The Brazilian Navy has formally signed an agreement to acquire two Royal Navy amphibious assault ships, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, during the LAAD Defence & Security 2025 event in Rio de Janeiro.

The agreement, described as a “protocol of intentions,” was signed on Wednesday and comes during the bicentennial year of diplomatic relations between Brazil and the United Kingdom.

The acquisition of the Albion-class landing platform docks (LPDs) would, say the country, significantly bolster Brazil’s capacity for amphibious operations, disaster relief, and humanitarian response.

The vessel will join helicopter carrier HMS Ocean, sold years ago, to the Brazilians.

According to an official update from Brazil’s Navy news service, the ships are being sought not only for their strategic military utility but also for their ability to support domestic civil operations. “We have seen the need for Navy ships to support the population in the various calamities that have occurred due to climate variations, such as the floods that occurred in São Sebastião in 2023 and in Rio Grande do Sul in 2024,” said Admiral Edgar Luiz Siqueira Barbosa, Director General of Navy Material.

He added that Brazil has long valued British-built naval assets. “Several British ships, throughout the existence of the naval fleet, have been incorporated into the MB. They are quality ships, so we already have this good experience.”

HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, built in the late 1990s and early 2000s, were among the Royal Navy’s most capable amphibious vessels, designed for transporting large numbers of troops, vehicles, and cargo.

Both ships are equipped with flight decks able to support heavy helicopter operations and were constructed with the projection of force and humanitarian assistance missions in mind.

The potential transfer aligns with long-standing speculation that at least one of the LPDs may be withdrawn from service as part of evolving UK defence priorities. The Royal Navy has maintained a rotating state of high readiness between the two sister ships, with only one typically active at any given time.

This announcement was made during the 15th edition of LAAD Defence & Security – Latin America’s premier defence and security exposition – which runs from April 1–4 at Riocentro in Rio de Janeiro. The Brazilian Navy has used the event to showcase its strategic programmes and capabilities, including interactive technology exhibits and simulations for public engagement.

The Royal Navy has not yet publicly commented on the deal, nor has the UK Ministry of Defence confirmed the timeline or conditions for the potential transfer of the vessels. However, the signing of the protocol of intentions suggests that negotiations are in an advanced stage.

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

78 COMMENTS

    • JOIN US Making cash is very easy an simple now days. 2025 is the year of making money online . I am here to tell you guys that its so easy to make more than $15k every month by working online. I have joined this job 3 months ago and on my first day of working without having any experience of online jobs I made $524. This is just amazing. Join this now by

      Follow instructions here………….. 𝐖­𝐖­𝐖­.­𝐇­𝐈­𝐆­𝐇­𝐏­𝐑­𝐎­𝐅­𝐈­𝐓­𝟏­.­𝐂­𝐎­𝐌

  2. Good that’s it’s a ‘protocol of intentions’. I was concerned it might be an ‘expression of interest’ or, God forbid, an ‘indication of inclinations’.

    • I am making a good s­al­ary from home $4580-$5240/week , which is amazing und­er a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now its my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,

      Here is I started_______ 𝐖­­­𝐖­­­𝐖.𝐖­­𝐎­­𝐑­­­­𝐊𝐒­­­­𝐓­­­­𝐀­­­­𝐑­­­­𝟏.­­­­𝐂­­­­𝐎­­𝐌

  3. Should just let the Brazilian Navy take over the RN, the rate we are selling ships to them vs replacing them they will be running it anyways!

  4. What is our MoD doing to significantly bolster Britain’s ‘capacity for amphibious operations, disaster relief, and humanitarian response’. What are their plans to replace the LPH, HMS Ocean.

    • MRSS has moved on to the PowerPoint creation stage, I think. Hoping the weather holds. Appeasement. Commercial Leasing. Looking at other countries sternly until they do something.

      We could move a fair bit by air for humanitarian and disaster relief, except we’ve cut down that capability too and we may have to wait for another nation to do the initial work including fixing runways (the French and Dutch waited for us to do so for them a few years back).

      The main thing of course, as has been the case for the last 40 years, is simply hoping nothing happens where we’d need them.

      For Ocean, there was no plan to replace it, talk of a second at some point in 98-99 maybe.

