In bullish mood last week, the First Sea Lord told the Portsmouth News “we are through with relegating frigates and destroyers to training vessels due to a shortage of sailors”. This is an encouraging sign and here we examine the context and true extent of the improvement in RN personnel numbers.
The total combined strength of the Naval Service (including the Royal Marines, Reservists, the RFA and untrained personnel) now stands at 38,550 compared to 38,140 in 2016. In contrast to the RAF, and the Army in particular, the RN has managed to reverse the decline and grow its headcount in the last two years. The management of human resources is complex and not just about total numbers and these headline figures demand closer examination. The RN has done well to arrest the crisis that was precipitated by the disastrous government decision in the 2010 SDSR to make 5,000 sailors redundant. This deliberate reduction had the unintended, if entirely predictable, effect of damaging morale hastening more people to leave voluntarily. In 2016 the number of new recruits joining finally began to match or even slightly exceed outflow. (Outflow consists of Voluntary Outflow (VO) people resigning – on average about 60% of the total, plus people reaching the end of their service and those medically discharged).
There has been a reduction of about 60% since 2014 of RN personnel employed on tasks that breach the agreed harmony guidelines. This is partly due to the end of commitments in Afghanistan but also the result of a determined effort to put the needs of people first where ever possible. The few officially recorded as having breached harmony guidelines are the tip of a rather larger iceberg, as many personnel are still under great pressure despite technically having served in compliance with the guidelines. Improving morale and especially by ensuring sailors have adequate leave, is the primary solution to reducing the high levels of VO. There has been a small improvement in the VO rate in the last 5 years, from around 5.7% down to 5% of trained personnel each year.
Made in the Royal Navy…
The RN has become dramatically better at recruiting and attracting new applicants. In March 2014 around 930 applications were being received each month but by September 2017 this number had risen to around 1,290 per month. RN recruitment advertising has been a real success. The memorable and inspiring series based on the strapline “I was born in… but I was made in the Royal Navy” has achieved a kind of viral status, with young people using it online as a kind of catchphrase (that may sometimes be subversively altered) but other times repeated verbatim. It is an advertiser’s dream to achieve this level of cultural penetration which has succeeded in raising awareness of RN career opportunities amongst the target audience. The delivery of the aircraft carrier, the first of the F-35s and the new Tide class tankers may also have a small recruiting benefit. Not only has HMS Queen Elizabeth raised the public profile the RN in general, but some applicants are attracted by the opportunity to work with new technology.
To match to growth in applications, the RN has expanded new entry training. In 2013 around 220 people per month were completing basic training but by 2018 this number had risen to about 260 per month. Admiral Jones alluded to this, noting the “conspicuous success in hiring more people” but admitted, “It’s a constant challenge to get the right number of joiners through training at the right tempo and available for service in the fleet as quickly as we can.”
A younger navy
Despite the small growth in the total size of the Naval Service, the number of trained regular personnel is still declining slightly. At the start of this year, the Full-time Trained Strength (FTTS) of the RN stood at 29,100, a reduction of 700 people since January 2016. The RN’s stated workforce requirement for 2020 is 30,450 FTTS but it is unlikely to grow by the 1,350 this year needed to met that target. There has been a rise in the strength of the RN and RM Reserves from 2,600 in 2013 to 3,700 today. This, together with an increase in people undergoing Phase 1 and Phase 2 training, explains how the Service is growing while the core trained full-time personnel numbers are falling. It is important to note the overall the ratio of experienced personnel is reducing in relation to the number of younger, less seasoned sailors. There are some definite advantages to having a workforce with a younger average age but there is also a danger in having to promote people too quickly. Most noticeable when under pressure or in a crisis, it is the old hands and senior rates in particular who usually form the solid backbone of the ship’s company.
RNP-Personnel-statistics-2012-18-1There are currently five frigates undergoing major life extension refit (HMS Richmond, Portland, Lancaster, Iron Duke and Somerset). While in deep refit these ships do not need much manpower but are not classified as ‘laid up’. Major refits are not unusual but the Type 23 LIFEX programme has seen an unusually large number of frigates unmanned and out of routine. This may have freed up people to be drafted to the aircraft carriers but there will be a bulge in demand for sailors when the frigates regenerate as they emerge from refit. HMS Daring had been one of the ships laid up but she is now being prepared for towing to Birkenhead have major ’surgery’ involving the installation of new diesel engines. It is unclear how long the Power Improvement Package (PIP) on each ship will take, but the work is planned to be carried out within the normal Type 45 refit cycle. HMS Dauntless should emerge from major refit later this year, at which point there should be a tangible increase in Type 45 availability.
