FDR – Naval Logistics #1
Share by EmailI am going to conclude the maritime section of the Think Defence Future Defence Review series of posts with a look at maritime logistics. This is a timely subject given the obvious display of logistics capability evident in Haiti.
The first couple of posts are from guest contributors…
Privatising the Royal Fleet Auxiliary – pragmatic or problematic?
For those of you who do not know, the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) is a civilian-manned fleet of the MoD which enables ships of the Royal Navy to maintain their operational requirements around the world.
The RFA’s primary role is to supply the Royal Navy with fuel and supplies. It also counts a repair ship, and amphibious assault vessels amongst its assets. RFA personnel are members of the MoD civil service who wear Merchant Navy-style rank insignia with naval uniforms and are under naval discipline when the vessel is engaged on warlike operations. RFA vessels are commanded and crewed by civilians, augmented with regular and reserve Royal Navy personnel to perform specialised military functions such as operating and maintaining helicopters or providing hospital facilities.
The RFA is funded out of the defence budget and its employees are counted amongst the 85,730 civil servants currently employed by the MoD.
Before going into detail about the virtues and vices of the privatisation proposal, consider first why it has been given so little attention in the main stream media.
Firstly the Army gets most attention currently which is only natural given the dire, albeit, kinetic situation in Afghanistan – with the government looking ever so amateurish with every new procurement announcement.
Secondly very few people actually know that the RFA exists as an organisation. It is a tiny organisation, relatively speaking, when compared to the likes of the RN and employes only 2,000 where the latter employes 80,000 – active and reserve. Neither does it have a particularly long military history by British standards, being established as recently as 1905 (the RN has been going since the 16th century) . When all is taken into account it is no surprise that this issue is making little noise on the mainstream airwaves.
The RFA has and remains a very active service in terms of deployment and ship building.
They recently (2006) received a batch of Bay-class landing ship docks and what is more are leasing Point class sealift ships under the Private Finance Initiative. Hence it is a very new fleet and at first glance it seems like a very odd suggestion to privatise it – this is without even considering the security related issues.
First consider the financial aspect; the RFA employes 2,000 and operates a grand total of 16 ships. According to the Times each department head at the MoD has been asked to identify savings of at least 10% resulting in a saving of £200m – by Christmas. The most expensive part of running the RFA comes from personnel costs; though they are few they are highly skilled at what they do.
Refuelling a destroyer at sea, whilst moving, is no mean feat.
Only two years ago a survey was completed on the RN and/or Civilian Firms taking on the role of the RFA. The RN found they could not man the Bay Class ship for example, with less than 200 (RFA – 91) and the Civilian firms could not man the RFA ships with crews holding the required Military and civilian qualifications, let alone continue with the in-house training (provided by the MOD(N) and sea colleges).
Thus, while flogging of the entire service remains on the table, it appears that it would be a very problematic option in terms of who exactly would take it over.
Financially it is cheaper to keep it in-house since privatisation is always run for a profit and margins will be added to the bill handed to the MoD.
A different plan which has been suggested is merging the RFA with the RN.
This plan, though attractive to financial reasons, has its drawbacks as well. The problem with incorporation is that many RFA personnel are in the RFA as they do not want to be in the RN (though it also contains a lot of ex-RN). Merge the two together, and watch UK merchant seaman join other firms.
Additionally, the RFA is the single largest employer of UK merchant seamen – lose this and you ring the death knell of the Merchant Navy – no matter how persuasive the logic may be.
However considering the continuing swing towards militarisation of the RFA over the last 40 or so years perhaps full integration into the RN as is done in many other countries, may be more sensible from the operational point and still provide cost savings. Certainly from a political point of view the latter option is very attractive, particularly with the Conservatives. MoD civil servants may well recommend to Mr. Cameron that the RFA becomes RN; he can then fulfil his pledge of cutting MoD civil service numbers whilst boosting RN hull numbers and personnel.
This is of course assuming that Liam Fox, Shadow Defence Secretary, was serious about cutting MoD costs by 25% but boosting operational forces, they have to find thousands of people to sack (it would be interesting to see if that becomes a manifesto commitment, but it is independent of any future Treasury review).
Finally one must remember that this story was provided first by the mainstream media who are looking for a sensationalist ‘bash-the-government-story’ and they are hence, by their nature, going to strangle the cat in the bag before it is even let out. Savings must be made since the current government has been living well above its means for the past few years and when (if) the Tories enter office there will be a lot of cuts, as a result civil servants and senior military brass will consider short-term cuts which look good on paper for the incoming government, so that they in turn can tell the electorate that they can be trusted.
However privatising the RFA is not a short-term cut and if enacted would mean that every other possibility was either not financially or politically plausible. Cuts are coming but most likely not to frontline personnel (not to mention operational personnel) hence we can but wait and see what precisely Dr. Fox meant when he said
“Frederick Duke of York was preparing for the Napoleonic threat between 1792 and 1804 he increased the size of the Army from 50,000 to 500,000 – and he did it with 38 staff in Horse Guards.”
Category: Thoughts on the Future
About the Author (Author Profile)
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
13th Spitfire said: “Additionally, the RFA is the single largest employer of UK merchant seamen – lose this and you ring the death knell of the Merchant Navy – no matter how persuasive the logic may be”
And this to my mind is the most strategic issue of them all – the RFA provides employment for merchant seamen. It provides a training ground for merchant officers, and it provides superbly trained seamen (with more firefighting and damage control training than the average Filipino sailor).
What can i say apart from i totally agree with Jed.
Jed,
I completely agree with you which is why I think this will not go through, it is so completely nonsensical. That said they will be investigating the possibility of merging the RFA with the RN for political reasons.
