No, actually it cannot be done. If it could, it would. Recall the slew of nationalized industries under the Brits some half century ago. How did that little experiment fare?
From each according to his larder, to each according to his greed. Robert Mugabe said, "Errybody can be reech!", and by God in a decade every Zimbabwean had bucket loads of $100,000,000,000,000 dollar bills. Maybe in the future my own personal happiness can be defined by how slow my personal situation declines in comparison to others...that is, my misery can be endured if it ain't as bad as the other proles. Mumble-mumble, Equity...something. Hoch auf dich, Klaus Schwab.
And Mugabe was no worse than Sithole, the founder of ZANU. But I get stuck on the small things like Sithole--->S_ithole and ZANU--->Xenu and go off on tangents. I see AOC I think of a Chief with a hangover and the D.T.'s handling bombs on the flight deck...sometimes Alexa Occasional Cortex. Need to cut back on the coffee.
Maybe AOC is one of those who doesn't think that zero is a number but just a simple place holder. The price of free is zero, innit? I can't get the ♫ Girls Just Wanna Have Fun vibe out of my head though, but at least she isn't twerking:
Dale, That vivid memory "of a Chief with a hangover and the D.T.'s ..." was perfect. Especially as I drink my final cup of black coffee for the day, from the Navy-issue cup I received at retirement, which the new wife was trained to never wash. Harry
Harry. Used to be that Chief, but sober since 19 September 1979. Was never given any bombs to handle. Did, however, get across -10KV on a floating deck modulator on the Frigate's AN/ULQ-6B and 5KV & 440VAC/400hz on the CVA's AN/SLQ-22A(V)1. Dodged the 20KV on the 22's high level TWT. My reckoning with Jesus now some 45 years deferred.
But coffee cups. My intro was in 1966, first ship, a Dealey Class DE. RD1 Waters said it was bad luck to wash your coffee mug. His relief, RD1 Cavitt took it a step further. First day at quarters behind the signal bridge with a cold wind whistling off Narragansett Bay he had his coffee cup in hand and when he finished the last drop he said, "This is my mug. I don't like to share it. You shouldn't want to borrow it." Then he did something unspeakable to the rim of his mug with a fleshy body part. Petty Officer Cavitt never had to worry about some germ-laden sailor using his mug. Cavitt retired an EWCM(SW) and that former Arkansas 8th grade dropout became a PhD and worked for DON another 20 years. Still alive and kicking last I heard. There was always some XO doing his duty in the daily habitability inspection who just didn't understand. In deference to their sensibilities, we'd hide away our mugs so he would never see them near the coffee mess. On my last ship, a CG, the XO would sometimes have me stand in for him to conduct the daily messing & berthing inspection. The XO and I were pals (in private). One of his mentors as a JO was a CWO who was a friend of mine when he was a Master Chief and I was a Chief. That CWO became an LDO and was my first detailer when I became a CWO. Networking...it's a thing in the Navy. I never bothered about the mugs but was a stickler for spilt creamer and sugar and dirty layabout stir sticks. I'll admit a bias toward unadulterated black coffee but I'd lay down the smack anyway on such coffee mess litter. Geez...I remember as a noob RDSA on that DE, I took it upon myself to scrub out that dirty 20 cup aluminum percolator in CIC with Comet Cleanser and a green weenie. My good intentions were rewarded with scorn and the appellation of "Drifty Dale". Transferred 17 months later as an RD2 and away from that nickname forever. I miss my Navy. What a great life it was.
I respectfully disagree. Using the UK as the example has some weaknesses - we are not the UK, and we still have a kernel of citizens who want the opportunity to succeed if given the chance.
The problem is that the US investor class does not want to invest in companies that actually make things. Google and Meta (and other digital companies) have much higher profit margins. The US investor class also does not see the PRC as a threat. They do business with China every day and cannot imagine a Sino-American war.
I would also add that US investors prefer short TROIs and large CLTVs. Neither of these are particularly true for industries reliant on government contracts.
If I were a Marine approaching the shore on a little boat coming out of an amphib I would feel much better if lots of 8" rounds and higher were falling on the enemy.
I get it, but that is the past. No Marine coming ashore will have that, because nothing firing on a ballistic trajectory can come within range of that shoreline while it is still defended by an enemy that has anti-ship missiles.
Folks, the age of the missile is here. Live with it. Dreaming about 'the big guns' is akin to admirals in 1939 that still felt Carriers were a fad.
The big guns have been anachronistic for 40 years or more.
And rapidly, the carrier is becoming so as well.
As one of those Marines, I know JUST how ineffective most ballistic "big gun" shore bombardments were.
Given a choice between an Iowa class with 9x 16" barrels in support, or 400-500 VLS cells spread across smaller hulls, able to provide precision targeting of the enemies specific defense emplacements, I'll take the latter over the former every time.
If the enemy can have anti-ship missiles, can they not also have missiles to shoot down incoming missiles? The HIMARS we sent to Ukraine did not turn out to be game changers.
I am reluctant to put all my faith in one particular type of system not knowing what the future will bring. That's Maginot Line thinking.
