The Ministry of Defence has declined to confirm the operational status of RFA Fort Victoria, saying only that the ship will be regenerated in accordance with defence needs, the department has said in response to parliamentary questions.
Kim Johnson, the Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside, asked two questions of the department: what assessment had been made of the additional crewing required to bring Fort Victoria back into operational service, and what the ship’s operational status and future are.
Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry Luke Pollard answered:
“The RFA operates platforms in accordance with the defence priorities. RFA Fort Victoria will be regenerated in accordance with defence needs,” the minister said. “To protect the operational security of the Fleet, I am unable to confirm the exact operational status of individual vessels.” Pollard then said the RFA is “an indispensable part of Defence,” thanking its seafarers for their support to defence outputs.
Fort Victoria, which entered service in 1994, is the Royal Fleet Auxiliary’s only solid support ship, able to transfer ammunition, food and stores to warships at sea alongside fuel, a capability on which sustained carrier strike operations depend. The ship supported the first operational deployment of the Carrier Strike Group in 2021, but has been laid up at Birkenhead in recent years amid the RFA’s crewing shortages, and did not accompany the 2025 carrier deployment to the Indo-Pacific, which relied on allied support vessels for solid stores. Her eventual replacement will come through the Fleet Solid Support programme, under which three ships are being built by the Navantia UK-owned Harland and Wolff yards, with the first not expected in service until the early 2030s.
The formulation used in the answers has a recent history as many readers will be aware. Under the previous government, ministers repeatedly stated that the amphibious assault ships HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark, held at reduced readiness with minimal crews, could be regenerated if required for defence needs. Neither ship returned to sea, and both were retired in November 2024.
The answers came by chance on the same day the department told Parliament that RFA recruitment is improving, with applications at a five-year high, overall strength stabilising and voluntary outflow reducing between January 2025 and January 2026, while acknowledging that the service has faced sustained recruitment and retention challenges driven in part by competition with the commercial maritime sector.
‘Regenerated’ 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Makes sense to keep the ships status as vague as possible until the Resurgent is ready. However the fact that we have managed global deployments with just one very old ship suggest we don’t have a need for 3 Resurgent class vessels and the funds would be better used else where especially in amphibious vessels.
What Global depolyments? A carrier every four years, no SSN’s, broken down frigates, a destroyer now and again…..
That very old ship hadn’t been involved in those deployments….
I thought it did accompany the first one?
I wouldn’t be surprised if CSG 2029 is cancelled. These long distance CSG trips are a huge drain on our resources, and for what? Protecting us from Putin is much more important.
And anyway, the US would deal with a Pacific emergency, and leave the RN and the Marine Nationale to cover European waters, where there are plenty of ports to put in to to replenish. There would have to be a lot of …. hitting a lot of fans for the RN to go to war outside NATO areas.
Ports are not counted as safe these days..!
Just remember, that Fort Victoria was part of a class of two ship to begin with and we also had the two ships from the older Fort class
The older Fort clas vessels were Sold to Egypt fairly Recently…
yep and why we keep them is service rather than RFA Fort George which 10 years younger was rather strange. they also couldn’t be fitted with resupply rig for the carriers
Remember the dribble released by ministers has been written by the same officals who wrote for the previous ministers. At least that provides continuity in evasion.
A vessel that’s barely moved for years and 32 yrs old seems Doubtful she will go far again …! But her Replacments are some 5yrs Away.!..so who Knows..?just Suprised she’s not in Brazil..!
Confidently predict delivery of FSS class would be expedited in the event of hostilities, possibly quite significantly. During the interim, other NATO navys will supplement the RFA for significant deployments. CSG25 was the successful proof of concept trial. Similarly, allied DDGs, FFGs and SSNs would be attached to a CSG, as required. RN is currently undoubtedly at the nadir of its capabilities, but the deficiencies are already being addressed. By 2035-2040, the RN will experience “Fair Winds and Following Seas.” Patience counseled. 🤔😊👍
I expected DIP to cut FSS to two ships, but the cancellation fees in the contract must have been to cast-iron. Nevertheless, by 2030 I expect that at least one will be on offer for sale at perhaps half her construction cost.
I hope that the money and crew can be found to get Fort Victoria back in to service for a final 2-3 years, she will make the CSG far more effective and transferring an experienced crew to Resurgent will then shave months if not a year off her ISD, supposedly 2031.
Thats what Dr Who does isn’t it? Typical fast streamer talk that is.