0 Points

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

more on MARS

Author

Comment

cyrilranch

more on MARS

Lead

[-]

Posts: 188

Jan 28 12 11:44 AM

http://www.navyrecognitio...amp;task=view&id=193

Remove this ad

Anthony58

The article

[-]

Posts: 4097

Jan 28 12 12:12 PM

There are several errors in the report. So how much is speculation, rather than fact?

Hyundai Heavy Industries, DSME and Fincantieri named final candidates for MARS program

Two Korean shipbuilders and one from Italy have been listed among the three finalists for the Royal Navy's project to purchase logistics support vessels (MARS program - Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability), the Korean state procurement agency said Thursday.

Hyundai Heavy Industries and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering have been joined by Fincantieri of Italy as the final candidates to export the naval ships to Britain, according to the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA).

Artist view of MARS concept

"The preferred bidder is scheduled to be selected around December or January next year," a DAPA official said. "Since two of the three finalists are Korean companies, I think it's highly possible that one of them will be chosen. It would also have a big symbolic significance that we would export naval ships to a traditional naval power."

A logistics support ship carries ammunitions, food and other materials necessary to help sustain naval battleships. Britain plans to acquire four 15,000-ton class logistics support vessels for $800 million.

www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=193

John Civie

[-]

Posts: 124

Jan 28 12 6:27 PM

I'm not very familiar with MARS and can't find that much on the web but why are they more than likely to be built abroad the goverment has bent over backwards to keep UK ship building alive with massive delays and cost overruns yet a potential for up to 6 (yeah right) orders to the yards has been sent abroad while no doubt we'll end up paying the cost to keep ship building afloat.

they look from the CGI to be very similar to the Waves which arn't even in their teens at the moment so why we don't see a follow on of waves mk2 espechaly with BAE threatening redundancies and yard closures and CVF modules being shuffled around so eveyone still has work and as i understand bae were trying to get brazil to buy some waves within the last few years. it just dosn't make sense to me they come in on time and budget but we'll still pay the cost to keep the yards open it might even help keep yards open between CVF & Astute and T26 & Trident replacment

Nauticus27

[-]

Posts: 973

Jan 28 12 7:56 PM

John Civie wrote:
I'm not very familiar with MARS and can't find that much on the web but why are they more than likely to be built abroad the goverment has bent over backwards to keep UK ship building alive with massive delays and cost overruns yet a potential for up to 6 (yeah right) orders to the yards has been sent abroad while no doubt we'll end up paying the cost to keep ship building afloat.

they look from the CGI to be very similar to the Waves which arn't even in their teens at the moment so why we don't see a follow on of waves mk2 espechaly with BAE threatening redundancies and yard closures and CVF modules being shuffled around so eveyone still has work and as i understand bae were trying to get brazil to buy some waves within the last few years. it just dosn't make sense to me they come in on time and budget but we'll still pay the cost to keep the yards open it might even help keep yards open between CVF & Astute and T26 & Trident replacment

From memory the govt has made a distinction between the strategic need to retain warship building capability in the UK, on the one hand, and the ability to build tankers on the other. Also I get the impression that building them in eg Korea would be vastly cheaper. Also again, with the rebaselining of Astute I don't think there's a gap to bridge at Barrow (I think they only do subs these days anyway?) before the follow on boats come onstream; and I don't think there's a significant gap between CVF and T26 either.

Moskit

[-]

Posts: 2036

Jan 28 12 9:49 PM

BAE had the option to bid, but chose not to. I believe this was due to their capacity being fully taken up with T45 and CVF. The fact that no other UK yards decided to bid should tell you something about the current UK capability in this area.

John Civie

[-]

Posts: 124

Jan 28 12 10:23 PM

Hadn't realised they drew a line between the RN and the RFA my thoughts were looking at the wave & bay procurments with a little albions (last surface ships i can find built at barrow Bulwark in 2001) as well, i was just thinking how the fight to retain any building within UK yards but if non of them bid they can't complain over future work commitments and as long as theres no messing around in contracts and alterations between the MOD and who ever wins the build it'll be nice to have something in service on time and budget even if it does say made in Korea.

eldritch

[-]

Posts: 236

Jan 28 12 11:57 PM

Moskit wrote:
BAE had the option to bid, but chose not to. I believe this was due to their capacity being fully taken up with T45 and CVF. The fact that no other UK yards decided to bid should tell you something about the current UK capability in this area.

In fact BAE are part of a consortium the other members being BMT, DSL and DSME which if there bid is successfull will probably build at DSME's shipyard in Korea.
I think you will also find that Navantia is also a bidder.

Jim WH

[-]

Posts: 2809

Jan 29 12 2:23 AM

Even very high spec tankers are still far closer to being civilian ships than they are military, and at the moment the Koreans do that far more efficiently than just about anyone else. It make way too much sense to build them in Korea. That being said one could also go for a hybrid build approach: build the hulls in Korea but do the military fit out in the UK. It costs a bit more than building them wholly in Korea, but it employs highly skilled shipbuilders in the UK and helps keep a base-load of ship building/ship repairing work. It's what we here in Aus are doing with our LHD, and the cost benefit analysis on that project showed that the marginal cost for building wasn't much higher once one factored in tax revenues for the work done in Australia, and in the long term it was probably cheaper since it meant that there was a workforce here who would be able to maintain and refit the class here in Australia.