I confess being inspired whenever I visit one of our battleships.
"The big guns have been anachronistic for 40 years or more."
Have to totally disagree... Maybe theres no place or need for battleships per se, but to think that there's no place for guns, especially in the 8in zone... Idk, I could think up tons of scenarios where guns are still useful, in lieu of the million dollar missiles...
Im wondering...if somthing " firing on a ballistic trajectory" cant come within range of the shore... Than what can?? Its not like the Marines magically show up in landing craft and the only ship around is a BB doing gun support LOL!! You know as a Marine how combined arms work and how an assault is prefaced. So isnt that kinda cherry.pickin to support your premise??
Yeah not gonna lie...Im a BB fan...but I know that the Iowas time passed. That doesnt mean that I dont perceive a very real utility in guns still, especially if we can move away from the popgun 57/76 and 5in and resurrect the MCLWG...even moreso if I can get it in twin-mount flavor...
This deal is a scam. What Nippon will do is close down the blast furnaces and basic oxygen furnaces. Raw steel will be made in Japan and the coils will be shipped to the US for final processing in cold strip mills. J. P. Morgan's greatest achievement will be reduced to the tail end of the supply chain.
Its all about outsourcing our pollution so we can feel smug about ourselves. The iron ore will still get smelt in to iron but not in the usa because that's dirt but we will take the finish product please
here are many things we make more of than we ever did, but it takes less jobs to do it and its a smaller share of the global market. We the people need to assess where some of our capital goes for things we need regardless the profit margin. To do that we need to look at what needs amended to make the legislature work better.
Sort of, if I recall, while we still have steel mills, the quality and fabricating type is limited. I believe single cast reactor vessels for nuclear power plants can only be made in Japan and France, two countries that support atom energy.
The rest of this story actually highlights the reasons this is not happening more and unfortunately may present a case of what not to do from an industry standpoint.
It seems there needs to be a business case to be opening more private yards. Dependence upon the whims of procurement doesn't bode well for either longevity or the quality of work as yards underbid to obtain the work.
It seems the only viable solution is to reestablish more government yards and accept the inefficiencies of maintaining an adequate workforce that may have enforced periods of inactivity. (All of course in high cost coastal areas.)
Jet, That is NOT the only solution nor is it needed. The "capital problem" could be helped by a US govt subsidized banking fund. The problem can be helped by USN contracting officer including offset clauses in ship repair contracts. Which takes higher level "guidance". The labor force problems have been addressed by such as the Apprentice School of Newport News DD, and the tech school set up by Austal US in Mobile, and there are other training programs.
Commander, truth be told, we have several overarching issues which will prevent the United States from regaining the kind of industrial base we had fifty years ago:
1-- Federal spending is now 40% more in 2024 than it was in pre-pandemic 2019. The federal deficit has reached 34 trillion dollars and is now increasing at a pace of 2 trillion dollars per year. The great bulk of this money has gone into domestic spending programs which do not necessarily expand America's industrial base.
2 -- If the political will is somehow found to dial back federal spending to that of 2019, the enormous cuts being made will, more likely than not, disproportionally affect that spending which directly supports America's industrial base, including American shipbuilding.
3 -- The Biden administration, with bipartisan support in the Congress, has committed the United States to a 90% decarbonization of the American economy at a cost of roughly 50 trillion dollars over the next twenty-five years. This is money which will not be available for naval shipbuilding. Or for anything else which isn't directly associated with decarbonization of the economy.
4 -- China has direct control of the industrial resources needed to support America's transition away from fossil fuels. Those resources include the raw material resources, the human resources, and the industrial manufacturing facilities needed to produce the millions of wind turbines, solar panels, energy storage batteries, and EV cars needed to decarbonize America's economy.
5 -- America's monied elites and the UniParty politicians who feed off those monied elites have no incentive for rebuilding a robust industrial base in America. Returning a healthy industrial base to America simply doesn't serve their interests.
6 -- After forty years of sending American jobs offshore, the job of the monied elites and their political minions, as they all now see it, is to do whatever they have to do to keep those jobs offshore.
The immediate task and purpose which now faces America's navalists is to slow the most serious adverse trends working against American seapower in order to keep the situation from becoming even worse than it now is. One of the first places to start is to start building the right ships for the right reasons.
The endless wars haven't helped. Imagine what we could have done with the $2 trillion we squandered in Afghanistan. BTW, when some reporter says we spent $100 billion on Ukraine that is true only under Pentagon accounting. I suspect the real figure is about $500 billion+.
Pete: "The endless wars haven't helped. Imagine what we could have done with the $2 trillion we squandered in Afghanistan."
We had no choice in 2001 but to go in to Afghanistan. But the Iraq invasion in 2003 was a whole different story. I'm not a veteran myself, but every military veteran I was working with in late 2002 and early 2003 was opposed to the invasion. For reasons which in hindsight were completely justified.
Here is a question for which I acknowledge we have no clear answer. Had we forgone the 2003 invasion of Iraq, would we have been better able to manage the ongoing civil war in Afghanistan in a way which made that country's prospects for survival under a non-Taliban regime a good bit better than they actually turned out to be?
