Serco Maritime Services operate the tugs that are commonly seen assisting RN vessels to leave and return to harbour. Serco also provides a diverse range of other marine services, that support warships and submarines. In this article we examine another of the key enablers that the RN could not sail without.
A PFI that works
The RMAS (Royal Maritime Auxiliary Service) which provided waterfront support to the RN was semi-privatised in 1996. The RMAS fleet was in a poor state and a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) offered an opportunity to recapitalise the fleet. In 2007 the RMAS was dissolved and the MoD signed a 15-year, £1bn Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract with Serco Denholm Marine Services Limited for the Future Provision of Maritime services (FPMS). SD took over the remaining vessels and between 2007-10 invested around £130 Million in 29 new vessels. Serco bought out its partner Denhom in 2007 but the SD prefix for its vessels has been retained. As the fleet was upgraded, there was a turnover of personnel as modern vessels with much-reduced manning requirements and entirely new ways of operating were introduced. By 2015 the service had settled into the new routine and is performing well, 99.9% of taskings have been delivered on time. Private Partnerships with the MoD and across government have had very mixed results and gained a poor reputation. The Army recruitment contract with Capita and the collapse of Carillion are examples of how they can go wrong. A collaborative relationship and an intelligent customer, together with the right initial investment in modern vessels are cited as the reason why this particular partnership is a success. The FPMS contract is due for renewal in 2022 and Serco expect to be in fierce competition with other marine service providers.
Serco Maritime Services is part of the Serco Group that has around 70 contracts for a range of support functions across the MoD. The company now operate a total of 113 vessels in the UK, including a contract with International Nuclear Services (INS) to manage and crew the 4 ships that transport nuclear materials in and out of the UK and across the world. Including the INS vessels, Serco employs around 1,000 seafarers in the UK but it should be noted they are not Sponsored Reservists and there is no provision for the vessels to be deployed in a conflict zone. During the Falklands War ocean-going RMAS tugs deployed in support of the task force but the current fleet of tugs do not have the range and any such requirement would have to be met by ships taken up from trade (STUFT).
Multi-tasking
Serco are responsible for the safe transportation of fuel and ammunition between depots and warships at the 3 naval bases for distribution to the fleet, although the actual handling of munitions is performed by DM staff. To completely outfit a Type 45 destroyer with ammunition is a 3 week activity of planning and execution. It takes about 10 barge loads and 4 days alongside at the UHAF to fully load or unload, a destroyer. There is strict regulation about the volume of ammunition that can be loaded simultaneously. In Portsmouth, there are 3 fuel oil barges with a total capacity of 2,200 tons. They are able to pump about 100 tons per hour into a warship so to fully fuel HMS Queen Elizabeth with her total capacity of 4,800 tonnes of diesel and 3,700 tonnes of aviation fuel is a lengthy process.
Some of the work is distinctly unglamorous but vital to the functioning of the more ‘sexy’ front-line warships. Sullage and tank cleaning barges help decontaminate fuel tanks and remove sewage and grey water. Serco are also responsible for the movement of personnel around harbours as well as providing the transport for Admiralty pilots. During the dredging of Portsmouth harbour to prepare for the arrival of the aircraft carriers, pilot boats conducted 1,600 tasks in support of the contractors, about three times their normal level. Navigation marks and buoys in the naval ports also have to maintained and updated.
As an example, a Type 45 destroyer returning to Portsmouth after a deployment will require two or sometimes three tugs to guide it into the harbour and bring it alongside. It will be cold-moved across to the UHAF to be de-ammunitioned and later taken back to its berth or into a non-tidal basin. Fuel and waste tanks may require cleaning and Serco barges will collect the sullage. As this ship prepares to turn to sea, the process is performed in reverse with the addition of refuelling and the supply of fresh water. In general terms, Serco’s workload will be inversely proportional to that of the fleet. When the harbours are more empty there is less to be done but as the fleet returns for Summer or Christmas leave periods, demand for its services increase.
