The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has provided detailed responses to parliamentary questions concerning the early retirement of HMS Northumberland.
The Type 23 frigate was deemed uneconomical to repair after significant structural damage was discovered during a planned refit.
Maria Eagle, Minister of State for Defence, revealed the estimated costs associated with repairing HMS Northumberland:
“The cost of potential repairs for HMS Northumberland was estimated to be at least £120 million. The decision taken by the Secretary of State to decommission the ship early has avoided most of this cost, saving the taxpayer in the region of £105 million.”
Luke Pollard, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Defence, assured that the ship’s early retirement will not affect the Royal Navy’s operational capabilities:
“The retiring of HMS Northumberland in March 2025 will have no impact on current operations.”
He added that the decision was made in light of the extensive time and financial resources required to repair the vessel, which would have yielded limited operational return.
The MOD is implementing a comprehensive Surface Fleet Transition Plan to manage the replacement of ageing Type 23 frigates. Pollard elaborated:
“The Royal Navy is carefully managing a Surface Fleet Transition Plan to ensure our highest priority outputs are maintained through the 2020s and into the next decade, as we replace ageing Type 23s with eight of the world’s most advanced anti-submarine warfare ships, the Type 26 frigates.”
The Type 26s will be bolstered by five Type 31 general-purpose frigates. According to Pollard, these ships will enhance the Royal Navy’s ability to project power globally, support NATO operations, and maintain a robust presence in strategic regions.
The MOD reaffirmed its commitment to balancing current and future force levels to meet operational demands. Pollard emphasised:
“Current and planned force levels are continually assessed to ensure that they are optimised to deliver the tasks His Majesty’s Government asks of it, now and in the future.”
HMS Northumberland’s early retirement marks a cost-effective step in the Royal Navy’s transition to a more modern and capable fleet.
Surface fleet transition plan – sounds good but unless the build timetable of T31 and T26 can be accelerated, there isn’t much planning needed yet.
Wasn’t one of the key recommendations of the national shipbuilding strategy to avoid expensive refits and instead have a constant building programme of new vessels? Just building one per year would maintain a 19/20 strong surface fleet of ships with a 20 year service life. No need for constant redesign- just build new versions of what is working satisfactorily.
FYI the ship’s initial build cost was in the region of £115 million in 1995 (ca. £230 million in today’s money).
The problem is not a single T23 has survived more than 7 years after its lifex..none have actually had a successful post lifex refit, they all get binned. If this continues, and all evidence is that it will, there will be no T23s left in the fleet beyond 2030 and by 2027 we will be down to 5.
T23’s have been worked hard in their service and have all gone well past their best before dates. Good ships but they could have replaced them with newer versions when they needed too and both generate good available hulls and of course a ship building industry contributing the UK economy. Lack of foresight once more at the top both in the RN and the Gov/MOD.
Lets just hope we don’t have to go to War real soon.
The 18 year life was around having a drumbeat of build and avoiding the very expensive midlife refits. Unfortunately a queue of governments made idiotic decisions ‘to save money’ spending £120m to fix a falling apart old ship is insane given the cost of T31. A lot of the navy’s budget has been sucked into fixing knackered kit such as SSBN’s, T23 & fixing the issues with T45….no escaping the fact that that trio of decisions has cost billions and then the issue of pushing back infrastructure costs on Astute and the shoplift saga all crystallised Withington 24 months to… Read more »
BAES has clearly implied a capability to increase rate of construction of T-26, given appropriate HMG financial management. This would permit an opportunity for an additional batch purchase of T-26 class at a historically favorable price point. RN could return to CW I status as pre-eminent NATO ASW service. Hindsight will again prove to be 20/20, after the fact. Only plausible path would be The Donald’s unilateral demand that all NATO countries return to CW I level of defence spending. Stranger events have occurred in history. 🤔😉
I would hope. It would be the much needed boost UK Defence needs.
