Upgrades to the Northern Ammunition Jetty at Glen Mallan near Faslane have now been completed.

According to a news release:

“We awarded a £67m contract to VolkerStevin in 2019. Alongside them, we worked with managing agent Jacobs, which provided engineering and professional services, as well as designer Arch Henderson. In completing this major project, £20m was spent with local suppliers and small and medium enterprises in Scotland. The jetty was last upgraded in the 1970s and had reached the end of its economic life. The upgrade work has not only extended the life of the jetty by an estimated fifty years, but has also made the site accessible for the Royal Navy’s aircraft carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

In fact, HMS Queen Elizabeth visited part way through the work, back in March 2021, in preparation for her first operational deployment. This was not originally planned but became necessary when the scale of the ship’s deployment increased, presenting the team with a challenge to make the jetty operational in time for her arrival. Everyone involved, from DIO, VolkerStevin, Jacobs and the various subcontractors worked closely together to enable HMS Queen Elizabeth to berth at the unfinished jetty, which she did successfully.”

Additionally:

“This was a large and complicated project, as you might imagine from something built in the water. The previous jetty was demolished and replaced with a new 135m long jetty structure, requiring 127 steel piles to be driven into the loch bed to support a reinforced concrete deck. The works also included the installation of navigation aids and five mooring dolphins which are connected to the jetty by a pedestrian access bridge. Two modular fender spacer units have been placed in front of the new fender panels and move with the tide to prevent the overhanging flight decks of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales from colliding with the jetty.

In addition, the project included the installation of two modern pedestal cranes to load and unload ammunition and the erection of modular buildings for offices, power generation and stores. The perimeter fencing and CCTV system have also been upgraded to provide a complete modern facility.”

You can read the rest from DIO here.

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. He also works for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
26 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Levi Goldsteinberg
Levi Goldsteinberg
2 months ago

So – hypothetically – if we were at war with a peer adversary (say Russia), places like this would be a clear target for land attack right? If ammunition jetties were taken out, would it be possible to arm our ships or would that be game, set, match?

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
2 months ago

Good to see. One of the original Forts was there the only time I visited it.

Taking out its attendant DM facility would be more problematic. Glen Douglas is built into the hills and mountains over a wide area. Holds the ( Northern ) Bomb stock as well as RN munitions.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
2 months ago

I guess the armament could take place wherever there is a place for the ship to come alongside. But that means wasted time and manpower effort if it is many miles from the facility supplying the ammunition and without the infrastructure to assist with the loading.

DM Glen Douglas, like many of the DM sites, does have railway access, so the munitions could be moved elsewhere.

Steve M
Steve M
2 months ago

Don’t worry i’m sure that in time of increase threat we would just deploy ground based Air Defence units to protect these vital facilities along with HMNB and our 6 main RAF operating bases.😀

Last edited 2 months ago by Steve M
DRS
DRS
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve M

How many Land Ceptor/ Sky Sabre kits are we ordering?

Louis
Louis
2 months ago
Reply to  DRS

If I’m not mistaken, rapier could only carry 4 missiles where as land ceptor has 8 and land ceptor reload times are much faster so we are probably getting less. Having said that I believe 16 regiment has only 3 batteries of 8 launchers, why not increase it to 4 of 12 like in BAOR 1980s.

Rudeboy1
Rudeboy1
2 months ago
Reply to  Louis

Later models of Rapier (FSC2000/Jernas) held 8 missiles at readiness.

Paul
Paul
2 months ago
Reply to  Louis

I think all them air defences are outdated now&replaced with much quicker &more accurate “sky sabres”we still have the best artillery regiment’s in the world not by numbers,but by quality&skill of our armed forces CEDE NULLIS 🇬🇧

Steve
Steve
2 months ago
Reply to  DRS

Lack of ground based air defense platforms seems to be NATO’s achilles heel. If Russia did a surprise attack using cruise missiles from subs, they could do some serious damage to NATOs ability to fight back. There is an over reliance on interceptors but they take time to get into the air.

Airborne
Airborne
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve M

Unfortunately mate wont have enough Land Ceptors to go round. Only one RA Reg is getting them, 16 RA, and they will only have 3 x Batteries with (at the moment) 6 launchers, plus a Bty down in the FI. Another area where we are lacking depth and capability.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
2 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Mate. So it’s defo 4 batts then?

Airborne
Airborne
2 months ago

Mate its got five Batteries, one being HQ and 4 missile Btys, but not sure how long the ORBAT will last or change depending on the futrure plans for the Army. Shit changes so often its hard to keep up. Mt Bro may have an idea and I will give him a shout as he is now at Larkhill.

Airborne
Airborne
2 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Mt Bro? Bloody hell, he’s a big lad but not a mountain…lol…My Bro that should read.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
2 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Yes mate, I meant the fire batteries, not HQ. So 4.
Was worried it might only be 3 including the Falklands rotation.

Joe16
Joe16
2 months ago

Yes, I’d imagine they certainly would be targets. Thankfully this one is relatively tricky to get at, not sure where you’d be able to launch missiles from to get there, but we’d be likely to see them coming.
I’d imagine that, if we went to war with Russia, we’d be able to put some special risk assessments through and use commercial facilities for loading aumminition if this place was wiped out. From looking at the photos, there doesn’t seem to be anything particularly special about the arrnagements, other than trained personnel, proximity to stores, and the right paperwork.

JohninMK
JohninMK
2 months ago
Reply to  Joe16

Missiles like the Kalibr have the range to be ground launched from Kaliningrad and Murmansk. Air launched the options increase but among the many military targets, like the DM, in that area I doubt that this one would be important enough, unless there was a ship alongside, for the top of the range Kinzahl, which could be launched from north of the Arctic Circle. Then there are the sub or ship launched missiles.

Sean
Sean
2 months ago

Yes, as would our opponents.
Nature of war that you target your opponent’s support infrastructure 🤷🏻‍♂️

JohninMK
JohninMK
2 months ago

Any non movable important military structure on either side would experience missile, usually of the cruise variety, attack until destroyed. With the critical ones first and then working down the list. This site is probably not up the top of the list unless a ship is loading there. Ultimately neither side would have any shore facilities left. This is the main reason why, if the were to be WW3, it is thought that both sides would have to fight with what they had to hand. Nothing or little on ships over the Channel for example.

Heidfirst
Heidfirst
2 months ago
Reply to  JohninMK

remember that it’s only up the road (5 Miles) from Faslane. Ground zero …

JohninMK
JohninMK
2 months ago
Reply to  Heidfirst

Yes, Faslane and Coalport are strategically rather more important than Glen Mallan.

Paul
Paul
2 months ago

That’s a legitimate question &hopefully the mod as thought about that aspect of warfare “Rule BRITTANIA 🇬🇧

David Lloyd
David Lloyd
2 months ago

Something that has come in on time and on budget for once. Well done all concerned!

Jon
Jon
2 months ago
Reply to  David Lloyd

Hear, hear.

Coll
Coll
2 months ago

I’m surprised this ended up being cheaper than the cruiser terminal near me. Granted, it is a floating cruise berth. I’m also surprised how much a berth costs. lol

Last edited 2 months ago by Coll
JohninMK
JohninMK
2 months ago

It looks really good and fit for purpose as no doubt a lot of thought went into its design. We need this kind of facility as the RN has operated since WW2 at peace in Europe and it has to plan on the basis that that will continue as it is most likely to.

Geoff douthwaite There in 1985 on RFA fort Grange
Geoff douthwaite There in 1985 on RFA fort Grange
2 months ago

There in 1985 on RFA fort Grange