      • What! The French and Dutch waited for us to fix the runways, come on we can’t fix our roads.
        We are seeing our Navy ships being sold of quite often, but before you do that, shouldn’t we at least have reliable replacements in place first. Look at those two aircraft carriers, both have had major problems and Ark Royal had gone before they even came into service.

  5. I think it’s a very sad day for the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines. I think it’s a bad day for the government, and a tragic day for the UK.

    • Not a bad day for the government this is the choice they’ve made, one which it turns out is not forced. Healey decided to cut them to save cash when fully expecting more cuts. The treasury was then told to find a way to 2.5% plus aspirations. An immediate thing to do alongside that announcement would have been to rescind those cuts and keep the Albions on. They didn’t so until I see otherwise, I’ll take that to mean amphibious capabilities are being downsized in the SDSR and that remains the plan.

      Terrible for all others you’ve mentioned and the peoples who would have welcomed the UK’s ability to get to them early with the things they’d need in the event of a disaster.

  6. I vaguely understand the logic in getting rid of two ships that are very expensive to run. However dropping down to 3 Bays and Argus seems like a mistake as it will take years to get 6 MRSS. Buying one or two ferry conversions as was previously planned for the littoral strike ship makes sense to bolster numbers.

    • They aren’t expensive to run at all.
      The cost of running each LPH was about £10+ million a year.
      Bulwark had just exited a £72 million refit, so we are flushing a very good capability down the drain for pennies.
      As of writing the UK can muster one RFA LPD for amphibious operations whilst Brazil will soon be able to field HMS Ocean, Bulwark and Albion.
      MRSS as a concept hasn’t even been developed let a lot a contract signed or steel cut.
      The French are now the foremost amphibious power in Europe with their three Mistral class.
      Such a sad day for the RN.

      • Italians are up their with their Stovl LHD and 3 LPDs.

        Cost in manpower is why the Albions are being retired. We won’t be able to bring them back online before their retirement

      • They have pretty much been mothballed for years, I suspect they aren’t in a great state. RN is a blue water navy, Brazil isn’t and so I suspect that will mean they will get use us out of them that the RN couldn’t.

        Also not having a hanger these days is a serious limitation for their intended purpose. Not to mention I don’t think in the era of constant drone survallinance etc that a slow moving landing craft would make it to the beach. The world has changed, even halo landing would be extremely difficult

        • Compelling arguments as to whether we are still a traditional blue water navy… particularly from a sustainment perspective. We are not far off but arguably we are a second-tier force along with France (sometimes) India (sometimes), China (if they wanted to) and Russia (probably not anymore) given the US definition is based on 5 factors:

          – Carrier Strike,
          – Amphibious Strike,
          – Nuclear Powered Submarines,
          – Ability to project in all 5 oceans,
          – Ability to sustain the above simultaneously.

          Fully agree that Brazil will have great utility for these platforms and will likely have far more universal use than we have. When I was training on Bulwark (years ago!) the CO used to describe it as the “nation’s Swiss Army Knife”, able to react to most things within reason, even if it is not the best tool for the job it is the best one to carry all the time. Particularly noting the Brazilian foreign policy and the increased demand for humanitarian work, these are very versatile platforms for the needs of the Marhina do Brasil.

          Noting the workforce requirements and the FCF construct, they are a legacy platform with better money elsewhere (I don’t think we should have to sustain the capability gap however). Selling them to a growing ally is the best to expect in these circumstances.

          • We were found out rather quickly after retiring the Harrier force, making us do Tornando bomb runs from Cyprus against Libya instead of using a carrier.
            As for capability gap it hasn’t even been decided what MRSS will be. We are at least 10 years from IOT if the MoD come up with a plan tomorrow.
            Has is abandoning a capability for 10 years acceptable? As to the LPDs being a legacy platform they are only 20 years old and will have lots of utility in the Brazilian navy. Keeping one operational and then rotating them every few years until their successors arrived was a sensible strategy.

        • Not true, Albion was in commission in late 2024 and unsurprisingly required a refit and Bulwark was well into her refit so she could re-enter service.

      • The identity crisis the MRSS has is so bad it could end up being a Frigate with an oversized flight deck and hook points for hammocks. We may never regain the capability.

      • The main issue that has been posted on here with the ships is the engineering staff required which the RN is desperately short of. They ship have a high crew requirement compared to say the LSD’s .

