Potential Royal Navy procurement over the next 18 months

The details released form the ‘MOD Acquisition Pipeline’, which constitutes a forward look of potential procurement activities.

The MOD emphasises the provisional nature of this data, stating "The MOD make no commitment that: the requirements identified in this table will be procured; the annual value of any contract will be as stated; or the timing of any future procurement exercises will be as stated".

A variety of contracts are listed, covering different services and equipment. For instance, ‘4G Managed Bearer Service for Operations and Operational Welfare (LND-0002)’ with an estimated contract value of £2,760,000, and the ‘CDIO IT Sys and Logs (ND-0027)’, estimated at £3,500,000. Both are scheduled for a re-let contract with tender release dates in December 2023 and May 2023 respectively.

New requirements are also part of the procurement pipeline. For instance, the ‘Navy Digital Operating Centre (NDOC) (ND-0123)’ contract with an estimated value of £2,000,000, and the ‘Counter Uncrewed Air System (CUAS) UCR Procurement Framework’, estimated at £6,093,000.

Focusing on the top five most valuable potential procurement activities for the Royal Navy, these are:

However, the MOD has provided a disclaimer regarding the publication of this pipeline: "The publication of this pipeline, nor any of the information presented in it, should be taken as a commitment or representation on the part of MOD (or any other organisation) to enter into a contractual arrangement or to proceed with a procurement. Circumstances may change and we cannot guarantee that the requirements, contract value, and/or timeline will be as stated."

Most of these potential contracts involve ‘Technical support or help desk services’ as per the category description, while others are under ‘Proximity sensors’, ‘Professional Services’ and ‘Military Spares – Unclassified’.

The procurement sourcing route for all of these contracts is ‘Competitive’, except for two contracts which follow a ‘Single Source’ route.

While these figures give an insight into potential MOD procurement activities, the MOD has stressed that not all opportunities will be available to all suppliers, citing potential security sensitivities or lack of current awareness about future contracting activities.

Δ

Δ

Those top five are just the top five in the Navy, right? There are programmes orders of magnitude larger in the other TLBs/HLBs.

Thanks for the clarifying the text.

Will the RN now need it as the T31 is being upgraded? Maybe the MCM logistical support vessels will become the T32?

I’m still half-convinced that the Type 32 was actually another off-the-cuff Boris announcement to get a quick headline and large chunks of the MoD have been scrambling to retroactively turn it into actual reality ever since….

The top three maritime procurement priorities need to be: ASW sensors for the T31 ASW sensors for the T31 ASW sensors for the T31

ASW isn't what they are designed for they are GP frigates with an emphasis on surface warfare, significant AA capacity and very limited ASW using Wildcats or UAV. To be honest in a high tempo ASW environment they would probably be a complete liability and easy targets. They do not have a hull designed for ASW and CODAD propulsion isn't exactly quiet. There are reasons a T31 is cheaper than a T26 and it's all down to the level of design finesse, sound cancelling / dampening, sensors and an ultra quiet propulsion system (CODLOG). So if you want more ASW… Read more »

Nobody is suggesting fitting them out with 2087 tails or anything, but a basic hull sonar or lightweight VDS for littoral operations wouldn't go a miss. As it stands they have literally nothing for ASW, not even their Wildcats have any submarine detection capability. No one has suggested using them to hunt submarines in the Atlantic, but they need something so they can at least defend themselves if a submarine or UUV decides to hunt them. They’re not air defence ships either, but nobody would ever suggest taking away Sea Ceptor from them. As GP vessels they should have a… Read more »

You’re right that they have no ASW sonar. They do have an anti torpedo defence sonar & countermeasure. Nothing to prosecute subs before or they attack. Seems like madness to me.

And that is because they were designed from the start to be able to be excellent ASW ships unlike the T31. They have an ASW optimised hull and CODLOG propulsion so are fast and quiet. The reason they weren't completed with full on ASW systems was because the French defence budget just couldn't afford to and build the numbers required. Now they can so a nice easy upgrade. You just aren't comparing like for like. You can put a saddle on a Clydesdale Horse and ride it, but you will not win the Grand National with it. Just remember the… Read more »

It would be nice to know that if an enemy submarine was passing nearby to get through the shield to more desirable targets they might notice. Or will these vessels never be seen in a carrier task force? Think we know the answer to that with terms like ‘state of the art’ being used whenever they appear on episodes of ‘The Warship’.

