How to fix USN shipbuilding

[Colonial-Marine]

Sort of a general topic here, and I hope this is the best spot for it. My question is how one would fix the miserable state that shipbuilding for the USN is in. I've got to assume commercial shipbuilding has suffered greatly as well due to many of the same conditions. It sounds like there aren't enough welders and other skilled workers, aren't enough shipyards, and most of the major programs for surface combatants in recent years have been disasters. FFG(X), now the FFG-62 Constellation class was supposed to be a relatively easy development based off an existing design. Now you hear about nothing but delays and price increases for it and it seems like the extent of the changes the Navy wants are very significant. What benefit was there with starting with something "off-the-shelf" by this point? The base FREMM class frigates seem like pretty capable ships on their own.

Then there was DDG-1000 which was supposed to incorporating all sorts of impressive new systems. But it went from an originally planned 32 hulls in the DD-21 days, down to 3, with the Advanced Gun System that was one of their purposes getting cancelled. I guess they'll be useful testbeds and platforms for those hypersonic missiles, but far from what was originally envisioned. So now we're back to building Burkes. Flight III improvements aside there are a few areas in which the design is a bit dated. And then there were the many issues with the whole LCS program. Or all of the problems with the CVN-78 class even though in a general sense it is an evolution of the CVN-68 (Nimitz) class.

DDG(X) is still something around 8 years out from the first one which seems like an absurdly long timeline. Programs for a larger surface combatant perhaps deserving of the cruiser term are consistently cancelled.

Seems like an absolute mess to me. Where does someone even begin addressing it all?

 

[Desertfox]

Simple, pay workers more.

 

[Dilandu]

First of all, do NOT order ships before project is completed.

Second, do NOT allow Navy to change already approved project after it was ordered - at least without Congressional specific approval & good justification.

Third, order a single prototype first. Test it, and only order a series AFTER you are satisfied with prototype performance.

 

[yeetmahboi]

Sipbuilding in the US is simply unprofitable for large yards. At least for small and mid size builders they have a commercial sector to fall upon. So does the Koreans. The Chinese yards is building so much because their navy is expanding, so no boom-bust cycle in sight.

It's a bad mess, really.

 

[Lc89]

The Jones act.

 

[Dilandu]

The Chinese yards is building so much because their navy is expanding, so no boom-bust cycle in sight.

They also have the largest commercial shipbuilding sector in the world, and also they started to export their warships quite efficiently. Pakistan ordered four Type 054A frigates from China in 2017, and all four were delivered by mid-2023.

 

[yeetmahboi]

They also have the largest commercial shipbuilding sector in the world, and also they started to export their warships quite efficiently. Pakistan ordered four Type 054A frigates from China in 2017, and all four were delivered by mid-2023.

Exactly. Their large yards can rely on commercial orders to keep the money flow. Essentially the same situation as the Korean yards.

 

[Yellow Palace]

The Jones act.

Hasn't worked for the last century, won't make a difference now.

Simple, pay workers more.

Not just pay, but also job security. A dwindling order book means that the workforce loses confidence in actually having a job after the next ship. Once those workers get into a job that pays them more and which has a future, good luck getting them back.

That's also a standard cause of technical problems: when you lose the skilled designers and engineers, you can't design new ships. That caused the Royal Navy huge problems from the 1920s onwards.

The resulting long design and build cycles then mean that technology moves on, the customer demands changes, and it's all delayed even more.

 

[Lc89]

Hasn't worked for the last century, won't make a difference now.

Not just pay, but also job security. A dwindling order book means that the workforce loses confidence in actually having a job after the next ship. Once those workers get into a job that pays them more and which has a future, good luck getting them back.

That's also a standard cause of technical problems: when you lose the skilled designers and engineers, you can't design new ships. That caused the Royal Navy huge problems from the 1920s onwards.

The resulting long design and build cycles then mean that technology moves on, the customer demands changes, and it's all delayed even more.

