The Govan shipyard in Glasgow has reached a significant milestone with its new ‘frigate factory’—officially named the Janet Harvey Hall—now hosting its first ship block, belonging to HMS Belfast.

This marks a pivotal moment in modernising the UK’s naval shipbuilding capabilities and demonstrates the substantial £300 million investment by BAE Systems to enhance shipbuilding infrastructure on the River Clyde.

We don’t have any photos for you as, to be frank, the weather has been too poor in Glasgow but we hope to provide photos either directly or through BAE when possible.

Named in honour of Janet Harvey, who joined the Clyde shipyards as an electrician during World War II, the hall pays tribute to her trailblazing role in a male-dominated industry. Harvey’s legacy as a pioneer in shipbuilding was further recognised when she was awarded an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Engineering by Glasgow Caledonian University at the age of 96. She passed away on Armistice Day in 2023, aged 101.

Paul Sweeney, Glasgow Labour MSP and a former BAE Systems shipyard employee, described the facility as a transformative development. “This new hall will probably become the largest building by enclosed volume in Glasgow, if not Scotland, and will make a dramatic impact on the Clydeside skyline,” he said. Sweeney also spoke on the competitive edge this facility brings, stating, “I hope that the competitive advantages it brings will help to reassert Glasgow’s global reputation for having shipbuilding capabilities that are of the highest quality.”

The Janet Harvey Hall is designed to accommodate the construction of two Type 26 frigates simultaneously, providing a controlled environment that shields the shipbuilding process from adverse weather conditions. This advancement overcomes historical constraints that prevented the construction of full ships longer than 75 metres under cover at Govan.

The construction of the facility has involved over 6,000 tonnes of steel and 20,000 cubic metres of concrete. Once fully operational, the hall will feature two 100-tonne cranes and two 20-tonne cranes, enabling up to 500 workers per shift to focus on frigate construction. The site is expected to sustain approximately 1,700 jobs in Scotland and 2,300 jobs across the wider UK supply chain, significantly boosting both the local and national economy.

This facility represents a transformative leap in the UK’s shipbuilding industry. It positions Glasgow at the forefront of naval construction, solidifying its role in delivering world-class vessels for the Royal Navy.

George Allison
George Allison
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
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

44 COMMENTS

    • Given the Norwegian’s desire for an early delivery of the first ship, it’s possible that Belfast will be diverted to them.

        • British Steel was bought by leading Chinese multi-industrial company Jingye Group on 9 March 2020. [Source britishsteel.co.uk]

          The Chinese are looking to close down the UK’s last blast furnaces while the government is reportedly offering £2bn of UK taxpayers money to keep Scunthorpe open. [source Financial Times, Nov ’24]

          I’m not saying that’s where the steel came from for the JHH, but it’s not too outlandish a speculation.

    • The Steel for the actual Ships is supplied from a variety of locations – for Batch 1 50% is UK Sourced,Batch 2 is 25% UK Produced, some specialist Plate comes from Sweden.The major supplier being Dent Steel.This answer came from UK Parliament written questions.

    • That tabloid article is riddled with errors, it says
      • the carrier is named after the late QE 2
      • that QE is bigger than PoW
      • that they are “super carriers”
      • that the Treasury was discussing scrapping both last month

      and that’s just the glaringly obvious errors.

      Which begs the question, why do you even bother to read this tabloid given it can’t get basic facts rights?

    • It’s another leak to have come out of the review however the cost of reducing a major assett at 6 months readiness is a waste of resources and money. In essence and its QE we are talking about would be stripped of spares to keep POW going.
      In plain English it means cutting the carriers to one.

  6. Great news, I have to ask though considering the small investment this cost, what better position would we now be in if this was done ten years ago. It’s been one of the major benefits of the Type 31 program and getting Babcock into construction that BAE has had to up its game and put its hand in its pocket to invest in its own facilities. Hopefully they can secure an order from Norway otherwise we are not going to be keeping three surface yards going for long.

      • Yes we need two ship yards with surface vessel production lines..market forces and the private sector only work properly if you have natural competition..with no competition you’re better off going state owned..

