Manufacture

After the CVF Project was initiated in 1999, a major problem that faced the then competing Prime Contractors - BAE Systems and Thales Naval - was where exactly they would build the new aircraft carriers.  The government was repeatedly stating that they would be constructed and out-fitted in the UK, but was no longer any UK shipyard with the capacity, facilities, and requisite design and construction skills for a project of this size, indeed there probably hadn't been for decades. 

In July 2002 a report by the Commons Defence Select Committee said that the DPA considered that the main problem related to building the CVF's was of securing sufficient labour capacity in the shipyards at that time.  There are very few issues relating to facilities, other than modernising.  To assemble a modular Future Carrier, CDP identified three likely candidates with an infrastructure large enough for its final assembly — Harland & Wolff in Belfast, Inchgreen on the Clyde and the former Cammell Laird yard in Birkenhead. They also understand that Swan Hunter are also developing a large dry-dock which will be able to accommodate the vessel, and that Rosyth Dockyard are working on similar plans.

As part of their ongoing assessment work for CVF, both BAE Systems and Thales conducted a thorough review of all UK shipyard facilities, addressing yard suitability, construction/access limitations and the overall cost-effectiveness of potential build strategies. With no single UK shipyard able "as is" to build carriers of CVF size without, at the very least, major risks to cost and build schedule, both prime contractor contenders proposed modular, multi-yard build strategies.  This is a politically attractive approach as it spreads the work around and supports multiple shipyards, however it is risky and expensive compared with using a traditional whole-ship build at a single yard.

BAE Systems' Build Approach
BAE Systems decided to adopt a modular construction approach because none of its own BAE Systems Marine shipyards have an existing slipway long enough for building a "whole ship" CVF hull.  Under this plan, multiple shipyards (its own Govan and Scotstoun shipyards, plus Vosper Thornycroft's new yard at Portsmouth, Ferguson's of Port Glasgow, and Babcock at Rosyth) are involved in constructing and fitting out modules which would then be moved to and assembled at one yard.  In March 2002 Mark Kane, managing director for the BAE Systems CVF bid noted: 'The modular approach has a lot of economic arguments for it as well as social benefits. Because it's so large I can see three shipyards at the very least participating.  We're taking a UK view on shipyard resourcing.'

The BAE Systems baseline plan foresaw CVF construction from four (later changed to three) 'mega-blocks' plus an island block (Source: BAE Systems)

BAE Systems' final plan envisaged the CVF's being assembled from three, pre-outfitted 'mega-blocks' (worth up to £300 million each!) built up to hanger deck level, while the hanger sides, flight deck and a separate island block complete the build plan.  This was a change from previous plans for four or even five mega-blocks.

BAE Systems announced on 29 October 2002 more details of its shipbuilding strategy for the CVF programme.  A non-exclusive agreement had been signed between the BAE Systems Prime Contract Office in Bristol, Swan Hunter in Newcastle, VT (formerly Vosper Thornycroft) Shipbuilding on the South Coast, Babcock BES in Rosyth and BAE Systems Sea Systems Group in Barrow-in-Furness and on the Clyde for the design and build of the CVF ship platforms.  The Agreement detailed the principles by which the team would work together to design, procure, manufacture and trial the warships. Additionally, each of the shipyards would work with BAE Systems to develop a detailed production plan for a significant section of the carrier platform.  [The lobbying in favour the BAE CVF bid by these shipyards, and the unions representing their workers was later judged to have played an important role in gaining the Prime Contract for BAE Systems.]

A team led by the BAE Systems Prime Contract office, with the involvement of the shipbuilding partners, would manage the final assembly of the Future Carriers.  Rosyth in Scotland was been selected as the preferred final assembly site for the two giant vessels. The final assembly activity would be undertaken in the main by the workforce from both Babcock BES in Rosyth and BAE Systems on the Clyde.  Inchgreen on the Clyde remained a backup site, to ensure that a risk mitigation option was available.