In the sense that this law ended up destroying US shipyards instead of preserving them. If there were no US Navy and Coast Guard, these shipyards would have closed long ago. China is also fearsome because it has a huge merchant marine, with civilian ships built in the same shipyards where they build PLAN ships. South Korea has built ships for the Philippine Navy. Since ships built in US shipyards are more expensive than those built in Asia (and here cheap labor only matters for China, not Japan, South Korea and Taiwan), the United States could not want to build so many ships for an allied country. If American shipyards were like those in Korea or Europe, they would be able to build diesel electric submarines not for their own navy, but to export to allies.

 

[Hood]

If American shipyards were like those in Korea or Europe, they would be able to build diesel electric submarines not for their own navy, but to export to allies.

Agreed, in theory the US should have picked up a large slice of the world export market in warships. Instead its sold lots of systems like Mk.41, missiles and SPY radars for overseas shipuilders to fit, but none of that has fed back into the domestic shipbuilding industry.
On the other side of the coin, a lot of nations want to preserve their national warship building capability so this may have been unavoidable anyway to some extent, but certainly there is a tier of well-off nations without domestic shipbuilding capabilities that could have been attracted to buy US ships from US builders.

 

[TinWing]

Agreed, in theory the US should have picked up a large slice of the world export market in warships. Instead its sold lots of systems like Mk.41, missiles and SPY radars for overseas shipuilders to fit, but none of that has fed back into the domestic shipbuilding industry.
On the other side of the coin, a lot of nations want to preserve their national warship building capability so this may have been unavoidable anyway to some extent, but certainly there is a tier of well-off nations without domestic shipbuilding capabilities that could have been attracted to buy US ships from US builders.

There's a lot more profit for contractors, and better value for the tax payer and society in general, in concentrating on the high value systems for export while leaving the actual metalwork of shipbuilding to experienced foreigners.

There is absolutely nothing to recommend American shipyards or their workforces. We recently had workers sabotaging welds in naval vessels for crying out loud. Having actually seen our shipyards, I'm horrified by how backward the industry has become. It's reached the point where even the yards themselves are in the wrong areas demographically. Skilled welders and electricians desperately don't want to move to Connecticutt and advertising at NASCAR races won't change that. Moreover, the best skilled tradesman can do better by working for themselves or in the building trades than to move away from their families to become union shift workers. Remember how the Moscow building boom lured the skilled Russian shipyard workers away? The same is true in our society. Sure, you could launch apprenticeship and vocational programs targeting disadvantaged urban youths in Connecticutt and surrounding states. Sadly, the truly capable ones would just move south as soon as they were fully qualified as electricians, plumbers and welders.

 

[TinWing]

In the sense that this law ended up destroying US shipyards instead of preserving them. If there were no US Navy and Coast Guard, these shipyards would have closed long ago. China is also fearsome because it has a huge merchant marine, with civilian ships built in the same shipyards where they build PLAN ships. South Korea has built ships for the Philippine Navy. Since ships built in US shipyards are more expensive than those built in Asia (and here cheap labor only matters for China, not Japan, South Korea and Taiwan), the United States could not want to build so many ships for an allied country. If American shipyards were like those in Korea or Europe, they would be able to build diesel electric submarines not for their own navy, but to export to allies.

As I recollect, the Germans have lost a lot of money building diesel submarines for export and the general state of their shipbuilding sector has become very poor indeed. It's worth noting that the German Navy's F126 class was designed in the Netherland and hulls are building in Romania. In the future, Germany will be competing for submarine export orders with countries like South Korea and even Turkey for orders. Even as far as South Korea, I'm shocked how they've lost marketshare to China in area such as cranes to offload containers ships. Shipbuilding isn't an easy or immensely lucrative business.

 

[Hood]

It's reached the point where even the yards themselves are in the wrong areas demographically.

Shipyards have the snag of having to be near the coast. And if your coastal areas are economically backward then you do have a problem. Much the same in the UK, the majority of major coastal areas are either terribly run down (Barrow-in-Furness might be one of the few places on earth capable of building nuclear subs but it is a slum town in most senses of the word in a remote spot of the country well off the beaten track).

Shipbuilding has always been associated with the working class heavy industry, whereas aerospace has moved more middle class in perception I would say but shipbuilding hasn't really upgraded its public image alongside the increasing sophistication of the job.

