The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has issued an early procurement notice outlining its intention to establish long-term port service support for Royal Navy vessels operating in and around Vietnam, the UK Defence Journal understands.
The timing comes as the Royal Navy continues to expand its presence across the Indo-Pacific. UK Carrier Strike Group 25, led by HMS Prince of Wales, is currently operating in the wider region.
The requirement covers the provision of husbandry and other port services, ensuring Royal Navy ships and other authorised vessels can access support during visits to Vietnamese ports. According to the notice, the estimated value of the contract is £1 million excluding VAT, or £1.2 million including VAT.
The planned contract would run from 31 October 2025 to 1 October 2029, a period of almost four years. It is classified under port operation services and will be tendered through an open procedure. The MOD confirmed that electronic submission of bids will be required, with English as the working language.
Tenderers will need to submit bids by 24 October 2025, with an award decision scheduled for 27 October. An electronic auction will be used as part of the process. The MOD has set the enquiry deadline for interested bidders at 1 October 2025.
The department also highlighted potential risks associated with the contract, specifically the risk of operational disruption to Royal Navy ships when operating in Vietnamese military ports. Payment terms will be in accordance with standard MOD terms and conditions, which will be detailed in the invitation to tender.
The tender notice has been published as a UK3 planned procurement notice under the Procurement Act 2023. By issuing the notice early, the MOD reduces the minimum tendering period to 10 days for an above-threshold contract once the linked UK4 tender notice is released.
The planned services form part of wider logistical arrangements to ensure Royal Navy vessels are supported during operations abroad, with Vietnam now included in the list of countries where enduring service provision is being sought.
I suspect the Royal Navy discovered in 1945 that it needs basic port facilities in any port the USN is likely to use in war time after admiral King was unwilling to share.
What a prat . . King, not you Jim 🙂
I also suspect that the Royal Navy has forgotten the importance of a fleet train. Which has been allowed to basically disappear. Then ports even become more critical
Seems to confirm that Tamar and Spey will remain forward deployed in the Info-Pacific until 2029. Does that mean the Batch 1’s will get another one year life extension?
Also, in a recent speech at DSEI by First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff Gen. Gwyn Jenkins said that when the CSG “next deploys to the Indo-Pacific region … in four years” (so 2029?) it will include a hybrid air group and hopefully “a combination of crewed and uncrewed vessels, in addition to autonomous ones”. But has he really got the money that this will need?
I think the Batch 1 Rivers will be replaced by Kongsberg Vanguard MCM / OPVs as a quid pro quo for the Norwegian T26 order.
You’d hope so, but I suspect the capability will be gapped. No word from any source on the replacement of the B1’s and they where initially intended to be withdrawn from service with only the B2’s to replace them.
Aren’t there a half dozen Sandown MCMs still in the RN that could be replaced by the same KV platform?
And all those P2000s!
I think all but one of the Sandowns are gone. Some Hunt class, which intetestingly, unlike the Sandowns have a secondary opv role, are still in service. I can see the logic of replacing the batch 1 Rivers and the Hunts with a single OPV / MCM drone mothership class like the Vanguard. Be interesting to see what Kongsberg come up with in response to the RN ‘study’.
The order was as full industrial off set package so we will have to order a lot of Norwegian stuff… which is not an issue as they do a lot we don’t.. and as long as the RN gets a solid MRSS order, an on time T83 order and an extra few T31s there is going to be zero space in UK yards for a good decade.
If you remember Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace were given an 8 month contract for a study about a new type of mine countermeasures (MCM) mother ship to support our autonomous mine warfare capabilities… so from that, the T26 order and need for industrial offset I would say the RN is going to get an ongoing long term order of this family for all its mine warfare and patrol functions.. probably a contract that will also see the rivers 2s replaced in 20 years so maybe 10-20 of these over 20 years.
We’re only getting 3 MCM motherships
Yes but then you have the rivers that need replacement and 3 was before Russia was constantly undertaking sub warfare attacks. I think everyone is now growing up from the idea of minimum planform numbers.
The latest announcements do not correlate with expending the manned fleet or even replacing stuff like the RB1
Expanding
Yep but the geopolitical and geostrategic situation is going to go further and further down the toilet.. Russia is not backing off, China is hitting a point where it will being to more to dominate in the western Indian Ocean as well as in a worst case start to work with Russia in the high north.. when the roof is falling in and the rain is coming down their is no choice but to replace the roof.
Another 2 Sterling Castles?
That sounds ridiculously too few! Why not 5-6? More ships so can be more places and also do other patrol surveillance roles. Less is not smart, its just simply less.
Vietnam ? Now that’s a surprise 🤔
Why? We have been cooperating with Vietnam for some years in a casual manner, they have been participating in UN operations and even the US have ventured there I believe. With a giant bully next door who they have already had one war with and with increasing western investment (geez even Trump wants to build golf courses there) I think they are hoping for even closer ties and Europe has the advantage of not being America in the present circumstances.
Maybe a potential T31 customer?
Vietnam and China have a profoundly complex relationship.. they constantly picker over territorial disputes and had a nasty little set of land boarder skirmishes in the 70s and 80s.. caused by both sides to be honest ( the Vietnamese decided to do a bit of ethic cleansing around the borders and China decided to invade)… now they are doing the same around the spratly islands.. the real issue is that the 82 uncos EEZ rules around islands was so ambiguous China, Vietnam and the Philippines all went a bit tonto… but China and Vietnam since the 1990s have tried really hard to stay on an even keel with each other and over the last few years have started to have a love in economically.. Trumps actions are working as an even greater catalyst to move them together… I think the big one is China is now starting to focus on getting geostrategic allies and partners and I would say a natural one to try and get onside is Vietnam.. both being communists. I think there is a chance of rapprochement, which is a geostrategic worry for the west..
Is the service charge included ?
I think there is a saving in the VAT if given as a tip ?
Hard to understand the VAT actually.
Vietnam don’t have a VAT scheme – in the way we know it – so there is no input VAT as far as I can see?
Diplomatic transactions are VAT free.
With just 13 escorts the focus has to be northern hemisphere – this is a cost we can’t afford
I’m assuming you means something other than the Northern hemisphere, Vietnam being in the Northern hemisphere, but I can’t quite figure out what. Euro-Atlantic, perhaps? As a globalist I disagree anyway. The world is a small place, with events anywhere capable of affecting everywhere. For example, a war over Taiwan would wreck the world’s economy. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, Britain has an obligation to keep an interest in the whole world. The withdrawal from east of Aden was a mistake.
I mean our AO should be around the UK ie North Atlantic, North Sea.
We have neither the funds, hulls nor manpower for these extravagant deployments.
Soft diplomatic power at work
There’s no mention of where in Vietnam. In the East it would be seen a provocation to the Chinese, but in the South West of Vietnam, less so.
I’m guessing the Chinese are not really concerned with the mighty Grand fleet swinging at anchor anywhere in Vietnam.
Key sentence : risk of operational disruption to Royal Navy ships operating in Vietnamese military ports.
WTF? Last I heard Vietnam was still a communist regime…
Surely we have allied nations close by whose ports we could use instead??
Very loosely Communist. Anyway when has that stopped anybody buying services from them?
We were buying clothing dye during WW1 for British Army uniforms. Just because you do something doesn’t make it right.
In the context of port services, what is husbandry?
Historically rather bizarre choice. Surely would be much better looking at Singapore or Malaysia?