how to rebuild US shipbuilding, and prepare for future conflicts

[johnpjones1775]

everyone who is a fan or enthusiast of the US Navy, keep moaning about the issues with US shipbuilding.
the only reasonable way to revitalize this industry is by buying smaller vessels that can be built in smaller yards.

a single basic hull form that can be mass produced, and then have different superstructures, and/or weapons/sensor packages added to that to meet specific warfare area needs.

this allows smaller yards to get in on the naval shipbuilding, encouraging them invest in their yards in order to eventually be able to build or repair larger ships in the nearish future.
of course this all has to be paired efforts to get kids to choose the requisite trades.

another thing i was thinking about, a lot of people only want expensive high capability ships, but then say that a modern naval war against china will be devasting very quickly decimating both navies, if not nearly out right destruction.

this way once the burkes, and ticos, and perspective connies, are all mostly sunk, or being repaired, we have lower end ships to fall back on to contest control of sea lanes, or even control sea lanes because the chinese fleet won't have the ships themselves to contest control.

not to mention as it is, even if we fight and win, with a small advantage numerically, and a major advantage in over all capabilities, china would blow us out of the water with the pace that they repair damaged ships, and new builds.

so having a larger pool of shipyards to build something of some naval use, we can either compete or significantly slow down the chinese advantage.

i would also advocate a short active service life with a focus on them living even longer lives in the reserve fleet. after a potential war, these OPVs/corvettes/FACs could be reactivated and refurbished in short order. one potential draw back to this is, maybe china strikes the basins these ships are stored in, in reserve...but that seems like a low return strike if they're trying to actually win the war.

 

[johnpjones1775]

i was initially thinking something in the 2000ish ton range, but i think using the FRC might not be a horrible starting point. at 353 tons you have an endurance of 2500nm scale it up a bit 500tons you can likely get a range/endurance of 3000nm or very close to it.

there's a large open deck on the FRC between the bridge and the mk38, this as is should be able to fit at least 4 ASM launchers, or a pair of SVTT on either side with angled launchers for sono-buoys. there's a small boat ramp aft, that could be used to deploy a UUV or USV for ASW or ASuW.

replace the mk38 with phalanx or SEARAM for some air self defense capability. on the larger hullform you might be able to maintain a mk38 and either gun or missile based CIWS.

 

[greedo]

Phalanx weighs 5x the MK38. Not sure the ship can support that. Plus the RPS-42 is pretty short ranged for air defense.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Phalanx weighs 5x the MK38. Not sure the ship can support that. Plus the RPS-42 is pretty short ranged for air defense.

Phalanx is a pretty short ranged system, and it’s radar would probably be the primary air radar.

Weight of mount not much of a problem, build the ships with stronger decks in that area.

 

[Deleted member 29851]

a single basic hull form that can be mass produced, and then have different superstructures, and/or weapons/sensor packages added to that to meet specific warfare area needs.

You’re describing SEAMOD or SSES. But that said, how much variation will there be I the fleet by 2040? Nearly the entire fleet will run on some version of SPY-6, everything will have Mk41 or VPMs, etc. I don’t think we need a modular warship for fleet action.

another thing i was thinking about, a lot of people only want expensive high capability ships, but then say that a modern naval war against china will be devasting very quickly decimating both navies, if not nearly out right destruction.

How much more austere can you go than a Constellation? You can absolutely reduce the payload, but the 3-antenna EASR can’t be simplified. I’d be incredibly weary of switching to the single rotating set.

replace the mk38 with phalanx or SEARAM for some air self defense capability. on the larger hullform you might be able to maintain a mk38 and either gun or missile based CIWS.

You’re talking about Burkes getting sunk and your solution is to make the ships even less capable?

I fully agree there’s a need for a high-low mix in the fleet - so the high end fleet can fight the war, and the low end fleet can hunt pirates.

All this does is give increasingly diminishing fiscal returns. Let’s optimistically say you can build these for $600M a hull. That’s a fair estimate because that’s what a base LCS hull cost in FY18.

You can get 2 for the price of 1 Constellation. I’d rather buy the Constellation, at least that won’t explode when something looks at it wrong.

this allows smaller yards to get in on the naval shipbuilding, encouraging them invest in their yards in order to eventually be able to build or repair larger ships in the nearish future.
of course this all has to be paired efforts to get kids to choose the requisite trades.

What smaller yards? Philly is allergic to naval shipbuilding, none of the Gulf yards are big enough, and there’s nothing on the West Coast.

so having a larger pool of shipyards to build something of some naval use, we can either compete or significantly slow down the chinese advantage.

We’re never going to be able to compete with the PLAN’s numerical advantage, the same way we couldn’t with the VMF. Our only solution is to build better ships and give them better crews. American shipbuilding can and will be more efficient, but we will never have anything to rival the size or cost-effectiveness of East Asian yards.

Also one last additional point I want to make; I see absolutely no reason to revive shipbuilding for commercial ships.

 

[johnpjones1775]

You’re describing SEAMOD or SSES. But that said, how much variation will there be I the fleet by 2040? Nearly the entire fleet will run on some version of SPY-6, everything will have Mk41 or VPMs, etc. I don’t think we need a modular warship for fleet action.


