DoD spec creep, what? Not enough [esp. West Coast] shipyards? Best of luck to new SECNAV. P.S. Get the naming of ships back to something closer to sanity.
Trump shows that he has used his Wilderness Years wisely. He reviewed the mistakes he made and will not make them again. He has looked at the Navy (and the other Service Branches) to see what went wrong. Trump will not allow the system or the people to continue making the same mistakes that put us in our current position. People will be held accountable. Processes will change. The opaque shield protecting Navy will not be allowed to continue. There will be accountability and transparency.
Trump's OODA Loop will be compressed in this Presidency. Trump has developed a Tier 1 Team of change agents and disruptors. TIghten the seat belts boys, we are in for a ride.
Behold the recent comment by Susie Wiles: "President-elect Trump’s incoming White House Chief of Staff said there won’t be any “backbiting” or “drama” tolerated in the next administration. “I don’t welcome people who want to work solo or be a star,” Wiles, who was Trump’s campaign co-chair and is a veteran political consultant, said in an interview with Axios. “My team and I will not tolerate backbiting, second-guessing inappropriately, or drama. “These are counterproductive to the mission.” This expectation and promise applies to all those under Trump's umbrella, it is not limited to the White House.
Of course he doesn't want any other drama llamas, the man himself provides more than enough for any administration.
That having been said, if he's actually serious about fixing this stuff and doing what needs to be done to get things back on track regarding America's capacity to protect itself and its interests, I will put up with his other shenanigans as long as they do not impair the mission.
Theodore Roosevelt was described as wanting to be the bride at every wedding, and the corpse at every funeral. He was also a President who was an ardent navalist and got things done.
I fully expect some tweets (X's ?), though far fewer than in Trump 1.0. Certain to be mini-dramas, some real and many fabricated. Almost no infighting or leaks in Trump 2.0. We will soon find out. We will be more faithful to our friends, and our enemies will fear us. All will respect America under Trump 2.0, though not all will like us. I am okay with that.
2016 Trump would just turn into the heavy seas. An expected novice move. Now with some "wilderness years", I am hopeful that he and his crew will take to quartering them.
Fair to say nothing predicts performance better than leaving a failed management team in charge of fixing a program that is failing. Just my opinion, of course.
There are still RINOs in the House and Senate. If they don't mend their ways, the "change agents and disruptors" may have issues with needed legislation.
Trump is fully aware of these variables. He can only do his best, which has been pretty good so far. Trump & Team can only control what they control. It is an imperfect world. The worst case with Trump is still much better than anything with Kamala.
"The worst case with Trump is still much better than anything with Kamala." That is a given. I am hoping the RINOs see an advantage to help the rebuild...
"...And maybe we’ll use allies, also, in terms of building ships. We might have to..." One can imagine veins popping out all over the place in DC on that idea... I can see it now, engineer in South Korea is speaking in SI units and engineer in the U.S. is thinking to themselves "kPa?..." Aside from many other challenges here, the rest of the world (that builds ships) is on the SI system. That commonality thingy is going to be an interesting thing to see unfold... :>)
We managed to bridge the SAE-SI gap when designing the DDG 1000, so I suspect we can do it again. Though I was brought up in SAEland and still get my head around those numbers more easily, US engineers can, and do, work well with SI units. We manufacture beaucoup metric-defined cars and trucks here, and every mechanic I know of has a set of metric wrenches and sockets. Maybe this is the way we drag ourselves over that measurement hump.
Adapt or die perhaps? Envisioning overseas shipyards building ships for the Navy seems unlikely but perhaps delivering pre-built sections and final assembly here?
If there is an engineer left on the Federal payroll in six months that can ONLY think in SAE, then that will be a disappointment. Conntractors with that limitation will take a little while longer to clear out. Its like having the State Department diplomatic corps ONLY communicating in English.
At my university (resumed studies 50 years after graduating the first time) all engineering majors take physics which is entirely in SI units and taught to convert to US customary units. I suspect engineers involved in any DOD hardware are capable in both systems since we share most weapon systems with NATO and other allies.
I had to solve problems in M.E. program in both systems. I'll take a base 10 system any day of the week. I used a metric tape measure on home projects and the accuracy of my measurements and cuts improved noticeably.
"The Leader cannot fail, he can only be failed." 🙈
Trump didn't even put forth bills that would build infrastructure, build the Wall, or replace Obamacare with something better. As CINC he had absolute power to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.
“Heartbreaking what we’ve done.” (Regarding the self-inflicted design issues of the CONSTELLATION-class FFG.
Well, as Jonathan Swift (and others) stated, “there are none so blind as those who will not see.” Let's hope (although hope is not a strategy) that accountability results in a good housecleaning at NAVSEA.