The ship platform design work would be undertaken primarily on the Clyde, utilizing design staff from around the UK.  As the Type 45 and the Astute design programmes begin to ramp down, their resources would be moved and joined to the Carrier design team at the BAE Systems Platform Design Center at Scotstoun, ensuring continuity of skills, jobs and processes.

BAE Systems estimated, from data provided by the warship organizations and the supply chain, that the Future Carrier program would sustain in excess of 10,000 jobs in the UK between 2006 and 2015.  It was expected that the first steel would be cut in 2005, the superblocks completed by 2008 and assembly would take place in 2009 with the ship completed by end of 2010.  In 2012 CVF01 would be delivered, followed by CVF02 in 2015.

Thales' Build Approach
Thales Naval UK had the problem that does not own a UK shipyard, and over the period 1999-2001 British newspapers repeatedly reported that if Thales Naval won an order for one or both of the carriers, it wanted to build the hulls in French shipyards, probably Chantiers de l'Atlantique at Saint-Nazaire - and that Thales had allegedly promised the MOD considerable cost savings if allowed to do this.  However the Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon, repeatedly insisted that a Thales victory in the battle against the BAE Systems consortium would not result in either of the two CVFs being built in France, and by early 2002 Thales appeared to accept this policy decision, Thales Naval managing director Peter Robertson saying: "The hull will be 100 per cent designed and built in the UK".  He added that the company was talking to all the UK shipyards - even BAE's - as it developed its design. 'These are very substantial ships using technologies that haven't been applied in the UK before. No single shipyard has the capability or facilities to build the whole thing on time and to cost.  Many have relatively few people on their books.  Each shipyard says it can go out and get the people it needs, but can we be sure?".  

Thales Naval announced in April 2002 how it intended to construct the CVF's if it won the order.  Under the Thales strategy, each CVF would be assembled from five separate sections called "Superblocks" (each 5,000-16,000 tons and worth up to £200 million) contiguous with ship damage-control sections (to minimise interconnections).  Each block would be self-contained and 80-90% pre-outfitted before being transferred by sea to a dry dock for final 'hook-up'.  As each "Superblock" would be fully outfitted, a ‘virtual ship’ would be created that could then be hooked-up to its adjacent partners to form the complete ship within a couple of months in dry-dock.  This process would have been co-ordinated by the Thales team member Halliburton KBR (formerly Kellogg Brown & Root), part of the American owned Halliburton group.

Mr Robertson said at the time that the MoD had stipulated that every aspect of the programme must be open to competition, as would the construction of each block.  "To optimise costs, each competing shipbuilder will provide the same segment for the two ships. We are still examining a number of candidate sites for 'hook-up', although final work-up and commissioning is planned at DML in Plymouth."  By October 2002, the list of the companies that had shown interest in competing for the Superblocks sections were: BAE Systems Marine, Govan; Babcock BES, Rosyth; Harland & Wolff, Belfast; Heerema, Hartlepool; KBR Caledonia Ltd, Nigg; McNulty Offshore Ltd, South Shields; Swan Hunter Shipbuilding, Wallsend/Port Clarence; and Vosper Thornycroft, Portsmouth.

The Nigg and Inchgreen yards remained an option for the final 'hook-up', but by November 2002 Thales favoured (like BAE Systems) undertaking final assembly of the CVF's at Babcock BES in Rosyth, which already has a large and experienced work force, in contrast Nigg currently employs just 150 people and many many more would have had to be taken on if it was awarded carrier work.  In total, Thales expected up to 10,000 workers to be involved in the construction during the peak through the (then expected) 2006 to 2010 period.

The work-up and commissioning of the CVF's would have been undertaken at the Devonport dockyard run by Devonport Management Limited (DML), which is also part of the Halliburton group.