We’ve so few escorts that it is essential all have a basic ASW capability beyond the embarked helicopter(which may be OOS/lost/or tasked elsewhere when needed). To my mind that means a hull ASW sonar & shipbourne ASW torpoedoes/ASROC. We’re a major maritime trading Island with worldwide commitments. Leaving escorts unequipped, hoping someone esle will take care of any sub in the area just won't do. Losing a precious escort just to save a few million by not fitting a sonar is criminally negligent.

Because on the very restricted budget, the RN went for a big frigate with a basic weapons and sensors fit which could be augmented in future rather than an out-and-out patrol frigate. It's proven a wise decision. Already we hear Mk 41 VLS are to be added, and probably NSM. A sonar would be next on list, I assume (or maybe a modular POD with a lightweight VDS can be developed for T31/2?).

My thoughts are that they will go for small autonomous ASW vessels. Carried aboard and lowered into water as and when. Elbit already have a fully functioning system called Seagull with dipping sonar.

Spot on a Merlin would solve the problem, it is a superb ASW machine. Just 1 small problem where do you get it from ? Each T23 has one, the Carriers have at any 1 time @10! And a 3rd of them are in refit or service. We just do not have enough of them. Interesting thing is Poland just decided to start building their own for their Army, FFS use that as leverage and order a new batch.

Yes, totally. Why isn't there a follow up order for Merlin's if we’re a bit short on numbers? I think the Polish army is getting the AW149 and their navy the Merlin. Now with some T23 dropping out now a few more T31s to bolster numbers sharing manufacturing with Poland if necessary. At least the Anglo-Polish CAMM-EX might make an appearance sometime.

Well over the last few days the Polish buy has changed. They signed up in 2019 for 4 AW101 for their Navy and now instead of the AW149 they ordered 22 AW101 for their Army. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/04/29/poland-acquires-aw101-helos-for-navy-under-430m-deal/

These will be built in Leonardos PZL factory. Now IMHO would be a great opportunity to talk to Leonardo about a new AW101 buy for the Navy and possibly AW149 for the Army to replace the Pumas. IF it was me I’d just buy more AW101 and KISS the logistics chain.

I wonder if this may then mean Hellfire integrated onto the AW101? Or mixed fleet with AW149. Something the UK could also do. I see Poland in also getting 90+ Apache's. Blimey, that's a force and a half!

I doubt we’ll need as many escorts once we retrench to closer to home.

Sensible stuff Frank. And with MK41s in the T31s as well as T26s it will be interesting to see if they put any Asroc type missile-rockets in those. And of course they can also add MK41s to the T45s. What an upgrade that would be as the T83 is nowhere in sight atm.

That ship has sailed, the space for MK41's has been allocated for 24 VLS CAMM. Besides which MK41 s are horrendously expensive. I just wonder where the crew will work out now the "Mk 41 Gym" is closing. As for ASROC it really is a weapon from a different era replaced by Helicopters and UAV's, which is why very few Navies use it these days. Besides which I can't see a T45 being much use as an ASROC carrier as it hasn't got a decent ASW sonar. I seem to remember someone saying the Sonar on T45 weren't even manned… Read more »

Have to disagree with you a bit. There's room for more CAMM whether MK41 or six pack silo. 24 is okay, but so is 32 or 48. There's room atop of the hangar. With the gym, just move it somewhere else. Having the gym next to the armoury is completely nuts! None of the these missiles can be reloaded at sea so capacity for long deployments and any potential high intensity scenarios need to be considered. Considering the T83 is nowhere to be seen yet and post PIP maximising the upgrades to the still youngish T45s is surely sensible at… Read more »

I’m not sure you understand the bit about the "MK41 Gym", it is a joke. The space was allocated at build so that they could have 2 MK41 VLS, as it was a big empty void, so why not put a Gym in it ? It was doing nothing else. The T45 is going to lose its Aster 15's which provide the short range AAW cover, they are being replaced with 100% Aster 30 (possibly ABM versions). That leaves a need for short range cover so 24 CAMM fits the bill nicely and if we are clever we can even… Read more »

Hi Rodney, liked your reply and all the detail. Yes I do understand the "gym" but I find the non take up of MK41s a huge legacy of wasted opportunity as is the 24 CAMM farm. Understand about constraints of weight, close proximity to the radars and comms, CoG, FOD. I’m sure the experts will know what they’re doing so we’ll leave it to them. 🍄 CAMM itself is pretty light so I still feel they can add an additional 1-2*6 alongside the Aster silo and all above deck. The BAE adaptive frigate concept show this exactly in combo with… Read more »

The Absalon-class on which they are based, are classified as ASW frigates and have both a hull mounted sonar and a towed array.