Navsea didn't decide on the lie of the parent design commonality, didn't pick the design for partisan political gain and didn't mandate Tomahawk and SM-6 integration after the design KPIS had been decided and contracted.
Don't get me wrong, they need fixed. Fixing them will hardly fix the entire shipbuilding issue. Not even cclose.
I'm sure he's not just limiting these comments to the Navy. He was already upset with the U.S. Coast Guard's heavy icebreaker program back in 2019-2020. As nothing has changed since then (except we all got four years older), I would say the door is going to open for foreign-built icebreakers as well.
Yep, l remember that well. I was the guy in Finland who answered the questions in the memo for the State Department. I also write my own little Substack about icebreakers over at sixtydegreesnorth.substack.com for more than you ever wanted to know about icebreakers.
I mostly write about icebreakers, but not exclusively. My favorite work is probably the write-ups I did tracing my Great Uncle Peter's WW2 journey, from draft until KIA. In the 2.5 years in between, he had served in three different infantry divisions and was part of a glider pilot training program. Killed in Action as a replacement soldier about a month after arriving to K/115 of the 29th ID in October 1944.
Living in Europe gave me the chance to trace some of his route, and to visit his grave at the Netherlands American Cemetary. I was the first family member to do so.
I'm not the expert here, but I'll share what I know.
We operate nine vessels there, many of them are quite old. The workhorse of our Great Lakes icebreaking fleet is the Macknaw, built in 2006, and Finnish companies were involved in her design. She's loaded with European icebreaking technology. (Azipods, Double Acting Hull, etc).
I know that the Great Lakes delegation in Congress wants another one equal to or more capable than Mackinaw, and they want it yesterday. The current Great Lakes icebreakers just can't keep up with the demand for icebreaking, meaning that there is often a reduced flow of trade through the Great Lakes.
In addition to Macknaw, there are two buoy tenders and a handful of icebreaking tugs from the 70s and 80s. They're just not as effective as the modern ships.
Who has a recently built design anywhere close to our specs? I really haven't found one. I suspect we need something based on Australia, Chile or Argentina designs rather than Canada or Finland.
Don't confuse what Finland operates vs what they can build. With its vast experience, Finnish companies can design and build a vessel optimized for a given mission in specific ice conditions based on their extensive experience (and test data from) building and testing hundreds of hull forms, propulsion types, etc over the decades.
For a specific ship close to a U.S. 'Heavy' Polar Icebreaker:
Le Commandant Charcot, designed by Aker of Finland and built by Vard in Romania and Norway is the most capable non-nuclear icebreaker in the world- and the one most recently built that is close to our specs. The sad part is that her design started around the same time as the PSC program, but LCC has been breaking ice since the summer of 2021. LCC was the first non-nuclear vessel (that I can find) to sail solo across the transpolar route, and she has (or had) the record for reaching the furthest point south of any vessel (in the Ross Sea, so capable of our McMurdo mission). Has also provided assistance to several research icebreakers and ice-hardened Naval and Coast Guard vessels while operating near Antarctica and Greenland.
Charcot is the only PC 2 class icebreaker in existence at the moment, she just happens to be operating as a luxury cruise ship.
Charcot could have easily been built in Finland. I'm not sure if the driver was money or local yard capacity at the time. (Helsinki shipyard was off-limits for a while due to Russian ownership.)
Finland has built hulls for Russian nuclear icebreakers, as well as Polar research vessels. They can build whatever the demand is- large or small, for polar ice, true icebreaker, or just ice-capable vessel. Polaris is a very most modern icebreaker (built 2016) but optimized for escort ops in the Baltic. She lacks the endurance for polar ops. The Yuriy Kuchiev, in contrast, is a huge, ice-capable oil tanker designed to operate independently along Russia's Northern Sea Route.
So yes, Finland is the right place to bring our requirements and let them optimize a design for us. It does not take the local Naval Architects long to do the work.
*edited because I wrote the original before having sufficient coffee*
Russians just launched a 35,000 ton nuclear icebreaker. Trying to open up the Arctic. Read an article that suggested that the road to peace in Ukraine may run through the Arctic because assisting with the effort offers a carrot to induce the Russians to make concessions elsewhere.
Yes, that's the fourth of seven planned project 2220 icebreakers, designed specifically to operate on the Northern Sea Route. Russia is working hard to make the NSR operable all year round, not just during the summer months. Nuclear power is good for the NSR, not a lot of places to pull into port and refuel.
I saw a similar article, but I'm not convinced by the argument. Russian LNG exports along the NSR are complex at the moment- some are sanctioned, some are not. I think the NSR is developing regardless, with both Russia and China interested in using it as it bypasses the dumpster fires in many of the world's choke points right now.