How much more austere can you go than a Constellation? You can absolutely reduce the payload, but the 3-antenna EASR can’t be simplified. I’d be incredibly weary of switching to the single rotating set.


You’re talking about Burkes getting sunk and your solution is to make the ships even less capable?

I fully agree there’s a need for a high-low mix in the fleet - so the high end fleet can fight the war, and the low end fleet can hunt pirates.

All this does is give increasingly diminishing fiscal returns. Let’s optimistically say you can build these for $600M a hull. That’s a fair estimate because that’s what a base LCS hull cost in FY18.

You can get 2 for the price of 1 Constellation. I’d rather buy the Constellation, at least that won’t explode when something looks at it wrong.


What smaller yards? Philly is allergic to naval shipbuilding, none of the Gulf yards are big enough, and there’s nothing on the West Coast.


We’re never going to be able to compete with the PLAN’s numerical advantage, the same way we couldn’t with the VMF. Our only solution is to build better ships and give them better crews. American shipbuilding can and will be more efficient, but we will never have anything to rival the size or cost-effectiveness of East Asian yards.

Also one last additional point I want to make; I see absolutely no reason to revive shipbuilding for commercial ships.

It’s like you didn’t even read the actual posts i made.

The FRC prototype contract was $88million, so maybe $95-$100million per hull for an enlarged version. Not even close to your $600m estimate.

If China wants to waste missiles shooting at 500ton missile boats and subchasers, that will drain their missile stocks significantly, quite possibly saving several high end ships.
If we built small FACs and corvettes we very well could rival the raw size of the PLAN since the overwhelming majority of their fleet is currently small vessels of 4k tons or less.

What smaller yards? Well idk the name of it off the top of my head, but there’s one about 20-30minutes south of New Haven that could likely handle this.
Vigor industrial in Portland is one.
Sparrow point/tradepoint Atlantic is another one in Maryland.

There’s literally a dozen or more yards that repair/build yatchs in the US that can take on such a project.

 

[Ozair]

everyone who is a fan or enthusiast of the US Navy, keep moaning about the issues with US shipbuilding.
the only reasonable way to revitalize this industry is by buying smaller vessels that can be built in smaller yards.

a single basic hull form that can be mass produced, and then have different superstructures, and/or weapons/sensor packages added to that to meet specific warfare area needs.

this allows smaller yards to get in on the naval shipbuilding, encouraging them invest in their yards in order to eventually be able to build or repair larger ships in the nearish future.
of course this all has to be paired efforts to get kids to choose the requisite trades.

another thing i was thinking about, a lot of people only want expensive high capability ships, but then say that a modern naval war against china will be devasting very quickly decimating both navies, if not nearly out right destruction.

this way once the burkes, and ticos, and perspective connies, are all mostly sunk, or being repaired, we have lower end ships to fall back on to contest control of sea lanes, or even control sea lanes because the chinese fleet won't have the ships themselves to contest control.

not to mention as it is, even if we fight and win, with a small advantage numerically, and a major advantage in over all capabilities, china would blow us out of the water with the pace that they repair damaged ships, and new builds.

so having a larger pool of shipyards to build something of some naval use, we can either compete or significantly slow down the chinese advantage.

i would also advocate a short active service life with a focus on them living even longer lives in the reserve fleet. after a potential war, these OPVs/corvettes/FACs could be reactivated and refurbished in short order. one potential draw back to this is, maybe china strikes the basins these ships are stored in, in reserve...but that seems like a low return strike if they're trying to actually win the war.

The CAVASHIPS most recent podcast covered the LCS and one of the key lessons learned provided by the guests was on how much advantage is provided by the standard power and cooling interfaces that are available on the LCS for the mission modules. This was a recommendation going forward and allowed the LCS to host different configurations with minimal fuss. Also mentioned how much the LCS will be involved in hybrid warfare using unmanned assets going forward.

Based on what you're suggesting though this sounds like the Future Unmanned Surface Vessel to me. I see no reason why the USN couldn't bulk out the fleet that way and it appears the USN is looking now at the medium sized vessel.

“The Future USV program will be an open ocean, 25+ knot, high endurance, non-exquisite, autonomous vessel,” according to the solicitation. “The vessel will be built to commercial standards and will provide the interfaces, payload deck area, and support for two forty-foot equivalent unit (FEU) containerized payloads, each weighing 80,000 lbs.”

Navy to host industry for talks about 'Future Unmanned Surface Vessel' program - Breaking Defense

The industry day will take place in Washington, DC, on June 17.

breakingdefense.com

Could easily leverage the JQL, the Mk70 and could mod the MK70 to use ESSM instead of SM-6 and Tomahawk. Four cells buys you 16 ESSM which would be really handy to have attached to a larger vessel for point defense.

What Saronic is trying to do seems the pathway forward. https://news.usni.org/2025/04/16/saronic-buys-louisiana-shipyard-to-build-larger-autonomous-vessels

 

[johnpjones1775]

For a subchaser variant, SVTT on the open foredeck, in between the mounts sonobouy launchers.
On the boat ramp a sonar/suicide UUV, basically a loitering torpedo.

