In a recent parliamentary exchange, Lord Coaker, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, clarified that Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) ships, while owned and operated by the Ministry of Defence, are not considered part of the UK’s Armed Forces.
Responding to Lord West of Spithead’s inquiry, Lord Coaker stated, “Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) ships are owned and managed by the Ministry of Defence for the purposes of the Naval Service but are not considered part of the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom.”
Instead, RFA vessels are classified as ‘Government Ships’ under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995. Although integral to naval support, their designation reflects a unique role within UK maritime operations distinct from commissioned warships in the Armed Forces.
This classification debate comes after the previous government acknowledged that the new Fleet Solid Support (FSS) ships would be categorised as warships following persistent calls from unions and industry stakeholders. In 2020, we reported that the previous government finally recognised FSS ships as warships, a decision carrying significant implications for British shipbuilding.
Government finally classifies new fleet support ships as ‘warships’
Initially, the government’s stance allowed for international bidding on the £1.5 billion contract to build three FSS ships, despite opposition calling for them to be built exclusively in UK shipyards. Under then-Defence Secretary Ben Wallace’s direction, the FSS ships were reclassified as warships, subjecting them to national security requirements which mandate that warships be primarily constructed domestically.
This decision followed extensive debate regarding the definition of warships. According to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, a warship is defined as a state vessel crewed by commissioned officers under military command. However, the National Shipbuilding Strategy had previously limited the term “warship” to destroyers, frigates, and carriers.
Former Defence Procurement Minister Stuart Andrew had stated that the FSS ships did not qualify under this designation due to the UK’s need to retain sovereign capabilities solely for the construction of complex combat vessels. In response, union representatives argued that the support roles and tactical functions of FSS vessels aligned them with wartime operations and warranted their classification as warships.
Ross Murdoch, GMB National Officer, noted at the time, “It looks like the Government has finally acknowledged what GMB has always said – these are warships. There is no reason to now hide behind any treaty – they must be built in the UK.”
Is there actually space to build them in the uk?
I think the better question is does it provide tax payer value building in the uk and can they be brought into service equally fast.
There is a need to build vessels and not constantly talk about it, at this point i don’t care where they are built as long as they are built. Same across the services.
Saying that the RFA isn’t due any additional vessels that I know of. The solid store vessels are already contracted out, what comes after them?
MRSS. They keep talking about them and since they are likely to be the replacement for the very versatile and heavily used Bay class then they need to get them sorted.
That being said they will keep pushing that boat downstream till the Bays are completely uneconomical to keep in service as per the Type-23s and their replacements. We’ve all seen just how well that has worked.
Yep. The whole armed forces have a common problem, everything has been pushed for so long that it all needs replacing at the same time, which is now totally uneconomical. The cash boost to fix it would be insane at this point. I can’t see how it can be resolved as the issue just gets worse by the year.
On that I wholeheartedly agree.
We need to get a wriggle on.
Given the MRSS are going to be a completely different concept and probably well armed in comparisons to Bays it’s going to be very difficult to class them as RFA. Also we have a yard in rosyth that is going to close in 2030 unless it’s gets MRSS work.
Our navy is way too small for three yards but might be just about large enough to keep two going.
Last definition I saw was ” large non complex warship” So RN manned.
I think that is the same definition they used for the FSSS so I’m still expecting it to be an RFA crewed vessel.
I think you could have just stopped at ‘Our Navy is way too small’ and illustrated how we can have work for three yards. I think everyone on here will tell you that each of our armed services is too small. The problem is until we end up in a shooting war nobody in power is going to do anything about it. They are all too worried about getting re-elected.
At which point it will be tooooooo late.
I wish the politicians would take a look at history from time to time. Defence spenging peaked at 52% of GDP in WW2 so even if we had to spend 5 or 6% of GDP to fix the current situation to effectively deter a war it would be a good deal. The numbers don’t include the human cost saving of avoiding a war either – obviously.
We are already involved in a cyber war which is often talked about but few talk about the very active sabotage war. The BBC is reporting that DHL flights were the targets of incendiary devices in the UK, Germany and Poland. The devices stated fires in warehouses prior to being loaded onto planes… The security services are all pointing the fingure at the Russian GRU.
Bringing down civilian transport aircraft is an act of war, we need to respond and those three ship yards will need to be part of the response. “We need a bigger navy.” A much much bigger navy, and air force and army…
Cheers CR
True; true; very worrying and true; true.
Even more worryingly it seems that Donald Trump is about four hours away from a landslide victory so things are probably about to get a lot darker over here in Europe.
I wonder how long it will be before he cancels any US aid packages for Ukraine leaving the door open for the man that just conned the US into electing a convicted criminal.