Article I saw argued the issue was bigger than oil and gas and extended to all the resources of Siberia using the large rivers that run north. Not sure how that tracks with the icebreakers as those rivers freeze up themselves and it would take a lot of icebreakers to bust up 1000 miles of river ice. The Russians use frozen rivers as highways but trucks would be inefficient for bulk commodities.
Trump has made a lot of mistakes over the years resulting in bankruptcy. But he LEARNED from those mistakes, and kept creating success (and wealth). DoD, Congress, and the Military Industrial Complex (TM) have created success in creating wealth for themselves while FAILING in their actual mission, that of creating military capability for the nation. This is a self serving, self licking ice cream cone of personal largesse that is deeply entrenched, massively entitled, and will lash out violently at any effort to change it. I wish President Elect Trump all the best and hope for his success.
I read the article with some degree of enthusiasm but it's tempered by the inertia in the Navy to do anything bold or innovative. To make this work DOD must first hold that panel that evaluates the fitness of GOFOs and especially their civil service equivalents.
As I observed in another comment, the DOD's senior bureaucrats are now gearing up to defend the status quo. The Biden administration has updated the managerial order of succession in all government departments and agencies to place its own policy acolytes into those senior positions just below those of the political appointees.
Their job is to block anything and everything the incoming Trump administration does to break the status quo.
One of their tactics will be to activate hundreds of whistleblowers in every department and agency of the federal government, whose assignment is to bring manufactured charges of incompetence and malfeasence against Trump's political and senior managerial appointees, and their senior staffs.
Donald Trump survived two bogus impeachments, a stolen 2020 presidential election, and two assassination attempts on his life in order to enter the Oval Office for a second time. As a more civilized means of deposing him, would you be on board with a third attempt at impeachment for some number of alleged high crimes and misdemeanors?
And if so, which high crimes and misdemeanors would you allege; and how soon into his second term would you allege them? May or June of 2025 possibly?
Trump earned every impeachment and 34 felony convictions. He should have been removed from office and be in jail right now. He is a threat to national security and is a 1 man impeachment rich environment. As soon as he tries to remove birthright citizenship by executive order, he should be impeached again. He doesn’t believe in the rule of law, and your comment belies your disdain for our justice system and institutions to include elections. Stolen election? Pfft.
As long as naval pronouncements are posted from an incompetent oaf who can’t form a cogent thought and someone who is the personification of a domestic threat to the Constitution, rebuttals belong on this site. He hasn’t a clue what he is talking about and his nominee for SECNAV is unqualified.
Albert, you have indicated that you are onboard with a third impeachment even before Donald Trump takes the oath of office for a second time. If I may say so, anything short of assassination is OK with you.
As a means of highlighting any problems you might think are currently present in how the US maintains its defense posture, what future policy actions in that sphere would you consider as being impeachable offences worthy of removing Donald Trump from office?
For an example, would cutting back or even stopping all assistance to Ukraine as part of a decision to give higher spending priority to naval shipbuilding be one such impeachable offence?
Why do you think Trump will give any priority to defense? However revenue is raised, it would still require a significant increase in the SCN budget to build new ships and the O&M budget to maintain them properly. Instead, Trump championed tax cuts and incurred an $8T deficit during his term without doing anything for National Defense. Why should we give him any credibility now? Abandoning an ally and democracy fighting against an illegal invasion by a dictatorship and enemy of the United States is not an answer.
The way things work now is that DOD is a slave to policy priorities imposed upon it by the Department of State and the White House national security staff.
The DOS and the current White House national security staff are in turn agents of the larger Deep State in defending the current status quo in all matters of US foreign statecraft and US national defense.
What I see happening in the first few months of the new administration is that DOD's legacy senior staff will work closely with the legacy senior staff of the Department of State in preventing an honest an informed discussion concerning where federal money should be spent, how much money should be spent, and which policy agendas should be funded and vigorously pursued.
Blocking these honest and informed discussions will be one key element among several in the legacy staff's plan for guaranteeing a Trump adminstration failure in the areas of US foreign statecraft and US national defense.
Another key element of the legacy staff's plan for a vigorous defense of the status quo is to ignore or even directly countermand Donald Trump's explicit presidential orders and policy directions in the belief that their allies in the Congress and in the courts will shield them from being terminated for acts of insubordination.
The hope is that the constitutional structure will hold. The power of the Sovereign has been chopped up and divided. We have separate Sovereigns; 51 of them. The one Trump was elected president of, cut the power into thirds. While Trump can execute, he can't legislate or adjudicate.