        Personally I would keep them but if they are overly complicated I would look for an OTC partial replacement as I don’t believe the 3 LSD are enough.

    • The UK has 34-40 F-35B in service, with more expected by the end of the year. That’s more than enough to supply the carrier under normal operating conditions, and almost enough to reach surge capacity of 36 fighters onboard. Max capacity is 72 aircraft (inc helos)

      • Whilst the post exaggerates the position, we would in practice find it very hard to deploy the carriers in a war zone due to the lack of escorts. It would require pretty much the full active fleet, which would mean the supply lines etc would not be protected.

        • Steve, it is only expected that we would deploy one carrier. How many escorts does that one carrier need? 2 x T23; 1-2 x T45; 1 x SSN? Surely we could do that?

          • We see this oft repeated until.two are used then its “oh look we have two.both out. aren’t we great”. I think there are many mixed signals
            and circular arguments regards the Carriers tbh that people like to trope.out as and when the situation dictates. I’m not even sure we have enough of the enablers to put out a fullly capable and effective carrier group without help.from other Navies..as for two with one on ‘standby’ I don’t think that standby capability will be all its cracked up to be and I definately don’t think it was worth the expense considering the detrimental impact it’s had across either the rest of the Navy or the defence budget in general . Its almost like someone decided two would be a good idea based on vanity and then everything else has been dictated to by that decision

          • Graham,

            Given the size of the fleet your list plus 1x SSN to protect the CASD, 1x T23 in the Gulf, 1x T45, patrol ships and that would be the total of the active fleet because the rest would be rotating through maintenance, refit, crew R&R… So yeh we can do it, but boy the cupboard is bare while they are away.

            Don’t get me wrong I fully support the idea of CSG25. Italy and France have been sending carrier groups to the Far East as well, recognising Europe’s interests in that region and the threat from China.

            We have accepted a senior leading role in the High North and JEF areas of operation, so we need an amphibious capability, so losing these ships is a serious set back, but it seems the RN is not in a position to effectively man them! Madness.

            The RN is far too small, with far too many capability gaps. I think we all agree on that. Even doubling the fleet wouldn’t meet our needs if the USN reduced its presence in, or withdrew all together, from the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean. If, as many have said on here, we accept that the UK should prioritise the maritime flank we should prioritise rebuilding the RN, then the RAF and finally the Army.

            That is not to say that we do not modernise the Army now, rather it means that we accept a smaller set of land responsibilities and size and properly equip the army accordingly. I would focus on the Army Commando Force to support the Royal Marines in being able to reinforce the High North and provide the army with sufficient capabilities to operate effectively in the JEF area of operations. JEF would need include heavy armed forces, given the need to deter an attack on the Baltic States. The Army is currently too small, obviously.

            The Maritime flank would need to be able to support the reinforcement of the High North, escort reinforcements into the Baltic States, Strike at the Russian maritime bastions and protect the Sea Lines of Communication. Two carriers, 13 escorts, 7 SSN are simply far too few to do all of that. The RAF would need to be able to support the maritime flank, defend UK airspace, support deployed ground forces and strike at Russian supply lines… The RAF is way too small to do all of that.

            Our conventional forces pay the price for our Nuclear Deterrent. If Europe wants the UK and France to provide a nuclear umbrella they will need to provide additional funds as we need to be able to look after our national interests in the conventional space as well as play a conventional role in eNATO.

            As a nation we need to up our military industrial capacity massively (so does the rest of Europe). So order more stuff and make orders dependent on industrial investment, and solve the rubbish recruitment system… The additional orders would need to signal an immediate response to the threats currently emerging so we will have to accept that we are where we are and initially look at increasing and accelerating existing programs, especially those we have some level direct control over so more T26 and T31 for the RN, more Typhoon and A400 for the RAF, sort out the Army’s lack of CS and CSS.

            The task is enormous and it will take time and money, both of which are in short supply.

            Cheers CR
            PS. Obviously a very truncated summary of the need…

  8. I stated that at the time Albion went into reserve… I also stated that the two Wave Tankers will go to Brazil as well. Its only a matter of time before its publicly announced.

    • HADR work will likely be their main use. Brazil is a huge country, has a population over 200 million people & a 7,500km coastline. It is also a capability generally lacking in South America as a whole.

