BAE Systems’ Maritime Services business is responsible for looking after 19 vessels based in Portsmouth. We were invited to see how the company is working to improve its methods, upgrade facilities and develop its people to maximise warship availability and provide greater choice to fleet planners.
Delivering FMSP
As part of the wider Future Maritime Support Programme (FMSP), in 2021 BAE Systems was awarded a 5-year £900M contract to maintain RN warships based in Portsmouth. Around 2,000 people are employed by the company in the naval base looking after the 2 Aircraft Carriers, 6 Type 45 destroyers, 2 Type 23 frigates, 6 Hunt-class MCMVs and 3 Batch 1 OPVs.
FMSP engineering is broadly split into two parts – asset management and ship maintenance and repair. Part of the asset management remit is to maximise useable availability for the customer, using data analysis to mitigate obsolescence issues effectively and to plan work packages for essential maintenance and capability upgrades. The asset management team work in partnership with ship repair to deliver integrated capability.
As a fundamental continuous development element of FMSP, BAE Systems is aiming to significantly reduce the time ships spend in dry dock, with an approach more in line with commercial ship repair practices. Effectively, other ship maintenance is being de-coupled from underwater work and spread evenly over six years, reducing the number of docking periods. This approach significantly reduces the length of what would previously have been a major refit, and helps to sustain the RN Continuous Carrier Availability (a concept introduced by PM, David Cameron at the NATO summit in Wales in September 2014 ). For the Type 45 Destroyers, a similar docking model and through-life support programme is being applied, replacing traditional upkeeps with short-duration dockings, supporting the customer’s need to increase the availability of the Type 45 class.
The BAE Systems Asset Management team have also worked to deliver a smart approach to Type 45 maintenance, reviewing and optimising what and when maintenance is undertaken, to deliver the customer with the desired level of platform sustainment, flexibility and capability, by optimising the Fleet Time Support Period (FTSP) programme. They have invested in new modelling techniques, to inform maintenance optimisation packages to deliver greater availability and enable data-driven decision making. This model is driving new ways of thinking, with plans to enact a trial of these new methodologies in the coming year, starting with the Type 45 class. There has also been some recent investment in additional spares inventory. While this approach requires a small additional upfront investment, the long-term benefit is improved availability and the insurance of holding spares.
Their ability to provide flexibility, agility and resilience was put to the test earlier this year when, HMS Prince of Wales was re-deployed at short notice whilst in a multi-million pound maintenance period. The efforts ensured that 17 different Capability Insertions were made safe or finished, 12 thorough examinations were undertaken and maintenance activities on 11 different power and propulsion works completed.
De-conflicting these works with the ship’s own preparations, including the embarkation of a huge volume of stores and transfer of equipment from HMS Queen Elizabeth was indicative of a significant and collaborative team effort. This response resulted in HMS Prince of Wales sailing from R5 (30 days’ notice) to participate in a NATO Exercise, Steadfast Defender, within seven days, with all engines and motors available.
-
HMS Queen Elizabeth in a support period, June 2022. The tents are to facilitate the re-surfacing of the flight deck coatings (Photo: Andy Amor). -
HMS Daring enters the newly commissioned 14 dock in August 2019 following a £15 million restoration. Upgrade of the facility included structural refurbishment, the addition of a sonar pit, a new cassion and giant gantry crane that can also service ships in the adjacent 15 dock. -
Following successful deployment to the Caribbean in 2023 and proving the PIP to be a success, HMS Dauntless went into number 14 dry dock for hull certification work. She is now out of dry dock and regenerating ahead of returning to sea shortly. -
Sampson Multifunction Radar being returned to HMS Dragon following overhaul at BAES Cowes facility, October 2023.