Oh please don't try and compare what the RDN would classify as an ASW frigate and the RN does. They are classified as such because the RDN only had 3 frigates and decided to bulk up by up arming the Absalon class. They were designed as multi purpose vessels but are diesel powered and only 24 knots. The entire rear hull from the hanger back was redesigned for the Ivor Huitfeldts as they needed to be faster and quieter. ASW frigates need to be quiet and that is pretty well impossible with a straight diesel design. On an a CODLOG… Read more »

I wasn't comparing RDN ASW with RN ASW, of course T23 and T26 are leaps and bounds better than Iver Huitfeldt class which I meant to say. My point was, these ships still carry out ASW work. Arleigh Burkes aren't the quietest of ships but have been the mainstay of the largest Navy in the worlds ASW fleet for 10+years. If the submarine will hear and destroy the frigate before it's even located then the frigate has an even smaller chance of survival without a sonar.

AB's have been in service now for 32 years and their LM2500 power plant is way past its sell by tech wise. The Zumwalts and LCS sucked up the funds for a new design and look where that went. Their new frigates are an enlarged iteration of the Italian FREMM and so will have a CODLAG system which is a 1st for the USN. And because it is unknown Congress insists on a full land based test before hand.

If you are using an LF VDS sonar ( 2087) you are actively transmitting to get the long ranges. The days of Passive=Massive 2031 listening only are well gone. Even hull mounted Active sonars give you a good chance of getting detection way past a subs torpedo weapon range.

All DGs are in boxes for sound suppression and fire fighting . Its a lesson learnt from having GTs in modules. DGs are on Vibration mounts anyway . The Gear box isnt. Yes electric drive is quiet but if you dont have it it does not mean you cannot do ASW.

I heard a presentation from Ultra, who make the navy's hull-mounted sonars, where it was suggested you could even get good use putting them on civilan vessels of opportunity.

Ultra Just been bought by a USA company. And so the beating goes on. Vital national interest doesn't count any more does it? In the past 18 months our defence industry has continued to be hoovered up.

Slightly off subject but do you know if they added extra sound suppression to the 3 new DG sets on the PIP T45 ?

Not seen the fit. However I would surmise that they are on there own shock/vibration mounts and enclosed. Shock/Vibration mounts will be a must because of big heavy kit moving in a ship when running. They also need to meet Shock protection DEFSTANS. Enclosures cut down noise in the space. They also have a dedicated gas drench system so if it goes bang and catches fire the fire is retained in the enclosure and you dont lose the whole space. HMS Broadsword had a DG fire during the early 90s off of Yugoslavia. I was on HMS Brazen at the… Read more »

Thanks for that GB informative as always. I can't think of a worse way to go than fire or scalding, my late uncle helped clean up after a fatal Steam Leak many years ago. Stayed with him for life,

I’m confused, the Ivor Huitfeldts are classified as anti air warfare frigates whereas the Absalons were (predominantly) anti submarine designs weren't they? Why would the former have to be quieter than the latter, or have I mis-interpreted your words?

Well it is quite a Confusing story. The Absalons were not designed as frigates but as Multi purpose support vessels with patrol and self defence capacity built in. The stern and profile aft is wider and less hydrodynamic than a frigate or destroyer. They have a vehicle stern ramp, multi purpose logistics bay to carry ISO containers, mine laying for 300 mines, military vehicles including 7 MBT, multiple positions for Stanflex containerised modules. She can be armed with various weapons such as 5" guns, 76mm guns, Harpoon missiles and containerise ESSM missiles. Denmark has upgraded them to serve as ASW… Read more »

To be honest in a high tempo ASW environment they would probably be a complete liability and easy targets.

Well, don't expect them to survive in a war with China or Russia

But they aren't expected to. The idea for them was a second line unit to operate in lower intensity theatres freeing up the first line surface escorts to focus on the high intensity fighting.

