We need an infusion of NEW/OLD talent at the Pentagon. CDR Salamander, would you consider reinstatement? Please have CDM get this topic at the top of today’s news!
Well start with Steel, you need rolled steel to build ships and submarines. Rather than allow Nippon Steel to buy US Steel, the government could allow the existing steel companies here in the USA to buy the assets and either consolidate or reinvigorate existing facilities. How about a nice chat with the unions? You union guys talk tough, we are offering you a percentage of ownership and seats on the board. Oh you don’t want that? Then quit slowing down the train. No Private Equity or Hedge Fund money allowed, just people with a BIG loan floating over their heads and share holders that have to take a long view, or just all shares employee owned. Perhaps low cost loans over a long period backed by the full and credit of the federal government. Okay now we have some steel, how about the shipyards to build the ships. Well someone(s) need(s) a kick in the ass so hard they chew leather. Military and civilian managers who have tolerated the sloth, laziness, waste and fraud, hello Fat Leonard, need to go to prison, and if a military officer or enlisted to Leavenworth for a good stretch. But let’s start with the overweight SecNav, hey tons of fun, grab a piece of iron instead of a Big Mac and get busy. Times wasting. While we’re at it and talking coatings because we don’t use “paint” figure out a way while deployed to at least make a feeble attempt at tackling rust. Here is a novel approach for a leadership refresher course for the flag officers, a 1 day all expenses paid trip to Coronado, there is it gang, the water! Now get wet and get sandy. The Marine Corps leadership doesn’t get a pass, they go swimming too. The guys with baseball hats, blue T shirts and camouflage BDU’s will help you all out in reaching your inner child. It would weed out the majority and then we can find some real leadership in the 05/06 ranks back fill. Honestly, it is so simple.
Understood for brevity’s sake was using the point that we need our own capabilities to formulate all manner of metallurgy products for all manner of uses. But good point and well taken. Suspect most here are on the same page.
Excuse me for pointing out that the three Australian Los Angeles class submarines that’s going to be produced in the United States won’t be using any actual steel actually produced in the United States! All three LA-classes will be using steel produced by Bisalloy Steel produced and shipped from Unanderra, New South Wales, Australia too the United States instead! So unless you’re going to threaten privately owned shipyards in the United States at gun point or simply take over their ownership by the Federal Government to use only US produced steel, any likely US production of steel being supplied is going to be a moot point…
Didn’t say we would not use another nations steel, only that we needed more of our own. Finland fabricates and commissions the finest SMR powered ice breakers in the world. Am all for simply buying what they manufacture and or having them make them for us. We have had a mess with the Italian designed frigate that is meant to replace the Oliver Hazard Perry class of US Navy Frigates. It’s a mess, and steel is the least of the problems. That said, steel is a matter of national defense, not just for ships and submarines. But what does it say that we decided it was better to buy from Bisalloy Steel and have them produce the steel needed for the 3 LA Class submarines and ship it half way around the world in order to be able to produce the boats?
For that to be achieved the Jones Act of 1920 would have to be either eliminated or heavily modified to allow direct foreign shipyards purchases! The last time the Jones Act was modified was in 2017, by the late Senator John McCain! And since 2017, virtually no one in the US Senate want to take up the mantle and responsibility of even wanting to take one the Jones Act of 1920! And as I recall for the first five or so years of the Oliver Hazard Perry-class development, it was also a mess In becoming a sure thing…
Part of our problem is some countries have the steel mill next to the shipyard and we don't any more. Even if we did, moving it on water here is more expensive than importing it. That is a fixable problem. We could fairly easily decide to be number 3 in steel production vs number 4, but there is a point of diminishing return so let India and China duke it out.
Japan is willing to invest one billion dollars in a new facility here. No one else has that kind of juice ready to go. We must let Japan buy USS. The Union boys want it.
What's the problem with letting Nippon Steel buy USS? The plants are still here, they will just try to run the business better than it has been. What's the issue?
From my perspective there is in principal not a “problem” with Nippon Steel owning the US Steel assets. That said why not incentivize two very good steel companies here in the States (Nucor and Cleveland Cliffs) to get a deal done. We are trying to revitalize and reindustialize the country. If we are looking at national defense security it might be something to think on. But if Nippon Steel has the dry powder in the form of a billion dollars to invest then be worth a shot at least to talk about it.
I don’t see how what you write is desirable compared to allowing Nippon to buy USS. Why incentivize a US company to buy USS if they don’t want to? How is allowing NS to buy USS not going to allow reindustrializing the country?
time for some airship magic here........okay, Campbell says we can build stealthy airships that can perform something like a floating-flying submarine-B-2 mashup; large capable ones at $250 Million a pop......and field them at a rate of at least one every two weeks (historical precedence).
fine, whatever.
but.......now for the real magic: build a small one to test, say 200' length. Payload about five tons. easy peasy. the magic is this.......if one simply doubles the dimensions....length, width, height......the payload potential increases EIGHT TIMES.
so, increase to 400' length...40 ton payload. increase to 800' length....320 ton payload. that's a fair number of VLS cells that can fly ANYWHERE, ( 100kts) land ANYWHERE, linger-range unlimited.
Bottom line, if China is outstripping us in traditional shipbuilding (and we can't catch up fast enough) then.......think outside the box, outside of traditional surface vessels.
Helium, a natural product, is a bit like oil. It's there, somewhere, but increasingly difficult to find and access, at ever increasing costs. The "running out" meme is incorrect.
