Harland and Wolff in Belfast and Babcock at Rosyth have been invited to compete for a contract to provide drydocking facilities for the Queen Elizabeth class carriers over ten years.
According to the contract notice, the requirement is to provide up to three dry dockings for the Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers over the next ten years, in order to undertake maintenance and repair activities.
There will also be a requirement to provide a facility for any emergency dockings that may be required.
The Request for Information states:
“This requirement is open to UK-based companies only. Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers are the biggest and most advanced warships ever built for the Royal Navy. The fleet consists of HMS Queen Elizabeth (QNLZ) commissioned in December 2017 and HMS Prince of Wales (PWLS) commissioned in December 2019. The vessels will be utilised by all three branches of the UK Armed Forces and providing eight acres of sovereign territory. Both ships are versatile enough to be used for operations ranging from high intensity conflict to providing humanitarian aid and disaster relief.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) Naval Ships Support (NSS) Team based at Abbey Wood in Bristol manage the in-service support of the Queen Elizabeth Class warships (QEC) and the NSS team has a requirement to provide dry dockings of two aircraft carriers: QNLZ and PWLS over the next 10 years. The NSS Team will look to ensure competition and value for money are achieved and the successful bidder will be required to deliver all requirements under the Contract throughout the planned duration.
The scope will include three formal dockings (QNLZ 1, PWLS 2) over a period of 10 years and the dockings will include, but not be limited to, the following activities: Complete Lloyd’s Register (LR) Hull survey and revalidation; Complete LR survey of underwater appendages, including:
Rudders, Shafts and A-brackets, Plummer bearings and shaft removal, Sea Inlet Boxes and Sea Tubes; Complete LR survey of Anchor, chain and cables; Removal and replacement of underwater valves; Inspection and replacement of Cathodic protection systems, ships sensor; Ships Stabiliser deployment, inspection and repair; Repair of ships underwater paint scheme; Undertake underwater repairs to known defects. In addition to this there will be a requirement to provide a facility for any emergency dockings that may be required”
The proposed issue date of the contract is 28/02/2022 and the proposed completion date of the contract is 28/02/2032.
I can see dry docking the carriers making sense at H&W provided it doesn’t lead to Rosyth winding down its large dry docks.
NaB will have an informed view on this. But I get how you could crew a shot blast and repaint pretty easily as well as most other programmed repair type works.
This would be independent of if the FSS went to H&W & friends.
Where I would be more dubious was if there was a large scale internal refurbishment of something like a QEC as I am certain that there is not the workforce/skills in Belfast to do that anymore.
I think this is why it’s vital that H&W get a FSS contract with a company like Navantia partnering with them, only way we’ll see that yard up-skill it’s workforce in the near future.
Agree, but the EU’s virtual annexation of NI will cause problems for parts movements. Until Boris gets out of bed, it may not be worthwhile.
Alternatively NI being inside the EU’s customs union will allow the UK to play both sides against the middle and have shipbuilding projects be build to EU rules when it plays to our advantage.
It’s a none issue…
Defence, defence equipment or items for the sole use of the MOD within a defence role are exempt from the NI protocol…
Why does Nab not contribute here? Read his pieces on STRN and Think Defence often enough over the years.
He has posted on arrse and on here but you’re right, not seen his pists in some time.
Rosyth is a non starter unless they make the dry docks deeper.
unloaded it literally scrapes in.
All the ship yards will want to use the dock when the carrier is not in it, so an emergency docking could take months if already occupied.
Best solution for the RN is to convert D lock at portsmouth and have one to use when they wish.
I think rebuilding capabilities at H&W makes a lot of sense. Scotland has all of the Navy’s new build frigate programme. It’s good to have some investment flowing to Northern Ireland to build skills for young people. Some skills might not be there but we can rebuild them.
I see your point and that’s all very well for general maintenance … But what about extensive repairs and refits?
They appear to strongly hinting about considerable conversion work as part of the first major refit, possibly of arrester wires, catapult systems, flight deck angled runway extension perhaps too, for UCAV ops.
‘If’ these plans come to fruition ( big if), then it probably has to be Rosyth.
I believe the old HW site has the required big hole in the ground, but is there any other infrastructure on site???
Possible issues with an area subject to EU rules?