 

[Ozair]

For a subchaser variant, SVTT on the open foredeck, in between the mounts sonobouy launchers.
On the boat ramp a sonar/suicide UUV, basically a loitering torpedo.

Makes sense. Could also deploy a landing pad across the payload containers and operate a dipping sonar buoy drone like this

 

[johnpjones1775]

Makes sense. Could also deploy a landing pad across the payload containers and operate a dipping sonar buoy drone like this

for a flight deck would probably need a 1k ton vessel at least

 

[johnpjones1775]

An interesting tactic for electric boat to expand their manufacturing/production space.

https://www.ctinsider.com/business/article/ct-electric-boat-crystal-mall-waterford-20397500.php

 

[Ozair]

for a flight deck would probably need a 1k ton vessel at least

Had a look at the USV Mariner, it has a full load displacement of approx 700 tons and potentially could host a flight deck capable of handling a medium UAV like the UMS Skeldar. An article from a couple of years ago discussing UAVs and ASW. Would probably need to extend out the deck either side of the vessel but that isn't rocket science.

Up in the above 1t section you have something like the Damen Game Changer Yacht which has similar length and width dimensions to the Mariner but clearly a heavier more capable vessel.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Had a look at the USV Mariner, it has a full load displacement of approx 700 tons and potentially could host a flight deck capable of handling a medium UAV like the UMS Skeldar. An article from a couple of years ago discussing UAVs and ASW. Would probably need to extend out the deck either side of the vessel but that isn't rocket science.

Up in the above 1t section you have something like the Damen Game Changer Yacht which has similar length and width dimensions to the Mariner but clearly a heavier more capable vessel.

Yes for smaller drones you need less space, I was talking about handling medium lift aircraft.

 

[aonestudio]

Challenging China's Shipbulding Dominance

China has become the most dominant player in the shipbuilding industry since World War II, when American builders like Henry Kaiser cranked out thous...

maritime-executive.com

 

[Dilandu]

because the chinese fleet won't have the ships themselves to contest control.

Erm. You realize, that PLAN is about twice as numerous as USN? And they have significant reserve of older and auxilary units, they could activate, if required (they have manpower and money to keep their reserve in actually working conditions)?

 

[Dilandu]

If China wants to waste missiles shooting at 500ton missile boats and subchasers, that will drain their missile stocks significantly, quite possibly saving several high end ships.

They would use cheap drones & low-cost missiles against such targets.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Erm. You realize, that PLAN is about twice as numerous as USN? And they have significant reserve of older and auxilary units, they could activate, if required (they have manpower and money to keep their reserve in actually working conditions)?

And we could reactivated some of our ships in reserve as well, but would you rather have a 60+ year old ship that’s been reactivated, that is essentially a WWII gunboat, or very early Cold War, or would you rather a modern FAC-M with a modern CIWS at the very least?

 

[johnpjones1775]

They would use cheap drones & low-cost missiles against such targets.

Not really such a thing as low cost missiles, but again that’s why I suggest phalanx. It will deal with those lower end threats.

 

[Dilandu]

And we could reactivated some of our ships in reserve as well,

Hardly. You don't have neither trained crews to man them, nor the shipyard capacity to restore them in reasonable time. Just imagine the amount of work any of retired "Ticonderoga"-class would require. And in terms of escort ships, USN reserve is basically down to seven remaining "Oliver Hazard Perry"-class frigates and a few prototype LCS ships.

Not really such a thing as low cost missiles,

You are a bit behind the curve, I'm afraid.

but again that’s why I suggest phalanx. It will deal with those lower end threats.

Phalanx is better than nothing solution, frankly.

 

[johnpjones1775]

They would use cheap drones & low-cost missiles against such targets.

Not really such a thing as low cost missiles, but again that’s why I suggest phalanx. It will deal with those lower end threats

Hardly. You don't have neither trained crews to man them, nor the shipyard capacity to restore them in reasonable time. Just imagine the amount of work any of retired "Ticonderoga"-class would require. And in terms of escort ships, USN reserve is basically down to seven remaining "Oliver Hazard Perry"-class frigates and a few prototype LCS ships.


You are a bit behind the curve, I'm afraid.


Phalanx is better than nothing solution, frankly.

…so we don’t have crews to man reserve ticos, even though we have people currently on ticos, but China has people to man their 60+ year old reserve corvettes and gunboats, and their 40+ year old designed destroyers and frigate that they no longer use?

 

[Ozair]

Not really such a thing as low cost missiles, but again that’s why I suggest phalanx. It will deal with those lower end threats

Anduril is touting the Barracuda 500 at 200k per missile which means other nations could get to that point as well. LRASM is a 1000lb warhead at over 3mill a missile so would notionally need 10 Barracuda 500 to replace one LRASM. Arguably more missiles with smaller warheads might result in a higher chance of a mission kill and far more likely to be used on smaller platforms that one LRASM.

 

[Kat Tsun]

Erm. You realize, that PLAN is about twice as numerous as USN? And they have significant reserve of older and auxilary units, they could activate, if required (they have manpower and money to keep their reserve in actually working conditions)?