However, it is certainly possible to build airships that use flammable gases (hydrogen, methane, natural gas, ammonia) for lift. Technology has progressed since the days of the the Hindenburg; we can create airships that are virtually, totally, fireproof. think......if we can build spacecraft that can withstand the temperatures of re-entry, we can build airships that are just as robust.
The United States has maintained the Helium Program, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a reason.
In the near term, we've got to change laws and acquisition regs so we can work with South Korea and Japan to build what we can before things kick off. Once they kick off, Japan and SK ports and facilities will likely be off limits. If we can export some of their capabilities here or other friendly countries to continue the line for maintenance and repairs, that would be optimal.
During that time we do need to kickstart things to build. It starts with energy before steel, before production. Coal, coke and steel have always been connected and are still necessary with our steel plants. So, we have to allow coal fired plants to restart to keep the coal mining industry going so 1) we have power and 2) we keep producing coal to 3) make sure we have coke to make steel. Any other energy, whether SMNRs that can rapidly produced or oil/nat gas generation would be good, too.
Get the small yards producing the LUVs and other vessels they can build to clear the rails in Bath, Marionette, and HII. There ARE a lot of welders in the old manufacturing and steel areas along the rivers, too, as well as the East Coast facilities. Go to them and/or find a way to get them to the big yards. Stop fiddling with the frigates, put on a 5-inch gun, and get a second yard in production. Put Burke IIIs and frigates in the water and kick the subs in the ass.
While I think ships are needed more, tell Lima they are going from "maintenance" production back into the production business. Start upgrading what we have and building new - what we have NOW, ready to go, not fantasy tanks of the future that are lighter than air and can shoot down ATGMs by the dozens.
The big key is missiles...missiles for all VLS/delivery systems and planes. We have a lot of planes and can make planes more quickly than ships. We need longer range and need to be able to do deep penetration strikes. We're going to get hit at the beginning with a massive missile barrage. We have to be outside that umbrella to the extent possible and able to get back in once the rain stops. The question is how quickly China can build missiles and how effective that first barrage is...
When I was helping to build ships and small craft on the Gulf Coast in the early 1990's, what came thru loud and clear to me was that at the end of the day, every worker bee needed to know he could provide for his family. Knee-jerk ups and downs in the shipbuilding contracts drove a lot of very capable welders to either build aluminum fishing boats or find some other line of work entirely. Unlike the DC DoD contractor environment, where a shift of contracts simply means a person moves from Firm A to Firm B (because the total work scope never has a negative slope), there was no place within reason to go. That led to a steady reduction in the number of people with actual hands-on skills. And that trend *must* be reversed.
I try and beat the drum for building naval ships in naval shipyards. There is a lot of opposition to idea of labor being government employees because of the idea that folks just lay around sucking the government teat. We live in a world where the idea of providing good, stable, jobs for folks is anathema.
In the past, Navy shipyards’ were required to have a zero balance at the end of each fiscal year. This was accomplished thru a huge annual slush fund known as the “corpus”. For the sake of this thread (though I’m willing to be corrected) let’s presume that is still the case. The problem with that was that as their costs increased for *whatever* reason, the shipyards simply passed those costs on to their fleet customers, leading to sloppy thinking and no accountability. At PHNSY, I referred to this as the hidden overhead of nuclear power - our sub overhauls, with all of their necessary additional engineering and QA were being underwritten by SURFGRUMIDPAC, who had no nuclear ships. As I was leaving the yard in 1989, MIDPAC had begun solving their own cost problems by using local commercial yards whenever possible. Just thinking out loud, one partial solution to this and the problem you lay out could be a classification of government employee in which their continuation on the job is dependent upon continued shipbuilding contracts.
My interpretation of the last election is not necessarily that the citizens object to a specific number of government employees, but that they want to get value for their money and they don’t want to get ripped off by unelected officials. So, let us use all of our infrastructure assets, including naval shipyards, in a competitive environment, to build the Fleet. Those jobs you write about would be good and stable because (a) we hold all contracting officers and contract signers’ feet to the fire, and (b) those naval shipyard employees would be pressuring their Congresscritters for more legitimate work.
Alan, take it one step forward. A shipyard is a source of shore duty. We have a retention problem. One answer has always been good shore duty. Take your industrial ratings and give them two years of shipyard duty. They will have a nice 9 to 5 job, and learn skills that directly apply when they go back to see.
Fantastic idea, sir! Those assignments would also add to their resumes for life after the Navy. Any reason, aside from unions, why a combination approach wouldn’t work?
What folks don't understand about unions is that every contract is different. If you open a yard, with lots of union jobs, you can gain concessions different from other situations at other yards. The United States can pass statutes that pertain to naval shipbuilding.
Trick is a maintenance yard and a new build yard aren't going to be as efficient if doing both. Those graving docks at the remaining navy yards have some pretty pricey gear to keep nuclear carriers and boats with a heartbeat while undergoing repair.
I wish I could like this comment 5x. We need to allow domestic operators and owners to purchase foreign ships for use in our domestic maritime trade. Unfortunately, this requires reform of the Merchant Martine Act of 1920 (which includes the Jones Act). We know how likely that is to happen.
"The US Army holds the most important Pentagon leadership roles and has built an enormous amount of power over the last two decades of the Global War on Terror. The $8 trillion dollar cost of two decades of land battles has benefited the Army most and now that we are pivoting towards the Pacific maritime domain, it’s unlikely the Army will be willing to let go of control."