War is tricky. Conservatives formerly expressed the notion that only the Congress can declare war. I have no idea what the prevailing orthodoxy is now. So, starting war with Denmark without a vote in Congress would be impeachable.
Ukraine was invaded by a nation with no respect for territorial integrity. Obviously the proper course of action is to aid Ukrainian defense, particularly when the victim's enemy is our foe too. But, currently, the President is given wide latitude by the Congress. It is within Trump's grant of authority to not give aid, just like it is within Biden's power to give aid. So, not impeachable.
Nobody is going to start a war with Denmark. People have absolutely no understanding of President Trumps negotiating, and too many are willing to believe the wildest nonsense about him.
I was responding to Mr. Brim. Starting a war is impeachable, because Congress is supposed to start wars. I picked Denmark because of the saber-rattling over Greenland.
Interesting fact: on a per capita basis, Denmark had a higher casualty rate in Afghanistan than the US did.
Since I read this 3 days ago I have been thinking about Samuel Pepys, "Peeps" to his friends.
Pepys lies at the intersection of navalism and literature. He was a bureaucrat in the Royal Navy during the Anglo-Dutch wars that left such an impression on A.T. Mahan. He was a bit of a libertine at a time when England was shaking off the shackles locked on her by a christian nationalist government. His diary remains widely read today.
Pepys was a senior bureaucrat in England's NAVSEA. His Navy was like ours, but, worse. Combat proved that England's wooden walls were worm-ridden and rotten. His Executive was much like The Donald; rich and indolent with a short attention span. The Legislature was parsimonious, much like ours.
Despite all this, Pepys made massive changes in this Navy. He overturned a corrupt system of ship building and turned the Royal Dockyard into one of the most efficient industrial facilities in the world. He created systems of procurement outside cronyism and corruption. He professionalised the officer corps, promoting officers on demonstrated competence.
Typical of Trump and not stating this negatively. He knows and we all know we need more ships. And we don’t have the capacity to build more ships right now. So details need to be handled by those tasked with the job of acquiring. And they need to do so without undue delay and complications. Period.
When dealing with Trump it is dangerous to the extreme to believe he understands why the admirals , who are also supposed to be well informed are recommending changes and whether some adjustments on models need to be tried to get prototype that is different than prior class . Main point is the Sec Navy choice must be someone that is influenced by the navy's value to the national security in its broadest sense - warfighting and other. , and not pleasing the boss per se.
As opposed to the resume of the current SecNav who made climate change his number one priority? We'll see if hiring for character instead of the resume makes a difference soon enough.
After all, FDR didn't have any qualifications yet actually ran programs while SecNav "giving the negroes the vote was a mistake." Daniel's (D) remained a figurehead.
Seems to me that the US has been setting up South Korea to build US Navy ships. The Koreans now run the Philly ship yard and there have been some deals or agreements to have Korea do maintenance work in Korea, if I recall correctly.
Maybe there is hope!
I personally liked at the 4 minute point where President-elect Trump said that he may participate in the 250th commemoration of the British Regular's sallying out of Boston into the Massachusetts countryside. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/maps/battle-lexington-and-concord-british-retreat-april-18-19-1775
DoD spec creep, what? Not enough [esp. West Coast] shipyards? Best of luck to new SECNAV. P.S. Get the naming of ships back to something closer to sanity.
Trump shows that he has used his Wilderness Years wisely. He reviewed the mistakes he made and will not make them again. He has looked at the Navy (and the other Service Branches) to see what went wrong. Trump will not allow the system or the people to continue making the same mistakes that put us in our current position. People will be held accountable. Processes will change. The opaque shield protecting Navy will not be allowed to continue. There will be accountability and transparency.
Trump's OODA Loop will be compressed in this Presidency. Trump has developed a Tier 1 Team of change agents and disruptors. TIghten the seat belts boys, we are in for a ride.
Behold the recent comment by Susie Wiles: "President-elect Trump’s incoming White House Chief of Staff said there won’t be any “backbiting” or “drama” tolerated in the next administration. “I don’t welcome people who want to work solo or be a star,” Wiles, who was Trump’s campaign co-chair and is a veteran political consultant, said in an interview with Axios. “My team and I will not tolerate backbiting, second-guessing inappropriately, or drama. “These are counterproductive to the mission.” This expectation and promise applies to all those under Trump's umbrella, it is not limited to the White House.
Of course he doesn't want any other drama llamas, the man himself provides more than enough for any administration.
That having been said, if he's actually serious about fixing this stuff and doing what needs to be done to get things back on track regarding America's capacity to protect itself and its interests, I will put up with his other shenanigans as long as they do not impair the mission.