Global reach
BAE Systems’ commitment is not just limited to Portsmouth Naval Base. Forward deployment of naval assets around the world is integral to current RN strategy. Through the Virtual Class Output Management (COM) framework, BAE Systems supports the RN to coordinate and deliver maintenance support to complete Task Groups when they deploy globally. In the last year, they have completed significant volumes of Deployed Support Periods (DSP), mobilising at reach – deploying small, expert teams to the Middle East, USA, Gibraltar, Finland and Sweden, working alongside local commercial engineering delivery partners and suppliers.
So far this year, Type 45 Destroyer, HMS Diamond and Type 23 Frigate, HMS Lancaster, have undergone DSP. HMS Diamond was activated at short notice to deploy as part of Operation Prosperity Guardian to the Red Sea, upholding freedom of navigation. To ensure the Type 45 received essential maintenance whilst meeting her operational commitments, a team of 17 BAE Systems engineers deployed to Gibraltar. The team completed a two-week deployed support package working with RN engineers and contractor, Gibdock on maintenance and rectifying defects, ensuring HMS Diamond was in the best possible condition to return to operations.
This volume of complex warship support activity demands an agile and collaborative approach to conducting maintenance and defect rectification at reach. It reinforces the deployed support model that has been successfully utilised in the Middle East, and along with the achievements of the CSG21 and CSG23 deployments, has proven to deliver results as they generate towards CSG 25 deployment.
-
Model of Portsmouth Naval Base showing 14 and 15 dock. Although based in Devonport, the Type 26 frigates will come to Portsmouth for recertification docking under current plans approximately every three years for about 13 weeks. FTSP work will be done in Devonport (Photo: Navy Lookout). -
The yellow stickers indicate buildings classified as either grade two, grade one, or scheduled ancient monuments. This level of legacy heritage infrastructure has significantly complicated the development of the base into a modern facility (Photo: Navy Lookout). -
The naval base is divided into various Centres of Specialisation including carrier support, fleet time engineering, 15 dock destroyer & frigate upkeep and mine countermeasures. The main workshops and small ships centre of specialisation (Ship hall) are in the centre of the photo Since 2017, the Portsmouth 2030 programme has delivered a series of major upgrades to the base including the jetties and support buildings for the carriers, new facilities for training apprentices, new powerplants and investments in green technologies that have substantially reduced emissions. -
The QEC Centre of Specialisation covers 70,000 square meters and includes not just the two new jetties, but several new buildings. The Illustrious Complex has amenities for the engineering workforce with domestic, catering and recreational facilities. -
BAES engineering apprentice under instruction at the Skills Development Centre (SDC).
Wider investments
Although the FMSP contract only formally guarantees BAE Systems work until 2026, Maritime Services remains committed to investing in its Early Careers programme for the long term – ensuring the maritime defence sector has the right skills in the right volume. Since the start of FMSP, their outreach programme has reached over 26,500 young people within the community through various STEM events and activities. This year, around 500 graduates and apprentices will be taken on in Portsmouth, and applications to become apprentices are hugely oversubscribed with 1487 applications for 101 places.
Considerable effort has been devoted to developing sustainable working practices in partnership with suppliers to reduce carbon emissions, and the amount of waste generated. Some of these measures include using 100% recycled and recyclable scaffolding wrap, replacing 22,000 items of packaging to be fully recyclable – achieving a 47% reduction in costs, and installing PPE recycling bins across the base – resulting in future savings of 400 tonnes of carbon and thousands of gallons of water.
They have also trialled a propeller cleaning exercise in HMS Queen Elizabeth, removing the bio-foul build-up, and saving in excess of £500,000 of excessive fuel burn and associated greenhouse gas emissions. They are currently developing a plan to implement this on other ships in the fleet.
Providing long-term investments in naval support, developing processes backed by data modelling and analysis, while implementing short-duration dockings and through-life support programmes, benchmarked against global competitors, will help BAE Systems to continue delivering improved levels of availability to the RN. Successful execution of the current FMSP contract will in turn help to export their naval base management and ship support capabilities globally.
Anyone want to play BAE Marketing bullsh*t bingo? I’m sure that good things are happening but this is typical PR trying to pack as many buzzwords in as possible.