Then again MBDA is currently advertising on Spotify for recruits so that hardly inspires confidence...

As I recollect, the Germans have lost a lot of money building diesel submarines for export and the general state of their shipbuilding sector has become very poor indeed. It's worth noting that the German Navy's F126 class was designed in the Netherland and hulls are building in Romania.

Germany has lost its way indeed. But then I think that the big mergers and corporatisation of the European industry in the 2000s didn't really help. It outsourced construction to cheaper Eastern European labour sources but that is not sustainable forever.

 

[jsport]

Shipyards have the snag of having to be near the coast. And if your coastal areas are economically backward then you do have a problem. Much the same in the UK, the majority of major coastal areas are either terribly run down (Barrow-in-Furness might be one of the few places on earth capable of building nuclear subs but it is a slum town in most senses of the word in a remote spot of the country well off the beaten track).

Shipbuilding has always been associated with the working class heavy industry, whereas aerospace has moved more middle class in perception I would say but shipbuilding hasn't really upgraded its public image alongside the increasing sophistication of the job.

In addition to a rejuvenated British Army, English 'want- to- be' TikTok influencers turn baristas need to be induced into Shipyard slums to 'compose' optionally manned, composite, ocean going multi-missile, catamaran, semi-submersible/speedboats. just enough mix of medium industry & artistry to make pride of purpose & place.

 

[Apophenia]

In addition to a rejuvenated British Army, English 'want- to- be' TikTok influencers turn baristas need to be induced into Shipyard slums ...

Not sure what that has to do with fixing USN shipbuilding but, yeah, I can definitely see inducing under-employed English hipsters to flock to Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria - The Guardian's "capital of blue-collar Britain" ...

 

[yeetmahboi]

Trump addressed the shipbuilding industry today. Wonder how much he would devote to fixing this problem.

 

[Halcyon66]

The fact that a "tik Tocker" can make huge sums from sitting at home doing nothing other than posting their dog dancing has up ended all industries.

No one wants to be an apprentice anymore in any segment, I truly don't think many want to actually learn anything other than optimizing hits.

Regards,

 

[jsport]

Trump announces new White House shipbuilding office - Breaking Defense

"To boost our defense industrial base, we are also going to resurrect the American shipbuilding industry, including commercial shipbuilding and military shipbuilding,” President Donald Trump told lawmakers during a joint session of Congress.

breakingdefense.com

 

[jsport]

Trump addressed the shipbuilding industry today. Wonder how much he would devote to fixing this problem.

SECNAV nominee says he'll bring 'urgency' to Navy's shipbuilding - Breaking Defense

"We're just going along and everybody — it's Kumbaya," Phelan said of the Navy's shipbuilding record. "It's almost as if you're waiting for a crisis to happen to ignite things. And I think in the business of warfare, that's a dangerous place to be."

breakingdefense.com

 

[aonestudio]

Vigor Marine Group Combines Key U.S. Shipyards, Strengthening Domestic Maritime Capability

In a major consolidation move aimed at boosting America’s commercial and defense maritime capabilities, five prominent U.S. ship repair and marine service providers — Vigor, Continental Maritime of San Diego,...

gcaptain.com

 

[Reddington777]

I posted this elsewhere but ...

I think there's many factors to consider to solve this problem and quite frankly speaking, none of these factors are going to be easy. I might sound crazy but here goes nothing:

1. Paying more is one thing. Educating is another thing. Teach kids about the field if you want people to actually do that. If you asked me before 2022 what field of study constructs ships, my answer would not be naval architecture. That's not even something I could have studied even at a large state university I went to. Stop telling kids the only way to success is college. Back in the early 2010s when i was still in high school, everyone wanted to be a doctor because the messaging was clear - do humane and "virtue signalling" things and earn big money. You can, at the very minimum, get kids interested in the field.

2. Have naval officers design ships like they did before. If they can't, then they had better start learning. But they can't learn if they can't be allowed to participate in programs and fail...