Thorvicson

[-]

Posts: 302

Jan 29 12 1:25 PM

Wasn't the idea for the overseas shipbuilders to build the ships cheap and UK yards would finish the fitting out over here with the RAS gear and military gear ?

Anthony58

[-]

Posts: 4097

Jan 29 12 1:58 PM

I think the idea or a variation of it came from this board.

Thiel

[-]

Posts: 376

Jan 29 12 7:13 PM

It's how Denmark built the Absalon and thee Iver Huitfeldt classes.

Remove this ad

Nauticus27

[-]

Posts: 973

Jan 29 12 7:14 PM

Thoughtful blog on the latest announcement, commenting on the curse of "up to" (as in up to 150 F35, up to 12 T45 and now "up to" 4 new tankers): http://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com/2012/01/up-to-four-tankers-rfa-and-quiet-death.html
Let's hope that for once they might see sense and order all four (bearing in mind that it was originally 6) - would make a fantastic difference to the RNs deployability and pretty much essential if we're serious about avoiding strategic shrinkage.

Moskit

[-]

Posts: 2036

Jan 29 12 7:20 PM

"I think the idea or a variation of it came from this board."

To be strictly accurate the idea was mentioned here several years after it had occurred to the project team

Anthony58

[-]

Posts: 4097

Jan 30 12 2:19 AM

ok

Bledlow

[-]

Posts: 2469

Feb 22 12 6:05 PM

Daewoo preferred bidder to build four new tankers, to BMT design.

BBC story

Meeware

[-]

Posts: 2118

Feb 22 12 6:19 PM

Good news. It's sad there isn't a UK or even European based commercial enterprise with the capability to do this work, but there we go- not much point in squandering scarce defence pounds on subsidising poorly run businesses in the UK.

shaun

[-]

Posts: 901

Feb 22 12 6:28 PM

Are the MARS ships replacing the Forts? Or the Leaf/Rovers? What will the future RFA look like?

The F-35 has developmental issues, much as the F-16, Tornado or any other half-decent jet has had. But when delivered it will be a digital weapon able to switch mission modes in-flight, fly all-weather and day or night, have integrated and encrypted communication, navigation and IFF through high-speed data links, communicate via SMS with units on the ground, use its own sensors (EO, IR and AESA radar) - and act as a hub for the sensors of other non-line of sight platforms - to give the pilot as much information as only theatre controllers have previously had, provide terrain-mapping capability comparable to that onboard E-8 JSTARs, show that information to the pilot on a MFD bigger than the computer screen you are reading this on now, see - and automatically identify - threats to the aircraft from any angle through its distributed aperture sensor system, co-ordinate small fleets of UCAVs, guide weapons launched from other platforms, launch a wide-range of its own A2A and A2G weapons, allow off-boresight shooting of missiles, use it's own AESA radar to conduct electronic attacks, diagnose it's own component problems, automatically schedule maintenance cycles, have high-commonality with augmented reality training simulators, have common training regimes between the three variants, and benefit from a lifetime 'service desk' to take the aircraft back to the shop for upgrades and significant maintenance on any of it's three (triple-redundant) computers. Oh and it's got a bit of stealth, flies as good as a Block 52 F-16 and some of it will be built in the UK. This is the f***ing starship Enterprise compared to any other aircraft presently out there!

Bledlow

[-]

Posts: 2469

Feb 22 12 6:37 PM

Meeware wrote:
Good news. It's sad there isn't a UK or even European based commercial enterprise with the capability to do this work, but there we go- not much point in squandering scarce defence pounds on subsidising poorly run businesses in the UK.

Plenty of European firms which could do the work. Fincantieri was one of the short-listed bidders, & others put in proposals.

Note that the tankers are British-designed.

cyrilranch

bmt design

[-]

Posts: 188

Feb 22 12 7:46 PM

DSME Announced As Winning Bid for the MARS Tanker competition

22-Feb-2012

BMT-AEGIR® platform design Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) is pleased to announce it is the preferred bidder for the Royal Navy's MARS (Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability) Tanker. DSME and partners will provide the specialised design and build of four new logistic support vessels, to be operated by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA).

The contract will be worth an approximate GBP452 million, with a significant proportion going to sub-contractors and partners. As part of the RFA's fleet, the MARS Tankers will offer logistical support to the Royal Navy by providing fuel, food and fresh water to naval vessels at sea. The vessels will each be just over 200 metres in length, 28 metres in beam, and have a displacement of over 37,000 tonnes. Each will be able to carry the equivalent volume of more than 7 Olympic-sized swimming pools of fuel cargo. This new addition to the fleet is due to be in service with the RFA from 2016 onwards.