Original CVF Alliance Build Approach
The MOD announced on 30 January 2003 that BAE Systems had been selected as the preferred prime contractor for the CVF project and would be responsible for the construction of the ships, while Thales would be a key supplier responsible for the design, the two companies being required to form an alliance. 

As regards the construction, the dominant BAE wanted to honour its previous agreement with other shipyards and press releases at the end of January 2003 stated that the ships will be designed and built entirely in the United Kingdom, with shipyards at Babcock BES at Rosyth on the Firth of Forth, BAE [Sea] Systems on the Clyde (both its Govan and Scotstoun shipyards), Swan Hunter on the Tyne; and VT Group (formerly Vosper Thornycroft) at Portsmouth playing key roles, creating or sustaining around 10,000 jobs in the United Kingdom.  The four partner yards would be allocated specific ship sections, but it was planned that half the value of the contracts they receive will be subcontracted by competition, although this could change (see below).   Other shipyards had not been ruled out completely but there was little opportunity left for them to gain any substantial work.

Using Rosyth's No. 1 Dock for CVF assembly will require some modifications prior to actual assembly work beginning in 2009 (or more probably now,  even 2011), in particular a significant widening of the entrance of the dock in order to allow the entry of megablocks and the departure of the completed ship.  But a relatively modest investment (tens of millions of pounds rather than the hundreds of millions of pounds a new dock would cost) will result in a facility suitable for assembly, outfitting, commissioning and maintenance of CVF's.  Rosyth probably has sufficient skilled labour to undertake the work, but if needed can easily draw upon BAE's Clyde yards and even a work force from throughout Scotland. and the north of England.  After assembly, Babcock Rosyth should be well placed to obtain a stream of valuable refit work for the entire 50 years life of the two carriers, with Devonport and Portsmouth unable to offer an alternative dry dock facility.

One build problem of the new joint approach was that Thales had designed their ship in 5 'superblocks', while the final BAE design and associated work allocation had just 3 'megablocks'.   It appears that during 2003 the Beta design was modified to form 4 "megablocks" - similar to BAE's original plan, but later reverted to 5 for the Delta variant.  

During the summer of 2003, as part of a cost saving exercise a much smaller "Bravo" CVF design was considered.    At this stage it appeared that the amount of CVF build work would drop by about 20% from previous expectations, and rather than distribute the pain equally, BAE Systems became inclined to cut one yard out completely - for obvious reasons they were unlikely to select themselves and Swan Hunter became the likely victim, prompting worried public statements by its Chairman, Jaap Kroese.  But by late 2003, the CVF design had again exceeded 55,000 tonnes full load, and Swan Hunter's role was again secure.

An important factor that emerged during 2003 was the ever increasing probability that France would formally join the CVF project.  In these circumstances, existing British government promises that the new carriers would be wholly built in the UK might no longer hold, particularly if large savings were in prospect.  The existing plan was that a considerable amount of the construction work, perhaps even whole superblocks (in theory at least) would be put out to competitive tender to all the main UK shipyards, however if the Prime Contractor was instructed by the MOD to open up the tender process to French shipyards as well, it was very likely that these (in particular the Alstom Chantiers de L'Atlantique shipyard in Sainte-Nazaire, which DCN and Thales have lined up to build the new French carrier, PA2) will submit far lower bids than UK yards and thus potentially win the work.  To counter this, by November 2003 the main UK shipyards involved with CVF (i.e. BAE Systems, VT Group, Swan Hunter and Babcock Engineering Services)  were in discussions to form a consortium, the intention being to present the CVF IPT and MOD with a joint proposal to construct the carriers in the UK that will be attractive from political, union and and financial point of views.  This will also involve agreeing how the work will be split between the consortia members in a non-competitive manner.

