The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has provided an update on the Multi-Role Support Ship (MRSS) programme, confirming its continued progress through the concept phase.
This initiative, announced in the 2021 defence white paper Defence in a Competitive Age, aims to modernise the Royal Navy’s amphibious capabilities.
Please note that the image above is illustrative and not representative of any choice for the ship’s design.
In a written response to a parliamentary question from David Reed, MP for Exmouth and Exeter East, Maria Eagle, Minister of State for Defence, outlined current activities within the programme. She stated:
“The Multi-Role Support Ship programme is progressing well through the Concept Phase. The Royal Navy (RN) and Defence Equipment and Support are conducting detailed work on key user requirements, conceptual designs, affordability, and exportability assessments, while working closely with leading UK shipbuilding entities and the National Shipbuilding Office (NSO) on the best commercial approach for UK to deliver for the RN and the Nation.”
The MOD revealed that an Outline Business Case is expected by mid-2025, which will pave the way for the programme to transition into the assessment phase in 2026.
Replacing a Legacy Fleet
The MRSS is designed to replace the Royal Navy’s existing amphibious fleet, including the two Albion-class landing platform docks, three Bay-class landing ships, and the multi-purpose support ship RFA Argus.
These vessels, some of which are scheduled for retirement as early as 2025, will be succeeded by up to six new multi-mission ships.
According to the MOD, the MRSS will maintain the Royal Navy’s amphibious capabilities, including global deployment and support for the Royal Marines. The first MRSS is expected to enter service by 2033, ensuring a seamless transition as the current fleet phases out by 2034.
The MRSS programme underpins the UK’s commitment to maintaining a globally deployable, amphibious-capable navy. As outlined in the 2021 defence white paper, these ships will be central to ensuring the Royal Navy remains equipped for future challenges, supporting both defence and humanitarian missions worldwide.
Funding and Timeline
The MRSS programme is funded from the Defence budget, enabling the Royal Navy and Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) to undertake detailed preparatory work. Eagle stated:
“The programme aims to deliver the first of class by 2033. This timeline remains on track to meet operational requirements.”
While I can accept the Albion class where no longer right for the envisaged mission getting rid of them in 2025 two years before the maximum danger period to Taiwan in 2027 might end up looking very much like the 1981 defence cuts.
These vessels should have been able to go to Belfast after they finished the FSSS however that no longer seems possible given the timelines. So that will mean trying to squeeze them in at Rosyth so no chance of a t32 now and our escort fleet will be frozen at 19 for a generation.
Was scrapping the Albion’s really worth all that.
It’s all a mess. Perfect storm of cuts, recruitment, incompetence = a capability gap. We are where we are. MRSS program looks to be approved and being being well managed. I’ve a feeling T32 might turn out to be something you can build in Appledore.
Uhhh, no?
They have no idea what they want the design to be and they don’t even have funding for 6 ships so hardly well managed.
T32 has zero funding, it’s not happening
I think a new type is funded and will happen-for mcmv / opv replacement. It just won’t be a frigate.
I think they at least know what they don’t want – a small hybrid opv/lpd. That’s why we pulled out of the discussions with the Netherlands. I expect the concept work will dovetail with the SDR.
Agree Jim. In the grand scheme of defence spending keeping the Albions was virtually nothing.
T32 was dead before this government took over. Tories knew it but it’s politically advantageous to let Labour be the ones to announce its demise.
It saves £9m annually to get rid of Bulwark and given the data provided so far about the MRSS project the only real differences in these vessels will be a hangar and a smaller crew.
The so called FCF is a product of disbanding 3 Commando Brigade because to modernise it is too expensive. The U.K.s amphibious capability was not about contested beach assaults but it is being used as a cover to suggest this is now too dangerous. The real reason is to save money.
We have conveniently forgotten to fight in the high north you need specially trained forces supported by dedicated shipping and aircraft all of which have been significantly reduced just at the wrong time.
The Bays may look similar to the Albions but they are not front line warships and are nowhere near as capable so the ‘seamless transition’ is just a downright lie.
I am sure the US amongst others have strongly voiced their displeasure at these ships being scrapped along with Waves.
Who do you think in the US would voice such displeasure, I’m curious 🧐
It goes often to the very top and let’s be honest our top military people speak to their US counterparts so this is then escalated to the White House.
So as an example when we we’re negotiating the adoption of Trident the Americans drove a hard bargain as below:
To pay for Trident, the British government announced deep cuts to other defence spending on 25 June 1981.[55]
Negotiations commenced on 8 February, with the British team again led by Wade-Gery. The Americans were disturbed at the proposed British defence cuts, and pressed for an undertaking that the aircraft carrier HMS Invincible be retained in service, which they felt was necessary to avert trouble over the Belizean–Guatemalan territorial dispute. They accepted a counter-offer that Britain would retain the two landing platform dock ships, HMS Fearless and Intrepid, for which the Americans reduced the R&D charge.
Exactly this.
Do you think it might be the one design for all 3-6 ships or two types to suit different capabilities requirements?
They want one design, but it’ll be a budget design that would’ve worked fine for 6 ships but will be sub par for 3
If the first MRSS won’t be delivered until 2033, it means that they will be replacing the Bays and Argos. The LSD Albions won’t be replaced, thus there is no capability gap. Why is it taking so long to settle on the basic design of ships first mentioned 4 years ago? Does anyone in the RN know what they’re doing?
With missile needs i don’t think amphibious is a priority.
The problem is that at this stage there is a lot of crystal ball gazing going on. Two big questions are, “What will be the threat and mission profile?”, and, “What future will technology be capable of doing?”
The trouble for many decision makers, especially ones who are told they need to eliminate risk, the answers to those key questions are rather woolly, too woolly for many. So you end up with lots and lots of ‘analysis’ being done going into ever more detail which basically leads to information overload or as we used to call it when I was still in the system ‘analysis paralysis’. It is the bane of effective decision making.
Cheers CR
The usual spin.
The LPDs were cut, they’re not being “replaced.”
An LPD with its c33, LCUs and LCVPs does not have to be used to storm a contested beach. It can land where it chooses. 🙄
Just excuses for cuts and dismantling 3 Cdo Bde from 2015 onwards.
Even if with Sweden and Finland now in NATO reduced their high north role, the LPDs could have still had use elsewhere.
I would think with the timescales a flat top maybe a suitable answer. With drones, helicopters, With a well deck for drone boats, landing craft. 8000-20,000t should do the job.
Even having 3 small flattops and 3 other ships. They need to be able to defend themselves so need guns, missiles, counter measures and medium range sensors, datalinks. These don’t have to be active all the time to reduce crews.
We are looking that ships can’t rely on an escorts and submarine being available all the time.
These are used to secure an area and other ships bring in heavier gear.
Or it goes down the cheap commercial ship with adaptations and not much protection.
To get around the politicians aversion to buying ‘more’ flat tops we could just come up with a new type of ship. Anyone for for a thru-deck LPD or LSD. It worked with the thru-deck cruiser.
I would propose a 3-4 MK2 Bays and a couple of Ocean sized LHDs.
Currently plan is only for 3-6 ships of one class