3. Start investing in commercial shipbuilding first. Create the policies, establish the trade schools and start up the stimulus to encourage shipbuilding in general. Right now is actually a prime time to do this. There is a literal tsunami of startups (some promising while others just full of shit) waiting to build UUVs and unmanned ships. Invest in those companies, help them grow, help them branch out into other areas of shipbuilding - like being subcontractors to larger ship building companies, then start building manned ships again. If there is no commercial market, there's absolutely zero way to sustain the workforce and capital required to rejuvenate the navy.

4. ... And so we need to embrace risk, implement quickly and increment rapidly. Design the minimally acceptable thing, build a small number of it, get it delivered and start using it while you continue to do the research and prototyping that will improve the next batch and iteration. We often integrate new technologies piecemeal into currently fielded things and that's certainly a risk averse way to mature technology, but we must also learn to field prototypes quickly even if they don't function as well as they are intended yet. The CCA / replicator program is extremely valuable in competition with China - at the very minimum, our expeditionary units can start investigating what works and what doesn't work while the next increment is being drawn up. Before WWII, we had a lot of trial and error of what a picket line destroyer or a battleship should look like. We built something that we may not have been happy with, but at least we had guns in the water first. After that, we can take a design, iterate upon that, then hand it over to the builders. The builders, in turn, have also accumulated experience from the last batch of ships. That's how we got the fletchers, the iowa (and the montanas in theory), and the Essex carriers.

5. In order to achieve 4, we need number 5, which is to stop unilaterally punishing risk taking. The risk averse paralysis experienced by the navy feels to me like it is baked in American culture. Nobody wants to take responsibility these days and everyone wants to take the safe route. Sure - you can chalk all this up to the fact that a democratic country necessarily moves slower and risk averse than a top down country like China, but your working culture and your academic culture certainly doesn't have to be that way. Some things require high and persistent amount of investment - like shipbuilding. Failure of a few tests or under performance shouldn't always be punished with termination as long as the vision itself is correct (like hypersonic weapons). Scientists and engineers understand this. Its the middle to high level management (think congress save for the few in the SASC/HASC, industry VPs, investors, finance). It's also the american people who are extremely averse to anything military these days.

5. And speaking of the american voter, raise the goddamn military budget back to the cold war percentages.

6. At the risk of being too political and partisan, I think political will is the most difficult but also the most important problem of which the only solution is... yet again ... adequately educate the public. Even if it is political and even outlandish for this forum and topic, I think this is the most important factor in all this.

Outside of forum lurking autists, the average american might well recognize china as an adversary, but quite frankly - most people ether don't understand the nature of their adversary, don't care, or think that it's our own fault for not avoiding it. With the current level of sheer lunacy in this country right now, waging a war against China in any extended duration is out of the question. People should know that countries do what is good for themselves even if it is at the expense of another. Every country is then made to play this game either, by choice or by force. Its absurd to think that China is a country you can just negotiate your problems away with or that by playing nice, China will play nice too, or that China wil just magically fall apart one day.

People ought to recognize that if we are going to compete, now is the time to go balls deep and prepare for yourself for a knife fight in a telephone booth. If we choose anything other than max commitment, then its time to give up and play second fiddle to the Chinese century. I can assure very single doubting American that many Chinese people and the Chinese leadership recognized this reality long before Xi ever took power.

If enough people can be brought to this understanding, political will will follow, and our adversary's misinformation campaigns will, for the most part, meet dead ends. With that political will, you'll have more than enough momentum to rejuvenate shipbuilding and compete against China.

 

[yeetmahboi]

6. At the risk of being too political and partisan, I think political will is the most difficult but also the most important problem of which the only solution is... yet again ... adequately educate the public. Even if it is political and even outlandish for this forum and topic, I think this is the most important factor in all this.

In the land of Murica? R.I.P Officer Reddington, Chief of Naval Rebuilding Office.

Fixing shipbuilding in the States is an entirely political situation. No amount of money thrown at workers can prevent malice... or incompetence. I think @Scott Kenny shared a story where he and his shipmates overheard a welder bragging out mishandling a ship part, something along the line "not my ride idgaf" and the group split between getting the smartass to eat a wrench and holding the hotheads back. It's simple, American are just like that. There's always that one piece of feces that somehow got himself in this situation. How can you assure that the employee got parents that raised him/her right? They can lie, just like mentally ill people.