In early 2004, with France appeared to be about to join the CVF Project after having decided upon conventional propulsion for PA2.  A build option that the MOD now increasingly favoured in such an eventuality was for one-third of each of the three carriers (2 for the UK, 1 for France) to be built by Chantiers de L'Atlantique in France, and the other two-thirds by a consortium of British shipyards - each sticking to the same bits for all three ships.  Final assembly of the UK ships would be either at Sainte-Nazaire or Rosyth depending on costs estimates, final fitting out would probably remain at Rosyth.  The cost advantage to the MOD of using the highly efficient French shipyard to build part of the UK ships was substantial, also with each shipyard building the same bit three times, construction costs should fall dramatically between the first and last block.  The estimated overall savings potentially amounted to hundreds of millions of pounds.  However it seemed to became clear by June 2004 that France was not interested in what it considered to be an unnecessarily risky and costly build technique, and it would build PA2 wholly in France.

Revised Alliance Approach
In early 2003 it seemed that key decisions had effectively been made on the design and build approach, however these did not become firm decisions, mid-April 2004, BAE Systems leaked to the newspapers that its three shipyards were potentially up for sale, and Thales UK and VT Group quickly indicated serious interest in at least two the "Naval Ships" yards in line for CVF work. 

In late April 2004 the MOD informed BAE Systems that it was no longer regarded as the preferred Prime Contractor for the CVF contract.  The MOD is expected to shortly announce a new procurement strategy for CVF that will included bringing the prime contract role in-house to the DPA, appointing a company "Solution Integration", and a revised alliance approach to actually build the carriers. 

The DPA will build upon prior alliance negotiations, and quickly has made it known that it planned to use best practices developed for the off-shore oil industry (e.g. modular construction techniques).  However, there is also no guarantee that the  work sharing and shipyard arrangements previously made by BAE Systems to build and assemble the ships will now be followed exactly, although the DPA has hinted that Babcock BES, BAE Systems (in particular BAE Naval Ships - as part of the old Sea Systems Division was renamed in early 2003), Swan Hunter, and VT Group are all likely to still have a role to play.

A now old (c.2004) graph from RAND of possible CVF times, probably derived from the original Thales (CVF Alpha) proposal.

On 8th February 2005 the Transport Secretary, Alistair Darling, told MPs "We anticipate that, subject to value for money, the carriers will be built potentially at four sites in the UK - at [BAE Naval Ships] Govan, [VT Shipbuilding] Portsmouth, [Swan Hunter] Tyneside and [Babcock BES] Rosyth."

In April 2005 it emerged that A&P Southampton-based A&P, was bidding to build one of the five superblocks (a term being used interchangeably with megablock).  It claimed that its Dry Docks at Hebburn, Southampton and Birkenhead offer ideal facilities for a portion of the work, in particular, the Hebburn facility has major fabrication capability alongside the dry dock (259m long x. 44m wide at the gate, and 9.5m water depth over the sill)  and is a candidate for a superblock.  A spokesman for A&P Group said the “A&P have been identified by the MoD as one of the organisations who have the people, experience and facilities to bring the project to a successful conclusion by 2015. We have been working with the various CVF project teams for two years and now look forward to the next stage of bidding for build and integration packages."   Similarly Northwestern Shiprepairers and Shipbuilders indicated that it hopped to bid for a piece of the contracts.  Swan Hunter had already indicated that it expected to fabricate blocks at its Port Clarence shipyard (now closed and sold off), which would then be moved to Wallsend for incorporation in to its superblock (Block 3 of the 5).  Other yards such as BAE Barrow and DML Devonport were also actively and publicly seeking seeking CVF work in 2005.