  11. FFS. Sold before replacement is ready. So that’s another defence capability gap just smashed open, perfect timing too. Just when expeditionary capability and the ability to lift and deploy large numbers of troops would be really helpful.

    We are told these vessels are yesterdays military….and yet Brazil will probably keep them running for another 20-30 years.

    We live in crazy times.
    SDSR will report soon enough.
    We won’t have any money to invest in defence.
    Big trouble is ahead.

    • These are great for HADR work. For UK to do the same, they would have to send them to the Caribbean. Look at a map, Brazil has a Caribbean coastline. They are already there. While I would rather RN utilised both, currently, if they can’t get them to sea, this is probably the best outcome. At least they might do something useful rather than rot away tied to a pier.

  12. Utterly ridiculous. The one thing the UK is still world class at and gives us clout on the world stage is commando operations. So what does the government do at a time of hightened world instability? Sells the Royal Marines two primary naval platforms. Don’t give me any cost justification. The ships are only half way through their operational lives. Replacement, if there are any, are probably the best part of two decades away. You could not make it up.

    • Unfortunately we haven’t had to make.it up…when it comes to strange decisions the UK government has past form.

  13. Stupid move, I can understand selling Albion as she it was planned for her to spend the next 7 years in extended readiness but bulwark was mostly refitted and could have cycled through to readiness when Elizabeth goes into long refit.

  14. JOIN US Making cash is very easy an simple now days. 2025 is the year of making money online . I am here to tell you guys that its so easy to make more than $15k every month by working online. I have joined this job 3 months ago and on my first day of working without having any experience of online jobs I made $524. This is just amazing. Join this now by

    Follow instructions here………….. 𝐖­𝐖­𝐖­.­𝐇­𝐈­𝐆­𝐇­𝐏­𝐑­𝐎­𝐅­𝐈­𝐓­𝟏­.­𝐂­𝐎­𝐌

  16. Reality is that there is nobody to crew them and still keep other vessels going … in a declining society/culture, too few want to sign up to defend the country while the Government itself doesn’t even bother to look for the best and faciliate their enlistment.

    • Sadly, can you blame many of historic recruitment pools for no longer wanting to sign up?

      Longer deployments don’t fit modern lifestyles
      Wages and benefits not great
      Young men being raised with media narrative that uk bad, wars of last 30 years were wrong, white people need to apologise for everything happened in the past, uk history is bad etc etc

      So, if this is what they have been raised up with, can you blame them for.not wanting to join up

      • The pathetic whining of incompetent white males is a recurring feature of the UK and US.

        Luckily you’ll be extinct shortly (though not soon enough) 🤡💩👎🏾

  17. Cost isn’t the issue with the Albions manpower is. The RN is short of enough people to run the ships 650 people to run both these ships you can run 3 Type 23’s and an Astute for that many.

    • In other words, a 2 percent increase in the active duty strength of the RN would provide enough manpower to operate these ships.

      • It is more that a few specific engineering trades are very low on people.

        The rest of the navy isn’t that bad in terms of numbers.

        Retention cycles would be massively improved.

        That said something doesn’t add up as with so few frigates on the water and only starting to generate T32/26 crews with the Albions, Echos and most of the Hunts/Sandowns gone that is an awful lot of people who numerically the navy isn’t short of.

  18. @George If you have a degree in Cyber Security, how come you haven’t stopped these “I earn…” spam posts

    • Don’t worry we are committed to defending the ‘High North’ said Labour a few weeks ago whilst simultaneously disposing of the very ships we might need to do so. Unfortunately this removal of key assets and capabilities plays perfectly (we were second only to the US in amphibious capability less than a decade ago) into Trumps narrative that we are spongers and not serious when it comes to defence.
      Gesturing you would send a couple of thousand underarmed soldiers and 4 Typhoons as part of a peacekeeping force to Ukraine does not make you a credible ally, however, well you try and spin it.
      Unfortunately whilst I back the deployment nor does sending a CSG to the Far East if you have to take virtually all your available escorts, SSN, replenishment ships and F35s in order to do so
      All in all an embarrassing state of affairs which adds yet another capability gap that fundamentally reduces the versatility of the RM’s.

  22. They can include one of the Carriers in the pack, this way they,ll acelerate the plan to leave Britain unarmed.
    Let,s go Mohamed Starmer.