The QEC aircraft carriers original core ships company was supposed to be just 690, but by the time HMS Queen Elizabeth deployed on Westlant 2018, numbers had grown to 800. The final crew requirement for the carriers is likely to move upwards in the light of experience. When the full Tailored Air Group is finally embarked it will only add to the burdens on crew workload. The small uptick in numbers will only benefit the escorts and is not enough to allow HMS Bulwark to be brought out of ‘low readiness’ and operate simultaneously with HMS Albion. Three RFA vessels also remain laid up on Merseyside. Total RFA personnel numbers have declined only very slightly in the last 5 years, (down by about 50 to about 1,540) but there is a particular shortage of marine engineers.
With HMS Queen Elizabeth due to go on operational deployment in 2021, the demand for escorts has never been greater. The announcement that the practice of having two ships laid up a ‘harbour training ships’ for lack of crews can be ended is timely and welcome. Precisely when this will be achieved may be hard to pinpoint due to the complex cycle of refits. In the longer term, both the Type 31e and Type 26 frigates will need a smaller ships company than the Type 23s they replace, helping reduce manning pressures.
Many already lean-manned ships still deploy with some billets ‘gapped’ and there are also significant ‘pinch points’, ie. shortages of particular trades or skills that are a critical requirement for a ship or submarine to operate. Keeping hold of its trained and experienced people for longer remains the biggest challenge the RN must overcome before manning is no longer a concern. It is certainly good news that overall numbers are going in the right direction and there are signs of recovery but there is still a very long way to go before the RN can be content it has enough sailors.
It’s certainly a pleasant change to be discussing an improvement in the RNs situation
One of the key factors is the distribution of trades within the manpower total. If the RN is maintaining or improving the proportion of “shortage” trades then this is a step forwards. It will be interesting to see how things play out over the next 18/24 months.
Regarding the decreasing ratio of seasoned sailors to new recruits: this is how ratios work. The number of seasoned sailors could stay the same, but if the number of recruits increases, the ratio will decrease. This is not, therefore, something to worry about, it is just an inevitability of successful recruitment.
While the T45s are having their refit….how about adding the Sylver 70 strike length VLS tubes while they are at it? There was space left for them and we all know the 45’s need more teeth in the offensive department (Harpoons with Zimmer frames and a 4.5 inch gun is quite pathetic) At least then they could have a few TLAMs, ASROC, Quad Sea Ceptor and a new LRASM 😁
I don’t think Cammell Laird fit missile systems, more likely to be done at a Portsmouth dry dock.
Also, there will be No missile upgrades, unless there is funding for it!
None of the above (TLAMs, ASROC, [Quad] Sea Ceptor and LRASM ) had been cleared for Sylver last time I checked, has that changed or are the French waiting for someone else to pay for it still?
(Also an upvote for “Harpoons with Zimmer frames “)
You are mostly right….the Storm Shadow LAM and its Naval ASM were being proposed for the s70 launcher. I wonder if they could fit some Mk41 or mk57 VLS instead? Adding a MK 41 would make sense as it would allow the RN to have missile commonality with many other Mk 41 users
Surely better to add some MK41 given the range of missiles it can hold and for the sake of commonality with T26.
Sylver can then be phased out of RN service in the 2030’s when the T45’s are replaced.
Mk 57 is designed to blow outwards, if/when hit by incoming projectiles, as a very expensive form of reactive armour so I’d say it’s strictly for new builds, but naval architecture isn’t my field so I may be wrong on that and they may be able to retrofit it to old hulls.