This is not a ‘pay as you go’ contract. If the RN decides to make occasional additional harbour movements above what has been planned, there is no extra cost to the taxpayer and a service level agreement specifies a flexible arrangement. The requirements of the Navy are the priority but Serco can assist with commercial vessel movements if they have spare capacity and profits from this work are shared with the MoD. The company is always looking at innovation to save costs and draws on best practice from the world of commercial shipping. The majority of their new vessels have been purchased from Dutch shipbuilder, Damen who have specialist expertise in the construction of tugs harbour craft. It is a shame there is no British company able to complete with Damen, but Serco has an established and successful relationship with this supplier.
Onboard the SD Indulgent
SD indulgent is a fairly typical modern harbour tug built by Damen in Poland in 2009. She is an Azimuth Stern Drive Tug (ASD) of about 158 tonnes and, together with sister SD Independent, are the workhorses vessel supporting warship movements around Portsmouth harbour. She spends the vast majority of her time at work in her homeport but occasionally makes longer passages to help with naval movements around the UK. She assisted HMS Duncan into Cardiff docks for the NATO summit in 2014 and may be called on to assist with the departure of submarine HMS Audacious from Barrow to begin sea trials in Spring 2019. In normal operation, she has a crew of four who can live in reasonable comfort on board when she is assigned as the duty tug. There are 6 berths on the lower deck, a mess room for up to 12 people, laundry room, showers and a galley below the bridge.
The tug crews in the naval bases work on a rotating duty basis. One of the larger tugs is always assigned as duty vessel for a week at a time. The crew live on board and the diesel engines are kept warm, ready to sail with 10 mins notice. A second tug crew is kept at 2 hrs notice to sail and a third at 8 hrs notice. HMS Queen Elizabeth requires six tugs to leave or enter Portsmouth and this evolution takes considerable forward planning.
Around the bases
SD vessels are mainly employed around the three Naval Bases but there are also Serco facilities at Greenock on the Clyde and Kyle of Lochalsh. Each of the five sites is slightly different in focus. Besides being a frigate and amphibious base, at Devonport, there is a lot of personnel transfer work and harbour movements associated with FOST which provides training to the RN and foreign navies. Serco also supports regular submarine movements at Devonport, although this is rapidly declining. Submarine movements are ideally done with a matched pair of two tugs of the same class on either side of the boat. Moving the large Vanguard class boats through the confined channels is the most critical of these tasks. Devonport also has by far the oldest tug fleet which is due for replacement soon after the FPMS contract is renewed in 2022. There are about 25 Serco vessels based in Scotland, the main work being in support of submarines. Great Harbour in Greenock is primarily a berthing facility for vessels working in the Clyde area. The harbour at Kyle of Lochalsh is a logistics base for vessels that support the work at the nearby British Underwater Test and Evaluation Centre (BUTEC) which is engaged in underwater weapons trials, sonar development and testing vessels noise signatures. Serco also supports the RN in overseas territories and has a small presence in Gibraltar, the Falklands and Cyprus.
The distinctive black and white SD vessels provide a unique and vital service to the RN and are another important part of the little-appreciated infrastructure needed by an effective navy.
How can a tiny country like Holland have a commercial shipbuilding industry building tugs yet we don’t? How come France, Germany and Italy have commercial shipbuilding industries building cruise ships but we don’t? It’s almost as if this has been to us done on purpose…………..
No we did it to ourselves. British shipbuilding is not competitive.
Have to get our costs down.
European shipyards can’t compete on their own against South Korean or Japanese competitors anymore than ours can. The difference is their governments are supportive in providing subsidies and other incentives like tax breaks. They do this not to prop up failing industries but because they recognise the value of retaining high value skills and that ultimately domestic orders recycle a lot of money back in the economy whereas seemingly cheaper foreign orders see virtually every penny leave the country.
To have a thriving shipbuilding industry that can compete worldwide will require massive taxpayer subsidies. The government is reluctant to do that.
In France they pay no business rates and there electricity is charged at cost.
When the new ships yards in Korea and Japan started to build tankers and bulk cargo ships instead of UK yards diversifying into more technical ships such as tugs, off shore supply and cruise ships they tried to compete with the Asian yards but were to costly, by the time they had realised their mistakes the European yards were years ahead of them.