As for the war in Ukraine, it is only a matter of time before Russia gains enough of an advantage in manpower and in combat resources to impose its will on its adversaries.
A point will come in a year or two when it ibecomes brutally obvious to every nation which opposes Russian aggression against Ukraine that overcoming Russia's ever-growing advantage in manpower and material resources has become a nigh impossible task within the industrial base constraints under which the west now must endure.
When the big fiscal crunch comes in 2025 or 2026 and spending on military procurement is reduced below current 2024 levels, America's politicians must then decide if supporting the war in Ukraine is more important than supporting preparations for a possible future war with China.
I agree with you about going into Afghanistan. My problem was staying there for 20 years.
The invasion of Iraq was done on the basis of false claims about Saddam's involvement with 9/11 and his arsenal of WMD.
Your comment about Russia reminds me about the debates held in Germany pre-1914 about the threat from a huge and rapidly industrializing Russia. The German leaders concluded that they must strike now while there is still time. Our current leaders do not fill me with confidence.
none of that money would have been available for shipbuilding. In point of fact, the Overseas Contingency Operatsions account was separate from the SCN Ship Construction Navy account and has OCO has been terminated.
You got FMS and military aid mixed up also. Most of what Ukraine is getting is EQUIPMENT (old and unused by DOD) NOT cash!
Brim all that is well and fine, but the problem at hand is a need for more shipyard facilities. That mean waterfront land, capital to build the facilities (like Fincantieri did at MMC), a qualified workforce and state/local governments who support an marine industry (when the might get more tax money from luxury residences~)
Lots and lots of superfund locations all around Hunter's Point. Many of the ships from the various Pacific nuclear tests were decomed there thus, lots of areas which are highly contaminated; asphalt was laid over the entire area to keep the dust down and prevent people from digging up the dirt. All the buildings have asbestos and lead issues. Then there's the problem of where are the workers going to live, while teh surrounding area is super-ghetto, the reality is the cost of living will prevent blue collar work from re-establishing itself.
The clearance level you need to run an industrial site is far less than that needed to clean to be safe to have houses with young kids. Where people can live is a different issue. But the USG can do eminent domain anywhere, it will just cost money.
There is a functioning shipyard at Charleston and Mare Island, but Hunters Point has gone residential. Long Beach was turned into a major shipping terminal
Long Beach is GONE. But the industrial part of Hunters Point appears still largely intact. San Francisco seems to be feuding with the Navy over how clear the industrial part has to be, so the buildings are still standing and the dry docks are still there. It would take many, many millions to put back in service, but still cheaper than buying new land and building a CVN sized dry dock.
Zero chance Hunters Point returns to being a functioning yard. The ENTIRE area is pock-marked with industrial and radiological clean-up zones. Even just focusing on the dry docks and surrounding area, every single piece of equipment & building would need to be replaced and re-built due to asbestos and lead. While I'd like to see Hunter's Point to return to its past glory, there's just too many factors working against it. Much easier to invest in updating Mare Island as it's still an operating yard, and Richmond which doesn't have as many obstacles as Hunter's Point.
It is time for a modern Merchant Marine Act that takes into account modern challenges and realities. We have not passed a major piece of maritime legislation in over 50 years. The Shipping Act of 1916, Merchant Marine Act of 1920, Merchant Marine Act of 1936, and Merchant Marine Act of 1970 need to be repealed, reformed, and consolidated into a modern piece of legislation. It can and must be done.
The starting point should be a Presidentially mandated Joint Interagency Maritime Task Force with significant and meaningful representation from industry and labor. For historical reference, we had one of these in 1965 that presented some pretty good findings. SECNAV's Shipbuilders Council is a good start, but it must be expanded and elevated. They need to scope the problem and offer meaningful solutions that Congress can then take and run with.
Fair point wrt SA 1984 and SRA 2022, but I think "major" is the operative word.
There was a good effort by Clinton in the 90s with the National Performance Review, but that was hijacked by special interests.
The challenge with reforming our maritime legislation is that the present system has concentrated benefits with diffused costs. Those currently benefiting from it are highly motivated to lobby for the status quo, even if it is at the expense of our national security.
The problem of concentrated benefits and diffused costs goes back to the Corn Laws in England (and you could probably find earlier examples). Sir Robert Peel ended the corn laws and his government collapsed. I don't see any statesmen of his caliber in this administration.
I'll submit to the Army Lawyer. The paper is due to my advisor in April. It will likely require additional editing and polishing if selected for publication. They only publish 4-5 papers from a class of 110, so my odds are low.
If not selected, I may keep developing the topic and submit it elsewhere, but I don't have a specific publication in mind.
Agree the degree of push back is likely to be quite intense on the west coast, the northeast & the mid-Atlantic. I would put the odds of revitalizing shipbuilding industry in any part of these areas as equivalent to the odds of winning the mega-million. As for the southern coastal states? Probably a more favorable picture.