The build plans continued to be in state of flux until the end of 2005.  Early expectations were that the superblocks would be nearly fully outfitted before being shipped by barge to Rosyth, latest plans (2005) are for a bare bones configuration, with most of the outfitting (including piping, electric and HVAC installations) being done at Rosyth.  Also, the blocks will only be completed to the hander deck level, the flight deck and islands being added at Rosyth.  It was revealed in September 2005 how the workshare plans are taking shape.  Five superblocks (aka megablocks) would make up each of the aircraft carriers.  It seemed that two BAE Systems shipyards on the Clyde in Scotland plus the yard at Barrow were likely to build the three aft-most megablocks between them, while VT Group had been upgraded to get the No.2 megablock block (it had been expected to get the bow block)  and islands, and that Babcock would get the smallest bow unit - plus final assembly.  The amount of work allotted to the various companies on the carriers would help determine the size of the stake each will hold in any combined shipbuilding entity dubbed 'NewCo' or 'ShipCo'.  Notably, Swan Hunter was no longer being mentioned and a manger of the company admitted that they were not directly involved in the discussions.

On 14 December 2005 the Defence Secretary, John Reid, announced that plans for the construction and assembly of the ships at Alliance members’ yards have now been agreed, and Dr Reid stated that he was “allocating some 60% of the ships’ construction to named UK yards: BAE Systems at Govan and Barrow; VT in Portsmouth and Babcock in Rosyth. Final assembly of the carriers will also be at Rosyth”.  The next day the MOD gave more details, confirming that the stern section of each CVF hull ( super-block 4, but including the former 5) will indeed be built at BAE Submarines Govan, block 3 at BAE Naval Ships Barrow, block 2 at VT Group Portsmouth, and the bow (block 1) and final assembly at Babcock Rosyth.  This work is some 60% of the overall build.   Approval was also given for the DPA to commit to some long-lead items for the new carriers, prior to the second and final Main Gate (probably in 2007).

(Above) A graphic from Thales Naval (slightly modified by the editor) showing how CVF construction work was allocated in December 2005.

(Below) Some more details from the Aircraft Carrier Alliance

The decision on work allocation, although expected, was a major blow to Swan Hunter. The yard had once expected to play a major role in the construction of the carriers and its future is now in grave doubt. However the Minister has left open that the possibility that the yard will be able to compete for the remaining unallocated construction work along with other companies. 

The super structure above the hangar deck is to be constructed from over 20 upper blocks, which will then be joined to the base structure at Rosyth.  Substantial elements of this super-structure will be competed for by shipyards and manufacturing facilities.

CVF construction plan as of September 2006 (Source: DPA)

BAE Systems will take responsibility for the integration of design, build, commissioning and acceptance of the ships; lead the engineering team; have responsibility for mission systems design; and design and construct the centre and aft blocks. Thales will take the role of design lead for platform, power and propulsion and take responsibility for the aviation interface. KBR will provide project management services; and Babcock and VT will have responsibility for design and build of the two forward blocks, with Babcock also managing ship integration and assembly at Rosyth.  An immediate task for the selected yards was to respond to a Request for Quotations for the work allocated them - this being essential for the development of the Business Case for the CVF Main Gate submission and approval process.

A graph from VT Group in late 2006 of its projected future shipbuilding work load.  The CVF work has since continued to slip right.

A computer image showing the modified dockyard at Rosyth, with one CVF in No.1 dry dock and the other alongside the quay wall.  The CVFs shown are of the old BAE Systems CTOL design.   (Source: Babcock International Group)

The proposed ‘first cut of steel’ date, marking the start of CVF production, is currently (end 2006)  late 2008 or early 2009.  Construction of the larger blocks is expected to take at least three years.

Shipyards are having to upgrade their capabilities to an appropriate standard in the period before then.  For example, just some of the upgrades that BAE Naval was planning in 2005 for Govan included £2 million for a Steelwork Centre, a new £4m Transporter Barge for CVF (and Type 45)  Modules,  £5m for a super berth, and £2.5m for new cranes. 

Babcock is faced with the highest costs in relation to upgrading its Rosyth facility for CVF.  How it will directly or indirectly recover from the MOD an investment amounting to £10's million is still an unresolved issue.  In February 2006 it was revealed that BAE and VT were seeking to jointly buy the dockyard from Babcock, a price of £700 million being suggested by the press.  They later said that they were no longer interested because of the inflated share price, but some form of deal still seems likely eventually.