Great quote from 2022. We see this playing out today as the Army pushes us back into the Middle East despite the fact that it isn't as strategically important as the Pacific.
Just going to say that "isn't as strategically important as the Pacific" is not the same as "not strategically important". And naval and air power will likely be more needed in the Middle East than ground power, now. Especially given Chinese interests in the region.
The conversation regarding Ice Breakers from Finland has come here and been openly debated in positive fashion. They make the best ice breakers in the world, and some are nuclear powered. They also have a big hold on the commercial cruise line ship building business. Could some sort of contract be made to make merchant vessels, you would think so, you would think we could get past the jones Act. It is a pity we are hide bound with an act of 1920 in a 2025 world. Here in New Hampshire the senior senator sits on the Armed Services Committee and sub committee on seapower. It appears she only gets involved when there is a photo op at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. See the problem….yep.
"Shareholder value" and low taxes becoming the preeminent objectives of US policy have paid their dividends - real and figurative.
Sal Mercogliano has written about how the decision to end construction and operational subsidies to US shipping and ship construction in the 1980s caused the fall.
At this point, with the self-destruction of US power accelerating, we'll be lucky to hold onto Guam.
The laws authorizing the construction and operational differential subsidies are still good law. The executive has the authority to use them. The problem is that they haven't been appropriated by Congress or requested by the President.
I have to wonder if this isn't a little bit what living in 1935 felt like.
Except the US had an enormous industrial base then, nowhere near the trade issues, and the PotUS could serve as many more terms as he wanted if he did a good job in directing the recovery.
I realize that in a shooting war, all of those PRC-built ships present a target rich environment. But with the exception of Taiwan, I don't think the CCP will let things get that far. They want, no they *intend*, to dominate world trade, and this is how they plan to do it. Our counter to that must include shipbuilding, but it must also be a multi-faceted response - economic and diplomatic, as well as deadweght tonnage and naval capability.
"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."
Both quotes are from a long dead Chinese dude whose theories on war probably don't matter. Anything from before the 21st Century is a boring old irrelevant yawnfest. All is well. We know our pronouns, and diversity is our strength. No worries. Everything was fine yesterday so I'm sure it'll keep being fine forever.
What concerns me is that China's maritime fleet is a military fleet disguised as a commercial fleet that leaves devastation behind it. In their pursuit of feeding their people, they've wiped out whole fishing fields and even destroyed coral reefs.
We need to rebuild out manufacturing base and revitalize our infrastructure, but that won't happen as long democrats betray us at every turn.
This goes beyond the fishing fleet. The CCP requires commercial vessels built in Chinese yards to be "militarily useful". This means their commercial RO/ROs have the space and capacity to carry military vehicles when called upon. It means their tankers and oilers are compatible with military vessels. In sum, it means their entire commercial fleet can be converted to military use with the stroke of a pen.
Democrats don't betray "us" at every turn. You are being whipped up into a partisan fever by consults who make their living sowing division. Democrats love America just as much as MAGA, maybe more, because our love is for a constitution, not a Caudillo.
There are hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters with proud records of military service. There are Democrats in Congress who are strong on defense, and to whom, other Democrats look to for guidance.
If you want the country to support a policy, put it on the table and make your case. Blaming others is counter-productive.
We can't wait for the shipyards to be rebuilt, workers trained, and contracts negotiated. We need to start buying ships from allied shipyards - immediately. We need them in hands of American owners before the war starts. Once it does, we will likely lose access to those yards.
This will require a blanket Jones Act Waiver and political courage from the executive and legislature.
That doesn't get the ships man nor the GFE built to equip those ships any faster.
We need to take personal inventory. What can I get faster, what can I put it on that can be used effectively for something I need faster. Where to build it, how to build it, will it be resilient to supply chain issues? Is it built in a secure location? These are all the little details no one seems to dig into any more.
Washington loves to talk about naval matters, but it doesn't actually do much.
In less than a month we'll know if President Trump is serious about enforcing his Executive Order 14269 ("Restoring America's Maritime Dominance"), because it's almost a certainty that the bureaucrats will slow walk everything. The first of Trump's deadlines are in Section 14 and Section 20, which require concrete actions by Friday, May 9, 2025.
If the bureaucracy continues to drag its feet, and if Trump & SECDEF Hegseth don't respond viciously and ruthlessly to compel obedience from the Pentagon and the rest of the Executive Branch, then we'll know that America will continue to sit on its ass through 2028 while China keeps building the world's most lethal navy.
You get more of what you reward, and you get less of what you punish. Trump is great at issuing decrees. Has he finally learned to follow through? We'll know in 23 days.
Fixing our maritime industrial base isn't a DoD problem. The DoD is a beneficiary of it, but doesn't own it. If you look at the last major pieces of maritime legislation (Merchant Marine Act of 1920 and Merchant Marine Act of 1936), the Departments of Transportation and Commerce took the lead in commercial shipbuilding. The DoD benefited from the commercial capacity and expertise when contracting for their own military ships, but military shipbuilding didn't drive the buildup.
I think the key is that more recently naval shipbuilding has strangled shipbuilding. Halting offshore oil and now slowing/halting offshore wind is also doing massive damage.