Jet nails it. We can pass all the laws we want to modernize our shipbuilding capacity, but unless Congress slashes self-serving social welfare spending in order to toss contracts to shipbuilders it's all smoke & mirrors. I am convinced that their game plan is to ride this dying carcass to the finish line and then hayaku off to their luxury bunkers to ride out the End Times.
"How long will this new yard last once the USN contracts disappear?"
Barring a collapse of the US Government, those contracts won't disappear. The previous tenant of that property has plenty of Navy work, as does the BAE yard (formerly Atlantic Marine) upriver from Mayport. BAE has civilian work to go along with the Navy contracts. Barges, tugs, fishing vessels, the like.
A 500' drydock in Jax would be a big plus. It's a long haul between the drydocks of the Detyens yard in Charleston (former Charleston Naval Shipyard) and the ones at Tampa Ship. Fincantieri wouldn't be making the investment if they didn't think the business would be there.
Mostly good but this yard is not new. North Florida has been there for decades . Fincantieri bought them out. And BTW the city now wants to "revitalize" that part of the land where the yard is. Want to bet who get money?
Yep, but Fincantieri is planning to do much more with that plot than NF Ship did. If that works out, it'll involved significant infrastructure improvements. JAXPORT won't kick them out to build a park or something; the yard will be a boost to the tax base and jack up employment.
I dont think JAXPORT owns the land??? And now the downtown development commission is blathering about putting in residential in that area between stadium and JAXPORT
I may be wrong, but I'm under the opinion that either JAXPORT or the company owns the land, not the city. If you look at the aviation side of Jacksonville city government, JAA owns everything airside and companies there lease from JAA. That's the way it is at all the JAA airports.
They can still develop the area between The Bank and Fincantieri without messing with the latter. More power to them if that's the plan. But there's a lot of private industrial property between Talleyrand and the river that the city would have to buy out if they want to go whole hog there. I don't see it. They should concentrate on the area south of Bay Street anyway.
The distinction that Fincatieri brings to the table is that they already know how to do the automation part. Now they are making those capital investments in the U.S. and that would suggest that the rest of the U.S. shipbuilding industry is going to have to take notice. Should the numbers, diversity and size of uncrewed surface vessels come as expected, how content are U.S. shipbuilders going to be content to let a European transplant soak up marketshare? They will either evolve technically for the age or they will die. Automation is coming to this industry and so is additive mfg (see statements from the PEOs for the Ford and Columbia programs). There is a lot of industrial waterfront that goes begging for revitalization and I suspect the southern coastal states will be far more accomodating to making that happen. In other regions of the country, question would likely be why even bother trying?
You forgot a third response to Fincatieri being successful, and one that has a fair bit of precedent behind it: The US shipbuilders will go to their bought representatives to have laws and regulations passed that will cripple the competition.
MMC(SW) Retired mentioned closures before. I have always thought developers would goad the greenies into cleaning up the coffee cans, beef bones and WWII detritus from Pearl Harbor's mucky bottom and then turn that whole area into a family friendly theme park replete with paddle boats, roller coasters, hula girls in grass skirts (for lecherous dads) and Primo beer & pizzas with pineapple topping served in nipa huts. Ford Island could be Las Vegas West. Renminbi and Yen accepted.
I wonder what our shipfitter friend Byron thinks about this?
While this site can be saved, most of the other ship building yards which have been shut down, both public and private are irrevocably gone forever. The land has been converted to other, mostly non-industrial uses, under private ownership. Given the maze of environmental and other regulations involved with any construction today, it would take years or decades to obtain the land and build a new yard on the site of an old one.
Then, of course, there is the problem of a surplus of gender studies graduates, and a shortage of certified welders if you want to find a workforce to actually build a ship. Not to mention the hatred for anything mechanical which burns carbon fuels.
But, let's celebrate a small victory. Although it would be better if the PR photo had real ships instead of a crappy little ship pier side.
Sparrows Point in Baltimore might have potential too. The SecNav visit to Mare Island might mean there is hope. We see lots of signs but very little in terms of commitments.
Let’s not forget about the damage over-consolidation has done to shipbuilding. When HII bought Avondale, the first thing they did was sell the huge floating dry/launching dock so the yard couldn’t be used for new construction or repair.
"If you live near any major coastal town, you most likely see the waterfront version of the collapse of the civilian and military shipyard industry across our nation - now just holding on in concentrated pockets."
Classic case study is the SF Bay Area. Where shipyards of varying sizes were scattered all about, with all the supporting industries, today there's one heavy yard (Mare Island) that handles USNS & USCG contracts and a smattering of small maintenance yards (Alameda, Sausalito & Richmond) that repair barges, ferries and restoration of historical vessels. Everywhere else has been regentrified into housing (who doesn't like a waterfront view), converted into marinas or, designated wetlands/watershed/nature preserves. All of the three are irreversible. Coastal space and availability are being snatched up, look at San Diego, they've max'd-out all their usable waterfront space for industry. Los Angeles is entirely dedicated to container terminals. Seattle and Portland would require a massive change in their governments for any expansion or creation of commercial industry beyond what currently exists. Vigor in Portland I believe handles all West Coast cruise ship contracts now since BAE closed its SF yard.