Yeah, I don't think people outside of current DOD planning staffs fully understand the depth of the manpower disparity. The good news is that takes a long time to get up and running. Months, at least.

Not really such a thing as low cost missiles, but again that’s why I suggest phalanx. It will deal with those lower end threats.

Nobody is sailing a Cyclone up to a Chinese Type 22 and strafing it with gunfire lol.

The low cost missile is LRASM. If you make enough, they will be cheap, so it's only a matter of perceived need. DOD and Congress have been working to double production rates of both JASSM and LRASM since DOD finished the 2022 wargames. The hard part is getting enough production in place before the war starts and ensuring it's enough that you can cover the actual quantity of weapons used.

If you come up short, you run out of missiles a couple weeks or months into the war, and then the U.S. has to start falling back on tit-for-tat nuclear weapons use. The good news is that probably won't lead to a countervalue exchange, though.

Anduril is touting the Barracuda 500 at 200k per missile which means other nations could get to that point as well. LRASM is a 1000lb warhead at over 3mill a missile so would notionally need 10 Barracuda 500 to replace one LRASM. Arguably more missiles with smaller warheads might result in a higher chance of a mission kill and far more likely to be used on smaller platforms that one LRASM.

Comparing LRASM to Barracuda is like comparing a Tomahawk to a TOW or a Javelin. Sure, they can both kill tanks I guess? The bulk of unit costs are from tests, certifications, and quality control being amortized over small (double digit) annual production runs. JSM would probably be under $200,000 if you ordered 10,000 a year too, I guess.

Barracuda isn't substantially different from other missiles of its class like RBS-15 Mk IV, JSM, or SLAM-ER. It trades warhead for range which is kind of stupid though. That's why nobody is hugely interested in it as a cruise missile. It could make a cool decoy but its payload is too small to be a useful anti-ship weapon.

 

[Dilandu]

…so we don’t have crews to man reserve ticos, even though we have people currently on ticos, but China has people to man their 60+ year old reserve corvettes and gunboats, and their 40+ year old designed destroyers and frigate that they no longer use?

To put it simply - yes. The PLAN have significant personnel reserves (not counting the marine militia), while USN reserves are much more limited.

 

[Dilandu]

Barracuda isn't substantially different from other missiles of its class like RBS Mk IV, JSM, or SLAM-ER. It just trades warhead for range which is kind of stupid.

Not exactly, it's main point is being optimized to mass-production in terms of tools and components. Basically, it could be made mainly from either off-the-shelf or easily obtainable components, using a small number of standard and common tools. The idea is, that it would allow to drastically increase production, if needed, by producing missiles on basically any mechanical factory.

 

[Ozair]

Comparing LRASM to Barracuda is like comparing a Tomahawk to a TOW or a Javelin. Sure, they can both kill tanks I guess? The bulk of unit costs are from tests, certifications, and quality control being amortized over small (double digit) annual production runs. JSM would probably be under $200,000 if you ordered 10,000 a year too, I guess.

I think you missed the point. You don't need a LRASM to kill everything in the AO, a Barracuda M size and cost missile will be sufficient. Like most things coming from Anduril you need to take what they are proposing with a hefty dose of salt but, in the context of the discussion being had where the target was defined as a 500t missile boat or subchaser, it is certainly a suitable low cost missile against a viable target set.

Barracuda isn't substantially different from other missiles of its class like RBS-15 Mk IV, JSM, or SLAM-ER. It trades warhead for range which is kind of stupid though. That's why nobody is hugely interested in it as a cruise missile. It could make a cool decoy but its payload is too small to be a useful anti-ship weapon.

If the ship you are intending to hit is a major surface combatant then I arguably agree, although a hell of a lot of factors that would influence that, but as stated above that isn't the target set being discussed.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Yeah, I don't think people outside of current DOD planning staffs fully understand the depth of the manpower disparity. The good news is that takes a long time to get up and running. Months, at least.



Nobody is sailing a Cyclone up to a Chinese Type 22 and strafing it with gunfire lol.

The low cost missile is LRASM. If you make enough, they will be cheap, so it's only a matter of perceived need. DOD and Congress have been working to double production rates of both JASSM and LRASM since DOD finished the 2022 wargames. The hard part is getting enough production in place before the war starts and ensuring it's enough that you can cover the actual quantity of weapons used.

If you come up short, you run out of missiles a couple weeks or months into the war, and then the U.S. has to start falling back on tit-for-tat nuclear weapons use. The good news is that probably won't lead to a countervalue exchange, though.



Comparing LRASM to Barracuda is like comparing a Tomahawk to a TOW or a Javelin. Sure, they can both kill tanks I guess? The bulk of unit costs are from tests, certifications, and quality control being amortized over small (double digit) annual production runs. JSM would probably be under $200,000 if you ordered 10,000 a year too, I guess.

Barracuda isn't substantially different from other missiles of its class like RBS-15 Mk IV, JSM, or SLAM-ER. It trades warhead for range which is kind of stupid though. That's why nobody is hugely interested in it as a cruise missile. It could make a cool decoy but its payload is too small to be a useful anti-ship weapon.

No one said anything about cyclones now did they?