If a private company wanted to develop the site, at no further cost to the taxpayer and the EU issue wasn’t a problem, then perhaps Northern Ireland might be worth looking at. They would have to get their skates on, getting a fully formed company off the ground, with all the skills and infrastructure though, clocks ticking……
H&W has a few big holes, including Belfast Dock and their main building dock, made famous by their two gantry cranes. They also have a painting/blasting shop and a fabrication area.
I imagine such work would be carried out in Belfast Dock, but I’m not an expert in their facilities!
Hi John,
Firstly, defence contracts are explicitly exempt from EU trade rules, so that will not be a problem. Think about how protective the French are with defence programmes…
I agree with you that Rosyth is probably the favourite for this contract for the reasons you describe, so I would see H&W getting the 3x FSS ships perhaps supported by Cammell Laird., which would nicely share the work around NI and English yards.
Cheers CR
H&W and Cammel Laird sharing the FSS work seems like a really sensible solution CR👌
I’m skeptical, if it works that’s great, but my brain is also thinking that there are the National Flagship and MRSS that will need ordering soon. If both CL and H&W are working on FSS who will those contracts go too?
H&W and CL are on rival teams for the FSS contract.
H&W are fronting for the main Spanish military ship builder. There roll in the build is open to question.
CL are part of a team that includes Babcock, BAe and RR.
This means it’s unlikely they will be working together on FSS.
Hi ATH
Agreed, however I was thinking in terms of the National Ship Building Strategy (NSBS) and how the government pushed two competitors to work together to build the carriers. Also, the current political reality in the UK.
For example, CL has considerable experience building specialist vessels. So if their team lost the contract then I would not be surprised if, to meet the work share requirements of the NSBS, they were then included in the build phase.
There is also the obvious political desire to ‘level up’ and ‘build back better’. So I again I would not be surprised to see political pressure applied to ensure that as many regions as possible benfit from the considerable up lift in defence spending. I would hope, however, that this would be balanced by recognition of the industrial realisties and that the ‘best’ or most appropriately skilled were included in the various projects.
A hint of this is given in the RFI for the FSS ships in the phrase, “in expressions of interest from UK shipyards who are capable of making a meaningful contribution to the manufacture of three (3) Fleet Solid Support (FSS) ships”. To me this suggests that there is at least a desire to ensure that the build is evenly and effectively spread across the country, certainly it suggests a modular approach to the build as per the carriers.
The current government is very reliant on its new northern constitutents staying happy…
Cheers CR
QE Class is never going to have the following ie arrester wires, catapult systems, flight deck angled runway extension.
there is little to no point when the carrier is designed around the F35bs BAEs dropped a huge bollock when playing with the UKgovs.
QE 1st refit will update her systems to POW standard, Increasing crew space, and updating defense systems.
Fitting of UCAV launch and recovery there is a design by Qinetiq based on the QE class.
Pompey had a design Proposal for a Dry dock and the local Council was pushing for this works.
H&W Is a gamble not built a rubber dinghy recently
Rosyth has to be a no brainer. The vessels were built there and QE has already completed an initial dry docking. Plus of course she will require a refit post CSG21. The knowledge of the ships is already there, plus of course Babcock purchased the crane.
That’s my gut instinct on it too Paul, one thing against it is if they end up building the new FSS and taking up the big drydock with them. If H&W get the FSS then I would imagine Rosyth will get this gig.
Its good that its going out to contract though rather than just one yard telling the MOD how much they’ll do it for.
Well no, Bob …… it depends on the Scottish electorate.
NS has no power to decide anything.
At the last elections more voted for unionist parties than nationalist ones.
So she has no mandate.
I guess that will be determined if and when she gets her second referendum?
George, Military ship-building/and repair has nothing to do with the SNP. Defence is not devolved by the UK government to the Edinburgh administration.
Incidentally, the shipyard in Glasgow is currently booming through orders placed by the Ministry of Defence.
In comparison, the old Ferguson facility near Greenock, nationalised by the SNP administration during 2019, is still struggling to complete two small Cal-Mac ferries – these are at least four years late, with over £50M of taxpayers money written-off. The situation has been described as a national scandal.
Many Scots do often contrast the differing fortunes of these two Clyde yards – and the efficacy of their sponsors.