In January 2006 Babcock disclosed that plans were being finalised for the necessary infrastructure modifications at Rosyth for CVF.  This included work on the direct entrance to Rosyth, to the No1 dock, and to dockside lifting capacity.  A 60 acre non-tidal basin (512 by 437 metres, with a depth 13m) will be made suitable as a CVF testing and commissioning location - able to accommodate both CVF's simultaneously and provide a trials environment.  Site survey work commenced in April 2006, with silt samples being taken.  The survey and investigation activity should allow detailed civil engineering design to be progressed in early 2007  Civil works on the direct entrance of the to the dockyard, construction slab for the bow section and No.1 dock with then start later in the year, with the final work due for completion early in 2010.

Engineering work planned at Rosyth dockyard (Source: Babcock International Group)

A major element in preparing to accommodate the pre-manufactured modules for CVF is the installation of Goliath, the 60m high giant crane, with a span of 150m to cover the construction area,  Goliath will be able to lift the 1,500 tonnes modules required by the CVF build strategy.  Design work for Goliath will start in 2007, with erection and completion expected in early 2010.

Babcock also said that construction activity (on its block) would commence in 2008 and continue through 2013. Hook-up assembly and integration work would commence in 2009 and continue through 2014.  Testing, commissioning and set-up work would commence in 2012 and continue through 2015.  Optimistically they had the first carrier (HMS Queen Elizabeth) ready for acceptance by early 2013 and presumably in service by the end of that year, however further delays have occurred since this schedule was published

 

 

Above - CVF construction plans as at February 2006 (Source: Babcock International Group)

It appeared that in-mid 2006 the French MOD was seriously interested in having its new carrier (PA2) added to the CVF production line in the UK - i.e. making it a three carrier series - if that was cost effective solution for them.  However French sources claimed that as of September 2006 they had not received any clear answer from the UK on this subject and that the industrial plan for the construction of PA2 (required by the French MOD in December 2006) would therefore have to exclude this option.

In February and March 2007 reports appeared in the French press stating that France was again urgently seeking a much closer industrial linkage between its PA2 project in order to achieve substantial cost saving for the two countries - this apparently included the manufacture at the Aker shipyard, St. Nazaire, of CVF superblocks or even their whole hulls.  Based on previous hints from Thales, this website estimated that the potential saving to the UK MOD of simply building the two CVF hulls in France could exceed £500 million.  The French apparently proposed that BAE Systems Surface Ship Solutions (formerly known as BAE Naval Ships) and VT Shipbuilding would be compensated for the loss of work by being given a share of the total savings. 

In early April 2007 UK sources confirmed that the build approach was indeed under review with the objective of achieving savings.  A number of options were being considered, including splitting the manufacture of superblocks with France under worksharing arrangements.  Under one option the Akers shipyard at Saint-Nazaire in France would build block 1, under another more radical option the BAE Govan shipyard would retain block 4 (which includes the old block 5) and with help from the Scotstoun yard build three units (two for the UK and one for France); the BAE Barrow shipyard would lose its block 3 to French shipyards, and VT's Portsmouth shipyard would lose its block 2 to France as well - being compensated by the block 1 that was headed to the Babcock dockyard at Rosyth.  Barrow has become a specialist submarine yard, completing its last surface ship (HMS Bulwark) in 2004,  while Rosyth has no experience of modern warship construction (rather than refit) - there are fears that using these yards for CVF superblocks would increase risks and costs.  Babcock would retain final assembly and outfitting as it has the only facility in the UK with a suitable dry dock (after an upgrade).  It was unclear how the French proposed to divide the work between the DCN Brest shipyard and the Aker Yards Saint-Nazaire shipyard - the later could easily produce a combined block 2+3 midships-section for three carriers over six 6 years.