Male Bovine Excrement just about sums this up perfectly. The top of the page says “Independent Royal Navy news and analysis”. Let’s analyse PIP performance.
How many PIPs have now been fully completed, with the ship accepted back into the fleet?
How many type 45s are currently being “Pipped”?
Is this new system an oportunity to reset the PIP timeline, or am I being excessively cynical?
We’ve got 1 PIP ship back, 2 more before the end of the year, Defender in PIP/Camm till 2026, Diamond starting now, Duncan probably when it returns.
Hmme
Well I’m not so sure all is well in PiP land…..
Some of the hulls are taking crazy long times to regenerate.
I’ll be happy when I can see progress speeding up and completed.
I smell skills shortages and knowledge deficits as well as tight commercials.
I’d be delighted to be proved wrong when more than three are deployable.
Difficult to know how the process is going without a detailed knowledge of the delivery dates BAe is funded to make. The RN also might not want ships before a certain date as the know crew won’t be available before then.
Two more back from PIP by end of year? Daring should have been back months ago, and its gone deadly quiet about her, she’s only the second Type 45 into PIP after Dauntless which was also strangely out of action for a far longer period than expected? In all honesty I don’t belive PIP os going to plan, and that they’ve encountered unexpected difficulties with it.
Isnt those new engines insertion/ mid life refit a different process to the BAE maintenance and repair at Portsmouth covered here.
Dragon has completed PIP and has crew back onboard. Daring has also completed PIP but requires more work due to being out of service for 7 years.
Dauntless is also back now, did have a lock dock period which included hull certification.
The extra work should have been pretty obvious on full survey prior to docking. If it wasn’t then a poor survey was done.
I suspect it is an issue around STOROB causing a shortage of some critical parts that are taking a lot of time to have produced.
Coupled with a lack of crew.
That said T45 has proved itself and so I’d be amazed if every possible avenue wasn’t being explored to get as many as possible into an operational state.
The PIP for T45 isnt part of the wider multi ship (19) maintenance/refit contract
That was a full mid life upgrade.
Read the story more closely again
Need to sort access to Victory Jetty. To get tools / parts from the car you have to wander along to the ARK Royal building, then back again. Ridiculous.
Is this because of a need to clear security between the car park and the jetty?
Yes. But they could open a “on foot” gate, closer to Victory jetty, with just one guard there. You could then park up that end of the jetty, external to security, this would alleviate the chronic parking problems associated with the carriers. With 2 alongside, its dire.
I am always surprised how long it takes to walk across HMNB.
Now do Submarines
Seems everything is Portsmouth
When Devonport closing
Devonport is submarines.
Devonport is getting major work for submarine maintenance so threat of it closing is out the window.
May also end up with maintenance facilities for the new frigates.
If you read the article you’d know the Type 26s will be based at Devonport and that FTSP work for them will be conducted there.
Stick to singing mate.
Don’t think Devonport will be closing anytime soon. They like to keep their submarines on a long term basis, the recent SSBN refit demonstrated that (7 years). What a shambles.
What about KBS?
All
It is great to read here on Navy Lookout that BAe (Portmouth) and Babcock (Devonport) are now furiously competing against each other……….
…..such that both of our two world-class (note 1) companies are now trying very hard – and by the looks of it from these photos, suceeding well beyond all reasonable expectations – to develop the two most badley organised, least effficent and thus slowest and most unproductive naval dockyards to be found anywhere on the surface of Planet Earth …..
regards Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Note 1. Please excuse my sarcasum…..and please consider this phrase an oxymoron….
You might be a bit peeved about all of this but trust me those of us that serve (served in my case) feel the pain even more as our concerns are either ignored or told not enough money for that. But don’t worry we’ll create another flag rank officer’s position to look into the issues.
Very pleased when someone other than BAe got the Type 31 contract!, wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw then!
You haven’t been to US Dockyards …they are a whole ‘nother level of bad!