I think that If war breaks out between the UK and Russia, China there will be no lower intensity theatres freeing up the first line surface escorts to focus on the high intensity fighting

Sure there will. The Russian Navy is dwarfed by European NATO and will mostly be bottled up in the Black Sea and "Lake NATO."

The Med won't be a huge high intensity zone, but will still need presence, as will the Caribbean and South Atlantic. Even the Gulf and Red Sea will probably be secondary fronts.

High End warships will be fighting in the North Sea, GIUK, and Pacific. The rest of the world won't be high intensity.

Exactly it's not like piracy or other actors will just pause ops just because a high end war breaks out. In fact likely hood is they would up the tempo.

This. Plus everyone seems to be forgetting we are in NATO, and are unlikely to have to fight a high intensity war without NATO. We won't be in a Falklands situation where NATO/Commonwealth forces will backfill our other commitments so we can "send everything." Because they’ll be sending their high end units as well.

E.g. the Germans are not going to be sending a Baden-Württemberg to backfill our Caribbean Missions because those will be patrolling off the Horn of Africa so that the F-126's and 127's can be provided to escort QE, PWLS, CdG and Cavour.

I disagree that we’ll be able to hold them back for secondary tasks. No enemy will ever say, "Oh they’re not proper frigates, we’ll let them off!" It's just empty words, lies, delusion or sinister naivity. We have so few escorts we’ll have to use whatever is available & if they’re 2nd rate, then the crew & country will suffer. Thankfully with a decent hull size & design, bringing them up to a decent standard looks acheivable if the will is there. The MK 41 VLS is a great start to ensuring they’re effective escorts rather than 2nd rate flag… Read more »

But we don't have few escorts. NATO, according to Statistica because I don't have the time right now to double check their maths with my own count, has 135 Frigates, and 112 Destroyers, This is against Russia's 11 Frigates and 10 Destroyers, and the PLANs 49 FFs and 51 DD's. So even if we fought the Russians and the Chinese at the same time we’d still have a massive overmatch. At the end of the day just because a high intensity war breaks out against a peer adversary, doesn't mean we’ll be able to neglect the other parts of the… Read more »

At the time of the Falklands we had c60 escorts in the RN & NATO had larger fleets. Today we’re stretched way too thin with 16 or 17 escorts & allies generally also have fewer escorts than back then too. Russia has a lot of corvettes that are more frigate in size & capability. PLAN is close to outbuilding the USN except in supercarriers, though other East Asian neighbours/rivals combined match them. Before we reduced escort numbers that far, it was considered widely that 25-30 were the bare minimum for the RN, but idiotic chancellors insisted on reducing to 19,… Read more »

I’ve not counted the Corvettes because the absolute longest range Russian Corvettes can't get past Iceland before they’re out of fuel, and vary considerably in size (some are only about 500t displacement). But even then, if you want to count the Russian Corvette fleet: My count now, so numbers might be slightly different: NATO (not counting Sweden) has 26 Aircraft Carriers 17 Cruisers 85 Destroyers 161 Frigates 99 Corvettes Russia has: 1 Aircraft Carrier 4 Cruisers 11 Destroyers 11 Frigates 82 Corvettes Nato could only deploy it's Frigate fleet and still have more combatants deployed than the entire Russian Navy… Read more »

The T21 was exactly the same philosophy. But as we saw in the Falklands, when a crisis erupts everything grey gets sent.

I take your point but I disagree with it: The Falklands was a 1 on 1 War between the UK and a not quite peer power, with no NATO involvement. Taskings for the T-21 were backfilled by NATO and commonwealth neighbours, rather than a multinational battlegroup being created, which is what is envisioned right now. If the argument is about a UK vs Russia/China on it's own war, rather than a coalition, I’d say we’re pretty buggered anyway.

We don't have many ASW Merlins though.

Lol… And I was just going to add 3 more T31s to the list! Plus some increased defensive armaments for the two carrier's especially prior to CSG 2025. It's still a bit early…lol 😁

I agree that improved defensive armaments are needed for the carriers. I’d like to see 2 x Sea RAM, 2 x Phalanx and 2 x 30mm. I’d also like to see Sea RAM replace Phalanx on the Albion class and RFA's

Why introduce yet another weapons system ? Whats wrong with CAMM ?