We certainly need to spend more on the UK and across NATO but not necessarily the same as in the first cold war. If we get on and build what is planned the royal navy might well have an adequate strength. There are huge gaps in capability in other areas which need to be plugged before looking at expansion of the royal navy. I would like to see at least 3% of GDP spent on defence in 2025-26 financial year, mainly to signal political intent to Putin. Massively increased ammunition stocks. Increased armoured capacity including man power and the development… Read more »
It’s the Leander’s all over again, huge sums spent to get 5 years on average from them. The navy said they would never do it again Oops then repeat again on the Type 23.
Pity they didn’t save a bit more on the refits of Iron Duke, Somerset, Portland etc and the partially completed work on Argyll which could have been put into accelerating the T26/T31 builds years ago.
More than enough to pay for the 72 million wasted on Bulwark’s refit. … my goodness, HMG is even 28 million ahead! Great day for British defence.
Agreed, let’s scrap the entire surface fleet and make even greater savings. It’s not like we are an island.
Given our SSN ‘fleet’ were tied up alongside for a very good six months, let’s throw them to the wolves and use Ryanair to a proper cmdo bgde to Norway.
At least they can fight, unlike the RN!
We seem to get less bang for our bucks than our contemporaries with similar sized budgets . Why does everything take so long to procure in this country and why arent the RN pushing back at the government . 13 frigates down to 8 , the RN should not accept this or the government will accept it as the norm and keep numbers low . The size of the escort fleet needs to double in all classes , same for the RAF and we keep a small but highly trained army . Km
Because Starmer thinks nothing of jailing people who speak out. We would end up with an RAF Air Commodore running the Royal Navy.
The army gets smaller every year be it manpower or equipment the IDF is in a better position than we are
And the cost of losing a towed-array ASW frigate without replacement. Priceless.
Exactly 💯!
It all goes to show spending a £ to save a penny is alive and well in the MOD, no such thing as a free lunch, saved millions on new ships between 2010 and 2020, now spending those millions twice over on keeping ships going and new ships and the added bonus of not having enough ships serviceable to cover needs.
I don’t buy the retirement won’t affect operational need, of course it does.
Actually, it doesn’t affect operational needs. Earlier this year (?) or late last year, Defence Select Cmtte interviewed MiL Head Shed re operational need…
I paraphrase…
Govt tell us what they want and we deliver. Ergo, doesn’t matter no subs at sea.
I shit you not.
It’s good to save 100 million here but then don’t go and waste another 100 million or more somewhere else!
The HMG/MOD insanity continues. We’ve saved billions running down our forces so far that many dedicated servicemen leave, enemies feel unconstrained to invade or bully neighbours & if we’re attcked we’ll not be capable of resisting very long before we either surrender or have to use nukes. Meanwhile billions are saved allowing people to die for lack of facilities, suicides due to lack of MH care etc, etc. Society is on its knees except for the privilaged rich few, but apparantly we can stuff it while they find new “savings” scrapping essential things that made Britain great & civilised. We… Read more »
Unfortunately the UK is a 2 star state now but with 5 star prices and that goes for the Armed Forces. As an Island Nation the Sea and Air should be the ones getting the lions share with a small but highly effective Army that can generate numbers when needed through having an equal sized active reserve. But those at the top (GOV/MOD) just don’t understand your have to be able to have the forces levels needed to take to the table and with the old worn out kit we have no one takes notice. Too much time, effort and… Read more »
The army gets smaller every year be it manpower or equipment the IDF is in a better position than we are
More money saved for starmer to pay for more hotels for the illegals
Really??? We have “barely” any ARMY to speak of, and now you’re selling off our NAVY!!! It beggars belief that we are reducing our Naval assets yet still feeding Ukraine all the money and weapons of war they need???? What is happening to our beautiful country??? Who is going to be held accountable if/when someone decides the U.K is an attractive possibility!?!
You can see Starmer and Labours priorities when they can throw an extra 30 billion at the NHS and not blink an eye but when it comes to defence it’s at the back of the queue. I’ve long held the belief that in the event of any conflict involving the UK that the off spring of politicians should be shoved into the front line.