The Ministry of Defence has announced a pre-procurement notice for an upcoming webinar focused on Maritime Autonomous Systems and the Mine Hunting Capability (MHC) Programme.

The Royal Navy, in collaboration with the Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) MHC team, will host this event on 16 July 2024, from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm, according to a notice published on Contracts Finder.

This webinar follows the MHC update in February of the previous year and the presentation at DSEI. The event aims to engage with industry stakeholders, providing updates on the Royal Navy’s requirements for mine countermeasures and their strategic context.

Additionally, it will outline MHC’s plans for the next phase of the Royal Navy’s Mine Hunting Capability programme (Block 2), including the proposed timetable and opportunities for potential suppliers.

The notice indicates that the event will offer a comprehensive overview of the strategic needs and upcoming procurement plans, with a focus on the evolving landscape for maritime autonomous systems in mine hunting operations.

Registration for the webinar will close at midday on 8 July 2024. The contract, identified by CPV code 73410000 for Military Research and Technology, is noted to be suitable for SMEs. For more information and to register for the event, visit the Contracts Finder website or contact the Ministry of Defence directly.

Event Details:

  • Date: 16 July 2024
  • Time: 11:00 am to 1:00 pm
  • Registration Deadline: 8 July 2024, midday
  • Location: Online Webinar
Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

10 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Jim
Jim (@guest_828134)
16 days ago

I really hope we don’t Fanny around with a new dedicated MCM style warship. For anything outside a high intensity conflict vessels like Stirling Castle and cheap and effective and for anything else, small badly armed OPV’s are a bad idea. Frigates carrying Drones is the way ahead.

Hopefully we get the 4 Stirling Castle class and 5 T32’s.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_828139)
16 days ago
Reply to  Jim

I’ve heard they’re looking at building new MCM mothershils. Which honestly baffles me because then we might as well have got involved with the Naval group program currently going on. Foreign Aquisition I know but it would be cheaper.

Jim
Jim (@guest_828185)
16 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

I just don’t see the point in what naval group is doing. What’s the point in building an expensive naval vessel that carry’s nothing more than a 40mm cannon and gives you a smaller over all vessel.

For a fraction of the cost you can buy a converted commercial vesell like RFA Stirling Castle that is big enough so it can travel any where in the world without a support ship.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_828189)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Perhaps. But a Stirling Castle type isn’t applicable for all situations. You may have to deploy them to Hostile zones and there may also be little available to protect them.

Jim
Jim (@guest_828233)
15 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Yes exactly, but deploying a specialised MCM vessel like Naval Group is building that has nothing more than a 40mm bofors for protection is just the same thing.

So why waste money on a dedicated naval vessel if all its getting you is a 40mm

For high threat areas use a T26 or T32.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_828235)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Fair point. In regards to T32 I am starting to wonder if it’ll will get combined with one program or another either as a more fights MRSS or a decently defended mine hunting/multi role mothership.
Both could be claimed and use as additional surface combatants, with drawbacks obviously

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_829434)
11 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Worth reading the article in Navy Lookout. The RN is looking to replace / enhance the the permanent presence which is being lost as the plastic MCM ships are withdrawn. Secondly it looks like they think they want a mothership which is big enough to work a large area i.e. to launch, control and recover a large number of drones – greater than the mission bays on a pair of frigates say. Also they see the possibility of a large ship as being able to provide a focus for assembly of other force elements when required. It could be that… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli (@guest_829695)
10 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

It could be that the thinking has changed such that the MCM motherships has become the focal forward based asset, freeing up the LSDs and frigates.”

I think freeing the Bay from its role in the Gulf has been desired for many years mate.

Paul.P
Paul.P (@guest_829715)
10 days ago

Quite. Had a boss once who said you can’t serve a meal until people have an appetite. Sunsetting the plastic MCM ships, technology changes and budgets have come together to make this large mothership the priority build. Having a dedicated platform also helps make MRSS design more straightforward. T32 has effectively been split into this mothership which will be built and more T31 or T26 which may or may not be built.
And if they are designated ‘less complex warships’ they can be built abroad and fitted out in the UK.
Love it when a plan comes together 🙂

Ron
Ron (@guest_831700)
3 days ago

I do wonder if it would be a better idea to have a small LPD say in the 10,000 ton range with a hanger as a mothership. Big enough to have all the command and control, able if need be to double up as an assault ship and able to launch underwater sneeky stuff through a moon pool in the well deck area. She does not need to be over complicated in the build but have some hard points for weapons if needed. Yes I know that is bigger than what might be expected but in many ways a much… Read more »