We’re talking about something in the same class as a visby class ‘corvette’

 

[aonestudio]

U.S. Shipbuilding, Maritime Dominance Requires a New Ecosystem

With all the Legislative fanfare, Executive Orders, Committee meetings, lobbying efforts and media announcements concerning American Shipbuilding…

www.marinelink.com

 

[Kat Tsun]

No one said anything about cyclones now did they?

We’re talking about something in the same class as a visby class ‘corvette’

Which is essentially a Cyclone, as far as survivability and seaworthiness are concerned, so it would be fine in the Caribbean or Gulf of Mexico I guess?

The lesson of LCS is that the U.S. Navy can't really afford small ships. Both practically, as a matter of combat survivability, and economically as a matter of cost and manning. It should just order another dozen Burkes (to replace the SLEPs), cut the Connie and LPD-17 orders if they have to (6 LHA-6 and 6 LX(R) would be fine), and call it a day while riding out the window to DDG(X)'s 50 hulls or whatever.

There isn't really time to accelerate or design new vessels for the USN in the short term. We will likely have another Pacific War within 2-5 years. Zumwalt pretty much exterminated major surface combatant construction in the United States and LCS did away with minor surface combatant. It's all Burkes forever now, until DDG(X) shows up and makes it all Mayas or Sejong the Great, I guess.

Subs and carriers are okay though, and they're the only ships that matter, so that's good.

I think you missed the point. You don't need a LRASM to kill everything in the AO, a Barracuda M size and cost missile will be sufficient.

As I said, a JSM would likely be similar unit costs at similar ordered numbers, and is actually in inventory. Establishing a new production line of a certified weapon is likely cheaper than an entirely new weapon, as the current European arms acceleration proves, and if the US were willing to give concessions it could likely secure a European built production facility in the United States for JSMs.

Like most things coming from Anduril you need to take what they are proposing with a hefty dose of salt but, in the context of the discussion being had where the target was defined as a 500t missile boat or subchaser, it is certainly a suitable low cost missile against a viable target set.

Joint Strike Missile already exists and this is its entire target set. It was designed to replace the Penguin.

If the ship you are intending to hit is a major surface combatant then I arguably agree, although a hell of a lot of factors that would influence that, but as stated above that isn't the target set being discussed.

JSM has a 200 lbs warhead and a range of 300 nmi. Kongsberg makes very good missiles.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Which is essentially a Cyclone, as far as survivability and seaworthiness are concerned, so it would be fine in the Caribbean or Gulf of Mexico I guess?

The lesson of LCS is that the U.S. Navy can't really afford small ships. Both practically, as a matter of combat survivability, and economically as a matter of cost and manning. It should just order another dozen Burkes (to replace the SLEPs), cut the Connie and LPD-17 orders if they have to (6 LHA-6 and 6 LX(R) would be fine), and call it a day while riding out the window to DDG(X)'s 50 hulls or whatever.

There isn't really time to accelerate or design new vessels for the USN in the short term. We will likely have another Pacific War within 2-5 years. Zumwalt pretty much exterminated major surface combatant construction in the United States and LCS did away with minor surface combatant. It's all Burkes forever now, until DDG(X) shows up and makes it all Mayas or Sejong the Great, I guess.

Subs and carriers are okay though, and they're the only ships that matter, so that's good.



As I said, a JSM would likely be similar unit costs at similar ordered numbers, and is actually in inventory. Establishing a new production line of a certified weapon is likely cheaper than an entirely new weapon, as the current European arms acceleration proves, and if the US were willing to give concessions it could likely secure a European built production facility in the United States for JSMs.



Joint Strike Missile already exists and this is its entire target set. It was designed to replace the Penguin.



JSM has a 200 lbs warhead and a range of 300 nmi. Kongsberg makes very good missiles.

What? Where are you getting this idea that the US can’t afford small ships?

The argument of survivability is a red herring to begin with because mission kills are not hard to achieve. Sinking a ship is great, but unnecessary to win.

Cyclones sailed themselves from the US to the gulf, so not sure where this idea they can only operate in coastal areas comes from, but the fight against China would likely be a pretty littoral fight anyway, so it’s no problem even if these hypothetical ships were only good for shallow waters.

No time to design and build another major combatant no, but plenty of time to design and build another small fleet of FAC-Ms.

 

[Kat Tsun]

What? Where are you getting this idea that the US can’t afford small ships?

The part where it's been trying for about 30 years to build small ships and failing consistently at it.

The argument of survivability is a red herring to begin with because mission kills are not hard to achieve. Sinking a ship is great, but unnecessary to win.

LCS just burns and the crew becomes POWs. A mission killed ship can be repaired or at least leave the battle area. If the assumption is that a ship can't be repaired, that suggests even larger ships which can fight hurt are preferable, rather than smaller ones which simply sink.

There's an argument for a robotic FAC or something but the state of US shipbuilding makes this dubious. That should be left to the Japanese.

Cyclones sailed themselves from the US to the gulf, so not sure where this idea they can only operate in coastal areas comes from, but the fight against China would likely be a pretty littoral fight anyway, so it’s no problem even if these hypothetical ships were only good for shallow waters.