The ACA had asked Aker to quote for the construction of Block 1 as this had the greatest commonality between the CVF UK and CVF FR designs, the other blocks having greater customisation to meet national requirements.

In late April 2007 the Chief Executive of Thales, Denis Ranque, confirmed that with the backing of the French government the company had submitted a proposal to the UK MOD for merging the separate PA2 and CVF projects into a single three-ship programme.  He said that "Building the ships together would be in the best interests of British and French taxpayers."  He suggested that a French yard could build one-third of the hull for each ship; British yards could build the other two-thirds: "If we can find a way that industry is incentives, if part of the savings are going to industry itself, I do not see why our friends at BAE Systems would not take that on."  Apparently this approach will realise saving of about £80 million (€120 million) per ship. 

BAE Systems was believed to have resisted the proposal on the grounds that they would cause further delays and that UK shipyards would be unable to each build their superblocks for three ships in the time scales being demanded by the two governments.  When asked to comment, the Ministry of Defence said it was still considering all industrial proposals for the carrier-building plan, and that the final go-ahead for the British carriers was still being negotiated.

(Above) A graphic illustrating the modified build approach announced in July 2007. (Source: DE&S)

 

On 25 July 2007 the MOD said that during 2006 an alternative build strategy was agreed with the aim of creating more time within the assembly programme. 

A series of pictures highlighting the 60 acre non-tidal basin and  other facilities at Rosyth Dockyard  that are expected to be relevant to construction of blocks and the assembly of the CVF's (Source: Babcock International Group)

The previously announced allocation of the modular 'super blocks' to the Alliance shipyards remains (hull lower block 4 at BAES Govan; 3 at BAES Barrow; 2 at VT Group Portsmouth, and the bow (lower block 1) at Babcock Rosyth, where assembly will take place) but that the assembly sequence would be reversed with the stern (block 4) entering the dock first.  Babcock will now undertake the upper blocks above block 4 and the size of the upper blocks will also be reduced (by building 'super blocks' higher) removing the need for investment in a 'Goliath' crane at Rosyth.  Substantial elements of the ship structure will be competed and competition within the 'super blocks', sub-contract will be maximised, pushing overall competition to around 60%.

In July 2007, the DE&S published the following list of CVF suppliers:

Alliance yards (Tier 1):

• Babcock Engineering

• BAE Naval Ships

• BAE Submarines

• VT Shipbuilding

Tier 2/3 Suppliers :

• A&P Group

• Burntisland Fabrications

• DML Appledore

• Harland & Wolff

• Heerema

• SLP Engineering

• Swan Hunter

• Cleveland Bridge

• D-CECC

• Fairfield Mabey

• Isleburn M&M

• Pallion Engineering

The list apparently dates to early 2006 and shows both selected and potential manufacturers of blocks.

 

Progress

Press reports in early February 2008 claimed that McNulty Offshore in South Shields and A&P Tyne at Hebburn had been selected  by  BAE Systems Submarine Solutions as subcontractors for the construction of the upper sections of both new carriers.

On 11 February 2008 Babcock Engineering Services signed a £35 million contract with Edmund Nuttall Limited to modify docks at Rosyth in order to accommodate the building of the carriers and widen its direct entrance.  Partially contradicting a previous statement in July 2007, the MOD said that the "The total investment in Rosyth [for CVF] will amount to £50m which will also provide for the necessary equipment to be purchased, such as the 'Goliath' crane, the largest in the UK, and hauling gear", this being required to move the ships' modules into position

In May 2008 Babcock revealed that CVF should provide it with a total of 9 million man hours of work: 7 million at Rosyth, 1million at Appledore in Devon (where one of Babcock's allocated hull modules will be constructed) plus another million in engineering.  Total carrier-related employment levels at Rosyth itself (including Alliance partner companies, commissioning staff and other sub contractors) will peak at about 2,000.

 

 

                                                                           Back to top                                       |<   <  Part 19  >   >|