Getting the submersible business to grow into an alternative is really a 50:50 long term decision. Which is really bad because the PLA is all hands on maximum automated logistics and production for their heavy industries, so the population boom wouldn't really impact them. In America OTOH it's dreadful to even think about that because of the long term demographic-related issue.

So yeah, you don't fix America's shipbuilding. You bring it elsewhere. SK, Oz, name it, frick Trump can invade Iran and bring it there and have the local men do it and Army boyz watch over.

 

[Scott Kenny]

In the land of Murica? R.I.P Officer Reddington, Chief of Naval Rebuilding Office.

Fixing shipbuilding in the States is an entirely political situation. No amount of money thrown at workers can prevent malice... or incompetence. I think @Scott Kenny shared a story where he and his shipmates overheard a welder bragging out mishandling a ship part, something along the line "not my ride idgaf" and the group split between getting the smartass to eat a wrench and holding the hotheads back. It's simple, American are just like that. There's always that one piece of feces that somehow got himself in this situation. How can you assure that the employee got parents that raised him/her right? They can lie, just like mentally ill people.

Yup. That was me.

Dude was escorted off the ship, and the boat CO personally called the Shipyard CO to inform him that Mister Shitty Attitude was no longer permitted onboard his ship, nor was he to work on anything going onto his ship. And that Squadron Commodore and Group Admiral would be calling the Shipyard CO really soon as well to inform him that Mister Shitty Attitude was now persona non grata on all ships in Squadron and Group.

And I believe that Group even called Mister Shitty Attitude's career detailer to have him transferred out of the local shipyard. Though that may have been a call to the Shipyard career counselor instead. From a 1-star to an E6: "Find Mister Shitty Attitude a new shore duty in someplace awful."

And this really was a matter of keeping Mister Shitty Attitude alive. If he'd expressed that attitude on one of the Projects boats like Parche or Jimmy Carter, I think he would have suffered a terrible accident involving a decompression chamber that he had no business being anywhere near.

 

[Reddington777]

It's simple, American are just like that.

How can you assure that the employee got parents that raised him/her right? They can lie, just like mentally ill people.

This is not what I'm talking about.

What I am talking about is more of a public understanding and acceptance of the nature of this conflict so that there is political will to fix the "political" problem - as you say. I really wasn't saying that educating them right would suddenly produce more shipyard workers who are willing to do the job right or be all of good quality. That's HR's issue.

Right now we are split between people who are woefully naive, who are unprepared for competition and refuses to entertain any ideas of conflict, and another group who believes that we and we alone are enough in this conflict. Those in the former think some moderate policy changes is going to get us to where we need to be (it isn't). Those in the latter are more than okay having no allies and just ceding influence. If you have people who are taught to recognize the reality of how things are, then at the very minimum, the leaders elected to office would at least share a more unified and practical vision to fix things.

These leaders would have less to worry about without some huge section of the public being outraged at whatever policies they need to enact in terms of policy and diplomacy. We wouldn't be going back and forth every 4 years between "lets have the koreans build our ships" and "lets revitalize our own shipbuilding industry" or "lets strengthen the west pac alliances" and "lets isolate ourselves". The military budget and critical programs wouldn't have to be repeatedly justified to certain influential civilians and government officials who have absolutely zero business in the matter and only co-opt these things to push their ass backwards agenda. Having a population that is informed of what it takes would also generate the political will to continue a conflict with China even if it gets nasty.

 

[yeetmahboi]

What I am talking about is more of a public understanding and acceptance of the nature of this conflict so that there is political will to fix the "political" problem - as you say. I really wasn't saying that educating them right would suddenly produce more shipyard workers who are willing to do the job right or be all of good quality. That's HR's issue.

But, you see, you really can't fix that. Bias is innate to every human. Even frigging mainland China is divided between Iran and Israel. The country where you know everyone has a common understanding of trampling on each other merely for survival, or that all of them must work for the greater good of the nation. I cannot see which general populace can get more, uhm, "politically sound" than that (sorry polisci majors, yours is the study of big management).