CAMM is better but I’m presuming it would be much more expensive to fit as it would require VLS to be installed. We already have a couple of dozen Phalanx mounts which the ships mentioned are configured to carry. Sea RAM can be fitted to those therefore leveraging the existing mount and its radar.

Yes it would require VLS and could be more expensive or maybe it wouldn't. Odd answer but I’ll explain. Firstly I’d keep the Phalanx and add the CAMM in 2 stand alone VLS boxes Port and Starboard just like the French CDG and Italian Cavour do with Aster. The reason I say maybe not; is the difference beteen purchase, installation and through life costs. We already have CAMM in service with both the Navy (Sea Ceptor) and Army (Sky Sabre) and I understand we are adding CAMM ER to the mix as well. It also has a lot of commonality… Read more »

Wasn't space for CAMM built into the design for our QEs?

‘Counter Uncrewed Air System (CUAS) UCR Procurement Framework’ – Estimated Contract Value: £6,093,000.

Part of Project Synergia I’m guessing🤔

That's RAF, but it could be a spin-off. This would be a new Navy requirement. It's a UCR, so what's hot in CUAS for the Navy? A lesson learned from Ukraine perhaps.

OT. How carriers die. Kitty hawk being taken apart

https://youtu.be/pBK09AOdTr8

George, I hope you look at the army procurement programme tomorrow or the day after. I do really need to cry into my beer again!

I watched an RN promotional video on YT from the 60's called 1400 zulu. (400 ships 100,000 personnel 🤯🤯). It stated that the then RN's primary mission is protection of UK maritime trade. Is this still the case?

https://youtu.be/IBu4Rcwpvgk

Halcyon days before Denis Healy (he of former Communist Party membership) and the drive to wreck global Britain began. If only the electorate then could have seen us today.

I don't think that most of the electorate could care less providing that they still get to consume loads of cheap rubbish from China

I can understand the view of providing Hull mounted sonars for the T31. I just wonder whether providing an ASW kit of sonar bouys and dipping sonar for Wildcat might be a better bet.

If we really wanted to up ASW capacity, then more T26s and more P9s and Merlins would be a better bet.

Wildcat is a pretty useless platform in terms of the capability it provides in comparison to its cost. Korea did fit a dipping sonar but the extra weight means that the endurance of the helicopter is poor. Its too small to be of much use and its primary purpose was to provide jobs for Westland hence why it has sold badly abroad with Korea deciding to spend money to give theirs some ASW capability that the RN's don't have.

Bearing in mind recent comments about the speed of procurement for Ukraine being faster than that for the UK perhaps we should consider new legislation to streamline the process.

Andy, I’ve read your posts here for many years. That you were long serving in the RN was obvious to me and probably most others. 👍

I’m sorry to hear about your limbs.

Hi Daniele. How are you.. Read late last night about HMS Scott.. To serve in the Navy for another 10 years.

Hi John. Yes, I only heard about that from a comment here. A relief, she has some vital niche roles apparently.

Many thanks for your service. Quick question: why is it called petty officer?

From the British tradition of very bad French ‘Petit-Officer! (Junior Officer), I guess. SNCO it became.

Oh that makes sense. Nothing to do with being petty

My prediction is T32 won't happen. 3 reasons, firstly next government will retrench closer to home. Next the maritime construction sector will be kept busy build offshore infrastructure, we dont have enough skilled labour as things stand. And finally cost. The Tories know we can't afford them but current costs are sunk and they don't need to decide until after next election. Like I say just my opinion

I hope you are wrong. I think a further batch of 5 type 31s with a medium calibre gun, bow sonar, and mk41vls is going to be very much needed in addition to the type 32s being planned. So 15 total type31/32s are actually the number of surface combatants the RN needs to just meet its current peacetime commitments.

Your last sentence is the crux of the matter, current commitments may change. Retrench to Europe reduces our commitments and probability of engagement in conflict outside Europe.

Appreciation for your service to the country Andy. So sorry for your stroke. Is your maths out? If you served 22 years in the RN, then 24 as a prison officer, only to have that stroke at 48, that would make you c2 years old when you joined the RN?

😄

If HMS Westminister is now not likely to get its lifex completed as it's too knackered as reported in Navy Lookout today maybe it's time to order a few more T31s for the RN? Seize the moment DOD-Mod!

Looks like HMS westminster isn't coming back into service. Which makes me wonder, how many frigates are there currently that are available should they be needed? Is it 10 or less?