I don’t honestly believe that the UK dockyards are all bad. They are not perfect by any means.
The Spanish practices are out of the window – rightly – and a collaborative approach between unions and the companies is in evidence.
Part of that is that pay has had to be increased to deal with the workforce recruitment and retentions. So it is a well paid workforce who want to be there for the right reasons.
The other part is that physical co dictions and site investment have been impressive and they are two genuinely modern ship yards.
Third thing is order book and for once it looks like a steady drum beat if work is assured. Part of this is an effective comms job by RN and industry that the private sector can’t just whistle up a few welders and warship magically appears. Part if it us that finally someone has convinced HMT that building consistently is cheaper due to the productivity improvements of an experienced workforce.
What do US Dockyards have to do with the UK?
I am sure Afghanistan shipyards are even worse, lol.
If war happens here in the Europe where do you think our ships will be looked after?
When did that last happen RN ships maintained in US in war?
If war should happen, how long do you think the RN operation fleet would last?
Start storing CAMM and Sea Viper in the US. Else try France, Spain or Italy.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13052235/Britain-navy-defend-power-abroad-Falklands-invaded.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cydv2v3170eo
Oh………………….
RN ships were maintained, repaired, upgraded , the last time was when U.K. shipyards were under attack from bombing, ie WW2. Hasn’t been the threat or the need since.
The RN fleet would last longer than the Russian fleet, or any other fleet sent to take on NATO.
Alright, then there is no need for any increase in spending for the Navy,
Rachel Reeves will be happy to know,
Wow.
Navies have global reach. As the RN sees itself as a ‘blue water’ navy it ha to think, well, ‘globally’……….
We live in age of long range weapons with global reach too.
All your posts have said is that you haven’t the faintest idea of what sea power is. There is more to this Weapons Top Trumps.
Never mind this isn’t just about attacking ships but attacking the infrastructure that supports ships too. The former can at least move the latter cannot.
Nor is it about NATO fleets being better than (Muh)Russia(!) fleet. The weapons don’t care whether the launched from ships, submarines, or RUSSIAN TERRITORY. Russia is a land power. Go look at a map.
Good grief.
There is a “black hole” in the nation’s budget and I was informed that the Navy is bound to win against any fleet, ships, weapons, and what not,
Simple facts?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cydv2v3170eo
Good that you know where Russia is and did not you support Putin?
Nobody informed you the RN would win against any fleet. You were told that the RN would last a lot longer than Russia’s. But even with the whole of NATO, we would struggle to defeat the Chinese Navy.
But you’re also being simplistic in your comparison of navy versus navy. Modern naval doctrine is you don’t send surface ships to sink your enemy’s surface ships, you use aircraft and submarines for that. We also don’t cross the T any more to fire broadsides using 32 pounders…
“The RN fleet would last longer than the Russian fleet, or any other fleet sent to take on NATO” —
so lasting is not winning? and any fleet does not include the PLAN?
Then Russia is also not losing but just lasting less.
No lasting is not winning; that’s a pretty easy concept to grasp.
Against PLAN it depends where, because that determines how much land-based air power can be used to destroy the opposing fleet. But you’ve not really got around the concept of using air power to destroy surface ships, might I suggest you look up “Battle of Taranto”?
It is good to know that RN is still using those Swordfish Stringbag, it is definitely winning and not just lasting a bit longer. Number 11 should take note when budgeting.
Those few thousand AShM, Hypersonic, and Ballistic anti-ship missiles of the PLAN will not be a match,
“But even with the whole of NATO, we would struggle to defeat the Chinese Navy.”
Fair point.
July 29, 2024
pentagon-has-insufficient-forces
You don’t say!
How the mighty RN has fallen now even struggling against those Chinese Junk!
Chinese junk? Really?
https://www.csis.org/analysis/unpacking-chinas-naval-buildup
“Citing new commercial satellite imagery of the Dalian Shipyard in Dalian, Northeast China’s Liaoning Province, overseas media including online news portal Naval News reported on Tuesday that China has recently launched its 10th Type 055 large destroyer and is ramping up ship production.