There is space at San Diego. but it would require taking over the wildlife refuge south of Sweetwater Channel or the big marina/industrial complex south of that. Or shoreline Park and the multiple marinas south of the Point Loma annex. Eminent domain combined with legislation limiting legal appeals. Not cheap, but neither are $9 billion destroyers without any ammo.
The greenies will tie-up in the courts any attempts to turn any nature refuge/preserve into a ship yard or, base, they'd go apoplectic. Just getting a telescope built on top of a Hawaiian volcano, were ten other instruments currently exist, was met by months long protests, joined by high-profile celebrities in an effort to eek-out a victory that didn't amount to anything other than NIMBYism wrapped around cultural/religious reasoning.
Theres still some new space opportunities around Portland... And theres still a decent chunk of the Vancouver Kaiser yard that is industrial and has potential. The slipways and even the deep water is gone...but dredging a lil bit is your last worry when considering opening somthing blue collar industrial in this transgender soy boy paradise.
Nice to daydream... At least the Vigor Vancouver facility is building boats for the Army now LOL
No, actually it cannot be done. If it could, it would. Recall the slew of nationalized industries under the Brits some half century ago. How did that little experiment fare?
Under Clement Atlee and Labour, everyone in the UK was equally miserable.
From each according to his larder, to each according to his greed. Robert Mugabe said, "Errybody can be reech!", and by God in a decade every Zimbabwean had bucket loads of $100,000,000,000,000 dollar bills. Maybe in the future my own personal happiness can be defined by how slow my personal situation declines in comparison to others...that is, my misery can be endured if it ain't as bad as the other proles. Mumble-mumble, Equity...something. Hoch auf dich, Klaus Schwab.
Mugabe is no worse than AOC.
And Mugabe was no worse than Sithole, the founder of ZANU. But I get stuck on the small things like Sithole--->S_ithole and ZANU--->Xenu and go off on tangents. I see AOC I think of a Chief with a hangover and the D.T.'s handling bombs on the flight deck...sometimes Alexa Occasional Cortex. Need to cut back on the coffee.
AOC was a contestant on the Price is Right but lost because she thought everything was free.
Maybe AOC is one of those who doesn't think that zero is a number but just a simple place holder. The price of free is zero, innit? I can't get the ♫ Girls Just Wanna Have Fun vibe out of my head though, but at least she isn't twerking:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXvqJTOKcp0
Dale, That vivid memory "of a Chief with a hangover and the D.T.'s ..." was perfect. Especially as I drink my final cup of black coffee for the day, from the Navy-issue cup I received at retirement, which the new wife was trained to never wash. Harry
Harry. Used to be that Chief, but sober since 19 September 1979. Was never given any bombs to handle. Did, however, get across -10KV on a floating deck modulator on the Frigate's AN/ULQ-6B and 5KV & 440VAC/400hz on the CVA's AN/SLQ-22A(V)1. Dodged the 20KV on the 22's high level TWT. My reckoning with Jesus now some 45 years deferred.
But coffee cups. My intro was in 1966, first ship, a Dealey Class DE. RD1 Waters said it was bad luck to wash your coffee mug. His relief, RD1 Cavitt took it a step further. First day at quarters behind the signal bridge with a cold wind whistling off Narragansett Bay he had his coffee cup in hand and when he finished the last drop he said, "This is my mug. I don't like to share it. You shouldn't want to borrow it." Then he did something unspeakable to the rim of his mug with a fleshy body part. Petty Officer Cavitt never had to worry about some germ-laden sailor using his mug. Cavitt retired an EWCM(SW) and that former Arkansas 8th grade dropout became a PhD and worked for DON another 20 years. Still alive and kicking last I heard. There was always some XO doing his duty in the daily habitability inspection who just didn't understand. In deference to their sensibilities, we'd hide away our mugs so he would never see them near the coffee mess. On my last ship, a CG, the XO would sometimes have me stand in for him to conduct the daily messing & berthing inspection. The XO and I were pals (in private). One of his mentors as a JO was a CWO who was a friend of mine when he was a Master Chief and I was a Chief. That CWO became an LDO and was my first detailer when I became a CWO. Networking...it's a thing in the Navy. I never bothered about the mugs but was a stickler for spilt creamer and sugar and dirty layabout stir sticks. I'll admit a bias toward unadulterated black coffee but I'd lay down the smack anyway on such coffee mess litter. Geez...I remember as a noob RDSA on that DE, I took it upon myself to scrub out that dirty 20 cup aluminum percolator in CIC with Comet Cleanser and a green weenie. My good intentions were rewarded with scorn and the appellation of "Drifty Dale". Transferred 17 months later as an RD2 and away from that nickname forever. I miss my Navy. What a great life it was.
Better looking too.
I respectfully disagree. Using the UK as the example has some weaknesses - we are not the UK, and we still have a kernel of citizens who want the opportunity to succeed if given the chance.
The problem is that the US investor class does not want to invest in companies that actually make things. Google and Meta (and other digital companies) have much higher profit margins. The US investor class also does not see the PRC as a threat. They do business with China every day and cannot imagine a Sino-American war.