Theodore Roosevelt was described as wanting to be the bride at every wedding, and the corpse at every funeral. He was also a President who was an ardent navalist and got things done.
Your first sentence applies to almost every politician. :)
I fully expect some tweets (X's ?), though far fewer than in Trump 1.0. Certain to be mini-dramas, some real and many fabricated. Almost no infighting or leaks in Trump 2.0. We will soon find out. We will be more faithful to our friends, and our enemies will fear us. All will respect America under Trump 2.0, though not all will like us. I am okay with that.
Your lips to God's ears. I hope it will be as you say, but I fear it will not be.
2016 Trump would just turn into the heavy seas. An expected novice move. Now with some "wilderness years", I am hopeful that he and his crew will take to quartering them.
Fair to say nothing predicts performance better than leaving a failed management team in charge of fixing a program that is failing. Just my opinion, of course.
There are still RINOs in the House and Senate. If they don't mend their ways, the "change agents and disruptors" may have issues with needed legislation.
Trump is fully aware of these variables. He can only do his best, which has been pretty good so far. Trump & Team can only control what they control. It is an imperfect world. The worst case with Trump is still much better than anything with Kamala.
"The worst case with Trump is still much better than anything with Kamala." That is a given. I am hoping the RINOs see an advantage to help the rebuild...
Trump and America are counting on that very thing.
"...And maybe we’ll use allies, also, in terms of building ships. We might have to..." One can imagine veins popping out all over the place in DC on that idea... I can see it now, engineer in South Korea is speaking in SI units and engineer in the U.S. is thinking to themselves "kPa?..." Aside from many other challenges here, the rest of the world (that builds ships) is on the SI system. That commonality thingy is going to be an interesting thing to see unfold... :>)
We managed to bridge the SAE-SI gap when designing the DDG 1000, so I suspect we can do it again. Though I was brought up in SAEland and still get my head around those numbers more easily, US engineers can, and do, work well with SI units. We manufacture beaucoup metric-defined cars and trucks here, and every mechanic I know of has a set of metric wrenches and sockets. Maybe this is the way we drag ourselves over that measurement hump.
Adapt or die perhaps? Envisioning overseas shipyards building ships for the Navy seems unlikely but perhaps delivering pre-built sections and final assembly here?
That worked real well with the Boeing 787.
Having said that, as long as the transportation costs are reasonable and the cognizant companies are really well coordinated, it can work.
Well coordinated and good at geometry and finish tolerances :>)
If there is an engineer left on the Federal payroll in six months that can ONLY think in SAE, then that will be a disappointment. Conntractors with that limitation will take a little while longer to clear out. Its like having the State Department diplomatic corps ONLY communicating in English.
I suspect most engineers can handle it but their intuition is probably sitting squarely in the SAE camp.
"Needs must when the devil drives." (credited to an anonymous Ford plant manager on December 8, 1941...just kidding!).
At my university (resumed studies 50 years after graduating the first time) all engineering majors take physics which is entirely in SI units and taught to convert to US customary units. I suspect engineers involved in any DOD hardware are capable in both systems since we share most weapon systems with NATO and other allies.
I had to solve problems in M.E. program in both systems. I'll take a base 10 system any day of the week. I used a metric tape measure on home projects and the accuracy of my measurements and cuts improved noticeably.
Whether you like him or not, he usually does what he says—a unique concept in Washington.
Not the last time. Building infrastructure? The Wall? A better healthcare plan than Obama/Romneycare? Getting out of Afghanistan?
Because he was fought tooth and nail by The Keepers of the Status Quo. (aka Cubicle People aka The Deep State)
"The Leader cannot fail, he can only be failed." 🙈
Trump didn't even put forth bills that would build infrastructure, build the Wall, or replace Obamacare with something better. As CINC he had absolute power to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.
Those failures are all on him.
Nice revisionist history.
"As CINC he had absolute power to withdraw troops from Afghanistan."
He signed a treaty and began the drawdown. And then got the blame after Biden botched it.
Pretty sure Biden got the blame, but I'll be damned if I can point to anyone who provided an alternate that would have changed a damn thing.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-review-of-chaotic-afghanistan-withdrawal-blames-trump
“Heartbreaking what we’ve done.” (Regarding the self-inflicted design issues of the CONSTELLATION-class FFG.
Well, as Jonathan Swift (and others) stated, “there are none so blind as those who will not see.” Let's hope (although hope is not a strategy) that accountability results in a good housecleaning at NAVSEA.
Navsea didn't decide on the lie of the parent design commonality, didn't pick the design for partisan political gain and didn't mandate Tomahawk and SM-6 integration after the design KPIS had been decided and contracted.
