The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has confirmed that the Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels, Wave Knight and Wave Ruler, will remain in Extended Readiness until 2028.

This confirmation is in response to reports that suggested the two ships were to be permanently decommissioned.

In a written question session on 15 June 2023, John Healey, the Shadow Secretary of State for Defence, queried the Secretary of State for Defence about the plans for the future of RFA Wave Knight and RFA Wave Ruler. “To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what plans he has for the future of (a) RFA Wave Knight and (b) RFA Wave Ruler,” Healey inquired.

James Cartlidge, the Minister of State, Ministry of Defence, responded by stating that both ships were placed into Extended Readiness in 2022 and 2017 respectively. He further mentioned that the option to reactivate them is being reviewed. “Both RFA Wave Knight and RFA Wave Ruler were placed into Extended Readiness in 2022 and 2017 respectively. The option to re-activate is kept under review,” Cartlidge said.

Addressing another question by Healey regarding the expected out-of-service date for both ships, Cartlidge provided further details. “Both Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) Wave Knight and RFA Wave Ruler are programmed to be in Extended Readiness until 2028 in His Majesty’s Naval Base Portsmouth and Liverpool respectively, under the care and custody of RFA cluster management,” he clarified.

Cartlidge declined to disclose the individual out-of-service dates for the ships, citing the need to preserve the operational security of the fleet, which is odd given that the department routinely does disclose this information.

George Allison
George Allison
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
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

86 COMMENTS

  1. Better than decommissioning, but the RFA is woefully undermanned so the likelihood of reactivation seems remote. The RN is using 4 and will have got by for a decade by 2028. Can’t imagine we’ll see these ships back in service. Short sighted as ever.

    • Sadly all true. So much in defence is short sighted. We never seem to learn the lessons from history. Every successive government has cut cut and cut again. We are rapidly approaching being a nation with a defence force.

  2. Good call. But only if they can be subsequently stretched into the 2030s.

    The last thing we want is to start raising the escort numbers at the end of the decade only to be hampered by a lack of tankers to service them. Even as a NATO/JEF contribution for combined operations, keeping the tanker fleet in reserve is no bad thing.

  3. Better than sold off, they are valuable assets.

    And now that nice Mr Healey of Labour has asked, obviously concerned, I look forward to increased manpower for the RFA and the return of these ships when Labour take over, yes?

    • Morning M8. Maybe nice Mr Healey reads ukdefencejournal and sees an opportunity to voice our concerns and cause a bit if mischief ? Or he is try to take you over to the Red side. 🤣

      • Morning mate. I have never, ever voted red. As their lunatic side scares the **** out of me. But I’m not voting for the current shower either, so there is always a 1st time, IF they state quite clearly what they intend to do and I agree with it. On defence. On Europe. On immigration. On the economy.
        On defence, so far, “spend the NATO 2%….” blah blah blah. Not good enough towing that old line any more. Cameron and Mays govs also peddled that nonsense.

        • DM, Wasn’t the agreed projection to scale up to 2,5% of gdp. or is that view not held by Labour? Something of a trick question, as Labour are unlikely to know themselves.

          • I thought only the Tories had declared that? After the election of course…not with immediate effect. And that is the catch. They’re as reliable as a chocolate fireguard, who’s to say they won’t just ditch that pledge once in for another 5 years?

          • Cheers DM, thanks for clarifying, so probably doesn’t bode well with a Labour government.

          • Any policy is meaningless without an energy strategy to go big on nuclear and using renewables to churn out hydrogen. Without that, we have a moribund or shrinking economy forever more and whatever % is promised will be of an ever smaller pie.