I would also add that US investors prefer short TROIs and large CLTVs. Neither of these are particularly true for industries reliant on government contracts.
The problem is that smaller shipyards do NOT make enough profits to pay for a good infrastructure. Which any bank will wonder about
At least we can still make steel.
To an extent. There have been operations to recover iron from waste rock and tailings in now closed mines, as well as ongoing operations.
What types of steel? Can we still make steel plates for the hull? Can we still make tubes for big guns?
What big gun will go further than a guided 127 or 155 round that can't be covered by ER-GMLRS or SDB-GMLRS?
If I were a Marine approaching the shore on a little boat coming out of an amphib I would feel much better if lots of 8" rounds and higher were falling on the enemy.
I get it, but that is the past. No Marine coming ashore will have that, because nothing firing on a ballistic trajectory can come within range of that shoreline while it is still defended by an enemy that has anti-ship missiles.
Folks, the age of the missile is here. Live with it. Dreaming about 'the big guns' is akin to admirals in 1939 that still felt Carriers were a fad.
The big guns have been anachronistic for 40 years or more.
And rapidly, the carrier is becoming so as well.
As one of those Marines, I know JUST how ineffective most ballistic "big gun" shore bombardments were.
Given a choice between an Iowa class with 9x 16" barrels in support, or 400-500 VLS cells spread across smaller hulls, able to provide precision targeting of the enemies specific defense emplacements, I'll take the latter over the former every time.
Semper Fi from the Gator Navy.
If the enemy can have anti-ship missiles, can they not also have missiles to shoot down incoming missiles? The HIMARS we sent to Ukraine did not turn out to be game changers.
I am reluctant to put all my faith in one particular type of system not knowing what the future will bring. That's Maginot Line thinking.
I confess being inspired whenever I visit one of our battleships.
"The big guns have been anachronistic for 40 years or more."
Have to totally disagree... Maybe theres no place or need for battleships per se, but to think that there's no place for guns, especially in the 8in zone... Idk, I could think up tons of scenarios where guns are still useful, in lieu of the million dollar missiles...
Im wondering...if somthing " firing on a ballistic trajectory" cant come within range of the shore... Than what can?? Its not like the Marines magically show up in landing craft and the only ship around is a BB doing gun support LOL!! You know as a Marine how combined arms work and how an assault is prefaced. So isnt that kinda cherry.pickin to support your premise??
Yeah not gonna lie...Im a BB fan...but I know that the Iowas time passed. That doesnt mean that I dont perceive a very real utility in guns still, especially if we can move away from the popgun 57/76 and 5in and resurrect the MCLWG...even moreso if I can get it in twin-mount flavor...
Yes but today you are dreaming
Sure. There is a plate mill in Portland, EVRAZ Portland. They'll have to check with Moscow before signing the contract, but I'm sure it will be fire.
Yes. But what big guns?
Different sorts of steel. Ship construction yes, gun barrel yes but not a mucch
Still plenty of ore mining going on in the Iron Range of Minnesota. Much of it exported to China. Some mining in Michigan as well.
Nippon Steel of Japan just bought U.S. Steel...but they're keeping the name.
This deal is a scam. What Nippon will do is close down the blast furnaces and basic oxygen furnaces. Raw steel will be made in Japan and the coils will be shipped to the US for final processing in cold strip mills. J. P. Morgan's greatest achievement will be reduced to the tail end of the supply chain.
Been doing that for years at "U.S.Steel" in Detroit, Michigan, USA. Every coil comes from Asia.
Its all about outsourcing our pollution so we can feel smug about ourselves. The iron ore will still get smelt in to iron but not in the usa because that's dirt but we will take the finish product please
here are many things we make more of than we ever did, but it takes less jobs to do it and its a smaller share of the global market. We the people need to assess where some of our capital goes for things we need regardless the profit margin. To do that we need to look at what needs amended to make the legislature work better.
My comment was more about Britain's closure of their last blast furnace - so they can remelt steel, but cannot make it from ore anymore.
Decline is a choice. Britain made their choice July 26, 1945 - the war wasn't even over and they decided to go communist.
Sort of, if I recall, while we still have steel mills, the quality and fabricating type is limited. I believe single cast reactor vessels for nuclear power plants can only be made in Japan and France, two countries that support atom energy.
Plus Russia and China. The UK and India are still planning on producing that capability. And they are not cast, they are forged.
The rest of this story actually highlights the reasons this is not happening more and unfortunately may present a case of what not to do from an industry standpoint.
It seems there needs to be a business case to be opening more private yards. Dependence upon the whims of procurement doesn't bode well for either longevity or the quality of work as yards underbid to obtain the work.
It seems the only viable solution is to reestablish more government yards and accept the inefficiencies of maintaining an adequate workforce that may have enforced periods of inactivity. (All of course in high cost coastal areas.)
Jet, That is NOT the only solution nor is it needed. The "capital problem" could be helped by a US govt subsidized banking fund. The problem can be helped by USN contracting officer including offset clauses in ship repair contracts. Which takes higher level "guidance". The labor force problems have been addressed by such as the Apprentice School of Newport News DD, and the tech school set up by Austal US in Mobile, and there are other training programs.