Don't get me wrong, they need fixed. Fixing them will hardly fix the entire shipbuilding issue. Not even cclose.
All good points. However, a journey has to begin somewhere, and fixing NAVSEA is a start (although not the entire journey)—particularly the PEOs.
I'm sure he's not just limiting these comments to the Navy. He was already upset with the U.S. Coast Guard's heavy icebreaker program back in 2019-2020. As nothing has changed since then (except we all got four years older), I would say the door is going to open for foreign-built icebreakers as well.
Trump memo demands new fleet of Arctic icebreakers be ready by 2029
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/09/trump-memo-demands-new-fleet-of-arctic-icebreakers-to-be-ready-by-2029/
Foreign buys are the only option now that could meet the target.
Yep, l remember that well. I was the guy in Finland who answered the questions in the memo for the State Department. I also write my own little Substack about icebreakers over at sixtydegreesnorth.substack.com for more than you ever wanted to know about icebreakers.
Peter: Interesting Substack. Working with the Finns makes sense, culturally speaking, although they spell funny.
Including Bastogne!
I mostly write about icebreakers, but not exclusively. My favorite work is probably the write-ups I did tracing my Great Uncle Peter's WW2 journey, from draft until KIA. In the 2.5 years in between, he had served in three different infantry divisions and was part of a glider pilot training program. Killed in Action as a replacement soldier about a month after arriving to K/115 of the 29th ID in October 1944.
Living in Europe gave me the chance to trace some of his route, and to visit his grave at the Netherlands American Cemetary. I was the first family member to do so.
Peter. What is the state of the ice breakers on the Great Lakes? Pete
I'm not the expert here, but I'll share what I know.
We operate nine vessels there, many of them are quite old. The workhorse of our Great Lakes icebreaking fleet is the Macknaw, built in 2006, and Finnish companies were involved in her design. She's loaded with European icebreaking technology. (Azipods, Double Acting Hull, etc).
I know that the Great Lakes delegation in Congress wants another one equal to or more capable than Mackinaw, and they want it yesterday. The current Great Lakes icebreakers just can't keep up with the demand for icebreaking, meaning that there is often a reduced flow of trade through the Great Lakes.
In addition to Macknaw, there are two buoy tenders and a handful of icebreaking tugs from the 70s and 80s. They're just not as effective as the modern ships.
I'm adding your blog right now.
Thanks! I hope you enjoy it.
Who has a recently built design anywhere close to our specs? I really haven't found one. I suspect we need something based on Australia, Chile or Argentina designs rather than Canada or Finland.
Don't confuse what Finland operates vs what they can build. With its vast experience, Finnish companies can design and build a vessel optimized for a given mission in specific ice conditions based on their extensive experience (and test data from) building and testing hundreds of hull forms, propulsion types, etc over the decades.
For a specific ship close to a U.S. 'Heavy' Polar Icebreaker:
Le Commandant Charcot, designed by Aker of Finland and built by Vard in Romania and Norway is the most capable non-nuclear icebreaker in the world- and the one most recently built that is close to our specs. The sad part is that her design started around the same time as the PSC program, but LCC has been breaking ice since the summer of 2021. LCC was the first non-nuclear vessel (that I can find) to sail solo across the transpolar route, and she has (or had) the record for reaching the furthest point south of any vessel (in the Ross Sea, so capable of our McMurdo mission). Has also provided assistance to several research icebreakers and ice-hardened Naval and Coast Guard vessels while operating near Antarctica and Greenland.
Charcot is the only PC 2 class icebreaker in existence at the moment, she just happens to be operating as a luxury cruise ship.
See here:
https://sixtydegreesnorth.substack.com/p/a-successful-commercial-icebreaker
Charcot could have easily been built in Finland. I'm not sure if the driver was money or local yard capacity at the time. (Helsinki shipyard was off-limits for a while due to Russian ownership.)
Finland has built hulls for Russian nuclear icebreakers, as well as Polar research vessels. They can build whatever the demand is- large or small, for polar ice, true icebreaker, or just ice-capable vessel. Polaris is a very most modern icebreaker (built 2016) but optimized for escort ops in the Baltic. She lacks the endurance for polar ops. The Yuriy Kuchiev, in contrast, is a huge, ice-capable oil tanker designed to operate independently along Russia's Northern Sea Route.
So yes, Finland is the right place to bring our requirements and let them optimize a design for us. It does not take the local Naval Architects long to do the work.
*edited because I wrote the original before having sufficient coffee*
This is good news, thanks!
Russians just launched a 35,000 ton nuclear icebreaker. Trying to open up the Arctic. Read an article that suggested that the road to peace in Ukraine may run through the Arctic because assisting with the effort offers a carrot to induce the Russians to make concessions elsewhere.