    • I’m going to pragmatic here, sometimes you have to sacrifice something to protect something even more important.
      I don’t see the manning issue going away anytime soon, it’s an odd situation as the RFA is stuck between the Navy, Merchant Navy and the civil service.
      Without a pay rise we can neither recruit nor retain RFA staff, if not fixed that could be really bad. Just look at the Irish Naval Service for an example.of what happens when it gets past a tipping point.
      With Proteus and Stirling Castle now to man they desperately need more personnel. I honestly cannot see these ships returning to service, they are 20 years old and need a crew of 80 whilst a Tide is just 63.
      If we know we will not use them again we should sell or lease them to an Ally and put the money towards a pay rise for the RFA and a recruitment campaign.
      At least if they are out there and being used by an Ally we can still access them, which is more than we do right now.

      You may now all fire your volleys at a Pragmatic realist.

      • Not at all, I’d be too sad to, actually, and I see the logic.

        Why have Proteus and Stirling Castle been made RFA? The Hydrographic forces as far as I remember, back to the H class of the 70s, were RN? Challenger was HMS.
        And if there is a “Castle Class” as has been suggested, as there must surely be more mother vessels, what will that add to manning pressures?!

        • Well thanks for that, for daring to suggest letting anything go I was expecting nothing less than Grape shot and a Carronade to boot 😎
          I’d even expand the idea of Sale or Dry Lease and suggest the Dutch, Australia or Singapore as who I’d speak to.
          The Dutch have a decent sized Navy, some overseas territories and zero RAS capacity. As primarily North Sea or Atlantic it’s would be a great fir for them and us.
          Australia has their 2 multi purpose Supply class but they can’t be everywhere and extra RAS capacity would be handy especially when refits are due. That would also fit well with the forward deployments of Frigates in a few years time.
          As for Singapore they are a little powerhouse of a Nation and would be worth approaching. I don’t think any of the Major Western Navies would mind Friendly RAS being available near the Malacca Strait and South China Sea.
          Proteus is a bit of a hybrid 24 RFA and 60 RN attached to RFA duties.
          As for Stirling Castle one of her tasks is trying RFA IN MCM/UAV operations.

        • Proteus and Stirling Castle have been made RFA because of the political flak that would have came if we had bought foreign build ships for the RN.

          They have backed themselves into a corner with that rhetoric in recent years.

          At most there will only be one more ‘Castle’ under the current plans, and that one will be equipped somewhat differently (if at all) – Think more HMS Challenger.

          The MCMV are essentially being retired without replacement.

          • “At most there will only be one more ‘Castle’ under the current plans, and that one will be equipped somewhat differently (if at all) – Think more HMS Challenger.”

            Do you have a source for that? I’d heard a class of 4.

            You do not consider the autonomous RNMB’s as suitable replacements for the MCMVs? I can see their advantages, it is deploying them that concerns me.

    • HiDM. It would be nice of Labour to share their detailed defence plan and strategy prior to the upcoming general election too.

  4. One has to be impressed with the interest that Labour is taking in the armed forces. Healey is putting pressure on Cartlidge over a number of issues, not just the RFA

    • Come on David. Really? Healey has never had a job outside the trade unions, left wing journals. Westminster or the house of Commons. He backed Jeremy Corbyn and was promoted by him to the Shadow Cabinet. Good material for a defence Minister. I don’t think so. As for Cartlidge he is the junior defence minister and has only been in the job for about eight weeks.

      • Nevertheless, I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Healey is asking the right questions and will make a good defence secretary. Starmer will be pulling his strings. And Cartlidge is going to lose his seat at the next election

        • So one Corbyn ally is going to pull the strings of another? I’m sorry David but you’ve lost me. Apart from some meaningless shadow cabinet sound bites Labour haven’t come up with a single commitment on defence and nor will they.

        • I think there is a big difference between being a good defence secretary and asking questions to embarrass or score points over the government…

    • Unfortunately David, it’s all just pre election run up mid slinging and point scoring, I don’t see the slightest evidence that Labour will improve defence so far, just the usual vauge and half hearted sound bites!

      More of the same under Labour as the current mob, managed decline….

      • Well, here are some of Starmer’s statements on defence

        “Sir Keir Starmer has criticised the prime minister for “breaking a promise” not to cut British Army troops.

