BAE Systems is looking for more than 400 skilled tradespeople to join their workforce as the Type 26 frigate programme gains momentum.
The firm recently tweeted “We’re currently looking for 400 tradespeople to join us in Glasgow. If you are after a career that makes a real difference, we want to speak to you”.
Our Type 26 programme is making history. We’re currently looking for 400 tradespeople to join us in Glasgow. If you are after a career that makes a real difference, we want to speak to you. #26on26 #Recruiting https://t.co/WKxUPxk1ks pic.twitter.com/dE1ziVmWn0
— BAE Systems Maritime (@BAES_Maritime) March 26, 2022
According to their website:
“For generations, we’ve been making history on the Clyde in Glasgow. Now you have the opportunity to help us write the next chapter. We have exciting roles for more than 400 skilled trades to help us build the Type 26 frigates for the Royal Navy. These will provide security for our country and allies for decades to come. Building such a complex ship requires exceptionally skilled trade labour.”
Manufacture of these new, highly capable ships is securing about 1,700 skilled shipbuilding jobs in Scotland and some 4,000 jobs throughout the supply chain across Britain until 2035. All told, naval shipbuilding supported 7,000 jobs in Scotland in 2019-20, this is now increasing with the Type 31s being built at Rosyth.
Now the issue of not keeping the ship industry supported rears it’s head 🙁 with Rosyth and Clyde competing for the limited supply of skilled engineers/fitters etc.
Don’t care which side of the house they sit all a bunch of ……..
I agree. The closure of Portsmouth should not have happened, and is something I think Cameron should have been shot for allowing.
There is no way the UK can support lots of small shipbuilding yards.I think realistically Portsmouth had to go.
Provided Scotland doesn’t vote for independence we are in a good place having two naval ship building centres that can provide the MoD with supplier competition but are close enough that talent can easily move between yards.
David Cameron was hell bent on cutting the armed forces and turning what was once the most feared Navy in the world into a boating club. The reason we kept the carriers was because it was more expensive to stop making them. And the only reason the Clyde was chosen over Portsmouth was because DC was scared it would increase support for independence in Scotland.
I’m no apologist for Cameron, his ‘advisers’ told him in 2010 that peer warfare was over and for the decades to come we would be fighting counter terrorism campaigns…..
He took it, ran with it and axed defence in a way that can only be described as criminally reckless!
As you say, PoW only survived due to the cancellation costs. Cameron had no intention of operating PoW and would have promptly sold her had he remained in No10.
That said, the previous Labour government had already cut far beyond sensible levels and I have little doubt a Labour SDSR in 2010 would have looked little better…
Labour made serious errors of judgement in their time in office, Nimrod MR4A being a highlight, it was a serious misjudgement that should have been cancelled early in the programme as massive issues became apparent, it wasn’t and sucked away billions in funding……
What’s needed now is a serious uplift in defence spending, ringfenced and a steady rebuild of our armed forces, we need to assess what’s needed now, as opposed to the now out of date SDSR2020.
The Cold War is back with a roar….
Osbourne was probably the problem, not Cameron. Chancellors follow the Treasury line they make for the UK. Portsmouth can and should be reopened maybe to include a drydock which we desperately need for the QE carriers.
The Marine infrastructure needs investment wherever you look.
Devonport is going to be too small in 10 years. If the Treasury want to run a country on a shoestring dont be surprised when it breaks.
I think CL in Liverpool is probably the yard we should invest in perhaps jointly with H&W. Both seem to have the facilities that could be updated to meet all future requirements and we can certainly have 1 large vessel (150m+) launched every 18 months for the RFA/RN perhaps all based on the Aegir hull.
current assets that will need replacing over next 25 years.
