Defence calls on commercial world for help

The problem is that two thirds of the UK’s defence budget, around £628m, is spent on equipment that moves. While a big slice is taken by the air force, the Navy accounts for “a significant proportion”, says Mr Broadbent.

It’s partially a question of future proofing operations. The Navy needs to sustain its present capability in the face of a fuel world price rise and even a rise of 1p per litre would add around £13m to the Navy’s energy bill; 2p would be equal to the cost of one whole helicopter.

The difficulty is that the impact of any increase gets leveraged upward. Mr Broadbent explains: “We tend not to call into our local petrol station to fill up, so it costs an awful lot on top of the price of fuel to get that fuel to where it’s needed,” which after all, can be the centre of a military operation. Not only does it “almost cost more than the fuel to get the fuel there”, he says, it spirals up further if you also have to protect the delivery tanker.

There are other factors. While the Navy now has to bear part of the Government’s emissions-reduction target, this sensitivity is pragmatic because the Navy does need assured access for peacetime manoeuvres: “We don’t want countries getting upset with us for dumping pollution in their seas,” he explains. There are also a number of bigger ships coming onstream and besides a greater fuel requirement, these new vessels also may have energy weapons on them which need powering from an onboard fuel source. Added to which, IMO Tier III emissions compliant ships are generally a little less efficient, which again impacts on fuel.

With all these points in mind, the Navy is looking at an overall 18% fossil fuel reduction and is turning to the commercial sector to help provide the “missing step” between paper concepts and real, physical and testable objects that will help gain efficiency and lower fuel bills. The reason, Mr Broadbent adds, is that MoD wishes to exploit the commercial sector’s ongoing experience in this area and faster concept-to-delivery timescales.

However, the ‘key message’ is the Ministry of Defence is looking, not for a new design of Navy “as we can’t afford to change at this stage” but for bolt on, retrofit technologies that won’t impact military capability. He points out that the commercial world is always putting some kind of fin or addition to the bow or aft to reduce drag, while in the engine room, a lot of energy goes up in hot air: “That’s not just civil servants or military commanders, its engines and electronics,” he points out, adding that a hot and glowing ship makes for both a very visible target and less than comfortable crew.

The Navy would like some software onboard to give energy advice, so it wants tools that can optimise the passage of a warship similar to the solution that is available to most commercial merchants: Mr Broadbent predicts “a lot of common ground” is to be had in this area.

“We are very interested in commercial input,” says Mr Broadbent, adding: “By that I mean we are putting real money up.”

Although this call has closed those interested in others like it can visit http://www.science.mod.uk/events/current_calls.aspx