As we reported in April, significant defects have been found aboard HMS Forth which was delivered to the RN in February. Initial assessments were that the problems would be remedied in a couple of weeks but this has not proved to be the case.
HMS Forth’s defects list has not expanded beyond what was originally reported; sheared bolt heads, failed marine fixings and the electrical system. However, the investigation and agreeing on the rectifications by all parties took much longer to complete than initially expected.
The ship has not been “handed back” to BAE Systems and remains a commissioned RN warship. However, that is really a technicality because, as is standard practice during deep maintenance, the contractor has taken over over care and protection of the vessel with no RN personnel living on board. After the delay caused by the investigation and scoping, there are now are teams of contractors working on board the ship to correct the problems. HMS Forth will definitely not require dry-docking for this work as the issues are all internal and not related to propulsion, steering or the hull. The date the work will be completed is unknown right now and sources can only say “well before the end of this year”. The ship is effectively under warranty and BAES are meeting all costs for this work.
HMS Forth is due to replace HMS Clyde as the Falkland Patrol ship. The delays to HMS Forth commencing work up and FOST will have the knock-on effect of extending HMS Clyde’s time in service. The RN is down to just one active OPV in UK waters right now and there is some speculation HMS Tyne could be re-activated. The RN is performing a delicate juggling act rotating crews between OPVs and MCMVs under Project Jicara. HMS Tyne’s crew joined HMS Forth in March 2017 and she was then manned until decommissioning by a crew loaned from the 2nd Minehunting Squadron. They then moved to HMS Mersey so her crew could join HMS Trent in build in Glasgow. There is no spare crew available for HMS Tyne so reactivation would be a challenge.
HMS Tyne was formally decommissioned on 24 May and, along with HMS Severn already decommissioned, and HMS Mersey, due to decommission in 2019, will be preserved alongside. This has been funded by a £12.7M allocation from the EU Exit Preparedness Fund, should the ships be required to patrol UK waters following Brexit. Unfortunately, the RN does not have the people to crew these vessels while at the same time providing manpower for the new Batch IIs. Reactivating the Batch Is would require innovative alternative manning arrangements.
BAE Systems has sensibly initiated inspections of the next 2 OPVs, Medway and Trent, currently under construction to ensure these issues are dealt with before the ships are handed over to the RN. This inspection is ongoing and rectifications being completed where necessary. So far only one sheared and glued bolt head has been discovered on Medway. Medway was named two months earlier in her schedule than Forth so their timetables for delivery do not easily compare. Medway is due to go on sea trials later this summer and the MoD is working with BAES to agree on the schedule for the remaining ships to come into service.
The RN’s relationship with BAE Sytems, its monopoly warship supplier is akin to an arranged and essentially loveless marriage. With absolutely no prospect of divorce, there is little choice but to live with reduced expectations and make the best of the situation, focusing on the positive aspects. (Some serious flirting with Babcock has not yet developed into a full-blown affair.) BAES have been embarrassed by this episode, the OPVs are, after all, relatively simple vessels and have proved a very expensive way of sustaining Clyde shipbuilding. The company has taken it very seriously and is working very hard to rectify the situation as quickly as possible.
More positive news is the very strong indications that the BAES Type 26 (GCS-A) design is going to win the SEA5000 Australian frigate competition, an announcement is expected by the end of next week. This would be the first major UK warship export success in more than 2 decades and will be of far greater significance than relatively minor issues with the OPVs.
1. If the Aussies go with T26 then they will bring it into service before we do, which is hilarious if somewhat tragic.
2. These are the most expensive OPVs ever built and they can’t even fasten boltheads. Pathetic.
Not a great advert for UK shipbuilding is it.
Hold on, not a great advert for bae!!! Don’t drag everyone into this! Babcock built 3 for 150mil no major problems
SNP now with nothing to say about ‘Scottish shipbuilding’!
The SNP are very quiet about ships built for the R.N. in Scotland Ms Sturgeon has barely mentioned the Aircraft carriers and her predecessor Alec Salmond only went to the naming ceremony for HMS Queen Elisabeth because his dad was in the navy and went with him it seems that they cannot stand this industry
I believe that a lot of the problems have occurred due to the use of many subcontractors by Bae instead of using their own highly skilled tradesmen, It is much easier for them to hire and fire and they do not have the overheads of pension schemes etc. However the standard of work is bound to suffer as many of these tradesmen do not have the same experience as people who have worked on shipbuilding for many years, but I am afraid that this is the way forward
There’s a bit of that, but I would take a Polish welder over one of BAEs lazy ,unionised permanent workers anyday.
I once thought the same until working alongside one who had clearly never welded just knew someone else on the job! Seen this over and over
But I bet that he was at least trying to do a good job
It’s a bloody disgrace and one more reason why future orders will be placed overseas. Our island’s maritime superiority is a thing of the past. We seem to have forgotten all the shipbuilding skills we once had – as the World’s once pre-eminent maritime nation.