It marks the launch of the second recently launched Type 055, with the Shanghai-based Jiangnan Shipyard having launched the previous ship in late 2023, Paris-based media outlet Naval News reported.
From January 2020 to April 2023, the PLA Navy had commissioned eight Type 055 large destroyers from the first batch of production, according to official releases.”
The Type 055 is considered the world’s best destroyer in terms of comprehensive capabilities, as it can accompany aircraft carriers or play the role of a command ship.
Illustrates your total lack of knowledge if you dismiss the PLAN navy as junk…
“The Type 052D destroyer (NATO/OSD reporting name: Luyang III-class destroyer) is a class of guided-missile destroyers in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), and currently one of the most numerous principal surface combatant classes in service of the PLAN Surface Force.”
“The Chinese naval shipbuilding industry continues to demonstrate that it is in a league of its own: A ship spotter photo released today shows five Type 052D destroyers all taking shape in a construction dock at the Dalian shipyard.
Contacted by Naval News, two Chinese military observers confirmed that there are currently 25 destroyers of the class (13 Type 052D and 12 Type 052DL) currently in service with the PLAN.”
The number of radars on that ship tells you something interesting…..
NATO current CMS’ now network the fused radar picture.
This ship doesn’t it has one radar for one function. So fundamentally at best a pre 1990’s approach. Sure the sensors could be better than the approach but it is still an interesting thought……
Nato vessels have gone to around two main radar bands.
T45 and European similar have 2.
Spy-7 uses 2 separate antennas and the Spy-6 has cleverly mixed the two modules for S and X on the same antenna
Indeed. It would be interesting to know if this was fact or fiction.
https://interestingengineering.com/military/china-ai-radar-defeat-us-growlers
Fiction.
Real full EW is never switched on for test. The systems and modes are very closely held secrets you don’t want anyone to know so they can mitigate.
They may have switched some basic stuff on, to see what happens.
Opening VLS covers is very aggressive and unprofessional. That is revealing – as it says ‘we feel threatened’. So to me that says the opposite.
5 destroyers under construction at same shipyard ?
How many AB F3 destroyers do you think the US has under construction at the same time at the 2 shipyards.
At 2 orders per year and around 3 years build time that makes 6 from keel laying through fitting out ( remember your link shows Dalian fitting out its ships too
RN has about 4-5 warships under construction – at same time
BAE has1 at the final fitting out and 2 more at the yard.
Babcock has 2 in build in its yard
Edit BAE has started build on its 4th with sub contracted hull modules
https://www.navylookout.com/type-26-frigate-construction-and-shipyard-investment-progress-update/
Correct, five ships are currently under construction.
I dont believe the photo is genuine. Not the normal method to build destroyers like this in dock basin
This is a recent (2024) satellite photo if the actual Dalian naval shipyard where the 052 Destroyers are built, not a local social media ‘spotter’
.webp
“Satellite image showing the Dagushan facility of Dalian in late April this year. The Type 055 now launched visible in drydock (top green box). Modules for a second Type 055 also visible (lower green box). In addition multiple Type 052D-modules also visible (red boxes). Image own work based on GE imagery.”
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2024/05/dalian-shipbuilding-launches-type-055-increases-production-at-dagushan/
The article with the included image was posted on 21 Aug 2022, it’s taking them roughly three years to build them.
Your image was taken in late April 2024 as you say.
Still a satellite photo of the naval shipyard shows individual destroyers or hull sections in each building dock- not a 4 pack from a chinese source that says its recent
Its clearly not even the same naval dockyard and maybe even showing fishing factory ships or something …
With China dont believe your eyes or their claims
“How many AB F3 destroyers do you think the US has under construction at the same time at the 2 shipyards.”
I have no idea.