Yes, that's the fourth of seven planned project 2220 icebreakers, designed specifically to operate on the Northern Sea Route. Russia is working hard to make the NSR operable all year round, not just during the summer months. Nuclear power is good for the NSR, not a lot of places to pull into port and refuel.
I saw a similar article, but I'm not convinced by the argument. Russian LNG exports along the NSR are complex at the moment- some are sanctioned, some are not. I think the NSR is developing regardless, with both Russia and China interested in using it as it bypasses the dumpster fires in many of the world's choke points right now.
Article I saw argued the issue was bigger than oil and gas and extended to all the resources of Siberia using the large rivers that run north. Not sure how that tracks with the icebreakers as those rivers freeze up themselves and it would take a lot of icebreakers to bust up 1000 miles of river ice. The Russians use frozen rivers as highways but trucks would be inefficient for bulk commodities.
Trump has made a lot of mistakes over the years resulting in bankruptcy. But he LEARNED from those mistakes, and kept creating success (and wealth). DoD, Congress, and the Military Industrial Complex (TM) have created success in creating wealth for themselves while FAILING in their actual mission, that of creating military capability for the nation. This is a self serving, self licking ice cream cone of personal largesse that is deeply entrenched, massively entitled, and will lash out violently at any effort to change it. I wish President Elect Trump all the best and hope for his success.
I read the article with some degree of enthusiasm but it's tempered by the inertia in the Navy to do anything bold or innovative. To make this work DOD must first hold that panel that evaluates the fitness of GOFOs and especially their civil service equivalents.
Trump is a babbling idiot
Albert Grecco: "Trump is a babbling idiot."
As I observed in another comment, the DOD's senior bureaucrats are now gearing up to defend the status quo. The Biden administration has updated the managerial order of succession in all government departments and agencies to place its own policy acolytes into those senior positions just below those of the political appointees.
Their job is to block anything and everything the incoming Trump administration does to break the status quo.
One of their tactics will be to activate hundreds of whistleblowers in every department and agency of the federal government, whose assignment is to bring manufactured charges of incompetence and malfeasence against Trump's political and senior managerial appointees, and their senior staffs.
Donald Trump survived two bogus impeachments, a stolen 2020 presidential election, and two assassination attempts on his life in order to enter the Oval Office for a second time. As a more civilized means of deposing him, would you be on board with a third attempt at impeachment for some number of alleged high crimes and misdemeanors?
And if so, which high crimes and misdemeanors would you allege; and how soon into his second term would you allege them? May or June of 2025 possibly?
Trump earned every impeachment and 34 felony convictions. He should have been removed from office and be in jail right now. He is a threat to national security and is a 1 man impeachment rich environment. As soon as he tries to remove birthright citizenship by executive order, he should be impeached again. He doesn’t believe in the rule of law, and your comment belies your disdain for our justice system and institutions to include elections. Stolen election? Pfft.
idiotic comment that doesn't belong on this forum
As long as naval pronouncements are posted from an incompetent oaf who can’t form a cogent thought and someone who is the personification of a domestic threat to the Constitution, rebuttals belong on this site. He hasn’t a clue what he is talking about and his nominee for SECNAV is unqualified.
Topic is Trump, not Biden.
Exactly.
Albert, you have indicated that you are onboard with a third impeachment even before Donald Trump takes the oath of office for a second time. If I may say so, anything short of assassination is OK with you.
As a means of highlighting any problems you might think are currently present in how the US maintains its defense posture, what future policy actions in that sphere would you consider as being impeachable offences worthy of removing Donald Trump from office?
For an example, would cutting back or even stopping all assistance to Ukraine as part of a decision to give higher spending priority to naval shipbuilding be one such impeachable offence?
Why do you think Trump will give any priority to defense? However revenue is raised, it would still require a significant increase in the SCN budget to build new ships and the O&M budget to maintain them properly. Instead, Trump championed tax cuts and incurred an $8T deficit during his term without doing anything for National Defense. Why should we give him any credibility now? Abandoning an ally and democracy fighting against an illegal invasion by a dictatorship and enemy of the United States is not an answer.
The way things work now is that DOD is a slave to policy priorities imposed upon it by the Department of State and the White House national security staff.
The DOS and the current White House national security staff are in turn agents of the larger Deep State in defending the current status quo in all matters of US foreign statecraft and US national defense.
What I see happening in the first few months of the new administration is that DOD's legacy senior staff will work closely with the legacy senior staff of the Department of State in preventing an honest an informed discussion concerning where federal money should be spent, how much money should be spent, and which policy agendas should be funded and vigorously pursued.