Lee, I just no longer see a viable long-term industry as long as it's reliant upon the USN for its survival.
Commander, truth be told, we have several overarching issues which will prevent the United States from regaining the kind of industrial base we had fifty years ago:
1-- Federal spending is now 40% more in 2024 than it was in pre-pandemic 2019. The federal deficit has reached 34 trillion dollars and is now increasing at a pace of 2 trillion dollars per year. The great bulk of this money has gone into domestic spending programs which do not necessarily expand America's industrial base.
2 -- If the political will is somehow found to dial back federal spending to that of 2019, the enormous cuts being made will, more likely than not, disproportionally affect that spending which directly supports America's industrial base, including American shipbuilding.
3 -- The Biden administration, with bipartisan support in the Congress, has committed the United States to a 90% decarbonization of the American economy at a cost of roughly 50 trillion dollars over the next twenty-five years. This is money which will not be available for naval shipbuilding. Or for anything else which isn't directly associated with decarbonization of the economy.
4 -- China has direct control of the industrial resources needed to support America's transition away from fossil fuels. Those resources include the raw material resources, the human resources, and the industrial manufacturing facilities needed to produce the millions of wind turbines, solar panels, energy storage batteries, and EV cars needed to decarbonize America's economy.
5 -- America's monied elites and the UniParty politicians who feed off those monied elites have no incentive for rebuilding a robust industrial base in America. Returning a healthy industrial base to America simply doesn't serve their interests.
6 -- After forty years of sending American jobs offshore, the job of the monied elites and their political minions, as they all now see it, is to do whatever they have to do to keep those jobs offshore.
The immediate task and purpose which now faces America's navalists is to slow the most serious adverse trends working against American seapower in order to keep the situation from becoming even worse than it now is. One of the first places to start is to start building the right ships for the right reasons.
The endless wars haven't helped. Imagine what we could have done with the $2 trillion we squandered in Afghanistan. BTW, when some reporter says we spent $100 billion on Ukraine that is true only under Pentagon accounting. I suspect the real figure is about $500 billion+.
Pete: "The endless wars haven't helped. Imagine what we could have done with the $2 trillion we squandered in Afghanistan."
We had no choice in 2001 but to go in to Afghanistan. But the Iraq invasion in 2003 was a whole different story. I'm not a veteran myself, but every military veteran I was working with in late 2002 and early 2003 was opposed to the invasion. For reasons which in hindsight were completely justified.
Here is a question for which I acknowledge we have no clear answer. Had we forgone the 2003 invasion of Iraq, would we have been better able to manage the ongoing civil war in Afghanistan in a way which made that country's prospects for survival under a non-Taliban regime a good bit better than they actually turned out to be?
As for the war in Ukraine, it is only a matter of time before Russia gains enough of an advantage in manpower and in combat resources to impose its will on its adversaries.
A point will come in a year or two when it ibecomes brutally obvious to every nation which opposes Russian aggression against Ukraine that overcoming Russia's ever-growing advantage in manpower and material resources has become a nigh impossible task within the industrial base constraints under which the west now must endure.
When the big fiscal crunch comes in 2025 or 2026 and spending on military procurement is reduced below current 2024 levels, America's politicians must then decide if supporting the war in Ukraine is more important than supporting preparations for a possible future war with China.
I agree with you about going into Afghanistan. My problem was staying there for 20 years.
The invasion of Iraq was done on the basis of false claims about Saddam's involvement with 9/11 and his arsenal of WMD.
Your comment about Russia reminds me about the debates held in Germany pre-1914 about the threat from a huge and rapidly industrializing Russia. The German leaders concluded that they must strike now while there is still time. Our current leaders do not fill me with confidence.
none of that money would have been available for shipbuilding. In point of fact, the Overseas Contingency Operatsions account was separate from the SCN Ship Construction Navy account and has OCO has been terminated.
You got FMS and military aid mixed up also. Most of what Ukraine is getting is EQUIPMENT (old and unused by DOD) NOT cash!
Brim all that is well and fine, but the problem at hand is a need for more shipyard facilities. That mean waterfront land, capital to build the facilities (like Fincantieri did at MMC), a qualified workforce and state/local governments who support an marine industry (when the might get more tax money from luxury residences~)
Just since my tenure in the Canoe Club, we have lost
Long Beach
Charleston
Mare Island
Hunter's Point
This is a shame
I think the drydocks at Mare Island and Hunter’s Point still exist.
Hunter's point has a contamination problem, but is getting redeveloped wherever that problem does not exist.
Lots and lots of superfund locations all around Hunter's Point. Many of the ships from the various Pacific nuclear tests were decomed there thus, lots of areas which are highly contaminated; asphalt was laid over the entire area to keep the dust down and prevent people from digging up the dirt. All the buildings have asbestos and lead issues. Then there's the problem of where are the workers going to live, while teh surrounding area is super-ghetto, the reality is the cost of living will prevent blue collar work from re-establishing itself.