I could not agree with you more , our shipbuilding trades used to depend on skills being passed down through the generations through apprentice training schemes lasting for at least four years before being considered a time served tradesman, but nowaday’s apprentices serve only a few months ,fill in a few modules in their colouring book and they become tradesmen with little or no experience ,We need to get back to being a major shipbuilding country again with proper apprentiship schemes before it is lost forever and we become dependant on countries like Vietnam or Korea to build our ships . So please let us start type 26/31 and solid fleet support ships without delay
How can you bring in apprentices when the only yard with longevity is bae Babcock appledore and others can’t due to boat by boat contracts and no support from government
Wasn’t the idea of these overpriced OPVs to maintain skilled workers until the type 26s were ordered. Well that seems to have not happened….
You are correct that was the idea ,however I believe that BAE have gone down the road of having a smaller core workforce and bringing in sub contractors in certain trades who have less overheads than permanent workers would have, and can be hired and fired very easily . This means that many of the skills and experience are not retained in the shipyard
I’m a subbie and I occasionally work in the dockyards and it has to be seen to be believed. 1970s union can’t do attitude, sloppy, lazy and a dirty mess. No pride or any shame.The subbies are appalled at what they see.
Save the navy seems to be trying to downplay all of this, but if it takes over 6 months just to assess the damage, something is badly wrong.
BAE did the same with the Type 23’s – getting rid of most of their tradesmen during the “down time” between ships. Consequently the skills available when the work recommenced were less than had been the case before letting them go. VT (Woolston yard) retained their skilled workforce during similar “down times”. Consequently they were a lot better shipbuilder (until BAE took them over, closed Woolston and moved them all to Portsmouth!)
If customers refuse to accept deliveries and go to (excellent) Lurssens instead, it ought to be a clue. As should the lack of export orders when the government has already paid for all the systems development.
Fingers crossed Babcock and Team 31 get the T31 order. You can pretty much guarantee their staff will be highly motivated to produce the best possible workmanship in the hope that it’ll win them more contracts and secure jobs. Combined with a clearly superior design that’s only flaw is that it really needs a BAES cms and radar, and its a winning bid
The BAE CMS-1 and Artisan radar are well below the standard that Babcock are offering.
Artisan is fully fit for purpose, and from what I can find on the NS100 it’s not enough of an upgrade to warrant introducing to service. Same story for the combat system, but even more so, because it’s already going to be in service for the lifetimes of the T45 and T26 and will benefit from the same continuous upgrades.
The performance difference isn’t what matters, the point is to standardise across the fleet to keep costs down and make training easier.
Take away their monopoly start spreading it around English yards they(Scots) will leave anyway without ship Oder bribes (Cameron ) secure shipbuilding future by ordering an amount of T26 or T31 suitable to a global looking nation 20 plus like the old Leanders Plus if we need volunteers to fill the gap on crews I’m up for it
What a fantastic sight that would be, type 26 frigates from the RN and RAN, exercising together and if New Zealand and Canada join the club, that would be a huge statement from the Commonwealth, the way .
I hope I live.long enough to see it !
The Kiwi’s usually buy the same as the RAN for compatibility, but they may decide they can no longer afford to equip at this level – maybe T31 for them instead.
Canada’s 15 ship order is the biggie to aim for given T26 is not in the running for the USN.
If the Australians use the type 26 design there ought to be significant savings from the greater volume.So I would expect to see some sensible swapping of work,sharing of experience and joint development of various components between the UK and Australia. I would also expect to see a reduction in the price from BAE.Oh look,a flying pig!
Allegedly, this whole issue is possibly down to the lack of professional ‘Programme Management?’ Like all lead vessels, there isn’t the luxury of a prototype vessel, the first hull is the prototype. Imagine instructing an aircraft manufacturer to build just one airframe then sell that directly to a customer! Astonishingly, that is how the warship business operates and I believe that is the only business to function in that way? Just for one moment imagine the level of stress that is placed on everyone involved, from management to the guys on the ground?
The only solution is to hire the very best people in line and planning management, to ensure all boxes are ticked and suppliers kept in the loop 24/12. Exhausting as it may seem, that is the only cure for poorly co-ordinated programmes. The other option is to call in the teams from the QE and Astute yards and try to identify where the job can be executed more effectively?
Not so with these OPV’s. There had already been 3 built and sold to Brazil. This whole deal was BAe’s version of a Brazilian! Aka Haircut for the UK Taxpayer where it hurts.
Yes these are essentially Amazonas class corvettes, sold to the politicians as just Batch 2 River Class OPVs for approval. So it’s not like these haven’t been built before…
“So far only one sheared and glued bolt head has been discovered on Medway”.
Oh that’s good things are progressing from the multiple ones found on HMS Forth.
Perhaps by the end of the build program we can expect to find all bolt heads with the threads still attached?