    • Rubbish. Bae wanted to build extensive new facilities to build the T26 but the Treasury refused based on the initial order for just 3 ships.

      As for “putting their hand in their pocket”, all such money come from the customer in one shape or another. The T31 contract financed the Rosyth building hall. In Bae’s case, being a T26 sole source suppliers, their contract is cost plus so every expenditure is subject to Treasury approval.

      • Yep spot on then again Jim never reads anything as he’s seen my similar replies on numerous occasions. He just sticks the same old BS waffle and I’ll informed opinion, I just wonder what some of the BAe employees who read this site think of it.

    • Jim as per usual your off in your own little world, you listen to nothing, read nothing and take no notice of anything that differs from your view. But here you are spouting possibly libellous allegations of inactivity and lack of investment about BAe. Bae has a long track record of building fast and on time on the Clyde, 6 T45 delivered in 5 years is impressive by anyone’s standards, it didn’t need Babcock to spur them on they were actually way ahead in the first place.
      The Frigate factory was all planned and costed in 2014 but Mr Cameron decided to be smart and cancelled the order for 13 T26 (8 ASW & 5 GP), instead they got an order for just 3. The really stupid thing is that given the increased cost of the facilities and the T31 price increases they would probably have been cheaper sticking with Plan A. And as all 13 would have been built inside we would probably have some in service by now !

      Not that you will read or absorb my comments nor anyone else’s but there is an excellent and well respected source you can actually read and then perhaps retract your incorrect comment.

      It’s called the UKDJ (heard of them ?), Sept 19 2014 “BAE now able to invest £200 million in Clyde ‘Frigate Factory’”.

      Then again you will probably ignore George as well !

      • the original frigate factory was planned for Scotstoun iirc.
        I have also been told (& living locally it wouldn’t surprise me) that BAE don’t actually own the land at Scotstoun shipyard – it is leased from Clydeport (Peel Ports), possibly Govan may be the same. Certainly. the building next door to Scotstoun yard (formerly Albion Automotive/AAM) is owned by Clydeport.

  7. Do we know what length ships the hall can take?
    I imagine a Type 83 would be longer than a Type 26, is there enough room to build a destroyer/cruiser under cover?

    • Thing is that until T83 FADS becomes more real it is a waste of resource constructing oversized build facilities.

      There are margins to extend the hall both ways but history is littered with dry docks etc that were oversized and never properly utilised.

  8. I woukd have thought that Belfast would have been under construction for sometime now and that the two main hull sections would be rolled out and moved into the new building for joining/fitting out prior to launch? Or is Belfast being completely built/assembled in the new building?

  9. Although the article does not specifically mention it, one would hope the facility can accommodate the construction of large vessels that frigates.

  11. They now need to be pushing all the funding needed to build hull’s quickly, we need to be joining the rest of the world and building and commissioning warships in 4/5 years not 9/10.

    Quite frankly the whole escort fleet is going down such a hole, I would like them to now have 2 building in the new shed and if they can pay to bring in a bigger workforce have the old sheds running as well…if they want to supply Norway as well this will be pretty much a necessity unless we don’t mind running with almost no escorts.

    any chance of having a T23 still running in 2030 is now looking slimmer and slimmer.( .have pissed away around two escorts worth of cash to keep each running an extra 6-7 years). So there needs to be a massive effort or the RN is going to be slipping down to 12 hulls for a long time even 11 if we sell one to Norway.

    At preset build and commissioning rates all we will have is 3 Type 26s and 2 type 31s ( hull three has only just started with steel cutting and it’s a fantasy to think hulls 4 and 5 will be commissioned by 2030)..that means if the last T23s go the same way as every other T23 ( and why would they not) they will be going for 20300) and we sell one T26 to Norway the RN in 2030 will have

    6 AAW destroyers
    2 ASW frigates
    3 GP frigates that cannot do ASW.

    The simple really is they need to hammer the hell out of the T26 line use all the sheds and capacity they have, throw money at the problem and get to building all the 5 batch 2 frigates at the same time..hopefully getting them all launched between 2028-2030 and commissioned between 2030 and 2032. Because otherwise the RN is going to be spending a lot of time with only 2-3 ASW hulls..if you consider all the T23s have been scrapped 6-7 years after lifex by 2027/8 the RN will have 3 ASW frigates..and if it takes until 2032 to get 3 type 26s that’s will be half a decade with only 2-3 ASW frigates..