        During Prime Minister’s Questions, the Labour leader quoted Boris Johnson from the 2019 election campaign, where he pledged to maintain the Army’s size.

        But Sir Keir said this week’s defence review would now see numbers fall by 10,000 as part of government plans.” BBC 23 March 2021

        “Labour’s support for nuclear deterrence is non-negotiable”

        “Ukraine-Russia: Sir Keir Starmer calls for Parliament to ‘look again’ at defence spending and defence strategy” 21 May 2022 Guardian (!!)

        “Labour leader urges the UK Government to reconsider its approach amid planned cuts, and claimed his view was shared by many Tory MPs.” 23 May 2022 Scotsman

        One more m8

        “Asked if he supports increasing defence spending, Sir Keir said: “Yeah, I do think the Government’s going to have to come back to Parliament and look again at defence spending, and I know many Conservative MPs think that as well”

        Lets hope he keeps to his word

        • None of the quotes actually mean anything.
          The fake outrage at cuts to the military are precisely that, fake outrage.
          Every single shadow party can always criticise defence because it is always handled poorly. Shock horror when that party comes into power there’s a new IR and more troops are cut. It’s happened every single time there is a change in Government.

          The last quote says it all really. It has no substance to it and is effectively what the Tories said at the same time. He made no mention of Labour increasing defence spending. I don’t know if he ever has said that.

        • all sound bites…. What is labours policy on defence? What did they take previously to an election as their defence policy?

        • So just to clarify, if labour wins the next election the army numbers will be restored and there will be increased defence spending, the extra spending coming from which budget? NHS, Education, work an pensions, foreign aid? I think labour has pledged to increase all of them at some point over the year.

          Heres the issue, both main parties want to increase budget but not really say where spending is going to be reduced.

        • That’s the nutshell David, reading through he’s promised nothing, using phrases like

          “look again at defence spending”

          “Breaking a promise not to cut troop numbers”

          It all means and amounts to nothing…

          Until I actually hear a cast in stone pledge to increase defence spending to a minimum of 2.5% of GDP and detailed plans and time scales of how things would be turned around, I wouldn’t believe a thing ..

          This is what you will get David, a promise to Look at Defence spending and a promise of a Labour Defence review, when they get in power….

          They will only confirm one thing and that’s the retention of the nuclear deterrent, that’s all.

          As said, the decline will just continue, if I’m wrong I will quite frankly be astonished mate!

    • Tides replaced the Rovers, not Waves. And further back, Leafs, Ols, Tides.
      Such has been the reduction of the RFA.
      Although the way the MoD works, I’d see the “sleight of hand” coming a mile off as they are then called a Wave replacement too. They do it all the time.

  7. Hi folks hope all is well.
    Makes good sense, and as Daniele mentioned, better than selling them off. Also as reported HMS Prince of Wales is going to be back in service August? Or something like that, so replenishment for both carriers and escorts is key.
    Slightly off topic. I read an interesting article in Thin Pinstriped Line that the author questions if the Royal Navy is a true blue water navy?
    When delving into this subject, there are very few navies that can claim to be a blue water navy, the Royal Navy does still appear to be one of that club. But of course this depends on supply and sustainability at any given point of engagement across the globe. Thus the issue of keeping the two ships in readiness.
    Cheers,
    George

    • Hi George, the RN absolutely is a blue water Navy, it’s a narrow spear, but we can still assemble a task group with a carrier at its heart, escorts (surface and sub- surface)and support shipping, then move it anytime the world…

      It’s a little on the thread bare side, but we can do it, few others can….

      As said by many on here, at least the RN has a clear goal and re- equipment plan, the Army seems to floundering about with no really clear direction, just desperately trying to keep hold of as many neche roles as it can with increasingly obsolete equipment.

    • Read the article in question. The author seems to fall into the novices trap of equating quantity with ability. Specifically he compares the Marine National with the RN, without taking into account age/capabilities of respective platforms.

