbers balance
https://www.navylookout.com/the-royal-navy-to-examine-the-balance-between-investment-in-submarines-and-warships/
It is somwhere in the 2022-2032 equipment plan
I assume RFA Stirling castle is the Offshore Support Vessel (OSV) mentioned in the Defence Equipment Plan 2022-2032.
Up to 4 Logistics Support Vessels (LSV) are also mentioned and it appears 3 are already funded.
The LSVs will probably be larger than RFA stirling castle but the SLAMF mother ships are somewhat smaller.
Quote:
The MHC programme is procuring up to 6 Mine Countermeasures (MCM) Maritime Autonomous Mission Systems (MAS), up to 4 MCM (LSV) and a UK MCM (OSV) from the spot market. The Mission Systems and LSVs will deliver a global MCM effect, while the OSV will enable UK offshore operations. The programme will replace the Hunt and Sandown Class MCMVs, exploit its MAS capability and to achieve rapid MCM effect at range without the requirement for personnel to enter minefields. It is designed to rapidly exploit advances in technology within a quickly evolving sector. The Mission Systems can be deployed at pace by air, land and sea and will eventually be capability of operating from a number of RN, RFA or suitable commercial vessels; including T26 and T32 frigates and the MultiRole Support Ship (MRSS).
page 29
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1120332/The_defence_equipment_plan_2022_to_2032.pdf
It was this site I read on, but there are 3 more to make 4 in total:
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-navy-autonomous-mine-hunting-at-the-sharp-end/
It is somwhere in the 2022-2032 equipment plan
I assume RFA Stirling castle is the Offshore Support Vessel (OSV) mentioned in the Defence Equipment Plan 2022-2032.
Up to 4 Logistics Support Vessels (LSV) are also mentioned and it appears 3 are already funded.
The LSVs will probably be larger than RFA stirling castle but the SLAMF mother ships are somewhat smaller.
Quote:
The MHC programme is procuring up to 6 Mine Countermeasures (MCM) Maritime Autonomous Mission Systems (MAS), up to 4 MCM (LSV) and a UK MCM (OSV) from the spot market. The Mission Systems and LSVs will deliver a global MCM effect, while the OSV will enable UK offshore operations. The programme will replace the Hunt and Sandown Class MCMVs, exploit its MAS capability and to achieve rapid MCM effect at range without the requirement for personnel to enter minefields. It is designed to rapidly exploit advances in technology within a quickly evolving sector. The Mission Systems can be deployed at pace by air, land and sea and will eventually be capability of operating from a number of RN, RFA or suitable commercial vessels; including T26 and T32 frigates and the MultiRole Support Ship (MRSS).
page 29
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1120332/The_defence_equipment_plan_2022_to_2032.pdf
thanks
At the beginning of both WW1 and WW2, we cut transatlantic cables to force Germany to use radio communications. The resulting activities in Room 40 and at Bletchley Park were crucial to the outcomes of those conflicts. I can’t therefore understand why underwater cables, comms and offshore infrastructure such as wind, oil and gas have not always been top priority. It seems negligent of the MOD or HMG not to have always maintained an MROS, or to have cut them, like Nimrod, in the name of austerity, praying that no conflict would occur. I hope there have been static protections in place but multiple UUVs and £70m (plus the work at Cammell Laird) for RFA Proteus is a bargain so a degree of redemption may be in order. Let’s hope it is not too late and hostile actors are not already at work.
As others have mentioned previously, are we actually following the wrong strategy for protecting seabed infrastructure? How much “line Km’s” of cable can an MROSS surveil ?
How do threats, say Russian UUV’s or diver delivery vehicles get to the cable – either by surface ship or SSN / SSK – have we ever seen a Russian dry dock or swimmer delivery vehicle on the back of one of their SSN’s ? Maybe they launch UUV’s from torpedo tubes, which puts a size / range limit on them, no?
So is what we really need instead of 2 MROSS, more along the lines of:
Because what we need to find and keep tags on is the assets deploying the actual threat system, not occasionally check in on thousands of km’s of cable…. OR …. react when once the cable is tampered with… ????
Yet to see how and what we will use/do, if we find a UUV tampering with an under sea cable/pipeline?
Probably a stern letter from an ambassador to a Foreign Government. Though as it’s an unmanned vessel, what would the ROE be, would there be any legal ramifications of taking out a UUV?
Or maybe we understand how they are deployed and so can mitigate…..?
It isn’t the Russians I’m too worried about with genius steps such as all GRU passports having consecutive numbers and issued by a special office….
I’d be more concerned about the Chinese in the medium term.
There are rather more communications cables criss-crossing our oceans today than in WW2, on numerous different well separated routes, which gives quite a good degree of resilience. It’s also possible for fibre cable operators to pick up quite small disturbances to the cable, and instantly find an approximate location, from shore systems. The bigger issue IMO is energy i.e. Gas and Electricity. Don’t forget also there are many civilian vessels routinely patrolling & maintaining these assets, particularly in the offshore wind sector. It’s one area the UK is still good at.
The battleship grey camouflage paint does seem to be a tad compromised by the fluorescent orange lifeboat? Wonder if they carry a grey screen?
The lifeboat is made from composite so invincible to radar. It’s the rest of the ship that is the camouflage risk! 🙂
I can confidently predict that ship will have an RCS the size of a small planet……
Because in its previous life being unseen wasn’t on the design criteria?
And being very visible to all was a good safety idea?
And in its new role a scarecrow might be what is needed?
Of course it wasn’t. It’s not a yacht it is way too big to need a reflector.
A scarecrow? Everybody will know what it is and where it is and why it is there.
RCS is something perhaps the majority here should consider when droning (!) on about MCM being able to be performed from any platform that comes to hand.
Yep!
Basically it’s international life boat orange which is set in regulations. putting things over life boats that would potentially slow their deployment is not really appropriate.
Exactly………..
It was my pleasure to be in charge of the last conversion carried out on Holland. This is a wonderful vessel and a very sophisticated operational system.
Very Sleek isn’t she.
Was this the ship used to mine for Vibranium, does the MOD know something we don’t?
Looks like a virtual sister ship of the Australian Defence Vessel Ocean Shield
There are lots of similar designs. The MN’s D’Entrecasteaux class which replaced the awesome BATRAL’s.
These types of large commercial Offshore Support Vessels appear to be rather popular by giving them a ‘second life’ as a Naval support vessel.
It’s been report here in Oz today that the Government appears to have recently procured another one:
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/has-defence-purchased-another-offshore-support-vessel
The ship reported cost the bargain basement sum of A$60m, the ship is reportedly to be named ADV Guidance.
This new ship is not the first of this type the Oz Government has procured, there are three other very similar ships.
Two for the RAN, ADV Ocean Protector and ADV Reliant, also one for Australian Border Force, ABFC Ocean Shield.
Great, another OPV that Australia can buy for peanuts in 5 years.