    • I agree we need to go all out with the Type 26. Norway’s escorts are much newer than the Type 23’s. If we do get the order for 5 Norwegian ships thereafter we will need to start with another batch of modified Type 26’s to build up the fleet. I would go for another 5 Type 26’s (T27) with a wider beam. We should aim for close to 30 escorts or ordering 1.5 per year. That means ordering 6 every 4 years! That roughly fits with the parliamentary election cycle.

      I’m very concerned with Navantia getting a foothold in a UK ship building yard. That is because It is 100% Spanish Government owned and would allow them to bid for all Royal Navy ships in future. Are Liebore really that thick?

    • The ASW ( in)capability is a real concern. The only naval threat to UK is the Russian submarine fleet. Building T31 down to a price so without the ASW kit used on the Iver Huitfeldts was a serious mistake. The intention was to deploy them as successors to the R2s but even that role really requires some self defence ASW capability. All surface escorts should have both AAW and ASW systems. With an escort fleet of at best just 19 hulls, GP frigates are a waste of resources. What is a T31 as currently equipped expected to do in the Pacific that an R2 can’t?

      • At best it seems T31 will get a passive torpedo defence system. There are no plans to fit any capability to track and attack a submarine.

      • T31 would be very effective at AAW with its Mk41, Sea Ceptor and 40/57mm combo.

        Sure it isn’t a T45. It can easily take a radar upgrade too if that is wanted or take a radar feed from somewhere else.

        We just don’t know what has been done in sonar or Mk41 fit for entry into service.

        As I’ve said one reason for the delay in T31 is that it has been substantially upgunned.

          • I wouldn’t be so definitive until we see one of George’s drone shots!

            We have seen zero topside photos – which I find interesting in itself.

            Because if the way T26 was an outdoors final assembly we could see how many and what was where….

        • I understand the RN was just desperate to get any hulls it could with the money allocated so I don’t blame them I blame the treasury, Personally I think we should have ensured every escort has adequate ASW so it can either protect itself from sub surface threats or support a screen. In if you look at the Italian and French navies every escort has a pretty decent hull mounted passive and active sonar as will as lightweight torpedoes as a minimum fit.

          As for AAW I’m not quite sure if I prefer the Italian route of every hull having a decent long range radar and long range area defence missiles but a smaller number of missiles, supported by 2 medium guns and guided rounds for mass or the RN idea of going for a medium/ short range with a bigger mass of missiles. But I do think there is an argument for improved radar and longer range AAW missiles on the Frigates..maybe the newer longer range CAMM family.

          • Indeed T31 was the only solution to the budgetary crisis imposed on RN by a whole host of programs with no increase in funding.

            I’m pretty sure T26 is the right balance for its prime purpose with effective AAW and land attack. If we’d had 13 of them then the 5” gun made sense too.

            Anyway we are where we are and at least 13 frigates are on order and quite a few in build.

    • Jonathan the old sheds are still being used as part of the process, small subassemblies go into the SBOH (old sheds) and built up and outfitted into blocks and then they are moved into the New Assembly hall. The new facilities, working methods and building inside are the way to increase throughput.
      The real killer to speed is the payment schedule from HMG and the lack of any follow up orders, BAe have been quite clear about this they either need more orders for T26, the T83 bringing forwards or the MRSS contract or they end up shutting down.
      The big difference between us and say Japan is the next design is ready to start being built straight after the present one, they announced the concept and orders for the FFM improved follow on as the 2nd Mogami entered service. Continuity is a lovely thing to have in engineering.
      Meanwhile at Rosyth all you can probably hear is the Calendar being replaced with 2025 with a lot of question marks in each day 🤷🏼‍♂️

      • More space and a more logical workflow improves productivity too.

        I agree the Norwegian order or RN follow on order are vital to build pace.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here