The only place offshore wind really makes sense is the Great Lakes, and good luck getting it done there. We couldn't get an experimental group of turbines installed on Lake Erie, let alone enough to get several ships built for the industry.
Good luck with this. The Democrats aren't going to spring for the necessary buildup without making sure that the Greens and grievance studies majors are happy, the Republicans are gutting the government's ability to collect the necessary taxes to pay for all this, and everybody wants to make sure their constituency gets a slice of the pie.
Taylor Swift has a bigger cultural impact on the world then all the music, literature, theater and art in China. There's something important to understand about this, but, I'm still trying to figure it out. Our military needs to study the Taylor Swift phenomenon more closely, and copy it.
Other thoughts:
--We don't need Bradley fighting vehicles. They aren't very good.
--Where are we going to deploy tanks in a war with China?
Yeah, Taylor Swift. Let's not forget American Exceptionalism. Who leads the world social media influencers, champions of Donkey Kong and HALO who have reached the 12th level, OnlyFans hotties, bundlers of mortgages & hedge funds to sell to the Chinese and Saudi's, GMO soy bean production and cable TV channels? America. Like MC Hammer famously said, "♫ Cain't touch this!".
Who benefits from trouble between the US and China? What nation with a huge contiguous border between it and China would gain if China, and the US, are weakened by a trade war?
I would like to posit that we need to integrate facilities to make this viable. We need about 100 acres centered on each shipyard. Within that footprint we build a SMNR (current approved NuScale design can be done in 36 months, or less if streamlined on regs), an electric arc furnace steel plant, and the shipyard (with graving docks). I would say Gulf and East Coast states that are politically amenable to enabling the development.
The SMNR can produce 77 to 250MWe of electricity to power the steel plant. If the electricity is owned by the same entity, that cuts the cost of the steel production and excess energy can be sold - also supplied to the shipyard. Thus the energy and transportation costs for steel are cut to the yards. If land can be acquired around existing shipyards on a crash schedule, you can get the SMNR, and arc furnace and yard up in 24-36 months. Do this in several locations.
Meanwhile, train and import the workforce. Build consortiums to finance it and bring in the Japanese and SKs to help - give them partial ownership/investment with our companies in the lead.
This all requires a shipbuilding plan that WILL NOT CHANGE. Frigates and Burke IIIs with replenishment ships, transports, and oilers.
Latest NuScale SMR isn’t likely to occur until 2039, because of NuScales last attempt fell through in November 2023, for lack of subscription, rising costs, escalating costs and delays and some utility members backing away from NuScales seemingly empty words and promises…
You can argue with the platform or company as you like, but the DESIGN is approved and the technology is valid and validated. Rolls Royce has an even smaller design that only takes up 10 acres. As with everything, the first one is difficult - numbers will differ from spreadsheets to the field. But letting the perfect get in the way of good enough - and a solution to an existential demand - because of pessimism will not solve anything.
A MOX (Mixed OXide) reactor could also be used and cheaply constructed too! Similar to the ones being developed by the Maersk International Container Shipping Company, using low enriched uranium oxide instead of high enriched uranium oxide, which has an even smaller footprint in containment…
Well, yes, but again the variable is time. An approved design now vs one in 5 years or 10 years makes a big difference for our objectives re China and building ships now.
The 100 acres is for the SMNR, the Shipyard, and the Arc Furnace. The steel mill and its supply and products yards require the most area, followed by 35 acres for the SMNR. Incorporating these into the same footprint with the shipyard minimizes some of the infrastructure for that and incorporates it.
YES! The United States simply must recover shipbuilding leadership. Having said that . . . it would take a national emphasis supported by the greater public to the point it would be a national FOCUS. I do not see that happening in the short term, though we have the right president to promote same.
Trump is at 48% approval, if you rely on the polls that actually got the election correct. If you go by the polls that said Kamala was going to win by 5-7%, then he is at 42%...but I wouldn't put my money on the latter given their past results.
The middle comes back in 6-18 months when the new economy starts humming. We hold many more cards at that point. Supply chains are solved at that point. MULTIPLE sources of things will then exist. American manufacturing will be back and growing, and most of the MIDDLE is right there!
We must prepare to inflict 10,000 centuries of humiliation, it's our only option worthy of us.
I didn't know Kai Wynn hung out on the front porch
We need an infusion of NEW/OLD talent at the Pentagon. CDR Salamander, would you consider reinstatement? Please have CDM get this topic at the top of today’s news!
We like Phib. Why would you invite him into that cesspool! J/k. I’d go with him. You know, to make coffee and stuff.
Well start with Steel, you need rolled steel to build ships and submarines. Rather than allow Nippon Steel to buy US Steel, the government could allow the existing steel companies here in the USA to buy the assets and either consolidate or reinvigorate existing facilities. How about a nice chat with the unions? You union guys talk tough, we are offering you a percentage of ownership and seats on the board. Oh you don’t want that? Then quit slowing down the train. No Private Equity or Hedge Fund money allowed, just people with a BIG loan floating over their heads and share holders that have to take a long view, or just all shares employee owned. Perhaps low cost loans over a long period backed by the full and credit of the federal government. Okay now we have some steel, how about the shipyards to build the ships. Well someone(s) need(s) a kick in the ass so hard they chew leather. Military and civilian managers who have tolerated the sloth, laziness, waste and fraud, hello Fat Leonard, need to go to prison, and if a military officer or enlisted to Leavenworth for a good stretch. But let’s start with the overweight SecNav, hey tons of fun, grab a piece of iron instead of a Big Mac and get busy. Times wasting. While we’re at it and talking coatings because we don’t use “paint” figure out a way while deployed to at least make a feeble attempt at tackling rust. Here is a novel approach for a leadership refresher course for the flag officers, a 1 day all expenses paid trip to Coronado, there is it gang, the water! Now get wet and get sandy. The Marine Corps leadership doesn’t get a pass, they go swimming too. The guys with baseball hats, blue T shirts and camouflage BDU’s will help you all out in reaching your inner child. It would weed out the majority and then we can find some real leadership in the 05/06 ranks back fill. Honestly, it is so simple.