4 points, 4 tides, 3 Bays, 2 Waves, 2 Albions, 1 Scott, 1 Diligence, 1 Argus, 1 Fort
we probably need more and realistically we need to ensure we are launching 1 frigate (high end combat) 1 corvette (mid sized combat) and 1 large ship every year which will stop the expensive life extensions, keep skills up and pricing competitive. Given we are paying people to work very slowly whilst expecting our service people to work in ships that are well past their dell by date, this should be part of a new national defence strategy.
same with subs but 1 every 2 years and perhaps all small ships <50m can be built in Portsmouth (circa 100 per year)
Blair and Brown are just as guilty. 1/3 of the surface fleet cut and SSN numbers slashed from 12 to 7, 6 if they had remained in power. The main reason the QE Class were given the go ahead by Gordon Brown’s Treasury was Scottish jobs plus the fact that there was no ‘Plan B’ and they could not delay the order any longer. Had it not been for this the carriers would have gone the same way as the Batch 2 T45s. What do you think the 2010 SDSR would have have looked like with Brown as PM?
Have to strongly disagree, the ship yard jobs for the carriers were far and wide with sections being built in multiple yards, it was purely down to cost.
Maybe, but I strongly suspect the part of the country that gained most from the project was Scotland. Nothing wrong with that, this is not a Scotland versus England thing. My point is that Brown was antagonistic to the MoD and regarded every pound spent on defence as a pound wasted. If he could get away with pruning back the military he would. Luckily Brown could not pull the rug out from under he QEs as it was such a high profile project and the associated political and economic fallout too severe.
The overriding factor in the 2010 SDR was the economic conditions, world wide financial crisis, bank bailouts, the outgoing gifts treasury Secretary “the money’s all gone” note. Also the lack of interest in defence matters by the minority coalition partner, who gave up their junior defence minister position .
Govt not gifts
Portsmouth may have been smaller than the Scottish yards, but it had far better facilities and better productivity.
3, if you include Barrow in Furness – she turned out the Assault ships at the same time as surface dodgers.
Agreed
But this is still good news?
More jobs and inward investment for the Clyde and Scotland…. not bad for a Union which produces nothing and ships which aren’t being built.
Scottish Nazi Party must be livid.
The jobs are probably banned from being advertised in scottish job centres!
They aren’t banned, calm yourself, also they’re readily accessible on various recruitment sites
Thanks to how run down we’ve let our shipbuilding industry get the pool of potential candidates for these roles is not large. I wonder if in the short term we’d be able to recruit from overseas nationals to fill some of these roles. Or would that be a security problem. If not start looking at attracting expats back into UK.
You are a part of the very problem that plagues our industry if that’s truly your opinion. All the yards are flooded with “cheap” foreign labour – and in the not so distant future there wont be any “locals” at all that build our ships. The only large ship building we really do is military related, thanks to your great idea just taken a step further
That might be tempting for the short-term but the problem with using foreign labour is that the employers scale back or stop apprentices, training etc because it will be cheaper just to bring in already qualified people. It’s then a vicious circle. Labour shortages force companies to invest in people, which can only be good in the long run
In long term agreed. In short term we’re going to need more skilled shipyard workers if we’re going to deliver the national shipbuilding strategy. If the strategy is delivered with what we have and what we can train great. If not we’re going to have to bring in overseas workers or transfer the work overseas. I think the first would be better.
Hopefully the increase in positions is in relation to a decrease in time frames for the build schedules, if so its still a long process so get young people in now willing to be trained by existing skilled workers and build up the workforce.
I hope so too.👍
Is this part of normal growth in line with workload or an acceleration of build time line?
To replace all the skilled workers let go as QEC wound down and just the core was kept on for the Rivers?
It is very good news to see the recruitment taking place in the defence industry.There are lots of skills in this country which need accessing.Over the past years there has been a big reduction in the Royal Navy.When one looks at Ukraine with Russia causing such devastion by Rasputin , the original being the mad monk this one the mad president.This area of the isles build the best ships min the world, and long may it continue
Good news for Scotland. It is vital to train serious numbers of apprentices and keep a work force together by placing orders. However, the Civil Service controls the future, not governments.
Quite a blunt comment thread.
Can former ferry-builders transfer for a long-term stable career?
Entire careers are spent at Ferguson’s building each ferry.
I’m not sure most of Ferguson’s workforce would be much use……the quality is just shocking….can you imaging if they mess up a ferry that much how much of mess would be made of a warship?
Entire generations will have lived and died in those ferries before they are launched.
And the T26 isn’t going down the same route?
Hilarious comments aside, Ferguson was a good ship builder until a change in management which led to a massive drop in standards, most likely as experienced workers went elsewhere.