Right now we are split between people who are woefully naive, who are unprepared for competition and refuses to entertain any ideas of conflict, and another group who believes that we and we alone are enough in this conflict. Those in the former think some moderate policy changes is going to get us to where we need to be (it isn't). Those in the latter are more than okay having no allies and just ceding influence. If you have people who are taught to recognize the reality of how things are, then at the very minimum, the leaders elected to office would at least share a more unified and practical vision to fix things.

I'd take it like this: one fourth are raised very well but has specific moral codes planted into their mind... so when the gov does something they either face a mental dilemma or just lash out. The second quarter are mentally ill people or thinks they are above the gov (democracy yk) and will do absolutely everything to dunk on the gov and safeguard their ideals. The radical opposition. The third is just a bunch of edgy people that absolutely failed in life and use foreign partners as a scapegoat to blame for "lack of government aid". A specific country in the Middle East is facing that stuff right now everyday. The last one is a bunch of people that really doesn't care. They go fishing or hanging out with friendos instead of wasting big time on social media, hence their obscurity as a major part of the populace and vote base on policy.

It'll take nothing short of an Orweillian twist to get even two third of Murica to agree together on something that isn't related to mortality or economics.

 

[Reddington777]

But, you see, you really can't fix that.

Yeah. Yeah I agree. The last one is always going to be a fever dream of mine I suppose, though in the long stream of history, Im hardly the first and certainly not the last to dream the fever dream.

That population breakdown is pretty accurate. Im not going to pull the whole "hard times make strong men" bullshit, but I think generational trial by fire tends to bring about some kind of agreement to cold realism to people. I saw it with my parents generation of chinese people. We in america haven't had that for a long long time. But ironically if we keep going like this, that generational reckoning might soon be coming.

It'll take nothing short of an Orweillian twist to get even two third of Murica to agree together on something that isn't related to mortality or economics.

which is why Plato's idea to have sage kings rule nations really would be the best way if not for how unstable that is. Now we could also choose to listen to experts, scientists and engineers but of course everyone thinks they have "their truth" and they are the expert of "their truth"... maybe it really is time to give ChatGPT a try for the presidency, congress and the courts.

Every time I think about this I will always end with rewatching this:

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFgcqB8-AxE&pp=ygUbYnV0IHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgYXJlIHJldGFyZGVk

 

[Reddington777]

I will add to my crazy shipbuilding rant that having Korean and Japanese shipbuilders open up or take over yards state side would help develop a viable work force for the future as well (and it would appear that thats what is being explored). Combined with subsidies and stimulus from the government, they can deliver results in the short(er) term while expanding the workforce in the long term.

 

[yeetmahboi]

It is something to ponder. Japanese/SK yards has orders on their plate but bringing them over to the States can mess it up... especially if new costs start to surface (undoubtedly will happen). Maybe make an equal deal: USG pays higher upfront to have general Navy ships built in the Asian branch yards and use the extra to cover for the corpos, corpos bring commercial deals over to the States but keep original pricings? With how the recent exodus of certain small job workers that turned out to be little more than a temporary hamstring, I could see masses flocking to the yards... Keep the industry knowledge by retaining the primes, give them the big ticket stuff. Smaller domestic yards get USVs.

 

[Reddington777]

Japanese/SK yards has orders on their plate but bringing them over to the States can mess it up... especially if new costs start to surface (undoubtedly will happen).

corpos bring commercial deals over to the States but keep original pricings

Disclaimer (if my military watching is amateurish, my understanding of business contract speak borderlines on illiteracy).

If I understood correctly: Keeping their current suppliers will incur added cost on moving materials to the U.S shipyards. Sourcing locally would probably also be more expensive than building at the yards in their native countries as well. That means the USG would need to absorb those costs somehow to prevent them from justifying jacking up their prices and to bring commercial ship building contracts to these yards when they aren't working on navy contracts. That way with consistent work, they'd be able to keep and grow a work force.