Hull Steel . . . it is not just normal steel in rolled plates. Formulation is important. https://www.shipbuilding-steel.com/News/introduction-of-hull-structural-steel_2494.html for just a start.
Understood for brevity’s sake was using the point that we need our own capabilities to formulate all manner of metallurgy products for all manner of uses. But good point and well taken. Suspect most here are on the same page.
Excuse me for pointing out that the three Australian Los Angeles class submarines that’s going to be produced in the United States won’t be using any actual steel actually produced in the United States! All three LA-classes will be using steel produced by Bisalloy Steel produced and shipped from Unanderra, New South Wales, Australia too the United States instead! So unless you’re going to threaten privately owned shipyards in the United States at gun point or simply take over their ownership by the Federal Government to use only US produced steel, any likely US production of steel being supplied is going to be a moot point…
Didn’t say we would not use another nations steel, only that we needed more of our own. Finland fabricates and commissions the finest SMR powered ice breakers in the world. Am all for simply buying what they manufacture and or having them make them for us. We have had a mess with the Italian designed frigate that is meant to replace the Oliver Hazard Perry class of US Navy Frigates. It’s a mess, and steel is the least of the problems. That said, steel is a matter of national defense, not just for ships and submarines. But what does it say that we decided it was better to buy from Bisalloy Steel and have them produce the steel needed for the 3 LA Class submarines and ship it half way around the world in order to be able to produce the boats?
For that to be achieved the Jones Act of 1920 would have to be either eliminated or heavily modified to allow direct foreign shipyards purchases! The last time the Jones Act was modified was in 2017, by the late Senator John McCain! And since 2017, virtually no one in the US Senate want to take up the mantle and responsibility of even wanting to take one the Jones Act of 1920! And as I recall for the first five or so years of the Oliver Hazard Perry-class development, it was also a mess In becoming a sure thing…
Finns build great icebreakers (we need to buy a few from them), but they're not powered by SMRs.
Part of our problem is some countries have the steel mill next to the shipyard and we don't any more. Even if we did, moving it on water here is more expensive than importing it. That is a fixable problem. We could fairly easily decide to be number 3 in steel production vs number 4, but there is a point of diminishing return so let India and China duke it out.
Japan is willing to invest one billion dollars in a new facility here. No one else has that kind of juice ready to go. We must let Japan buy USS. The Union boys want it.
Before we re-industrialize, we must de-finance. The casino on Wall Street must be burned to the ground.
That would require destruction of the gerontocracy. All in favor of it, but most lack the will.
What's the problem with letting Nippon Steel buy USS? The plants are still here, they will just try to run the business better than it has been. What's the issue?
From my perspective there is in principal not a “problem” with Nippon Steel owning the US Steel assets. That said why not incentivize two very good steel companies here in the States (Nucor and Cleveland Cliffs) to get a deal done. We are trying to revitalize and reindustialize the country. If we are looking at national defense security it might be something to think on. But if Nippon Steel has the dry powder in the form of a billion dollars to invest then be worth a shot at least to talk about it.
I don’t see how what you write is desirable compared to allowing Nippon to buy USS. Why incentivize a US company to buy USS if they don’t want to? How is allowing NS to buy USS not going to allow reindustrializing the country?
time for some airship magic here........okay, Campbell says we can build stealthy airships that can perform something like a floating-flying submarine-B-2 mashup; large capable ones at $250 Million a pop......and field them at a rate of at least one every two weeks (historical precedence).
fine, whatever.
but.......now for the real magic: build a small one to test, say 200' length. Payload about five tons. easy peasy. the magic is this.......if one simply doubles the dimensions....length, width, height......the payload potential increases EIGHT TIMES.
so, increase to 400' length...40 ton payload. increase to 800' length....320 ton payload. that's a fair number of VLS cells that can fly ANYWHERE, ( 100kts) land ANYWHERE, linger-range unlimited.
Bottom line, if China is outstripping us in traditional shipbuilding (and we can't catch up fast enough) then.......think outside the box, outside of traditional surface vessels.
Airships filled with helium?
I keep hearing that the helium supply chain can't keep up with current demand.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20250331-why-helium-shortages-are-worrying-the-world
Helium, a natural product, is a bit like oil. It's there, somewhere, but increasingly difficult to find and access, at ever increasing costs. The "running out" meme is incorrect.
However, it is certainly possible to build airships that use flammable gases (hydrogen, methane, natural gas, ammonia) for lift. Technology has progressed since the days of the the Hindenburg; we can create airships that are virtually, totally, fireproof. think......if we can build spacecraft that can withstand the temperatures of re-entry, we can build airships that are just as robust.
If we choose to do so.