I forgot the Cyclones could match their namesake. How many Cyclones remain in Navy service?

Anyway, it would be a deep ocean fight for the surface navy because there's no real way to breach the SCS for surface combatants, even small ones. By the time it becomes a "littoral" fight, the war is essentially over, so it's probably not really a big deal to sail a Burke within gunnery range of the shore. It may even be optimal given the presence of shore-based anti-ship batteries honestly. What happened to HSV-2 is indicative of LCS so going smaller is just giving free kill marks to the PLANAF.

The littoral forces in theater will just be the ROCN and maybe the JMSDF. Without the Japanese the U.S. can't actually protect Taiwan though. If those aren't enough to stop the PLAN (they likely won't be), the addition of a dozen or so more anti-ship missile targets like the PGMs/Visby/whatever won't be either.

It would be "smarter" to forward base Burkes but the assumption is 7th Fleet is just going to die and 3rd Fleet will finish off the PLAN tbh. SUBPAC will probably survive but they might need to shift to Diego Garcia or Pearl if the tenders get killed. That would be rough. The subs also need deeper magazines from either cruise missiles or torpedoes. The Block V 774s will fix part of that at least and maybe making a half-sized electric ADCAP would help.

None of that suggests the U.S. needs to stand up a littoral FAC force. It's not that kind of navy. Maybe if it loses the next world war and China takes over the world it'll build one for Caribbean and Gulf of America policing though. Just like how the European navies went from battleships and dreadnoughts to OPVs and guided missile corvettes when America took over the world.

No time to design and build another major combatant no, but plenty of time to design and build another small fleet of FAC-Ms.

LCS took longer than the Connies to submit RFIs and begin construction.

LCS: 2001-2008.
FFG: 2018-2024.

America's economy is designed to build bigger ships because the tiny yards that LCS and other small ships hoped to take advantage of are simply not competitive with the Burke assembly line. They've shown that with the Freedom and Independence classes. The biggest issue with the Connies atm is the same people who failed to deliver the LCS on time and on budget are responsible for the FFGs.

FFG-62 is just about the minimum viable combatant the US can make that's actually worth building and that's debatable. The workload demanded might be unsustainable for the FY25 shipbuilding program since they want a re-run of the Perries now.

The Sentinel WPCs took almost as long as the LCS class to go from award to afloat and that was a literal MOTS design from Damen lol. The indigenous WPCs were so bad the Coast Guard told Northrop to throw the plans in the trash.

 

[johnpjones1775]

The part where it's been trying for about 30 years to build small ships and failing consistently at it.



LCS just burns and the crew becomes POWs. A mission killed ship can be repaired or at least leave the battle area. If the assumption is that a ship can't be repaired, that suggests even larger ships which can fight hurt are preferable, rather than smaller ones which simply sink.

There's an argument for a robotic FAC or something but the state of US shipbuilding makes this dubious. That should be left to the Japanese.



I forgot the Cyclones could match their namesake. How many Cyclones remain in Navy service?

Anyway, it would be a deep ocean fight for the surface navy because there's no real way to breach the SCS for surface combatants, even small ones. By the time it becomes a "littoral" fight, the war is essentially over, so it's probably not really a big deal to sail a Burke within gunnery range of the shore. It may even be optimal given the presence of shore-based anti-ship batteries honestly. What happened to HSV-2 is indicative of LCS so going smaller is just giving free kill marks to the PLANAF.

The littoral forces in theater will just be the ROCN and maybe the JMSDF. Without the Japanese the U.S. can't actually protect Taiwan though. If those aren't enough to stop the PLAN (they likely won't be), the addition of a dozen or so more anti-ship missile targets like the PGMs/Visby/whatever won't be either.

It would be "smarter" to forward base Burkes but the assumption is 7th Fleet is just going to die and 3rd Fleet will finish off the PLAN tbh. SUBPAC will probably survive but they might need to shift to Diego Garcia or Pearl if the tenders get killed. That would be rough. The subs also need deeper magazines from either cruise missiles or torpedoes. The Block V 774s will fix part of that at least and maybe making a half-sized electric ADCAP would help.

None of that suggests the U.S. needs to stand up a littoral FAC force. It's not that kind of navy. Maybe if it loses the next world war and China takes over the world it'll build one for Caribbean and Gulf of America policing though. Just like how the European navies went from battleships and dreadnoughts to OPVs and guided missile corvettes when America took over the world.



LCS took longer than the Connies to submit RFIs and begin construction.

LCS: 2001-2008.
FFG: 2018-2024.

America's economy is designed to build bigger ships because the tiny yards that LCS and other small ships hoped to take advantage of are simply not competitive with the Burke assembly line. They've shown that with the Freedom and Independence classes. The biggest issue with the Connies atm is the same people who failed to deliver the LCS on time and on budget are responsible for the FFGs.

FFG-62 is just about the minimum viable combatant the US can make that's actually worth building and that's debatable. The workload demanded might be unsustainable for the FY25 shipbuilding program since they want a re-run of the Perries now.

The Sentinel WPCs took almost as long as the LCS class to go from award to afloat and that was a literal MOTS design from Damen lol. The indigenous WPCs were so bad the Coast Guard told Northrop to throw the plans in the trash.