But as it stands, there appears to be too many obstacles for privatization that would not endanger the whole purpose of a support fleet.
“Financially it is cheaper to keep it in-house since privatisation is always run for a profit and margins will be added to the bill handed to the MoD.”
If the private company that takes it on cuts costs by an amount greater than the profit, then it will be cheaper. Availability contracting for example has saved well over a billion pounds on the maintenance of the Tornado fleet, and BAE Systems and Rolls Royce will have made a profit on the work.
That’s not necessarily to say that a private company would in practice be able to make cost savings with the RFA, but in general terms it is far, far from the case that privatising MOD work increases costs.
Missed this site until I found the link on 13th Spitfire, today.
Agree with most of the text of the article, though It’s a shame nearly half of it was telling everyone what the RFA is, quite obviously by a tasked PR person in RFA.
The media are devoid of understanding the role of the RFA. The media is, as you say, only looking for some political advantage. The RFA should not be sacrificed on the altar of the New Labour miss-managements. All heads in the RFA should be kept well below the parapet. Some really good PR might help, change the ROE to give the pirates a headache, don’t send an RFA to do a Warships’ job it only looks bad in the media.
The RFA has done sterling service in all British conflicts, in one way or another, looking after the RN at sea, carrying enough oils, water, food, ammunition, storm/hurricane relief stores, booze and backy and a place to have diplomatic entertaining for and after long voyages. History is not important, only savings and tomorrow’s budget and willy waving silly party politics. Long term ‘Defence of the Realm’ issues are a luxury?
If the RFA were privatized it will surely go the way of every other recently privatized State owned industry or service, right down the pan. The reasons you mention are some of the correct ones but surely ‘security’ is of prime importance, not just security of the ship and its assets but ‘Home Land’ security if ‘the stuff’ it carries is compromised by neglect or an act of terrorism from one of the Officers’ or ratings.
Historically, shipping companies cannot always be relied to put the ship, its crew and its mission first where profit is concerned. Anyway, who will take on the new role of the RFA? P&O, Stena, Normandy Ferries, Virgin PLC. The government could cast the net wider outside the EU to the Middle East or the Far East or even try Coca-Cola or Pepsi. Management buy-out? I am of the opinion that the RFA is not any old shipping company that can be bought and sold at the whim of its owners, it has developed according to the needs of it’s role over the years. Will the new owner build the ships in the future that are needed to face the ever changing threats?
Can the Government and its Ministers not remember the adage that: if its working and works well, leave it alone?
I suppose there is in COMRFA a team of people discussing this very problem, trying to think up ways they can wangle a job with the New RFA Private Management Enterprises PLC. The terms of privatization are not even thought out yet let alone set in stone.
As the media has gone quiet there is some hope but the media don’t make Government policy or so it would seem.
Mr. Bruno I am glad you liked most of the article, though I must add I am not PR person, I am only a student who is very interested in politics and defence, and happens to know a fair amount of the latter. Perhaps, you are right; I should not have added as much background information but to me it seemed that few people actually knew what the RFA is.
“to me it seemed that few people actually knew what the RFA is.”
I still dont, I get the basic role, but dont understand why crew would refuse to be part of the RN
DominicJ said: “I get the basic role, but dont understand why crew would refuse to be part of the RN”
Because they are Civvies ! If they wanted to join the RN and be under military discipline then I guess they would have.
The RFA is crewed by MERCHANT SEAMEN, as such they have very, very different pay and conditions. During my 9 months as part of a Naval Party onboard RFA Diligence we would see merchant sailors come and go every time we made port, some had signed up on long contracts, some on short. If you transfered the RFA to the RN, I think the wages bill would sky rocket.
I agree with most of what has been said, however The sealift command point boats, ARE NOT managed or controlled by RFA.
These ships are run by James Fishers, the way they get aroung war zones, is by making sure that all employees are Royal Naval Reserve.
But one fact that must been borne to mind is the cost of the NEW tankers that RFA need urgently, if a commercial company provided the new ships and ran those ships, it would take a massive commintment from the MOD. This in turn would demonstrate to the TAX payers that MOD is making savings. To those out side of the RFA it is very easy to make these comments, to those inside the RFA, we are aware of the fact that Maersk Shipping currently runs manages and operates, 46 MSC Vessels (Miliatry Sealift Comand) US Version of RFA.
It has been proven by the US and also by UK that commercail shipping companies, can and do these roles.
I think the keynote is the fact that RFA is too small an organisation to gather public support, ask your average Joe in the street what the merchant navy is, i would hazard that very few if any could give the correct answer, and there lies the problem!
Remember if it was not for the eeforts of the Merchant Seamen of UK US and Canada, vital supplies would never have gotten through. More Merchant Seamen died during the atlantic conveys, than service personnel during the war from all services. It took the UK government over 40 years to recognise this and award Merchant Navy Day!
The even worse news, is that money dictates and common sense does not even play a part in future policies regarding public spending cuts.
I am afraid that it may well be a case of the writing is on the wall.
Tankers ran by commercial shipping company, the more speacialist ships stay RFA but under RN control!
Before anybody makes the comment that RASing would not be able to be done by a shipping company, look to the Falkland BP shipping did it then! to prove it can be done!
I think that merchant mariners can do most of the job you put on RN servicemen.
If you have seen those service men work together you will recognise that usually merchantmen are more flexable and multi-purpose people than those belonging to the regular Navy.
If you got able seamen from the Icelandic CG on board Icelandic merchant vessel you found out that you could usually not use them, because they could not work in handling deck cranes and work the usual merchantmans job when the ship was loading or unloading cargo.
You could make use of them in the paintwork and handling mooring lines, on helm and bridge work they were good but they had to be on board for some weeks to get trained for new and different job.