The enemy has incendiary devices. 🤷♂️
That's why you go "minimum manning". Crew of 6, maximum; optimum 2. Load with LRASM and cycle from outside 1sat Island Chain.
The United States has maintained the Helium Program, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for a reason.
Its dead Jim. Nine months ago. https://www.blm.gov/press-release/blm-completes-sale-federal-helium-system
Yeah,, I feel like we had this same conversation on here a few months back.
The designers of the Titanic made the same claims: virtually, totally, unsinkable. Spacecraft do not face enemy action. Yet.
I subscribe to these remarks, and think Airships should return.
In the near term, we've got to change laws and acquisition regs so we can work with South Korea and Japan to build what we can before things kick off. Once they kick off, Japan and SK ports and facilities will likely be off limits. If we can export some of their capabilities here or other friendly countries to continue the line for maintenance and repairs, that would be optimal.
During that time we do need to kickstart things to build. It starts with energy before steel, before production. Coal, coke and steel have always been connected and are still necessary with our steel plants. So, we have to allow coal fired plants to restart to keep the coal mining industry going so 1) we have power and 2) we keep producing coal to 3) make sure we have coke to make steel. Any other energy, whether SMNRs that can rapidly produced or oil/nat gas generation would be good, too.
Get the small yards producing the LUVs and other vessels they can build to clear the rails in Bath, Marionette, and HII. There ARE a lot of welders in the old manufacturing and steel areas along the rivers, too, as well as the East Coast facilities. Go to them and/or find a way to get them to the big yards. Stop fiddling with the frigates, put on a 5-inch gun, and get a second yard in production. Put Burke IIIs and frigates in the water and kick the subs in the ass.
While I think ships are needed more, tell Lima they are going from "maintenance" production back into the production business. Start upgrading what we have and building new - what we have NOW, ready to go, not fantasy tanks of the future that are lighter than air and can shoot down ATGMs by the dozens.
The big key is missiles...missiles for all VLS/delivery systems and planes. We have a lot of planes and can make planes more quickly than ships. We need longer range and need to be able to do deep penetration strikes. We're going to get hit at the beginning with a massive missile barrage. We have to be outside that umbrella to the extent possible and able to get back in once the rain stops. The question is how quickly China can build missiles and how effective that first barrage is...
When I was helping to build ships and small craft on the Gulf Coast in the early 1990's, what came thru loud and clear to me was that at the end of the day, every worker bee needed to know he could provide for his family. Knee-jerk ups and downs in the shipbuilding contracts drove a lot of very capable welders to either build aluminum fishing boats or find some other line of work entirely. Unlike the DC DoD contractor environment, where a shift of contracts simply means a person moves from Firm A to Firm B (because the total work scope never has a negative slope), there was no place within reason to go. That led to a steady reduction in the number of people with actual hands-on skills. And that trend *must* be reversed.
Long term high quality contractual obligations are required, and not just for combat vessels, or logistical support vessels.
Very true. Now all we need are politicians with a longterm view of maritime power, and the will to make it so.
"But we can get cheap stuff at Walmart without that expense!" That’s what too many voters think.
I try and beat the drum for building naval ships in naval shipyards. There is a lot of opposition to idea of labor being government employees because of the idea that folks just lay around sucking the government teat. We live in a world where the idea of providing good, stable, jobs for folks is anathema.
In the past, Navy shipyards’ were required to have a zero balance at the end of each fiscal year. This was accomplished thru a huge annual slush fund known as the “corpus”. For the sake of this thread (though I’m willing to be corrected) let’s presume that is still the case. The problem with that was that as their costs increased for *whatever* reason, the shipyards simply passed those costs on to their fleet customers, leading to sloppy thinking and no accountability. At PHNSY, I referred to this as the hidden overhead of nuclear power - our sub overhauls, with all of their necessary additional engineering and QA were being underwritten by SURFGRUMIDPAC, who had no nuclear ships. As I was leaving the yard in 1989, MIDPAC had begun solving their own cost problems by using local commercial yards whenever possible. Just thinking out loud, one partial solution to this and the problem you lay out could be a classification of government employee in which their continuation on the job is dependent upon continued shipbuilding contracts.
My interpretation of the last election is not necessarily that the citizens object to a specific number of government employees, but that they want to get value for their money and they don’t want to get ripped off by unelected officials. So, let us use all of our infrastructure assets, including naval shipyards, in a competitive environment, to build the Fleet. Those jobs you write about would be good and stable because (a) we hold all contracting officers and contract signers’ feet to the fire, and (b) those naval shipyard employees would be pressuring their Congresscritters for more legitimate work.
Alan, take it one step forward. A shipyard is a source of shore duty. We have a retention problem. One answer has always been good shore duty. Take your industrial ratings and give them two years of shipyard duty. They will have a nice 9 to 5 job, and learn skills that directly apply when they go back to see.
Fantastic idea, sir! Those assignments would also add to their resumes for life after the Navy. Any reason, aside from unions, why a combination approach wouldn’t work?
What folks don't understand about unions is that every contract is different. If you open a yard, with lots of union jobs, you can gain concessions different from other situations at other yards. The United States can pass statutes that pertain to naval shipbuilding.
Trick is a maintenance yard and a new build yard aren't going to be as efficient if doing both. Those graving docks at the remaining navy yards have some pretty pricey gear to keep nuclear carriers and boats with a heartbeat while undergoing repair.