Allan. Having served shoulder to shoulder with more Scottish soldiers than I care to count. One in particular a Glaswegian Royal Engineer still calls me his Big Bro and I call him Little Bro. So please understand it hurts me to say things like this or even address the subject. However, the rise of the SNP and their continued clamour for full independence cannot be ignored and only seems to be growing. Meanwhile UK is shrinking it’s armed forces. Meaning the percentage of loyal old soldiers north of the border. who realise we are stronger together, is on the decline. I’m afraid the ship builder votes are unlikely to win the next referendum.
The example you quote demonstrates quite nicely that MoD orders can turn any yard or united group of yards/drydocks and support services. Into a booming centre of excellence. I propose HM. Gov start shifting facilities including nuclear submarines, away from SNP grasp at the earliest opportunity. The only remaining question for me, is where?
Northern Ireland could certainly do with a vote of confidence after recent EU attacks but not from shipbuilding. The North East of England has the necessary port facilities that have been ticking over with North Sea oil work. The Able UK dry dock needs to be seen to be believed at 360m by 120m by at present 12.5m it’s immense and the biggest we have. It could easily accommodate a carrier and another vessel alongside. Floating heavy lift cranes etc. The dock could even drydock a “floating recovery dock”, capable of taking our carriers. Which is a subject for another time.
George,
But strangely, when you look at the constitutional position of Northern Ireland you will find that it is further down the road of separatism than Scotland!
Scotland is still a full participant in the UK market, and does not have foreign powers intervening in its governance.
Currently, ship-building only plays a minor part in the referendum debate – however, that may no longer be the case if the UK government unfairly discriminates against Scottish workers (fellow UK citizens) when they bid for contracts. Your proposal, if instigated, will make your fear of Scottish independence a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Despite the claims of separatists, long-term voting patterns suggest that Scotland is a long, long way from going it alone. Indeed, it’s the Scottish electorate that is preventing another referendum – not the UK government.
For all the best of intentions, I fear you’re proposing to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Meantime, whatever the untested claims of other parts of the UK, the Clyde/Forth complex remains the centre of excellence for warship construction in the United Kingdom.
This contract is not for a refit. If you read the spec it’s for the required class society check of the underwater fittings. This will be a quickly like the one QE had. In and out in a few weeks. I understand the plan is to do everything else needed (at least until a poss mid life upgrade) in small packages whilst the ship is in Portsmouth. The QE class won’t have traditional refits in the plan comes to fruition.
Belfast please! Pretty please!!
Rosyth can’t actually meet the requirement to deploy the stabilisers as the dock simply isn’t wide enough.
After the disgusting way NI has been treated for the past few years? It should be Harland. Scotland gets too much cake and asks for bigger portions. If its to remain a “United” Kingdom, then equity of workshare needs to be a priority.
Is Able UK capable of gearing up for this sort of work? I know they used to dismantle carriers and their dry dock is big enough.
Big enough and then some. It could be a candidate for a future manufacturing and repair facility for every type of naval vessel. All it needs is the political will and private investment.
Hello, George.
I’m aware from email of your reply yesterday to my below, but so far no record of it here, evidently.
Anyway, just to say I do not actually foresee any major industrial moves away from Scotland any time soon. I believe the overall UK mindset will remain focussed on as great a harmonious relationship as possible* due to our countries’ long and fruitful association (the desire of James 6th/1st, of course), despite the SNP.
Still don’t comprehend SNP preference to be a small cog in EU, with the concomitant disruption to the above* that would ensue, rather than remain a significant player in GB/UK, but there you are.
I don’t see the issue of staff and trained skills in a location any issue these days when big engineering contracts start skilled staff move to the location. Look at nuclear power plants sited nowhere near population centres as an example. Who ever lands the contract skilled staffed won’t be an issue. At town of over 25000 set up to build Hinckley point C. So a few welders and painters won’t be an issue.
With significant Carrier docking and FSS in the pipeline over the next decade and beyond, there would seem sufficient motivation for UK build, assembly and maintenance investment by yards with the potential capacity. Add in security of supply requirements due to the continuing deterioration in world politics, and the necessity only increases, evidently.
From my bad memory I think there is 3 docks at rosyth. I think only one is big enough for the carrier. Invincible class could fit in another so could no doubt accommodate some future projects at same time. If the frigates are being built in a frigate factory I’m guessing they can dropped in the water basin not in a dock.
Only thing I’ve seen Harland and Wolff recently is a museum and a crane collapsing in the dock.