That sounds like it could be workable enough. The new administration also seems to finds this as a viable option so hopefully we'll see a few more yards being taken over.

Keep the industry knowledge by retaining the primes, give them the big ticket stuff.

Long term, these primes would benefit greatly from the workforce that could be generated from the foreign docks, but short term, they still won't be pumping out enough DDGs a year to mitigate the gap in shipbuilding. If one yard from each of the two countries could add a burke or some aegis ship per year, the future fleet size difference won't be so lopsided anymore. They both already build aegis ships and with some further experience with maintaining current US ships, they could maybe start doing that?

Oh and in addition to this, if congress could really consider adding more to budget, we could also buy some oilers, resupply and maintenance ships to replace the aging merchant mariner ships.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I will add to my crazy shipbuilding rant that having Korean and Japanese shipbuilders open up or take over yards state side would help develop a viable work force for the future as well (and it would appear that thats what is being explored). Combined with subsidies and stimulus from the government, they can deliver results in the short(er) term while expanding the workforce in the long term.

It'd require massive subsidies from the USGov to make work.

A significant part of the cost issue in the US is cost of labor. Plus cost of compliance with OSHA and EPA (both federal and state, which have different requirements and different reporting formats). The USGov would have to pay the shipyards for that.

The other significant part of the cost issue is cost of materials. Materials in the US are expensive. You cannot ship steel to the US for a shipyard here to use without paying tariffs on it.

 

[SUPER=BUG]

It's hard to say. When the avalanche comes, no snowflake is innocent, and there are many reasons why such a large manufacturing industry, which was prominent in the late World War II, is now so decayed, I don't believe that money alone can solve the problem.Maybe you can learn how the Chinese manage the shipbuilding industry, after all, the Chinese also learned a lot of management experience from the Americans, which is not ashamed.

 

[Arjen]

You might have a look at how Meyer Werft survives to this day in the construction of luxury passenger ships.
Shipyards in Papenburg, Rostock and Turku.

 

[Jacky]

If Boeing is stating they could build both the F-47 and F/A-XX, that is a potential huge risk in my opinion. I would put more faith in NG pulling off both B-21 and F/A-XX. If the program is truly on hold then the USN maybe honking things up unfortunately.

The biggest problem for the Navy is to solve the shipbuilding industry. The shipbuilding funds account for too much, but not many warships can be built. Three problems need to be solved: 1. How to expand the production capacity of the shipyard; 2. How to spend less money to build more warships; 3. How to solve the chaos in the Navy's procurement procedures, that is, the construction contract is issued before the specific needs and specific designs are confirmed. Regarding the first point, I think a separate allocation (not in the defense budget) can be made to restore the construction capacity of the Navy shipyard, and at the same time, the Seabee can be involved in the construction. Regarding the second point, I think private shipyards can be forced to participate in the international civil shipbuilding competition, so as to expand the group of qualified shipbuilding workers and share the cost of warships. Regarding the third point, I think the original process of the fleet proposing the needs, the BuShip being responsible for the design, and the SCB coordinating and determining the final design plan is quite good.

 

[Jacky]

The navy and our problem isnt building planes its building ships, so who knows. Theres a ton of people / companies capable of building aircraft but apparrently no one knows how to manage ship programs anymore so maybe spending some time to reorganize isnt a terrible idea. One can only hope its bleed now so that things will be better later.

Yes, the shipbuilding funds account for too much, but not many warships can be built. Three problems need to be solved: 1. How to expand the production capacity of the shipyard; 2. How to spend less money to build more warships; 3. How to solve the chaos in the Navy's procurement procedures, that is, the construction contract is issued before the specific needs and specific designs are confirmed. Regarding the first point, I think a separate allocation (not in the defense budget) can be made to restore the construction capacity of the Navy shipyard, and at the same time, the Seabee can be involved in the construction. Regarding the second point, I think private shipyards can be forced to participate in the international civil shipbuilding competition, so as to expand the group of qualified shipbuilding workers and share the cost of warships. Regarding the third point, I think the original process of the fleet proposing the needs, the BuShip being responsible for the design, and the SCB coordinating and determining the final design plan is quite good.

