The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that assessments are under way on whether to repair or decommission RFA Argus, while stressing that amphibious support remains available through the Royal Fleet Auxiliary’s Bay-class vessels.
Baroness Goldie asked what cost-benefit work had been done on Argus and what plans were in place for her replacement, as well as the risks of having no amphibious support ship available for service.
Defence Minister Lord Coaker responded on 16 September: “The Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) retains three Bay Class Landing Ships Dock (Auxiliary) to support UK amphibious capability. The RFA has committed to at least one of these vessels maintaining appropriate readiness, while the others undergo deeper maintenance and upkeep.”
He added on Argus: “The RFA continue to work alongside Defence Equipment and Support surveyors and commercial partners to assess the cost and value of effecting the required repairs.”
RFA Argus arrived in Portsmouth on 8 June but has been unable to sail for repair in Falmouth after her safety certification was withdrawn. Both the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and Lloyd’s Register deemed her unfit even for the short voyage, meaning the Naval Service currently has no amphibious support vessel available. The RFA is working to resolve the issue, but the situation highlights the fragility of the support fleet and the increasing strain on ageing platforms.
Commissioned in 1988, Argus has alternated roles between aviation training, casualty receiving, and amphibious support. Decades of service have left her requiring extensive work to remain seaworthy, with the decision now resting on whether the costs of repair outweigh the benefits of retiring her.
Although officials point to the Bay-class ships as the backbone of amphibious capability, the loss of Argus leaves the Royal Navy without an active vessel in this role at present. No replacement programme has yet been announced, but the Defence Investment Plan due later this year is expected to provide more clarity on the future of the amphibious support fleet.
Another defence and capability cut incoming. I thought we were increasing our defence budget and capabilities. Clearly not.
I think it’s safe to say we won’t see her in RFA service again, I would guess the treasury pen pushers would never sign off on the kind of work she’ll need to be operational again. They might as well strike her off now and save everyone some time.
Cut it after a re fit, that is the normal way, then never replace it. Job done. What spin will the CDS and MOD put on this.
to little to late.
Another capability holiday
I hear Brazil is looking for a boat like this. Just saying…
Closest we’ve been to a World War in decades and they’re going to cut a key ship. IF there was a replacement lined up then sure but its the same thing time and time again.
We are an island nation. Vast majority of our economy is through sea trade routes. The Navy should be expanded.
I feel like I am taking crazy pills
I wondered where they had gone !
So in April 2025 just 5 months ago we had the following “The MOD has confirmed that RFA Argus will be joining the UK Carrier Strike Group for the latter part of its deployment to the Indio-Pacific region this year. The ship was assigned to Falmouth for a Future In-Service Support MOD contract in 2018. Argus has completed a comprehensive overhaul at APCL Falmouth, which included significant upgrades and alterations to her aircraft lift, as well as the upgrade, overhaul and the replacement of several onboard systems. This period marks a crucial phase in ensuring the continued service of RFA Argus ahead of her programmed Ship Life Extension, due to commence later this year”.
Now either the people in the know and manage this ship are either blind or incompetent, or we are just being told blatant lies. Is there any other explanation because I am at a loss to think of any.
Not necessarily either. It seems that for some reason Argus was deemed unsafe in June, which reason no one was aware of in April. A big reason by the sounds of it.
Unless you believe the Treasury have infiltrated the safety certification process and are deliberately deeming everything unsafe simply to save money, which sadly isn’t as unlikely as it sounds.
The ship had just come out of a ‘comprehensive’ overhaul from Falmouth in April and was earmarked for a Service Life Extension when it returned from the Pacific. Was Steve Wonder Services overseeing the work because I would expect a comprehensive overhaul would have naturally been preceded by a comprehensive survey to scope the works.
How can the MCA and LR suddenly withdraw the relevant safety certificate etc and the ship be deemed unsafe to make a trip that a weekend pleasure craft could undertake.
I hate conspiracy theories but it is either incompetence or a contrived excuse to scrap her.
HMAS Choules where are you? Stunning snafu!
No surprise – the ship is nearly 45 years old. A replacement should have been ordered years ago.
Yup, just like many other areas of our armed forces when it comes to equipment. Labour and Tories have a lot to answer for.. Plus of course mistakes that have been made at times within the MOD. But a lot of that was because of ‘cuts’ and the pressures that brings on decision making plus political interference at times from Politicians from different political parties over the years. Too much of what suited the governments and not what really suited the military. On a brighter side I do have hopes things will start to improve for the British military during the 2030’s but that is a hell of a long time to wait.. for some of the kit anyway.
Sadly she wont return to service, she will go to Turkey. as for the silly comment about Choules.. do you realise how much the Australian refit cost due to the entire electric ship failure cost and the huge replacement of parts cost? She was stripped before entering service to keep the others on budget, time and in service.
It was made aware by the MoD (and to the public domain) how much it would cost to repair RFA Largs Bay – (around 3/4 of the ship build) hence why she was given to Australia (at a very good bargain price), I dont think they realised the extent of the repair work needed …
In June 2012, one of the two main electrical transformers involved in the ship’s propulsion system failed, after an earlier engineers report highlighted “overheating of the propulsion motors and transformers”.
Inspection found that insulation failure had short-circuited the transformer, while other transformers aboard showed premature wear. Unable to find an available spare, a new unit had to be ordered from the manufacturer. In June, it was predicted that Choules would be out of service for four to five months, but by October, claims were made that the ship would be inoperable until at least January 2013, and if all of the wear-showing transformers were replaced, she would not return to service until April 2013. By December, the faulty transformer had been replaced, and the RAN had decided that although the other transformers (propulsion and others) had been shown to have acceptable levels of wear, all would be replaced before Choules was reactivated.
These repairs were completed in early 2013, and the ship was assessed as ready to re-enter service on 12 April.
In the end Australia spent a further 70% on bringing the ship back into service – would the UK have spent this ?
Would the UK have spent this? Well we don’t know, but it looks like it would have been a better investment than what was spent on Argus.
Do you have figures to back up your theory?
Fantasy fleets moment: Has ENATO ever considered a joint development programe for a joint amphibious support (& potentially amphibious warfare) capability? Resources provided by the willing. Efficiencies in funding, personnel requirements, virtually guaranteed. Precedent established w/ E-3 programme, possibly others. Anyone interferes in mission deployments, immediate Article 5 event sponsored by multiple states.
“Although officials point to the Bay-class ships as the backbone of amphibious capability”
The usual spin and cobblers.
The LSD(A) might be the “backbone” as they are all we have left. But they have minimal capability compared to the LPDs.
Again HMG, you fool NOBODY.
As we both know they are not front line amphibious ships but hey they look something like an LPD and that’s good enough for your average Uniparty politician.
Loopy to say that three increasingly knackered Bays can do the work of the seven or eight ships we had not so long ago.
4 x Bay
2 x Albion
1 x Ocean – should have been two
1 x Argus
Argus should have been replaced decades ago.
Maybe now regretting letting Albion and Bulwark go to Brazil?
No not at all but when she is gone then in a couple of years when the MRSS programme finally gets beyond concept stage there will be a subtle change of wording. The MOD will announce plans to replace our 3 amphibious ships with two larger, more lethal, blah blah MRSS in 2038. This programme will then eventually deliver the first ship only 5 years after the last Bay class was withdrawn from service.