  23. !!!!
    All part of the strategy. UK gvmt has managed to kill many UK defence contractors so wants to do favours for the boys when it comes to naval industry.:-

    Same old shite: pay a pittance to the seafarers and warriors whilst gifting profit to the brotherhood.

    Meh

  24. When you consider the actual number of frigates now in the RN with the loss of several Type 23, the ongoing work for the PIP to the Type 45s limiting their availability, the run down of the crewed MCM force along with the RFA, which also have a small RN contingent on deployed vessels. Don’t forget Albion was at sea in 2024 with two carriers in commission.
    Then to blame a lack of crew for one of these ships because of the introduction of the carriers suggests the manning situation in the RN is far worse than is being publicly acknowledged. Yes people must be trained to work on the machinery and equipment on different classes of ship but all this points to an ongoing loss of skilled people across the board.
    The pressure on the experienced personnel that are remaining to deploy must be very high and cannot be sustainable in the medium term.
    This is not about lean manning and clever systems reducing crew numbers but a far more worrying trend and if none of this identified in the SDR then no amount of new ship orders will offset the terminal decline the RN is suffering. I am sure the same can be said about the Army and RAF.

  25. The Royal Navy has developed a new stock control practice… One Out, One more PowerPoint slide.

    Frankly it is disgraceful that a warship is refitted at the taxpayer’s expense only to be sold to a foreign navy.

    At a time when ‘the world has never been more dangerous’ and militaries across the spectrum are rearming, our woeful political class put rhetoric before reality. If you read Navy Lookout’s excellent article on ‘The rise of the drone carriers’ it is clear other countries would see the value in these assets and, as JRuss notes up thread, if the Albion class presented a big fat vulnerable target as an amphibious warship, surely a role could have been found for them as drone carriers – especially given the glacial pace at which this nation builds ships.

    Pathetic.

  26. The destruction of Britain’s defences has to stop. We’re are going to have to find a way of forcing Britain’s political class to do their job. Maybe some sort of annual audit where too many Red’s automatically triggers an official censure and too many reds over 3 years triggers an automatic vote of no confidence in parliament. Obviously the governing party would probably win but boy oh boy politically it’s a very bad look.

  27. Gutted. Getting the bad news out of the way before the SDR is published. On the positive side this sale consolidates UK soft power projection in South America. Brazil was born as a colonial offshoot of Portugal, England’s oldest ally, and is the largest and most powerful country on the continent. On balance an excellent strategic investment.

    • Paul, the time when we could talk about a strategic investment by selling old ships to other countries was over long ago and we are now disposing of valuable assets with at least another decade of life in them and way before there replacements are even ordered. There is no upside to unilaterally disarming yourself when the world is as volatile as it is currently.
      It is more akin to tempting fate or national suicide, which seems quite acceptable to our political class.

  29. It seems evident to this observer of the defence scene that one of the problems the UK defence effort faces is that we spread our money far too thinly attempted to do a little of everything rather than concentrating of that which is vital to our national security. If the only real NATO role of our amphibious forces is still to operate off the Norwegian coast then perhaps we should ask ourselves why send ships into this situation – on the doorstep of the Russian Northern Fleet and strategic bomber forces – when you can now drive there in a matter of hours thanks to modern infrastructure. It seems to me that a large amphibious force is unlikely to long survive placed in such a exposed position anyway – so don’t do that and instead deploy to the area before combat operations start via air and road transport links.

    Are, rightly or wrongly, not the Royal Marines organised into a widely detached special forces type organisation now rather than the coherent Brigade they once were? Therefore, are large scale amphibious forces even required anymore?

    Needless to say the money (and scarce naval personnel) saved by not maintaining this expensive LPD capability can be usefully diverted elsewhere – for example on additional ASW frigates and submarines that really are vital to our defence effort. If on the other hand you want to argue that in a Falklands type situation a LPD capability would be essential than you would probably be correct – but then we are back to doing a little of everything again and I’m not at all sure that is sustainable anymore given the rapidly deteriorating international situation.

    • With the current British políticians you can forget the increase in defence capabilities, amphibious ships are needed, global capability is needed to project british influence and economic trade, maybe the solution for these incumbents IS to sell the overseas territories, don,t exclude it, they,re traitors.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here