The Fleet Solid Support Ships programme for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary has successfully completed the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), which marks the first major milestone in the programme.

The PDR has been completed in working sessions between the Ministry of Defence (MOD), Navantia UK as prime contractor of the programme and BMT, who has led the functional design phase.

According to the firm:

“This milestone has confirmed the robustness and maturity of the design, marking the progression of the programme. The FSS now enters a new phase, focused on detailed design and heading towards the start of construction in 2025, according to the schedule.

The completion of the PDR has been possible thanks to close collaboration between Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S), Navantia UK and British designer BMT. As prime contractor, Navantia UK has overseen the design phase, contributing its programme management expertise in order to ensure the seamless integration of all facets, such as scheduling, procurement, and production engineering.”

An MOD spokesperson said:

“We are delighted to see completion of this important milestone on schedule. We would like to acknowledge Navantia UK and BMT’s strong commitment to delivering an innovative and capable design, as well as their collaboration with DE&S. The Fleet Solid Support programme is on track to deliver highly capable ships for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and we look forward to the continued successful delivery as we work towards production milestones in 2025.”

José Luis Viguera, Navantia UK FSS Programme Liaison, said:

“Industrial collaboration is at the core of the mission of Navantia UK. Shipbuilding is a complex industry that requires the combination of the expertise of leading companies. The achievement of this significant milestone underscore Navantia UK’s excellence in programme management, showcasing our ability to lead and innovate within the industry.”

Catriona Savage, Programme Director at BMT, said “The successful completion of the PDR is a testament to the collaborative efforts within the partnership, driving the FSS programme forward. This milestone paves the way for delivering advanced and efficient support ships for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, enhancing the Royal Navy’s operational readiness for global missions and contributing to the UK’s industrial and economic growth. Our collaboration and shared commitment to innovation are setting the stage for a new era in UK maritime capabilities.”

Following the completion of the functional design, BMT will continue to be involved in the FSS programme by monitoring changes that impact the functional design, developing through-life support and training packages, delivering comprehensive safety and environmental case reports, and supporting Navantia UK with the ships’ security accreditation.

Avatar photo
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

17 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Jon
Jon (@guest_864727)
4 hours ago

Good to see an image from Navantia. I hope we’ll be getting a bit more of a sneak preview than that.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_864730)
4 hours ago
Reply to  Jon

Outdated photo unfortunately, no HRAS or dual replenishment for carriers. But I’ll be happy if the ships are crewed at this point

Last edited 4 hours ago by Hugo
Jon
Jon (@guest_864749)
4 hours ago
Reply to  Hugo

A disintigrating RFA and a bankrupt shipbuilder are challenges to be overcome. It may be that this design will become a historic “look at what you could have won”, but Navatia/BMT needs to be pitching again to avoid out-of-touch politicians starting a do-over.

Grinch
Grinch (@guest_864786)
2 hours ago
Reply to  Hugo

HRAS was cut from the requirement to save money. Carrier replenishment is one side only for the same reason.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_864807)
1 hour ago
Reply to  Grinch

A bit pathetic though, developed a HRAS system just not tuse it for marginal savings.

Mike
Mike (@guest_864827)
17 minutes ago
Reply to  Hugo

They are not having HRAS anymore – 6T too complicated and restrictive in SS6 . Rigs are 2.5T

Bazza
Bazza (@guest_864738)
4 hours ago

As long as it passes the industrial capability review we should be set then.

Ted
Ted (@guest_864740)
4 hours ago

Looks like they’ll need a fair sized crew for something that large. Wonder where they are going to get them from 🤔

Mark B
Mark B (@guest_864840)
22 seconds ago
Reply to  Ted

If the lifeboats are any indication perhaps a smaller crew.

David Lloyd
David Lloyd (@guest_864750)
4 hours ago

Unless they sort out the issues at Harland &Wolff Belfast soon there will be a massive delay in building them

ABCRodney
ABCRodney (@guest_864753)
4 hours ago

I hate the idea of Navantia buying the H&W site at Belfast, simple reason is it’s 100% Spanish state owned and IMHO that’s just plain nuts. The building dock, Cranes, SBOH and the Belfast dock were originally funded by HMG via grants and are a strategic asset. As I have said before my preferred option would be to for HMG to take it back into state ownership, invest in the infrastructure and facilities and use it to build the larger ships in our building programme. One thing is for sure State owned and run Ship building has an appalling history… Read more »

Challenger
Challenger (@guest_864761)
3 hours ago
Reply to  ABCRodney

Agree that the Spanish state via Navantia owing all of the infrastructure the UK state has helped H&W to set up would be far from ideal. If the UK Gov wasn’t run purely by bean counters looking at spreadsheets in The Treasury then a sensible option would be to nationalise it ourselves to get FSS up and running and get H&W to a place where it can be privatised again. Maybe the gov retains a stake (they’ve owned a chunk of RBS/Natwest for 15 years now) or as you say we retain public ownership of the site but H&W (or… Read more »

ABCRodney
ABCRodney (@guest_864836)
4 minutes ago
Reply to  Challenger

The US own a lot of their industrial facilities and use the GOCO model, where it comes in really handy is when they suddenly need to expand capacity. Rather than a private company having to find a site, raise the capital etc, the Government funds the capital investment and owns it. BAe is one of the contractors they use.

Aurelius
Aurelius (@guest_864778)
2 hours ago

The innovations the military concoct with A.I. in the event of a global conflict will make all we know of military logistics, tactics and after the inevitable disastrous learning curve, strategy, will be be on the scale of difference as Agincourt is to Falaise.
Unless of course we invent a specific target EMP gun. The use of EMP bombs won’t end well.
Make peace you idiots. ☮️

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_864808)
1 hour ago
Reply to  Aurelius

You go ask the Russians to make peace then, well wait.

Richard
Richard (@guest_864814)
1 hour ago

Bit hard with no crews to man the new ships. We can’t man what we got now!! Everyone is leaving due to the pay and conditions!!

AlexS
AlexS (@guest_864829)
15 minutes ago

Big mistake these ships classes. RN has no navy size neither crew to have solid store mission separated from replenishment.
It will make RN more vulnerable.