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2024/04/02/us-navy-ship-programs-face-years-long-delays-amid-labor-supply-woes/
Posted today 30.07.2024
State Dept’s Campbell: Gap between US, China shipbuilding is ‘deeply concerning’
An idiotic response, you seem to think losing ships and sailors is acceptable.
Yes I want the RN with our NATO allies to win any conflict against Russia, but I want it with as few casualties on our side as possible. More spending on the RN will achieve a faster and less costly victory.
So how much in monetary terms are you personally prepared to pay extra per year to achieve this “faster and less costly victory” per year? £1000, £2000 or more?
This might help the Chancellor.
I’ve already paid £50k in income tax this year. Maybe if losers such as yourself got a job instead of claiming benefits then taxes wouldn’t have to rise…
So you are too stingy to pay more and “losing ships and sailors is acceptable“?
There will be no increase in spending for RN.
BAe run a number of US yards.
The comment about being the worst in the world …UK yards are not but admittedly not the best
Gunbuster
Factual correction….. yes I have…… I have previously posted here on NL that the town, base, and especially the dockyard at Groton (Mass), fully lives up to its name….
Therefore I will 100% agree with your key point that – today – the US dockyards are, as you have quite rightly said, a complete and utter pain in the a**e to even try to get into: let alone to be able to get to do any proper work once inside…..
…….so, you have my sympathy…..and I bet you send them the “correct invoice” .
..because, once working inside the “military-industrial complex”, it is always the final customer (i.e. end user) who pays the (often very big) bill for “lost productivity”…
..which is often called “queueing up time”…. (or, in my own case, called me getting very bored very very quickly)……
.
——————
However, on an historical note, up until 9/11, the US dockyards were actually very easy to get into….. .indeed, right up until that fateful day, the US superpower was so confident about their homeland’s national security that the US Department of Defence (DOD) even did guided public tours of the Pentagon (note 1)….
…..however, then everything changed.. …when 19 hi-jackers attacked the USA military hyperpower with nothing more sophisticated than a few box-cutters……and so wiped out much of the aforementioned DOD headquarters and also the entire downtown of the USA’s largest city (3,000+ died)
……so, as a result of that massive increase in homeland security, the productivity of all of the US yards (both shipbuilding and refits) has greatly declined since the 12th September 2001…..
……..and thus warship refits “stateside” now take lot longer than they used to…… and thus also cost a hell of a lot more……all as a direct result of all of that lost productivity……
————————-
However, all joking apart, the RN really needs to get its act together, at both Portsmouth and Devonport.
The fundamental key point with any type of large-scale industrial operation, which is fundamentally what shipbuilding has always been, always comes down to just one very simple question:
“Can one get the entire workforce, with ALL of the necessary materials, tools, plant and equipment quickly to the workface: and, once operating at the workface, can all of those workers be kept working safely, efficently and effectively?
However, as “wandering contractor” has as quite rightly pointed out (directly above), the entire layout of the whole dockyard at Portsmouth is, and I shall now be polite = “crap” (and so, in my humble opinion, Pompey comprehensively fails that test…)
That has happened despite the fact that over a quarter-of-a-billion quid of taxpayers hard-earned readies was, in very recent times, spent building that brand-spanking new jetty for the two QE class carriers….
Furthermore, some other buildings are being / will soon be knocked down at Portsmouth Naval Base = just to create more space for yet more car parking.
Therefore the suggestion just made by Russ (directly above), that there now needs to be appointed a senior RN flag officer for Supervising Dockyard Parking (note 2), is probably a very wise one…..
and then the RN could do what is done in many large dockyards – and especially major ports – all around the world = implement park and ride….
….because that entire coordinated approach – to improving all aspects of Portsmouth’s productivity – might just help to get a few much-needed RN warships out of the dockyard…..to what they are supposed to be doing = fight wars….