I wish I could like this comment 5x. We need to allow domestic operators and owners to purchase foreign ships for use in our domestic maritime trade. Unfortunately, this requires reform of the Merchant Martine Act of 1920 (which includes the Jones Act). We know how likely that is to happen.
Just as an adjunct to illustrate the problem (that we all recognize)...https://gcaptain.com/us-shipyards-record-revenue-but-firesale-valuations/
"The US Army holds the most important Pentagon leadership roles and has built an enormous amount of power over the last two decades of the Global War on Terror. The $8 trillion dollar cost of two decades of land battles has benefited the Army most and now that we are pivoting towards the Pacific maritime domain, it’s unlikely the Army will be willing to let go of control."
Great quote from 2022. We see this playing out today as the Army pushes us back into the Middle East despite the fact that it isn't as strategically important as the Pacific.
Just going to say that "isn't as strategically important as the Pacific" is not the same as "not strategically important". And naval and air power will likely be more needed in the Middle East than ground power, now. Especially given Chinese interests in the region.
Importance of Middle East is mostly to Europe.
The conversation regarding Ice Breakers from Finland has come here and been openly debated in positive fashion. They make the best ice breakers in the world, and some are nuclear powered. They also have a big hold on the commercial cruise line ship building business. Could some sort of contract be made to make merchant vessels, you would think so, you would think we could get past the jones Act. It is a pity we are hide bound with an act of 1920 in a 2025 world. Here in New Hampshire the senior senator sits on the Armed Services Committee and sub committee on seapower. It appears she only gets involved when there is a photo op at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. See the problem….yep.
"Shareholder value" and low taxes becoming the preeminent objectives of US policy have paid their dividends - real and figurative.
Sal Mercogliano has written about how the decision to end construction and operational subsidies to US shipping and ship construction in the 1980s caused the fall.
At this point, with the self-destruction of US power accelerating, we'll be lucky to hold onto Guam.
The laws authorizing the construction and operational differential subsidies are still good law. The executive has the authority to use them. The problem is that they haven't been appropriated by Congress or requested by the President.
I have to wonder if this isn't a little bit what living in 1935 felt like.
Except the US had an enormous industrial base then, nowhere near the trade issues, and the PotUS could serve as many more terms as he wanted if he did a good job in directing the recovery.
I realize that in a shooting war, all of those PRC-built ships present a target rich environment. But with the exception of Taiwan, I don't think the CCP will let things get that far. They want, no they *intend*, to dominate world trade, and this is how they plan to do it. Our counter to that must include shipbuilding, but it must also be a multi-faceted response - economic and diplomatic, as well as deadweght tonnage and naval capability.
"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."
Both quotes are from a long dead Chinese dude whose theories on war probably don't matter. Anything from before the 21st Century is a boring old irrelevant yawnfest. All is well. We know our pronouns, and diversity is our strength. No worries. Everything was fine yesterday so I'm sure it'll keep being fine forever.
What concerns me is that China's maritime fleet is a military fleet disguised as a commercial fleet that leaves devastation behind it. In their pursuit of feeding their people, they've wiped out whole fishing fields and even destroyed coral reefs.
We need to rebuild out manufacturing base and revitalize our infrastructure, but that won't happen as long democrats betray us at every turn.
This goes beyond the fishing fleet. The CCP requires commercial vessels built in Chinese yards to be "militarily useful". This means their commercial RO/ROs have the space and capacity to carry military vehicles when called upon. It means their tankers and oilers are compatible with military vessels. In sum, it means their entire commercial fleet can be converted to military use with the stroke of a pen.
Good planning.
Democrats don't betray "us" at every turn. You are being whipped up into a partisan fever by consults who make their living sowing division. Democrats love America just as much as MAGA, maybe more, because our love is for a constitution, not a Caudillo.
There are hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters with proud records of military service. There are Democrats in Congress who are strong on defense, and to whom, other Democrats look to for guidance.
If you want the country to support a policy, put it on the table and make your case. Blaming others is counter-productive.
thousand "likes'.
We can't wait for the shipyards to be rebuilt, workers trained, and contracts negotiated. We need to start buying ships from allied shipyards - immediately. We need them in hands of American owners before the war starts. Once it does, we will likely lose access to those yards.
This will require a blanket Jones Act Waiver and political courage from the executive and legislature.
That doesn't get the ships man nor the GFE built to equip those ships any faster.
We need to take personal inventory. What can I get faster, what can I put it on that can be used effectively for something I need faster. Where to build it, how to build it, will it be resilient to supply chain issues? Is it built in a secure location? These are all the little details no one seems to dig into any more.
Washington loves to talk about naval matters, but it doesn't actually do much.
In less than a month we'll know if President Trump is serious about enforcing his Executive Order 14269 ("Restoring America's Maritime Dominance"), because it's almost a certainty that the bureaucrats will slow walk everything. The first of Trump's deadlines are in Section 14 and Section 20, which require concrete actions by Friday, May 9, 2025.
If the bureaucracy continues to drag its feet, and if Trump & SECDEF Hegseth don't respond viciously and ruthlessly to compel obedience from the Pentagon and the rest of the Executive Branch, then we'll know that America will continue to sit on its ass through 2028 while China keeps building the world's most lethal navy.
You get more of what you reward, and you get less of what you punish. Trump is great at issuing decrees. Has he finally learned to follow through? We'll know in 23 days.
Set a reminder on your phone's calendar app.