The winning bid combines outstanding shipbuilding quality and superior technology from DSME with naval design expertise from Bath-based BMT Defence Services with their AEGIR® vessel design. These Naval Auxiliaries will exploit the economic efficiencies of the world's premier shipbuilder, whilst retaining UK capability, knowledge and skills in naval ship design and engineering.

DSME is the world's pre-eminent specialised shipbuilder with a proven record of delivery spanning both complex commercial and military ships. From commercial tankers and offshore platforms, to destroyers and submarines, DSME is recognised as a world leader in the construction of technically demanding vessels. The commercial build and outfitting practices adopted for the MARS Tanker, will deliver an efficient, high quality build process.

With the RFA Flotilla providing ever greater support to Royal Navy operations as well as providing a visible UK military presence across the globe, the BMT-AEGIR® platform design has been specially optimised for the requirements of the Royal Navy and RFA. It utilises a hull design that meets the latest marine pollution regulations and adopts design principles that are common with the latest Royal Navy platforms. DSME and its partners have refined this design in conjunction with many equipment suppliers.

Sang-Tae Nam, President and CEO of DSME commented; "DSME is especially proud to have won this important contract from the UK MOD, it shows a level of confidence in our ability to build ships to time, cost and performance. This significant win in the UK, coupled with our recent Indonesian submarine order, helps to further broaden our international business credentials. Exporting these MARS Tankers to the UK adds to our already strong and competitive portfolio, and we have no doubt that the great and longstanding relationship between DSME and BMT will be strengthened by this success.

Muir Macdonald, Managing Director of BMT Defence Services said: "We, and our partners DSME, are delighted with this result against such strong international competition and are looking forward to reinforcing our partnership with this joint success. I know we shall very much enjoy working closely with the MOD to now deliver these ships that are such an important addition to the RFA fleet. It will be a privilege to work with a shipbuilder with the reputation and capabilities of DSME; it gives BMT a massive boost in further proving our design and engineering expertise." He continued: "The global market for auxiliary vessels will remain strong over the next couple of decades and the selection of our AEGIR® design puts Britain in pole-position for championing our design and know-how around the world."

Chief Defence Materiel, Defence Equipment and Support, Bernard Gray: "After an open, fair and rigorous competition involving bidders from around the world, DSME emerged as the preferred bidder. The DSME solution offers the best operational capability for the Royal Navy at the lowest whole life cost. A foreign build offers best value for money for Defence, whilst the UK SME Company BMT Defence Services -AEGIR® design ensures our ability to meet international maritime obligations and provides the means for the Royal Navy to operate worldwide."

more info here
http://www.bmtdsl.co.uk/News/?/187/0/943

Meeware

Ah, granted

[-]

Posts: 2118

Feb 22 12 9:10 PM

There was one european firm who thought it was worth bidding.

Dickon M

[-]

Posts: 882

Feb 22 12 9:52 PM

From defence management.com

http://www.defencemanagement.com/news_story.asp?id=18949

Four new 37,000-tonne naval tanker ships are to be purchased for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary as part of the £452m Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (MARS) programme, it has been announced.

The ships, which are to be built by South Korean firm Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, will be manned by the RFA and provide fuel to Royal Navy warships and task groups.

The 200m long tankers will have the ability to operate helicopters and will replace the RFA's current single-hulled tankers when they come into service in 2016.

Daewoo was named as 'preferred bidder' for the £452m contract, which is based on a design by BMT Defence Services, after no British companies submitted a final bid for the build contract.

UK companies will still benefit from around £150m of associated spending, including £90m on the systems, design and support services, and around £60m on customisation, trials and specialist engineering support.

Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology, Peter Luff, said: "Over the next decade, the government will be investing billions of pounds in our maritime capabilities to ensure that our Royal Navy remains a formidable fighting force. This project will inject up to £150m into UK industry and support and maintenance will also be carried out in the UK. The government remains committed to building complex warships in UK shipyards."

Commodore Bill Walworth, head of the RFA, said: "We are delighted the RFA will be able to operate these world-class vessels. These fleet replenishment tankers will be flexible ships, able to operate with the Royal Navy and Armed Forces in conflict, and are designed to allow for upgrades and emerging technologies meaning that they have been designed with the future in mind."

Chief of Defence Materiel, Bernard Gray, said the bid offered the UK the best value for money.

"The MARS tanker is an exceptionally versatile platform; able to simultaneously refuel an aircraft carrier and destroyer whilst undertaking helicopter resupply of other vessels," said Gray. "I am looking forward to the award of the contract and the work that will follow in the lead up to the delivery of the ships."

Muir Macdonald, managing director of BMT Defence Services, said the selection of the company's AEGIR design for the ships would put Britain in "pole-position for championing our design and know-how around the world".

However, Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy said the deal was "bad news for British industry".

"First we lose out to France over fast jets and now we lose out to South Korea over Royal Navy tankers," said Murphy.

"The government do not have an active defence industrial strategy. I'd like to see more of our defence industry with a 'Made in Britain' stamp on it. The country will want the government to do more to support British industry

Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

more on MARS

more on MARS

DSME Announced As Winning Bid for the MARS Tanker competition

22-Feb-2012