But it is difficult in the current political environment. Because American society does not have a sufficient "engineer culture", lawyers and accountants are everywhere in society.

 

[Hydroman]

The biggest problem for the Navy is to solve the shipbuilding industry. The shipbuilding funds account for too much, but not many warships can be built. Three problems need to be solved: 1. How to expand the production capacity of the shipyard; 2. How to spend less money to build more warships; 3. How to solve the chaos in the Navy's procurement procedures, that is, the construction contract is issued before the specific needs and specific designs are confirmed. Regarding the first point, I think a separate allocation (not in the defense budget) can be made to restore the construction capacity of the Navy shipyard, and at the same time, the Seabee can be involved in the construction. Regarding the second point, I think private shipyards can be forced to participate in the international civil shipbuilding competition, so as to expand the group of qualified shipbuilding workers and share the cost of warships. Regarding the third point, I think the original process of the fleet proposing the needs, the ship being responsible for the design, and the SCB coordinating and determining the final design plan is quite good.

Yes, the USN really needs to fix shipbuilding as well.

 

[Sferrin]

Yes, the shipbuilding funds account for too much, but not many warships can be built. Three problems need to be solved: 1. How to expand the production capacity of the shipyard; 2. How to spend less money to build more warships; 3. How to solve the chaos in the Navy's procurement procedures, that is, the construction contract is issued before the specific needs and specific designs are confirmed. Regarding the first point, I think a separate allocation (not in the defense budget) can be made to restore the construction capacity of the Navy shipyard, and at the same time, the Seabee can be involved in the construction. Regarding the second point, I think private shipyards can be forced to participate in the international civil shipbuilding competition, so as to expand the group of qualified shipbuilding workers and share the cost of warships. Regarding the third point, I think the original process of the fleet proposing the needs, the BuShip being responsible for the design, and the SCB coordinating and determining the final design plan is quite good.

But it is difficult in the current political environment. Because American society does not have a sufficient "engineer culture", lawyers and accountants are everywhere in society.

Not to mention the whiplash priorities whenever power changes hands. Who would want to invest in overhead in those conditions? It's a "perpetually kicking the can down the road until it's the next guy's problem" situation.

 

[EmoBirb]

Yes, the USN really needs to fix shipbuilding as well.

More so than anything else tbh, given it's a navy first and foremost.

Seeing how the Ticos are fading away without a genuine replacement (the AB IIIs are good but the hull has reached its limit) together with all the delays and failed ship classes paints a bleak picture of the formally largest navy in the world (by number of ships).

F/A-XX is nice and dandy, and most of us are obviously aviation focused. But for the Navy itself something like DDG(X), the Columbia SSBN or Constellation FFG is arguably more important and more urgently needed.

 

[Jacky]

Yes, the USN really needs to fix shipbuilding as well.

Something is wrong. The US shipbuilding industry has been declining since 1960, but no one realizes it. McNamara deprived the Navy shipyard of its construction capabilities, and his successor in the 1980s killed the SCB, the agency that coordinated and released the final design plan. After entering the 21st century, the basic design of the Littoral Combat Ship and the Constellation-class frigate was not designed by the Navy itself. How could this be! Looking back at history, the combination of "Fleet Operator-Buship-SCB" was so efficient that several design plans could be proposed in a year.

 

[Jacky]

First of all, do NOT order ships before project is completed.

Second, do NOT allow Navy to change already approved project after it was ordered - at least without Congressional specific approval & good justification.

Third, order a single prototype first. Test it, and only order a series AFTER you are satisfied with prototype performance.

So, who killed the "Fleet Operator (demander) -Buship (designer) -SCB (coordinate and issue the final design)" combination?

 

[Jacky]

Sipbuilding in the US is simply unprofitable for large yards. At least for small and mid size builders they have a commercial sector to fall upon. So does the Koreans. The Chinese yards is building so much because their navy is expanding, so no boom-bust cycle in sight.

It's a bad mess, really.

No, the orders from the Chinese Navy only account for a small part of the orders from the shipyards. And the shipyards that build warships are all large state-owned shipyards. No private shipyard can enter this field.