Will probably be what’s the cheapest with the best skills
With the long wait for the new FSS’s would it be worth the while to fix up the next best Fort’s in the meantime? It’ll give work, keep skills and could then be a good interim filler in for UK-shared operations?
Im no expert on this, but I believe there are significant hurdles to overcome that effectively rules this option out.
Apparently the RAS rigs are not compatible with the QE class ships! Altering them is not a simple task either, as these ships are over 40 yo, so are all their high power systems, which, it appears do not meet current safety standards.
Believe this is one of the main issues preventing the upgrading of these ships. It’s not economically viable it appears.
Totally agree that we should not be in this position, after all, we have known about this requirement since we started building the carriers!!!
The crane incident was in 2007…14 years ago.
There is no museum at H&W though owners Infrastrata did talk about looking at the tourist side of things as another revenue stream for the yard, and why not if it can be done safely and side by side with the engineering activities? People would come in their droves…the hugely successful Titanic Visitor Centre is next door.
Have a look at their website; they are aggressively targeting people with the requisite skills to work in all of their four sites. They are commencing an apprenticeship scheme this autumn. Amongst other things they are waiting for the go-ahead for a gas storage facility / hydrogen production facility at Islandmagee near Larne, along with a floating gas storage facility. Both major engineering works.
H&W are more than capable of dry-docking these carriers; they dry-docked 20+ merchant vessels last year to conduct the type of works listed in the article above. Currently in Belfast Dry Dock (ship repair facility) is the MV Victorine a car ferry and MV Azura a cruise liner is alongside the ship repair quay for works. Its not that bad for a company who were out of business this time two years ago. Winning this contract would be a further boost and a vote of confidence in the yard.
So many post on Scottish independence but following the train crash that is brexit, HW might be firmy within Eire within the next few years.
Time to reassess and perhaps Newcastle should be favoured. Thoughts?
Don’t hold your breath on that assumption!
Not a chance. As the well informed know.
They could send it here!
500,000 Ton capacity Graving Dock and we can hull blast a ULCC / VLCC, change or overhaul the valves, do prop and stern seals, pull the shafts, repaint using say silicon paint all in 4 weeks.
Cannot see it happening though!
Ship repair is all about prior planning and it can reduce the time needed in the dock. You only need to do the underwater items (obviously!) in dock. Anything above the waterline including substantial structural work can be done afloat.
If you replace Valves one for one that’s quicker but more expensive because you need to buy in a 1005 set of new valves . Using soft seal kits to overhaul the existing valves is cheaper but takes a little longer as you need to remove the valve to a workshop, overhaul, pressure test, return and refit.
To get QE into the dock in Rosyth there is a lot of before and after underwater engineering work that is needed. The Prop blades I think need to be removed from the Prop Hub or she wont go over the dock sill and I think there is an issue with the Stabs. Its pretty much bread and butter work for Industrial underwater engineering divers who did it already to get the ship out of dock on build.
Shaft and bearings on A Brackets are straight forward. You take poker gauge readings using divers to measure the shaft to bearing wear at set intervals and these reveal any excess wear in the bearings. if you graph the results of the readings over time , considering shaft hours and shaft speed and you can predict when the bearings will need to be looked at or changed.
Painting is straight forward but the UK weather can be an issue. If using Silicon it cannot really be patch repaired and you usually need a full removal and reapplication. For such a paint there are very strict application requirements for temp, humidity, airborne dust and times between coatings. If it rains ( Because it never does that in Fife or Belfast!)and the hull gets wetted between or straight after a coating it can result in a re-blast and a complete start again. I would expect the dock to be encapsulated for the paint application to stop this from happening.
If its standard Anti Foul Paint you can spot blast and repair a lot more easily. The difference between using AF and Silicon paint is a balance between the substantial cost in application of silicon but getting a big recoup on fuel cost as it can save around 5% in fuel use, reduce emissions and help to keep the vessels speed higher than when using AF paint over the same time period.
Anchor Cable inspections are straight forward and can be done alongside if needed . In dock its a little easier as you can lower the cable into the dock bottom, lay it out and do the inspection there.
Cathodic protection, Underwater sensors(Echo Sounder etc) are standard checks you do in the water and when in Dock. If you identify an issue Docking is the ideal time to fix it so that you don’t need to use a coffer dam.
Interesting post as usual GB.