Frankly however the RN is already operating too many different types of VLS, and while VLSes are comparatively simple next to old school point and shoot launchers it’s still multiplying both the training and logistics burden on the RN, and every dollar/pound/euro spent on the logistics and training side of things is two dollars/pounds/euros not available for hulls or headcount. What they should have done is stuck with the first one is service (Sylver) and just fronted the development costs for DNCS of ensuring the compatibility/certifying each new missile with it, some would have been recouped in the long run in royalty payments as other navies adopt the same missile/launcher combinations (much as the UAE is getting royalties on future F16 sales) but having A50 on the Darings, Mk 41 and a unique Ceptor tube on the T26 is poor planning.
The T26 needs to be singled out for criticism because of the spectacularly poor planning that sees it having two different systems on it in the first place, as not only do the above logistics and training problems apply but they have lost one of the key advantages of VLS tubes as it takes away the flexibility of swapping the missile loads around to suit the mission it’s on at the time, instead of developing a launcher for Ceptor they should have just made it compatible with Sylver and put that into the T26 or at bare minimum, if they really had to introduce a 2nd system into the fleet with Mk 41 (I imagine both the RAN and RCN versions will just have Mk 41 but thats an aside), even if the RN’s headcount issues are solved for the foreseeable future, they now have to train people to operate and maintain three different systems, two of which will be installed on one hull.
You’re missing several key points, Geo.
The RN always wanted Mk41, even during the Horizon programme that lead on to the T45s. Unfortunately, the French and Italians wanted Sylver, and even after we split off the cheapest and most practical option was to stick with Sylver to avoid the extra costs of adapting the combat system and certifying Aster for Mk41 (although if I’m not mistaken the Aster 30 is actually certified for Mk41 now). As for paying out for and then recouping (potential) royalties from the certification tests of new missiles for Sylver, do you not think it makes more sense to go with Mk41 (the far more popular option over the Sylver with international customers), and AVOID all the certification tests? The weapons to go in the Mk41 like ASROC and Tomahawk are already certified after all.
Given that the RN has no requirement for another tactical-length VLS like the existing Sylver A50s and wanted strike cells for the T26, it made far more sense to go with the strike length VLS with the most options, which also had the benefit of integrating a common VLS with countries like Australia and Canada and thus making them more attractive for export, instead of buying the A70 Sylver which we don’t have any weapons for anyway. As for the Sea Ceptor soft-launch cells, you’re ignoring the fact that they’re far simpler, cheaper, and lighter than a hot-launch system like the Mk41.
Yes, as you pointed out the T26 has lost most of the ability to mix and match its loadout, but in context it really hasn’t. The T26 carries 24 strike length weapons and 48 short-mid range AA missiles, while the Canadian and Australian versions with the same loadout, with 32 Mk41 cells, can carry only 20 strike length weapons and 48 quad packed AA missiles. For a combatant as big as the T26, you’ll want to be carrying at least 48 defensive missiles anyway, so the RN has simply cut out the expense of buying more hot-launch cells and developed a cheap soft-launch system suitable for fitting on lighter combatants as well. The Australian and Canadian ships are meant to be more versatile vessels, so they might swap out some of those quad packed AA weapons for longer range or even BMD weapons, but the RN version will primarily be an ASW escort under the cover of either a T45 or carrier/land based aircraft.
Has the RNs online Capita recruitment system been improved?
I understand that their online system was overly complicated and had problems like registering candidates.
It is telling that in 2017 the RN stopped reporting publicly the manning levels by Engineering Trade breakdown. The last available figures in 2017 showed that the RN was losing a huge amount of skilled trades people from the legacy Tiffs and new ETs. I dont see how this can have changed that significantly.
Whilst the manning levels are improving its where they are improving that counts.
No point having a surplus of Warfare operators if the Radar, Sonar and Command systems they operate don’t work because there are no maintainers to keep them running.
good luck with experienced numbers being maintained. i conducted my career course in 2015 and was offered a financial retention bonus for staying in 4 year. surprisingly all those people who took the bonus which was up to 90% of the class are now free to put their notice in. i myself a mechanical engineer have only recently put my notice. the only thing that was keeping me in this unsupported and overworked job was my time left on the financial retention. good luck to the RN but you’ll see in the next year these numbers drop off just like before
That’s not bad news.
However, what about the “black hole” which was (is ?) messing up the whole HR structure ?
J
HMS Forth finally sets forth to resume her sea trials!