The Ministry of Defence has said it is developing options for a future Ice Patrol Ship capability, following questions about command arrangements and cost contributions for a shared ice cutter role in the British Antarctic Territory.
In a written response to Reform UK MP Andrew Rosindell, Defence Minister Luke Pollard said the UK remains committed to supporting its interests in the Antarctic, with HMS Protector continuing to deploy routinely to the Antarctic Peninsula in support of the UK’s responsibilities under the Antarctic Treaty and the British Antarctic Territory.
Pollard said: “To deliver the vision of the Strategic Defence Review (SDR), we are developing options through the Defence Investment Plan for future Ice Patrol Ship capability.”
He added that the work would take account of both Antarctic and Arctic requirements, noting the Strategic Defence Review identified the Arctic as an area of growing competition. “These options will consider requirements for the Antarctic, but also encompass the requirements for Arctic capabilities which the SDR identified as a region of increasing competition.”
He also said that the options being developed will include both cost and command factors, but did not provide further detail on how any shared ice cutter arrangement would be structured.
In other words, don’t hold your breath.
“developing options” There are two announces MOD… We keep the existing one for another twenty years or scrap the service altogether.😒
Developing options through the DIP 🤣 That says it all. It’s being done through something that doesn’t even exist.
They need at least 1 vessel to support the BAS bases in the BAT (currently HMS Protector). If there’s an identified need for a sustained presence in the Arctic (which there is), then that implies the need for at least one additional vessel- probably 2-3 if they want guaranteed availability. Relying on one ship and sending it back and forth between the ends of the earth would be the 2nd stupidest option. The stupidest option would be to scrap the capability altogether. Place your bets please.
Another option I read about was a shared asset with the BAS.
Future funding has been put aside in a special Chest Freezer whilst any decision Is on Ice pending the thawing of relations with China.
(best I could do, sos !)
They’ll order nothing and scrap Scott.
To be fair, Scott has nothing to do with this. She’s just coming out of Falmouth after a refit to serve into the 2030s.
HMS Protector is the issue.
Any idea if a Canadian or Finnish Ice breaker design might be considered for these roles? Potential for a “NATO” deal?
Not sure if we need a fully fledged icebreaker.
The deWolf class OPVs look nice, but they are on the pricey side, maybe £600m each. Protector has a pretty minimal nominal capability as an icebreaker rated to DNV ICE-05, or can break though up to 50 cms of ice. That’s about PC-7 (Summer/autumn operation in thin first-year ice), whereas the deWolfs are at PC-5 (Year-round operation in medium first-year ice). So deWolf is closer to an ice breaker, but really these are ice patrol ships.
Cheaper and possibly equivalent in ice-breaking to the deWolfs are the Finnish built Arctic Security Cutters for the US. Probably PC-6 or 5, but yet to be finalised, these are being build at around £400m each (although as some are being built in the US and some in Finland, isolating the cost of more Finnish built ones isn’t easy). Both the deWolfs and the ASCs are currently on a hot production line.
Not quite hot, having finished build in 2024 are the Norwegian Jan Mayen class. I’d go for these. They are bigger, cheaper and given our new relationship with Norway, a good tit for tat to keep Norway onside with the frigates. They paid around £550m for three, at rating PC-6. That’s almost within our non-existant budget.
Thanks. I’d not seen the Jan Mayen class. Great reply.
Publish the DIP and we’ll listen to your pie in the water discussions with slightly less disdain.