….because even the long-range AD system of Sampson and Sea Viper cannot shoot down any Iranian-made drones which are flying over the Red Sea – when the T45 itself is moored up, motionless, alongside at Pompey…
Regards Peter (IrateTaxpayer)
Note 1. My sister was very impressed by her public guided tour of the Pentagon: especially the key fact that their definition of a superpower (back in 1996) was that the US DoD had 44,500 telephones inside just that one building….
Note 2. I am sure many senor officers will be delighted to be told that they are being appointed to the new role of “SDP” = until they look up the TLA translator…
Ports and Dev dockyards are constrained by
The use of commercial yards helps. Commercial providers abroad (Me!) can do things to assist and we do but as I said complex systems need OEMs. Uk Commercial yards also help A&P are very good at it and they are another company I have worked very closely with on RFA alongside and dry dock maintenance.
Park and ride was a thing in the past. Nobody walked from Western Mill to South yard you always got the shuttle bus.
Gunbuster
I will “half agree” with you….
However, and no prizes for guessing that next comes the BIG BUT…..
There is no lack of money = only a lack of wllingness to “do the job properly” when comes to properly modernising the essential infrastucture which supports the fleet……
Regards Peter (Irate Taxpayer)
Yeah, sorry but 24 years in the RN and you can’t convince me of any of this. Whilst there are issues with the Government doing all the work (owning dockyards etc.) – it is so much worse when you employ companies that have ‘shareholders’, they don’t give a flying f**k about anything other than money/shares/payback.
Been there/seen that!
Yes. Government is not business and you can’t constantly apply business methods as they aren’t always applicable.
I worked a lot with the T23 in the Gulf, the one that was Babcock. I worked very closely with the Babcock /Platform team through several alongside maint periods and short notice OPDEF defect repairs. Even during COVID the arrangement was excellent and Montrose crew where over the moon with the support they got. The Babcock team was also excellent.
Some stuff we couldn’t do such as complex weapon systems but the majority of the Marine Engineering and Husbandry stuff wasn’t an issue. That said I did put my Weapon Enginering head back on and did some system fault finding and repair with the crew a couple of times. (Its a bit sad when you remember where fuse panels are and the maintainer doesnt but he was a new straight out of the box Leading Hand.)
The main issue with support and maint periods abroard is existing contracts with UK support OEMs and complex systems. OEMs need to flyout (Business Class of course) and stay in secure/approved hotel accom. That is an extra cost that isn’t a factor in for the UK work. The premier Inn in Pompey is a lot cheaper than a 4/5 star hotel in the Gulf!
On the general question of ship availability what is happening to the T31?
They seemed to have failed on the last promise of a ship launch by midyear. That is not the end of the world but it is another deadline they set for themselves that they have missed.
The real issue of having the first ship still in the shed is the effect on the second and maybe the third ship schedules.
Quite.
I’ve been saying that for a while #3 is running behind because there is nowhere to assemble it. That is becoming blatantly obvious now.
I *suspect* quite a lot if it is fabricated but can’t be assembled…..
read the last story on T31 again. They dont promise a launch date at all
Probably isnt a definitive word.
Navy Lookout
“ consider the balance between outfitting in the hall and what needs to be done after launch”
That is a depressing statement all of its own.
You might as well write ‘we are making up the project plan as we are going on because things are not getting done as planned due to resource constraints’.
In this context ‘resource constraint’ likely = skilled people.
FMSP is about to be replaced by NSIGN; not sure what this article is all about unless it’s to reinforce the BAE status in Portsmouth.
Its only at RFI stage , and will still have multiple contracts , just as FMSP has different ones for Devonport (Babcock) and Portsmouth ( BAE)
Could do with an update on Harland and Wolff, after dropping their 100% loan guarantee ask back down to the normal 80% it was still rejected by the government last week as too high risk an investment. The financial struggles of the company have also impacted its Scilly Ferries Penzance to St Mary’s venture which was due to launch its highspeed catamaran ferry service in early May but the new boat Atlantic Wolff only arrived on the 23rd ahead of its fresh launch date of the 24th of July. Then on the launch day they announced they had cancelled the first weeks sailings due to the financial issues but the service would definitely start on the 30th of July. The the very next day on the 25th of July they announced the service was now postponed until the 20th August, again because of the financial issues. The locals are pointing out they will now be launching a new service only three weeks before the end of the season which is itself a financial misstep.