The navy hasn’t remotely been trying to build small craft for own navy for the last 30 years.
A little bit beyond the arbitrary 30 year timeframe, we designed and built the badr class corvettes

The only reason we haven’t brought small ships back into our navy is because for some reason we think we’re too good for them.

The USCG proves we can build small ships like FAC-Ms and corvettes. We just don’t want them for the navy apparently

 

[Ozair]

As I said, a JSM would likely be similar unit costs at similar ordered numbers, and is actually in inventory. Establishing a new production line of a certified weapon is likely cheaper than an entirely new weapon, as the current European arms acceleration proves, and if the US were willing to give concessions it could likely secure a European built production facility in the United States for JSMs.

And do you have any evidence for that claim? USAF has ordered the missile already and the costs are an order of magnitude greater than those suggested for Barracuda. While there are clearly some fixed costs associated with that purchase to expect the JSM to approach even 1 million per round with a very high production volume is unrealistic at best.

Joint Strike Missile already exists and this is its entire target set. It was designed to replace the Penguin.

But unaffordable as stated above.

JSM has a 200 lbs warhead and a range of 300 nmi. Kongsberg makes very good missiles.

They do but it is still too expensive and bespoke compared to what Barracuda would be able to provide for what is being suggested here.

 

[johnpjones1775]

If the AGM-88 HARM could be a great option as an ASM for such a ship.
It targets radar systems specifically, pretty much guaranteeing a mission kill if it hits.

 

[Kat Tsun]

And do you have any evidence for that claim?

No.

USAF has ordered the missile already and the costs are an order of magnitude greater than those suggested for Barracuda.

The purchases are 50 a year. That's awfully high, too, but I wonder if that's related.

While there are clearly some fixed costs associated with that purchase to expect the JSM to approach even 1 million per round with a very high production volume is unrealistic at best.

Possibly. Which makes Barracuda even less believable assuming you ignore all evidence of their actual production capabilities.

Anduril has demonstrated they're not even capable of competing with RTX so I don't see any evidence they can compete with Kongsberg.

But unaffordable as stated above.

They do but it is still too expensive and bespoke compared to what Barracuda would be able to provide for what is being suggested here.

Barracuda doesn't exist. Roadrunner, however, does. It's about five times the cost of the comparable RTX system Coyote. Shocking, truly.

If the AGM-88 HARM could be a great option as an ASM for such a ship.
It targets radar systems specifically, pretty much guaranteeing a mission kill if it hits.

AARGM already exists. It's about as expensive as a Tomahawk.

 

[Ozair]

Possibly. Which makes Barracuda even less believable assuming you ignore all evidence of their actual production capabilities.

As I said above, I always take everything Anduril say with a healthy dose of salt but the intent from the start has been low cost and as much COTS use as possible. JSM and others were not conceived with that mandate. They are very much a different market segment.

Barracuda doesn't exist. Roadrunner, however, does. It's about five times the cost of the comparable RTX system Coyote. Shocking, truly.

Barracuda 100 actually flew just the other day.

https://asiapacificdefencereporter.com/barracuda-100m-completes-new-flight-test/

 

[Kat Tsun]

As I said above, I always take everything Anduril say with a healthy dose of salt but the intent from the start has been low cost and as much COTS use as possible. JSM and others were not conceived with that mandate. They are very much a different market segment.

They're the exact same "market segment": lightweight air launched medium range anti-ship cruise missile.

JSM is closer to Barracuda-500 though.

Barracuda 100 actually flew just the other day.

https://asiapacificdefencereporter.com/barracuda-100m-completes-new-flight-test/

"Existing" as in "actually entering inventory", which JSM has with multiple armed forces, but I didn't know they had a flight model tbf. I figured it was just components on a shop floor. Anyway given how Roadrunner turned out compared to Coyote I'm surprised anyone takes Anduril's stated expectations seriously.

It's possible to carve out a space in the lightweight cruise missile space but JSM's orders of "about 30 a year" means it's a hard sell.

As I said, the cheap cruise missile is LRASM and JASSM. These are produced at rates two orders of magnitude higher than JSM for similar prices. If JSM were a true bargain, and it's already better than Barracuda-500 in warhead and range, it would be the one being built at rates of "thousands" per year rather than "dozens".

There's simply no market for lightweight cruise missiles like JSM or Barracuda when LRASM is so cheap these days and getting cheaper. Anduril simply can't compete with the likes of RTX, probably not even Kongsberg, in real terms since these are established firms with industrial and engineering knowledge combined into trade processes that Anduril doesn't have and needs to learn. It'd just be Tesla all over again. A very brief period of advancement followed by rapid and immediate catchup and surpassing by legacy firms.

Missile business is cutthroat but they might be able to break into UUV/AUV marketspace by making a cheap underwater robot to kill Bluefin and Knifefish in the harbor defense role. Assuming they stop focusing on missiles and start focusing on UUVs. Assuming Anduril, headed by the guy who made the 1st generation of Oculus Rifts, can deliver a competent and well designed product first time.

Bold assumptions there.