      • I don’t think he does. He compares the MN reliance on overseas bases with the RAS capabilities of the RN. He concludes that the RN is indeed a blue water navy but, because of RFA manning issues, perhaps only a part time one. Realistically, that’s perhaps all that can be expected of a personnel total of @ 27000.

        • That’s part of his argument, but it is made moot, as arguments go, by the fact that he doesn’t discuss MN manning issues. To be fair this is common to most commentators, they discuss MOD/RN issues as if they exist in a vacuum in order to cast a negative light. However, the truth is that all modern navy’s have manning issues even the CCCP! These issues obviously differ slightly from country to country.

          • Agreed. I read recently on 2 different French websites of growing concern about retention and recruitment across all branches of the armed forces. Because of generally much higher unemployment amongst under 24s than in UK, France has usually found initial recruiting a bit easier.
            I normally find Sir Humphrey errs on the side of optimism but this time think he has.got it about right.

    • Biggest issue from the article seemed to be lack of manpower and the apparent need for ex RN to do retraining before they could transfer into RFA. Not knowledgeable enough to comment if this is true of not, but if so, seems absolutely mad. I suspect quite a few ex Matelots would be happy to serve a few extra years in the RFA.

      • I had a look at the rfa website. You get 3 months off for every 4 months u work!
        For every year get a 9 month holiday. It’s probably a single persons job ideally but still a good job anyway. The need to do recruitment better.

      • Manpower needs addressing urgently. We’ve a record population but a tiny RN/RFA. We need to stop treating those who put their lives on the line so shoddily, pay them better, look after them better & train up all we need. That will deal with both retention & recruitment.

  8. I remember that at least one of the Invincible class carriers was placed in extended readiness, just a short time before it was scrapped! I am sure that fate won’t happen to the Wave class but many are talking of them being sold off.

    • Many talked of the LPDs going, we’ve had that topic on and off here at every GE. And they’re still here. PS I posted a reply to you on the UKR SAM thread on a topic you’ll find interesting.

    • Invincible herself was in ER for ages with no gearbox so it would have been very extended whilst a new gearbox was procured.

  9. Blue sky thinking.

    Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are former Hansa League. Latvia has a proud sea faring tradition – I know several sea-farers but with a country of 1.5m, big ticket naval items are off the list.

    So!

    Gift the tankers to the Balts on condition they will service the fleet.

    Stand by for incoming.

      • Balts have affordable manpower and certainly, Rīga, has repair shipyards stretched out along the river.

        They could do the job and would benefit from doing so.

  11. Yet another completely messed up procurement, with no end in sight for the replacements, subject to endless delays. If the navy actually had to deploy on a war footing it would be stuffed, one solid state tanker actually deployable and I assume these 2 are probably not being maintained for quick deployment, to save money.

    • The main Question being what is the government expecting the armed forces being able to accomplish now and in the future.
      Then when it’s decided the funding and numbers can be worked out.

    • Very interesting Farouk. I am surprised that the reporter cannot understand why army numbers and capabilities have uniqueness. Armies generally actually do warfighting/kinetic combat (and often on a regular basis) on virtually every deployed operation and make a tangible difference to the outcome of the conflict – territory is lost or won back – the enemy is vanquished or emerge triumphant.

      During the Suez crisis, ‘The Troubles’, both Gulf wars and numerous other examples, the focus was on the army (its effectiveness, and its casualties) and not the other services. [The Falklands conflict was a rare exception with the focus being on the Navy].

      In contrast the last time our Navy engaged an enemy state’s vessel was 40 years ago – and briefly. Naval deterrence operations do not capture the public imagination, or that of many politicians.

      How much interest was there by the public/politicians in the CAS operations of the RAF on Op Herrick? …or their bombing of IS targets in Syria?

      I am not of course denigrating the RN and the RAF – just trying to explain the greater interest in the army by the public and by many politicians.
      Sadly the casualties of the army (KIA and wounded) also draw attention – and interest.