There was a parliamentary written answer on H&W but it didn’t contain anything new. I suspect the most important part of the company statement was the appointment of Rothschild & Co to advise on the future direction of the company. I think this indicates the lenders who forced the change in CEO would like to find a buyer for the business.
Probably only one bidder a certain Spanish company?
The other alternative is Babcock but then and transfer the work to their existing yard.
I don’t think BAEs would want the headache?
This article was sponsored by BAE Systems. Unless otherwise credited, all photos: BAE Systems.
Yes, a disappointing development from Navy Lookout as the articles here are usually so unbiased and well-informed. A league above other U.K. based sites.
Even if this article is totally honest and accurate, the fact that it’s sponsored gives the appearance it might not be.
Just because an article is sponsored doesn’t mean it has to read like it comes from the corporate publicity machine. At least we are left under no illusions with this piece.
How many volunteer stories have you written or any media articles at all ?
As interesting as HMNB Pompey is there be other news. JMSDF’s Upgraed Mogami class is looking mighty impressive. They will build 12 in just 5 years. They will complete the 12th standard Mogami in 2027. Astounding building times for us here in the West. This is one of the competitors for RAN second line frigate. I don’t think they will be disappointed with a purchase of this design.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUgJADMQkUc&ab_channel=NavalNews
That this was a BAE advert was pretty obvious on reading it, with BAE mentioned a dozen times and Babcock not once, even when talking about Devonport, carrier and forward maintenance. Half the piece was on BAE aspirations with no review of success rates, or real discussion on the well-publicised problems of carrier and Type 45 availability. We also get very little on small ship maintenance. Even though the Hunts and RB1s are not long for this Navy, more than a listed mention at the front would have been appreciated. Nevertheless there was a lot of good information and I’m glad I read it.
I felt that this was a piece on BAE ship maintenance, not on Portsmouth ship maintenance. I would have liked a little more on the geography and future of the dry docks and which dock takes which ship class, like we had in the recent Devonport article.
Global forward maintenance is an interesting topic for another article. Despite all the good bits we get from Gunbuster and others in the comments section, a systematic review would not go amiss.
Finally, someone sees the light while the rest are just blindingly making comments, hear hear.
It was obvious because NL didn’t hide it, or did you miss the
“This article was sponsored by BAE Systems. ”
at the bottom of the article?
Of course I didn’t miss it, but see my earlier comment: sponsored by doesn’t have to equal publicity piece. It’s possible for a company like BAE to pay for things as a community service. MoD/DE&S looks kindly on that sort of thing and many defence companies, including BAE, do it.
One of your complaints was it didnt mention Babcock , or Devonport…..
I do think you missed the advertorial credit and seemed surprised it was all about BAE at Portsmouth
Utter rubbish being written as people try to find positives from a service that has been neglected, but also poorly managed by its own kind and fleeced by 3rd parties.
Changing acronyms, from DED or AMP to the latest variant will not better the vessels availability I fear.
Accounting, and Just in Time procurement is now entrenched in the service. What this means is robbing kit from one ship to put in another. Sadly, the RN is a hollowed out shadow of its former self. Interested to know when Daring will finally reappear.
Inevitably, it will get worse as 3 services are given equal standing, with a diminishing pool of resource in form of personnel and finance.
Hope the SDSR is a true review, but sadly I believe it will obviously be heavily influenced by treasury.
Hard times ahead.
“This year, around 500 graduates and apprentices will be taken on in Portsmouth, and applications to become apprentices are hugely oversubscribed with 1487 applications for 101 places.” Such a shame to let this eager talent go to waste, could some of these would be engineer apprentices not be transferred to RN Engineers and asked/offered to join up?