If this is an indicator that someone is looking at accelerating the glacial pace of Type 26 construction, then I for one would be very pleased.
👍
Then the pace of acceleration will be glacial as these guys will need to be trained.
Rush that and you end up with a QA nightmare….
As in batch 2 OPVs.
Yes but no but.
Despite the seemingly large amount spent on the B2s, it did enable some skills to be kept alive, and if there were quality shortfalls, well, best identified early on less expensive kit. I would say the wisdom of the spend amount and the seemingly “high end” spec for an OPV was actually money well spent considering the alternative of bashing out simply a few more B1 versions.
Given the advanced spec, what needs to happen right now is to fit the B2s with a 57mm gun and better radar, and then FFAW (fit for AND with) some of this drone malarkey. Ideal vessels to prove the operation of some of this tech ahead of all this theorising which will undoubtably hold up a T32 as they try and decide what that should look like.
It would give us back a few capabilities quickly, assuming all this tech works as claimed and also inform as to the sort of vessel that is really needed.
Build some less high end OPV in a sort of B1 style cheaply to carry out the possible loss of B2 availability.
Just a thought.
AA
Yes once you get rid of your skilled workforce it costs time and treasure to build it back up.
Pity they can’t produce 1-2 more T26/T31/T32s while we wait…
I wonder what the US Constellation (Fremm based) class is like in an ASW/ASuW and cost comparison to the T26s, anyone here know?
Hi Quentin,
The basic FREMM, being more mature than the T26, is cheaper I believe (although equipment fits vary user to user).
However, the US Conctellation Class are starting to look very expensive as the USN insist on turning them into an American design. At least according to something I read a a few months ago. Congress is not impressed apparently!
Cheers CR
Thanks CR, and we’re left wondering “what if” the T26 had of been ready and the US would have purchased it. Maybe it’s still possible for batch 2-3, but I’d imagine they’d stick with the Constellation for commonality. Hope there’s some good T26 capability spin-off into the more affordable T31/T32s. Love for the UK to have some more export success…and a slightly bigger fleet…always!
French FREMM have been winning recent USN ASW prizes.
Type 26 appears much more expensive. Base Constellation is 700-/800M$ with USN Equipment(Aegis etc. it is slight over 1B$. Eventually with numbers will get cheaper.
One of the reasons that FREMM won the competition is because it was the only offer with electric propulsion.
Its a shame the US didn’t pick type 26, of course, but I’m still happy for our friends in the USN. FREMM is a good design and I always thought it was a questionable choice for them to phase out their frigate fleet. That said, the radars and other bits of kit they want to add to it are going to make the Constellations considerably more expensive and capable than any other FREMM variant. It also undermines the “tried and tested” design argument and one would think they’d be happier with a slightly heavier hull to fit everything.
they may have been better off jumping on T26 with the Canadians after all
Don’t think so, Type 26 is too big and too expensive.
It’s so difficult to get over that 10 year period without a single escort being built. Piss poor planning from both labour and Tory governments. If only there was a bit of sense around ensuring a continuing drum beat of escort production at 1 every year or so after the T45s we would be in such a better place and saved billions.
its not like we don’t need a lot of tonnage built for the navy, we could easily have a fair number of shipyards just churning our RN vessels, it’s just constant trying to save and budget in year or in parliament
the simple fact is we could easily have the following shipyard production lines running:
1) large hull warships ( carriers, amphibious, solid store, Oiler’s,). That’s 14 large hulls and many hundreds of thousands of tons so that would be a constant production line.
2) complex high end escort, T26, T83, 16 of those over 24 years that one every 18 months and it just Keeps on going as we retire each ship after 24 years.
3) low end escort T31, T32, patrol ships ( rivers 3) that will be another 16 hulls every 24 years so one every 18 months.
4)small ships: mine warfare, survey, border cutters ect: again there is work for a smaller shipyard on. A constant basis.
5) commercial shipyard support: strategic sea lift, science vessels and Antarctic patrol.
6) small craft ( a good few boat builders ) supported, harbour vessels, security, ships boats etc.
If the U.K. government actual kept ordering what was needed and stopped all the in year saving crap, the RN is of a size that could support a really big well run shipping industry…instead we just pause buying anything for years at a time to save a few hundred million that then costs billions in a decade as well as destroyed industrial bases.
