Navantia have launched the ‘Stalwart’, the second of two logistics vessels it is building for the Royal Australian Navy.

The ceremony took place at Ferrol’s shipyard at, coinciding with high tide.

During the event, the president of Navantia, Susana de Sarriá, has thanked the Australian Department of Defence and the Australian Navy for the trust placed in the Company, which has once again demonstrated its ability to design and build on time, quality products and services for the most competitive of markets.

She also highlighted the work of the Navantia staff, the collaborating industry, and the rest of the partners who have put all their effort and know-how on this boat.

Navantia’s president also announced that Ferrol’s shipyard will soon begin the implementation of an ambitious investment plan of more than €160 million digital transformation, in the face of F110 frigates.

These investments will generate more than 700 jobs over the next 5 years, to most companies in the area, say the firm.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Launched in August of this year, with both ships being based on the Cantabria class, which has operated alongside the RAN previously (though I still think they should have selected a Tide variant). The last Adelaide class frigate, HMAS Melbourne, was decommissioned in October, while the RNZN recently decommissioned two of its patrol ships.

Andy P

Give them good practice for the RFA’s I suppose.


The Aussies have ambitious plans for their military, and it’s good to see.


They do ensure they buy what is needed in the numbers required. I would the UK do likewise.


Fortunately here in Oz both the two major political parties, the current Government (LNP, Centre Right) and the Opposition (ALP Centre Left), have pretty much a bipartisan approach to Defence and Security policy. Yes they are like all political parties and will disagree on most other things, and try and throw crap at each other at any opportunity, but as I said, for the most part Defence is pretty much isolated from the day to day political crap. Considering how many times we’ve change Government and Prime Ministers in the last couple of decades, defence has continued to benefit from… Read more »


They do it because they cannot build them themselves. We bloody can and cheaper!


Just wondering if the British Government actually designed and built similar ships in the UK, would we be getting similar orders?


There was an uproar locally when Canberra decided to have these built overseas. Especially in Spain, where effectively, you are dealing with a nationalised industry. So, in effect, the Spanish can set the price wherever their government wants it to be, more or less. So long as they don’t make a loss “on paper”. Some would call it “dumping”, which, of course, is illegal in the EU!
Wouldn’t trust the Spanish Government as far as I could throw them.


Interesting reading some of the comments here, some are not particularly accurate either. Yes I know the Poms hate the Spanish (can’t trust them!), and the Froggies, and the ….. (there is probably a long list), but here in Oz, we actually to have a good relationship with Spain and the Froggies, lots of countries, and even with you Poms too. Australia received a good deal, and a very short deliver time, for the two Supply class AORs (based on SPS Cantabria), in fact Cantabria spent nearly a whole year here in 2013, that’s a pretty good ‘try before you… Read more »


Yes. Australia does not have the capacity or history of building ships like these, unlike Britain. There is no excuse for Britain to look to buying overseas and in our case it certainly does not save any money, but as a dominion of eu we are bound by eu rules that dictate we have to tender UK taxpayer funded ships abroad. One of the many reasons why we are leaving this nightmare empire. That aside, I do not know your sources of the price or costs of the two Supply Class ships, but even with this low figure, they seem… Read more »

Jerry Lissing

Australia is currently building 12 OPV’s and will soon begin construction of 9 8,000tonne Frigates based on the BAE Type 26, Australia will also be building 12 Conventional Subs and have just compted the 3rd Hobart Class Aegis DDG, a formidable platform, for a small Counrty Australia has developed high tech Military capabilities and Shipbuilding, fortunately Australia has also taken delivery of the first of 75 F35’s with an option for more. Certainly the Australian Miltary is modernising completely and has the just about the best pay and conditions of any Military anywhere in the World. Thats why so many… Read more »



Matthew East

The EU rules dictating shipbuilding pertain to none military and national security ships. Others nations within the EU have listed there own naval and even coast guard under the national security clause in the EU to keep the production within their own nations and there is absolutely nothing that prevented the UK also doing so. As for cost Australia budgeted 1 to 2 billion for program no break down given on acquistion, sustainment etc and what they paid was. Actual price was $640m AUD with an average EU to AUD exchange of 1.6 so just under 400 million euro. Adjusting… Read more »


The 640m AUD figure comes out to about 440m euros in 2016 and about 458m euros in 2019, or 398 million GBP. Roughly the cost to build the two Waves ships, although exchange rates can and have fluctuated much over the past 3 decades. But the Cantabria back in 2005 alone cost 238 million euros to build, so what is going on here unless design engineering with development has been removed from these two ships price, but still makes them very low compared to the original first ship? I find the price dubious, and more so with articles like these:… Read more »


The infrastructure projects that are being put in place are themselves extremely impressive and bodes well for the future projected capabilities.


Unlike the UK for future ships beyond frigates and subs and to do with commercial shipbuilding.


Very expensive ships. I think the UK could have built them cheaper.

Oscar Zulu

Delving into the world of military procurement is a murky business of smoke and mirrors and its difficult to know exactly how much taxpayer funds are spent on any given project. One thing to note about Australian defence projects is that they often include either life-of-type costs extrapolated out over a service life of 20 to 30 years and/or their supporting infrastructure. In the case of the AORs there is a separately budgeted sub project (N2262) for onshore support facilities. However, Australian industry participation in the actual ship’s construction is estimated to be in excess of $120 million including 4,500… Read more »

Supportive Bloke

To be absolutely fair to Big And Expensive (BAE) the cost creep on the QE class had far more to do with deliberate build slow down than anything else. In fact the lack of cost creep, apart from that imposed, on the QE’s is the most remarkable part of the project. The unit cost blowout on the T45 program had a lot to do with 12 -> 8 -> 6 numbers cuts so the 3Bn R&D was split over much fewer units. I am not saying that was the whole story but simple commercial maths dictates that it will have… Read more »


Yes and other Countries do not include certain items such as weapons in the total cost. Burkes as an example.


Sorry. I did not realize I had a reply via my email inbox. Yes. Australia’s case is different to the UK’s and more so with the closure of the Cockatoo shipyard which built the last FSSS for Australia. Australia does not have the capability to built a ship like this at the moment and these 2 ships would not be enough to justify creating a new shipyard even with tax claw back. The UK on the other hand easily has the capability, despite the excuses of lack of capacity for the Tides when the Carriers were being built (the extra… Read more »