Blocking these honest and informed discussions will be one key element among several in the legacy staff's plan for guaranteeing a Trump adminstration failure in the areas of US foreign statecraft and US national defense.
Another key element of the legacy staff's plan for a vigorous defense of the status quo is to ignore or even directly countermand Donald Trump's explicit presidential orders and policy directions in the belief that their allies in the Congress and in the courts will shield them from being terminated for acts of insubordination.
The hope is that the constitutional structure will hold. The power of the Sovereign has been chopped up and divided. We have separate Sovereigns; 51 of them. The one Trump was elected president of, cut the power into thirds. While Trump can execute, he can't legislate or adjudicate.
War is tricky. Conservatives formerly expressed the notion that only the Congress can declare war. I have no idea what the prevailing orthodoxy is now. So, starting war with Denmark without a vote in Congress would be impeachable.
Ukraine was invaded by a nation with no respect for territorial integrity. Obviously the proper course of action is to aid Ukrainian defense, particularly when the victim's enemy is our foe too. But, currently, the President is given wide latitude by the Congress. It is within Trump's grant of authority to not give aid, just like it is within Biden's power to give aid. So, not impeachable.
Nobody is going to start a war with Denmark. People have absolutely no understanding of President Trumps negotiating, and too many are willing to believe the wildest nonsense about him.
I was responding to Mr. Brim. Starting a war is impeachable, because Congress is supposed to start wars. I picked Denmark because of the saber-rattling over Greenland.
Interesting fact: on a per capita basis, Denmark had a higher casualty rate in Afghanistan than the US did.
Please check the SSC on your LES, and tell us how much time is on it. You'll find it in Block 76.
Your point?
Since I read this 3 days ago I have been thinking about Samuel Pepys, "Peeps" to his friends.
Pepys lies at the intersection of navalism and literature. He was a bureaucrat in the Royal Navy during the Anglo-Dutch wars that left such an impression on A.T. Mahan. He was a bit of a libertine at a time when England was shaking off the shackles locked on her by a christian nationalist government. His diary remains widely read today.
Pepys was a senior bureaucrat in England's NAVSEA. His Navy was like ours, but, worse. Combat proved that England's wooden walls were worm-ridden and rotten. His Executive was much like The Donald; rich and indolent with a short attention span. The Legislature was parsimonious, much like ours.
Despite all this, Pepys made massive changes in this Navy. He overturned a corrupt system of ship building and turned the Royal Dockyard into one of the most efficient industrial facilities in the world. He created systems of procurement outside cronyism and corruption. He professionalised the officer corps, promoting officers on demonstrated competence.
He did all this from inside the institution.
Trump won't be able to do much, domestically or internationally, until he removes everyone who intends on sabotaging him.
On this subject he is reported to have said no more than 80% of the commenters on this site over the past few years.
Call your doctor; TDS can be harmful:)
Trump Dun Shat his pants?
Albert Greco is a babbling idiot.
Nadler, did live on TV no less.
Shut up. I’m hearing jibber Jabber
You must be one of those MAGAtards
Albert Grecco is a babbling idiot.
No, he's a navel gazer.
Typical of Trump and not stating this negatively. He knows and we all know we need more ships. And we don’t have the capacity to build more ships right now. So details need to be handled by those tasked with the job of acquiring. And they need to do so without undue delay and complications. Period.
When dealing with Trump it is dangerous to the extreme to believe he understands why the admirals , who are also supposed to be well informed are recommending changes and whether some adjustments on models need to be tried to get prototype that is different than prior class . Main point is the Sec Navy choice must be someone that is influenced by the navy's value to the national security in its broadest sense - warfighting and other. , and not pleasing the boss per se.
Doesn't look like the nominee fills that bill. He may own a yacht but that would be his only Naval qualification.
As opposed to the resume of the current SecNav who made climate change his number one priority? We'll see if hiring for character instead of the resume makes a difference soon enough.
After all, FDR didn't have any qualifications yet actually ran programs while SecNav "giving the negroes the vote was a mistake." Daniel's (D) remained a figurehead.
Albert Grecco is a babbling idiot.
Kinda' depends on the bosses orders, don't it? And he could do worse than ignoring the Admirals who gave us the Ford ALRE, the LCS and new Frigate.
Talk... talk... talk. Yes, the FFG-62 is a mess, and we shouldn't have closed so many public yards... but...let's see what they ACTUALLY do.
Seems to me that the US has been setting up South Korea to build US Navy ships. The Koreans now run the Philly ship yard and there have been some deals or agreements to have Korea do maintenance work in Korea, if I recall correctly.
It won't built SPY-6 RMAs any faster.
South Korea knows how to build ships.