UK plans new explosives, propellants and munitions factories. Is there a clear plan? By Paul Hough

On 19 November 2025 the UK Ministry of Defence announced that it intends to establish, or have someone else establish, six new facilities to manufacture munitions explosives and propellants. There will be a plan that justifies this initiative, however from at least one perspective it is opaque at best. Please consider some observations and questions on the announcement.

Context

Some context for the proposed factories.

Munitions

• Land forces are the largest consumer of munitions explosives and propellants particularly in the 155mm Artillery (explosives and propellants) and 120mm Tank (propellants).
• The MoD has an agreement in place with BAE System titled the Next Generation Munitions Solution (NGMS) contract. This contract effectively preserves the BAE Systems facilities at Glascoed (Fill Assemble and Pack); Washington County Durham (metal parts for ammunition) and Radway Green (Small Arms Ammunition). How will the new facilities align with this commitment?
• It is likely that the Intellectual Property for the suite of ammunition covered by NGMS is owned, mainly, by BAE Systems. The qualified sources for the energetic material are Rheinmetall (propellant) and Eurenco (explosives), amongst others.
• It is not clear what munitions the UK will have in its inventory in the future, hence the technical standard for explosives and particularly propellant, is unknown.

UK Tank and Artillery

The British Army Main Battle Tank Challenger 2 is being upgraded to Challenger 3. The key feature of the upgrade is to replace the 120mm Rifle Gun that was unique to Challenger 2 with the NATO standard 120mm Smooth Bore Gun that is produced by Rheinmetall. It is not clear what the baseline munition natures are for Challenger 3, however the UK is participating in the German programme to produce a new Kinetic Energy round and it would be reasonable to take the in service DM63 KE round from Rheinmetall, along with other natures from that suite, as the baseline for the programme. Whatever ammunition is procured for Challenger 3, the manufacturer will have its own propellant specification. There will be 148 Challenger 3 in service.

The UK AS90 155mm artillery capability has been donated to Ukraine with only a small number of Archer systems purchased as a stopgap. The UK has selected the RCH 155 as the next generation artillery system. This is the Boxer Drive Module with a 155mm remote control turret Mission Module. The ordnance for the RCH 155 is the Rheinmetall 52 calibre gun. The primary qualified charge system for that ordnance is a Rheinmetall design. The In Service Date for RCH 155 and the number of systems that will be fielded by the UK has not been made public.

The Market

Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine the major European companies have started to build new munitions facilities across the continent. For example Rheinmetall has announced new explosive and propellant plants in Germany, Romania, Hungary and Spain. It is not alone in this investment programme that is backed by national and EU funding.

Observations on the UK announcement

Below are some statements extracted from the UK MoD announcement published on 19 November 2025. I have added the bold text and some questions and observations:

1. UK government is acting on the Strategic Defence Review’s recommendations by investing in an ‘always on’ pipeline for munitions including building at least six new energetics and munitions factories in the UK.

• How will ‘always on’ be maintained? The lack of consistent and sufficient demand from UK MoD led to the closure of the UK propellant and explosive facilities at Bishopton1 and Bridgwater in early 2000s. What has changed? The UK demand from 155mm and 120mm is unknown and may not sustain the required ‘always on’ status.
• The materiel listed in the announcement covers the source elements of explosives and propellants. It does not define any end product. The materiel quoted in the announcement does not include any munitions.
• Why six factories?
• How will the UK facilities align with the supply chain that is being established in Europe?

2. Additionally, the Authority welcomes expressions of interest from consumers who wish to establish a supply of these materials for current facilities (domestic or exports) or aim to establish a capability in the UK which will rely on them.

• If ‘consumers’ are businesses that design manufacture and sell munitions; what is the business case for such consumers to qualify UK facilities as part of their supply chain?

3. The MoD aims to achieve this through a coherent set of significant multi-year investments in onshore energetic materials synthesis through UK-based or overseas-based suppliers. These investments will typically form part, but not all, of the funding required for the establishment of a facility.

• UK MoD expects businesses to invest in these plants.

4. Companies with established order books/markets will be prioritised. Proposals must demonstrate that they are economically and technically viable to progress.

• A company must have an established order book and the UK facilities are presumably a second source of the materiel, given that the order book would not be deliverable without a qualified supply chain.
• Is the order book for the materials set out in the announcement or the end explosive and propellants.

5. Consideration should also be given to:

• The scale of the proposed facility and the market demand required to support it:
• Proposals should assume a range of scenarios such as surge demand and reduced or minimal UK MoD demand.
• Other offtakes, such as exports and civilian markets, should be considered and are expected to form the majority of the demand signal. UK government, via the MoD’s Defence Exports team, will actively support export campaigns.
• Economic viability including fluctuating demand and market prices.
  • Proposals should be economically viable as further support funding for facilities is not envisioned.
• The level of investment required (VROM) and how this will be raised:
  • Including internal company investment and external venture capital
  • It is expected that MoD funding will not form the majority of funding for proposals.

Observation.

• The UK is seeking to establish an energetic materials manufacturing capability where the business case in primarily built on demand from customers other than the UK.
• This onshore capability is mandated in the Strategic Defence Review and is entirely dependent upon a business case that at first glance must be considered risky.

Is there a plan?

I am just an observer of issues relating to the UK and European defence industrial base. I acknowledge that there may well be a robust business case to underpin the six factories that I cannot see from my perspective. More information is no doubt available to potential investors. However, it is reasonable to question whether to date the UK MoD has presented a convincing argument to the public for an investment of any tax payers money. Given the demands that defence is placing, and will continue to place, on the nations finances it is incumbent on UK MoD to close what appears to be gaps in its case.

I hope there is a plan, cunning or otherwise, that survives first contact with reality.