      The relative low priority accorded to our army compared to other nations is easily explained – we have no land borders under threat from foreign hostile armies. We are at heart a maritime nation given our island status and reliance on international sea routes. The RAF regularly head off Russian intruders heading for our airspace, so get a lot of ‘home defence’ Brownie points.

      Interesting that the article views our Defence posture (a little of everything) as an experiment, and a risky one at that. It has surely been that way for a long time. It remains to be seen if indeed all is ‘hunky dory’ in 2030-2032 – I suspect our forces will be even smaller by then, even if the Gucci kit has arrived.

  13. Hear me out but at the moment a number of nations pool resources under the Multinational MRTT Fleet to provide tanker and transport across a number of NATO members. Is there no appetite for something similar with supply ships perhaps, could the UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Denmark etc. not put together a rotational force to support the crewing of vessels like the Waves which are force multipliers for all concerned.

    • If a decent rota and crews could be worked out its a good plan.
      BUT it sounds a lot like the European defence force so probably a non starter.

    • As they say, hold that thought. Watching Trooping of the Colour on Saturday I saw Radakin chatting with his guest,,,,his French opposite number. Relationships are being firmed up.

      • Yes, but the French presidents rather like self aggrandising and have a narrow ultra nationalistic and exceptionalistic outlook disguised item as being ‘European’.

        • Morning, Re ultra nationalistic and exceptionalist outlook I’d say it takes one to know one 😂
          Nothing wrong with being proud of your country and looking after number 1. We could could learn from them.
          You are right with your ‘European’ comment. The political model of the EU is essentially an implementation of French ‘communautaire’ society. The British system is still essentially feudal; leaving prime ministers honours lists being a good example. This cultural difference is the reason De Gaulle observed that the UK would have to change to make a success of EU membership. We didn’t manage to do that so we ended up leaving.

          • The UK was very well respected in the EU because we always took a pragmatic logical line in negotiations whereas France, Spain and Italy are always arguing for things that suit them rather than the good of the EU. Although it is always dressed up the other way round.

            That is why the Nordics, and to a lesser extent Germany, were sad to see UK leave.

            BREXIT negotiations were always going to be a nightmare and were very, very badly handled by UK and someone like Barnier was always going to enjoy putting the boot in.

          • Re respect for the UK I absolutely agree. We have a reputation for fairness and for facilitating compromise. Our departure was a disappointment for many in Euope not just the UK. The Brexit campaign to a large extent was based on fanning the flames of a delusion that in some way the UK was a helpless ‘victim’ of the evil EU ‘Empire’. It was cleverly done. Barnier is a bit of a teddy bear; can’t seeing him put the boot into anybody. But he was tasked to defend the communautaire principle of the EU….sharing of both benefits and sacrifice; mutual respect and support. EU membership was never the cause of our problems; we can see that now. But being outside the EU does make it easier to figure out how to change our own politics and culture so its rooted in communities not clubs. I’m minded of the Scottish tourist board advert for golf: ” in Scotland you don’t join a club you just bring a club’.
            The EU was an elastoplast to help us through the end of empire. It’s in our own hands now. We need to improve the way our democracy works and update our constitutional framework.

  14. Found RFA Fort Victoria keeping Royal Yacht Britannia company in Leith harbour this week, both looked ship shape in the sun….
    Sorry I can’t get the photo to load..

  16. Why not convert the Wave class to littoral strike ships? Or as base ships in the Persian Gulf? There is plenty of life left in their hulls.

  17. I think it’s time for the Ukraine to sink a few more ships maybe live testing for the NSM. Russian troll factory St Petersburg or Africa ? It’s getting worse with disinformation apparently a Russian massive air craft carrier 200 thousand ton now been secretly launched the air craft carrier called the Sprit of Putin . Useful idiots on social media swallowing this rubbish .

  18. these were great ships but why bring a 26 years old tanker back into service. It will cost a fortune and the ship will need major upgrades. Better to sell now and reinvest in two new tankers that can support the future navy. Just don’t spend 20 years deciding the tanker needs to be a ship. Two moded Tides learning the lessons from the present 4.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here