I would argue strongly for a continuous production mentality to hit the MoD/Government(s). A long-term plan for this would help nurture UK industry and keep design teams together. Even if it were for just a small amount of production, at least we would be able to gear up when needed. This needs to be done for key, strategic assets like warship building, heavy armour, drones, aircraft etc.
Yes the whole paradigm needs to come away from in years savings and funding to long term strategic planning.
Great idea on paper. But specialty yards would need to run for decades to get operation that smooth, and let’s be honest. Carrier/amphibious focused and high end escort focused yards would be pretty much at constant risk of having things dry up on them.
In a different timeline with a better run UK maybe, but not ours.
But that’s the unfortunate point it could be that way. We get the results and negative outcomes we design for. All it takes is an acceptance of a paradigm of strategic planning as the central point of decision and commission process, not short term in year cost control.
400 skilled trades people? Where in the world does one find them nowadays? The world of 2022 is a plug in and replace society.Gone are the days when truly skilled tradesmen and women went through intense 3 or 4 year apprenticeships under craftsmen of old. This is what is needed to produce such individuals which begs the question-are such Craftsmen still really needed in this age of Robots and electronics controlling everything
Outside the UK?
Good Day Bringer. Yes-Durban South Africa. We used to have proper apprenticeships to match any First World country complete with Foremen(Journeymen) armed with sticks and sour faces😂. After the required number of years the Appies would go off to write a Trade test in the Transvaal and then get their Papers. Not blaming the ANC entirely but the whole system has collapsed in most industries with on the job training replacing formal education. Not many good men left in Industry and many new ones who don’t have page one skills-square and plumb and leave site clean just for starters!!
He is. And the “father” of the site.
😆Hi Daniele-I am blushing. Hope you are well
Yes my friend.
Be careful that kind of talk could lead to your comment being removed.😎
Wonder how the SNP will greet that news. Probaly look the other way
Is this an acknowledgement that the Type 26 program needs to be accelerated badly or anticipation that the MOD are going to need more hulls above and below the water.
It doesn’t take a genius ( as long as they don’t work in the treasury) that our anti submarine assets are stretched too thin. Especially if you consider over and shove normal duties we need hulls to protect the two carriers, our vulnerable sub sea data networks and the North Sea basin.
As good as these ships are, they cannot be in two places at once .
Just reading about the new Japanese Mogami class frigates :
3 years from cutting the first steel to commissioning.
What are they doing differently?
Funding things properly
I know I am going to get some stick but I wonder if the Batch 2 Type 26s should get an upgrade. What I am thinking is to replace the CAAM tubes with between 2-4 Sylver A-43 or better yet A-50 modules. If it is two modules then that could mean 64 Sea Ceptor or Sea Ceptor ER as they can be quad packed. If all four modules would be installed then it gives a much more powerful capability possibly even some Aster 30s to be used via data link from a T45. The foot print would be about the same, there would be an increase in depth by about 70 cm if using the A-50 and weight would be about 35 tons max. My recommendation would be two A-50 modules, one forward, one midships with a mix of 40/24 ER. If all four modules would be installed and A-50, still keep the 40/24 mix and have 16 Aster 30s
@Ron Did you serve? KISS
Better to bring things in on time and to budget in the madhouse world.
Of course, in a sane world 100% behind you.
Yeep Royal Signals.
Sounds like a plan to refit them as corvettes or very tiny frigates. The RN has been ambivalent about that category of ship in recent times, I suppose because our fleet has to be ocean-going by nature and small escorts threaten to limit its range. This is one of our differences with the big corvette building countries (Russia, Indonesia, France to an extent)
I admit to some ignorance about whether this would really hold true though, or if it’s just an excuse. Padding out the fleet with some more capable OPVs and lower end escorts (maybe like the French La Fayettes) is an appealing notion.
Wow, I misread this and thought you meant River B2s. Ignore me. I’m ranting like a lunatic lol
Do you really think shipyard workers think about pride every time they go into the yard to build a UK warship? Barra lads show up and get paid. Perhaps the Scots are more patriotic towards the Union.
Oh, er, wait a mo…