Mostly what the others said below; these countries’ governments support their industries because they appreciate the knock on benefits of doing so enough to front up the higher face cost. The British government doesn’t do that because they’ve relied for too long on London’s financial sector and services to be the backbone of British economy. That’s mainly because they either have a direct stake in financial services or are friends with those who do. Why bother funding or developing anything else if you don’t have a direct stake in it? Besides, financial services show quicker growth and larger profit margins, so who cares about the rest of the country? (To be absolutely clear, I don’t agree with that at all, it just seems to be the way that politicians have been behaving for the last 30 odd years. I think it’s disgraceful)
As for the Netherlands, their entire economy is basically to act as a shipping and logistics hub for Europe and out globally. They’re almost obliged to have a commercial shipbuilding industry, but note that the tugs themselves were actually built in Poland…
In a way it has. For example the British brewing industry was reduced to small scale Ale brewing by the Government’s Beer orders. However the Belgians were allowed by the EU to build up Interbrew ( now Indbev) into the World’s Largest Brewery. So yes the EU is partisan in allowing continental businesses a clear road. I must say we have unpatriotic industry chiefs and financiers who have allowed the sale and dismantling of UK industry. This epic of wanton destruction is noteworthy.
#BringBackRMAS
Why? The new arrangements seam to work fine and cost a lot less. Governments typically not good at running businesses.
“SEEMS to work fine and cost a lot less “Who says?I have very little doubt that Serco runs a tighter ship than the civil service, but they are also paying their shareholders and it costs a lot more for them to borrow money than the government. PFI is basically an expensive accounting trick used to push expenditure foward. Billions of pounds have been committed by previous governments that now have to be paid for.
This article sounds like a puff piece for Serco,who have an appalling record in other fields.
“Clearly someone is getting very rich on the back of precious defence funds and is a prime example of why PFI is a plague on all our houses”,and much more on this scam-STRN,17/01/2017
“PFIs don’t work, all you are doing is mortgaging the future “,Mike Turner CEO BAE systems 2003.Now Babcock CEO!
As suggested in the article, not all PFIs have been a success but the FPMS contract is an example of one that is working, Serco are certainly not making huge profits and the next contract will be a tough negotiation. Without this PFI the RMAS fleet would probably still be soldiering on with a fleet of ancient vessels. That said, the inherent principles of PFI are not good, something govt has recognised and stated there will be no more.
One day Grubbie, you might just manage to say something positive about the world instead of an endless stream of negativity.
I do agree that Serco has done a splendid job at keeping the fleet going, and I am fully aware of how government run organisation seem to be underfunded quite a lot. The comment was kind of sarcastic but also sort of protesting my dislike for privatisation, and I do believe in time we should renationalise a lot of what has been taken away i.e. Royal Mail etc. Trains I’m not too worried about! But the privatisation of supporting organisation for the services has become ridiculous, air training is now done by Babcock and Lockheed I believe, The RMAS, RAE, ARE, NATS to name very few, the naval bases are run by Babcock and BAE now as well! I believe that if it supports the armed forces it needs to be run by the government and not a private company.
But my comment was slightly sarcastic with a bit of honesty in there as well!
There is nothing good to say about PFI.Forget about the management side of it, the private sector is almost certainly better at that.
As you say, an investment needed to be made and the government could have just directly made it and then made the repayments. Instead it got a private company to do it for them.It costs more for a private company to borrow money than a government and they also tend to charge a large fee for the service.The money still has to be paid back, but the bill is bigger. PFI can only be a more expensive way of borrowing money, no matter how clever everyone is and the only reason for it is to keep the debts off the books.When this unnecessarily large bill comes in, the forces are required to reduce the numbers of ships and aircraft, etc to pay for it, but PFI and long term service contracts stay the same despite the smaller numbers and in the event of the provider getting it wrong and making a loss, they go bust leaving the government on hook after a few glorious years of dividends and executive pay.
I hope that this explains why there can be no such thing as a good PFI.
Also, beware of PFIs in disguise.
Thank God for these companies like Serco, BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin. Where would we be without them? £1 billion for a defective destroyer, £160 million for a defective fighter plane, £3 billion for an enormous carrier where we can’t afford enough of those £160 million defective aircraft to use properly.
I feel so safe at night given thanks to these companies delivering us value for money weapons with our low taxes to protect us from those evil Russians.
It doesn’t matter that we don’t really need many tug boats any more since the fleet is so small and those ships we do have don’t sail much because they either brake down or we can’t afford to operate them. Serco should get paid regardless of this!
Very cynical David