 

[Dilandu]

There's simply no market for lightweight cruise missiles like JSM or Barracuda when LRASM is so cheap these days and getting cheaper.

The cost is only one of parameters. The ability to increase production is another. Barracuda's main selling point is that its components could be made by many non-specialized factories and accembled in regular workshops. There is no practical way LRASM could do that, it's too component-specific and complicated.

So if you need more missiles, you could increase Barracuda's production order of magnitude within the year. If you try to do this with LRASM, you would need years just to double the production.

 

[tychosis]

Missile business is cutthroat but they might be able to break into UUV/AUV marketspace by making a cheap underwater robot to kill Bluefin and Knifefish in the harbor defense role. Assuming they stop focusing on missiles and start focusing on UUVs. Assuming Anduril, headed by the guy who made the 1st generation of Oculus Rifts, can deliver a competent and well designed product first time.

My primary work is in manned submarine sonar but I've done some tertiary support on a few UUV proposals. I've seen Anduril's offerings in this space and ehhhh, they're all hat no cattle--but they say things program offices like to hear.

Now in fairness, building genuinely useful UUVs is really hard. Most of the traditional players in the space don't fare much better. Everyone struggles with it, and if the time comes that these things see regular use (and aren't just glorified science projects) then you'll see a chain of broken promises.

Full disclosure, I work for a large defense contractor so I'll be accused of trying to elbow the grifty techbros out of the space, but that isn't the case. I think everyone deserves a shot, I just think they're gonna learn some really hard lessons about working within the system when it comes time to deliver. Lessons the legitimate players learned decades ago.

 

[Kat Tsun]

My primary work is in manned submarine sonar but I've done some tertiary support on a few UUV proposals. I've seen Anduril's offerings in this space and ehhhh, they're all hat no cattle--but they say things program offices like to hear.

Now in fairness, building genuinely useful UUVs is really hard. Most of the traditional players in the space don't fare much better. Everyone struggles with it, and if the time comes that these things see regular use (and aren't just glorified science projects) then you'll see a chain of broken promises.

Full disclosure, I work for a large defense contractor so I'll be accused of trying to elbow the grifty techbros out of the space, but that isn't the case. I think everyone deserves a shot, I just think they're gonna learn some really hard lessons about working within the system when it comes time to deliver. Lessons the legitimate players learned decades ago.

Yeah, that's the trouble with startups over the long run, they have a lot of money but very little sense. Very hare and tortoise.

Anduril will probably do okay providing software in the long run, though, since that's an area where traditional primes are weak.

 

[Ozair]

They're the exact same "market segment": lightweight air launched medium range anti-ship cruise missile.

JSM is closer to Barracuda-500 though.

I don't see that as the market segment The difference these missiles have is pretty clear by their intent.

The JSM is described by Kongsberg as "high survivability against modern and future Air Defence systems" https://www.aerocontact.com/public/...talogues/92/Brochure-Joint-Strike-Missile.pdf

The Barracuda is described as "the munition configuration of Barracuda that delivers a more affordable, producible, available, and adaptable cruise missile capability than existing options available to warfighters today." https://www.anduril.com/barracuda/

The JSM is a high end weapon designed for high end threats. If we wanted to describe all cars as the same market segment, ie a mode of transport, then sure they fit together, but I don't go to the BMW dealership expecting to pay Ford costs. Barracuda is aimed at a different market and really a different target set than the JSM and that alone is the primary reason for the cost difference and the ability to manufacture at the rate Anduril projects and that JSM could almost certainly not meet.

Will Barracuda succeed? I don't know, and neither am I an investor of Anduril so don't care either way, but there is clearly an opportunity and market space for it be successful if they can deliver on the promise.

"Existing" as in "actually entering inventory", which JSM has with multiple armed forces, but I didn't know they had a flight model tbf. I figured it was just components on a shop floor. Anyway given how Roadrunner turned out compared to Coyote I'm surprised anyone takes Anduril's stated expectations seriously.


It's possible to carve out a space in the lightweight cruise missile space but JSM's orders of "about 30 a year" means it's a hard sell.

As I said, the cheap cruise missile is LRASM and JASSM. These are produced at rates two orders of magnitude higher than JSM for similar prices. If JSM were a true bargain, and it's already better than Barracuda-500 in warhead and range, it would be the one being built at rates of "thousands" per year rather than "dozens".

There's simply no market for lightweight cruise missiles like JSM or Barracuda when LRASM is so cheap these days and getting cheaper. Anduril simply can't compete with the likes of RTX, probably not even Kongsberg, in real terms since these are established firms with industrial and engineering knowledge combined into trade processes that Anduril doesn't have and needs to learn. It'd just be Tesla all over again. A very brief period of advancement followed by rapid and immediate catchup and surpassing by legacy firms.

Missile business is cutthroat but they might be able to break into UUV/AUV marketspace by making a cheap underwater robot to kill Bluefin and Knifefish in the harbor defense role. Assuming they stop focusing on missiles and start focusing on UUVs. Assuming Anduril, headed by the guy who made the 1st generation of Oculus Rifts, can deliver a competent and well designed product first time.

Bold assumptions there.

I'll leave your industrial ramblings to you.