Fixing our maritime industrial base isn't a DoD problem. The DoD is a beneficiary of it, but doesn't own it. If you look at the last major pieces of maritime legislation (Merchant Marine Act of 1920 and Merchant Marine Act of 1936), the Departments of Transportation and Commerce took the lead in commercial shipbuilding. The DoD benefited from the commercial capacity and expertise when contracting for their own military ships, but military shipbuilding didn't drive the buildup.
I think the key is that more recently naval shipbuilding has strangled shipbuilding. Halting offshore oil and now slowing/halting offshore wind is also doing massive damage.
The only place offshore wind really makes sense is the Great Lakes, and good luck getting it done there. We couldn't get an experimental group of turbines installed on Lake Erie, let alone enough to get several ships built for the industry.
Good luck with this. The Democrats aren't going to spring for the necessary buildup without making sure that the Greens and grievance studies majors are happy, the Republicans are gutting the government's ability to collect the necessary taxes to pay for all this, and everybody wants to make sure their constituency gets a slice of the pie.
Well, Tom, reference has been made to environmental destruction, stopping the factory ships from exterminating Cetaceans is as green as green can get.
Taylor Swift has a bigger cultural impact on the world then all the music, literature, theater and art in China. There's something important to understand about this, but, I'm still trying to figure it out. Our military needs to study the Taylor Swift phenomenon more closely, and copy it.
Other thoughts:
--We don't need Bradley fighting vehicles. They aren't very good.
--Where are we going to deploy tanks in a war with China?
--Knock out Beijing and the war is over: Discuss
Yeah, Taylor Swift. Let's not forget American Exceptionalism. Who leads the world social media influencers, champions of Donkey Kong and HALO who have reached the 12th level, OnlyFans hotties, bundlers of mortgages & hedge funds to sell to the Chinese and Saudi's, GMO soy bean production and cable TV channels? America. Like MC Hammer famously said, "♫ Cain't touch this!".
Dale: That's what I'm talking about! American culture destroys everything its path. The US Military needs to harness this power.
Yes, Bill, our military and America needs to harness its best and worst powers in good ways.
I think we're very serious about being Russia's biggest, most beautiful, vassal state.
Who benefits from trouble between the US and China? What nation with a huge contiguous border between it and China would gain if China, and the US, are weakened by a trade war?
Who benefits if the NW passage over Canada and Greenland is blocked? The list with the same answer goes on and on.
I would like to posit that we need to integrate facilities to make this viable. We need about 100 acres centered on each shipyard. Within that footprint we build a SMNR (current approved NuScale design can be done in 36 months, or less if streamlined on regs), an electric arc furnace steel plant, and the shipyard (with graving docks). I would say Gulf and East Coast states that are politically amenable to enabling the development.
The SMNR can produce 77 to 250MWe of electricity to power the steel plant. If the electricity is owned by the same entity, that cuts the cost of the steel production and excess energy can be sold - also supplied to the shipyard. Thus the energy and transportation costs for steel are cut to the yards. If land can be acquired around existing shipyards on a crash schedule, you can get the SMNR, and arc furnace and yard up in 24-36 months. Do this in several locations.
Meanwhile, train and import the workforce. Build consortiums to finance it and bring in the Japanese and SKs to help - give them partial ownership/investment with our companies in the lead.
This all requires a shipbuilding plan that WILL NOT CHANGE. Frigates and Burke IIIs with replenishment ships, transports, and oilers.
Latest NuScale SMR isn’t likely to occur until 2039, because of NuScales last attempt fell through in November 2023, for lack of subscription, rising costs, escalating costs and delays and some utility members backing away from NuScales seemingly empty words and promises…
You can argue with the platform or company as you like, but the DESIGN is approved and the technology is valid and validated. Rolls Royce has an even smaller design that only takes up 10 acres. As with everything, the first one is difficult - numbers will differ from spreadsheets to the field. But letting the perfect get in the way of good enough - and a solution to an existential demand - because of pessimism will not solve anything.
A MOX (Mixed OXide) reactor could also be used and cheaply constructed too! Similar to the ones being developed by the Maersk International Container Shipping Company, using low enriched uranium oxide instead of high enriched uranium oxide, which has an even smaller footprint in containment…
Well, yes, but again the variable is time. An approved design now vs one in 5 years or 10 years makes a big difference for our objectives re China and building ships now.
100 acres isn't that big. Its not small for the U.S.
The 100 acres is for the SMNR, the Shipyard, and the Arc Furnace. The steel mill and its supply and products yards require the most area, followed by 35 acres for the SMNR. Incorporating these into the same footprint with the shipyard minimizes some of the infrastructure for that and incorporates it.
YES! The United States simply must recover shipbuilding leadership. Having said that . . . it would take a national emphasis supported by the greater public to the point it would be a national FOCUS. I do not see that happening in the short term, though we have the right president to promote same.
Trump only has his base, the 30%. He's losing the middle.
In other times, a charismatic figure, way lower down the chain advanced the navalist agenda. I'm looking at you TR.
Trump is at 48% approval, if you rely on the polls that actually got the election correct. If you go by the polls that said Kamala was going to win by 5-7%, then he is at 42%...but I wouldn't put my money on the latter given their past results.
The middle comes back in 6-18 months when the new economy starts humming. We hold many more cards at that point. Supply chains are solved at that point. MULTIPLE sources of things will then exist. American manufacturing will be back and growing, and most of the MIDDLE is right there!