I guess none of those people that went back to him after voting for Biden last time have remembered Einstein’s definition of insanity.
You should care where they are built!
It was confirmed just the other day that the contract is still with Harland & Wolf in Belfast, even though they have now gone bust. How that circle is squared is still being discussed.
Square circles are a core requirement of much military procurement.
Plenty.
I had always thought that the RFA vessels weren’t classified as “warships”, as it allowed them to call into “neutral” ports etc etc.
As a former “pongo”, I am happy to be educated/ corrected if my understanding is incorrect.
You are correct mate.
There was a time when we used to send an RFA into a potential trouble spots unannounced. Trouble makers could hardly fail to notice a blinking great grey painted ship in their harbour flying the Blue Ensign and be in no doubt that there were more big gray ships over the horizon with a different coloured ensign at the mast head.
Subtle it wasn’t. 🙂
Cheers CR
Ignores the state of affairs when a conflict breaks out with said RFA (war)ships.
Idiots.
Stop this pathetic merry go round of are they or aren’t they? They should have given the order to S Korea years ago.
The RN might have a FRS by now.
But, as usual, defence industry jobs come before the military who need the asset.
Our shipyards, clearly, have limits, there are so few, as a result of our own government incompetence.
That should have been clearly identified years ago, but politics wins the day.
I agree both the solids and MRSS should have gone to Korean yards as per the Tides.
We have at least one hull ready for final fit by now.
Which is better than a whole pile of CAD, some arguments and an empty shipyard.
Regenerating H&W shipbuilding was always a step too far. I’m afraid born of the idea that everyone can be trained to do anything is you out up a sign for a ‘world class academy’ etc…on the front of a nice new building…totally ignoring the value of time served experience.
I’m all for training but it takes decades to train people properly even to weld.
Why should they have been built in S Korea ? I’m a British worker that is proud to be going to build these ships in Belfast and paying British tax.
FFBNW Faffing about 😣
Whether or not they are classified as warships has little to do with the UK Governments Build Policy and everything to do with International Law. Warships are crewed by Military Personal and are fitted with complex weapons, Merchant Ships (including Government Vessels) are crewed by civilians and are only to have simple (i.e. aimed by an operator) self defence weapons – anything more would need embarked Military Personnel to operate.
My son is in the Royal navy and serving on Lyme bay after leaving cardigan bay in middle East as security team the ship has weapons on board as well as anti missile system not to mention a floating dock for the royal marines they can carry. The ship crew are civilians.
To be honest I think the different between merchant and warship status has been blurred in recent years as the RN has tried to used the RFA to fill gaps in it’s own capabilities.
Thing is some RFA’s seem to carry military contingents most if not all the time which would strongly suggest they are tasked by the military and therefore are legally warships. Other vessels are mostly crewed by civilians and don’t carry RN people routinely (although I suspect that they all do from time to time) so these vessels could more correctly be classes as civil ships…
Thing is there is nothing stopping classifying them as merchant ships during the build, bringing tham back to the UK and fitting the military / classified stuff and calling them warships if you want to. Classifications can change.
Storm in a teas cup and misses the point.
We need a bigger navy as much much bigger navy or sooner or later we will have a fight on our hands…
And when the fight comes we will need lots and lots of industry, shipyards and trained people.
Cheers CR
RFA Vessels ok there not fighting ships but they with out doubt are ship of war .Just sounds like a Get out Claws for the government not been in any hurry to sort the mess out 🙄
So when the RFA puts itself in danger they’re just out for a cruise which happens to put them next to warships. I get it. Stupid. 🙄
The merchant classification also allows RFA vessels to enter virtually any port to load where as a warship could be denied access.
I’d forgotten that. I’m just amazed that with all the money being handed out at the moment Reeves couldn’t have found a decent pay rise for some very brave, hard working people who literally put their life on the line, unlike train drivers!😏
If we name them all HMS Endeavour will the enemy leave them alone ?
The way it’s going there won’t be an RFA much longer!
We’re treated like canon fodder
Buy 2 from a competitive foreign ship builder, get the bloody things into a UK port to be fitted out with the right kit for the carriers, strap on a Phalanx or two and then buy the plans to build any future ships here in a timely efficient manor. Why government officials seem content with no re-arming capabilities at sea for the carriers is beyond me. Just GET ON WITH IT!! They never wanted to pay for 3 anyway just like there was never going to be 10 type 45’s or 13 Type 26’s, it’s all timewasting and penny pinching.
So RFA vessels are not part of our armed forces, but often undertake front-line roles (eg acting as a platform for amphibious assault).
The C.O of an RFA vessel is a merchant navy officer, so therefore the vessel is officially under civilian command.
There seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors here.