The clearance level you need to run an industrial site is far less than that needed to clean to be safe to have houses with young kids. Where people can live is a different issue. But the USG can do eminent domain anywhere, it will just cost money.
Correct.
They do the annual referb and modernization of USCGC Polar Star, along with a number of USNS ships. Both AS had their Restricted Availabilities there.
where?
Mare Island
There is a functioning shipyard at Charleston and Mare Island, but Hunters Point has gone residential. Long Beach was turned into a major shipping terminal
Long Beach is GONE. But the industrial part of Hunters Point appears still largely intact. San Francisco seems to be feuding with the Navy over how clear the industrial part has to be, so the buildings are still standing and the dry docks are still there. It would take many, many millions to put back in service, but still cheaper than buying new land and building a CVN sized dry dock.
Zero chance Hunters Point returns to being a functioning yard. The ENTIRE area is pock-marked with industrial and radiological clean-up zones. Even just focusing on the dry docks and surrounding area, every single piece of equipment & building would need to be replaced and re-built due to asbestos and lead. While I'd like to see Hunter's Point to return to its past glory, there's just too many factors working against it. Much easier to invest in updating Mare Island as it's still an operating yard, and Richmond which doesn't have as many obstacles as Hunter's Point.
It is time for a modern Merchant Marine Act that takes into account modern challenges and realities. We have not passed a major piece of maritime legislation in over 50 years. The Shipping Act of 1916, Merchant Marine Act of 1920, Merchant Marine Act of 1936, and Merchant Marine Act of 1970 need to be repealed, reformed, and consolidated into a modern piece of legislation. It can and must be done.
The starting point should be a Presidentially mandated Joint Interagency Maritime Task Force with significant and meaningful representation from industry and labor. For historical reference, we had one of these in 1965 that presented some pretty good findings. SECNAV's Shipbuilders Council is a good start, but it must be expanded and elevated. They need to scope the problem and offer meaningful solutions that Congress can then take and run with.
There have been many such task forces over the years. Anyone remember the Packard Commission?
Congress did pass the Shipping Act of 1984 and the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2022. Limited results.
Fair point wrt SA 1984 and SRA 2022, but I think "major" is the operative word.
There was a good effort by Clinton in the 90s with the National Performance Review, but that was hijacked by special interests.
The challenge with reforming our maritime legislation is that the present system has concentrated benefits with diffused costs. Those currently benefiting from it are highly motivated to lobby for the status quo, even if it is at the expense of our national security.
The problem of concentrated benefits and diffused costs goes back to the Corn Laws in England (and you could probably find earlier examples). Sir Robert Peel ended the corn laws and his government collapsed. I don't see any statesmen of his caliber in this administration.
I am assuming that you saw this afternoon's What's Going on with Shipping?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD1tC_-7XWc
I had not - in the midst of writing a research paper on the legislative history of the merchant marine. I am going to take a look at that now.
Interesting topic. Where do you plan to publish the paper?
I'll submit to the Army Lawyer. The paper is due to my advisor in April. It will likely require additional editing and polishing if selected for publication. They only publish 4-5 papers from a class of 110, so my odds are low.
If not selected, I may keep developing the topic and submit it elsewhere, but I don't have a specific publication in mind.
sounds nice, but another commission ??
Jacksonville is still a USN town, and its southern.
Up north, or urban California where they really need jobs and infrastructure?
1. Lack of local interest in blue cities like LA, NYC, Philadelphia, Baltimore
2. No National Will
3. Insufficient market to be profitable
a.) wages will be too high to be competitive. (Nevermind the Europeans who are successful.)
4. No interest in creating a viable US commercial fleet (See #3 for both ship's crew and proposed yards.)
5. Will be opposed by
a. environmentalists
b. NIMBY
Sorry Commander. If a industry makes noise, involves fire, or hires blue collars the nation as a whole doesn't want it.
Edit: How long will this new yard last once the USN contracts disappear?
Agree the degree of push back is likely to be quite intense on the west coast, the northeast & the mid-Atlantic. I would put the odds of revitalizing shipbuilding industry in any part of these areas as equivalent to the odds of winning the mega-million. As for the southern coastal states? Probably a more favorable picture.
Jet nails it. We can pass all the laws we want to modernize our shipbuilding capacity, but unless Congress slashes self-serving social welfare spending in order to toss contracts to shipbuilders it's all smoke & mirrors. I am convinced that their game plan is to ride this dying carcass to the finish line and then hayaku off to their luxury bunkers to ride out the End Times.
I don’t think Phila fits into this category. There is a building yard and a repair yard operating in the old facilities.
I believe there is still some un-utilized infrastructure remaining.
Aren't carrier propellers still forged at Philly?
The new FFG-62 Land-Based Engineering Site is located there, along with the same for DDG-51.
I truly don’t know. There is some activity, and Navsea, but I have no details.
Is Sparrows Point still available or, undeveloped?
My limited understanding is it's available(ish).
There's been some starts, but nothing has taken hold.
I put the last Navy ship through what was left of Bethship. A conversion of the USNS El Paso T-LKA 117
"How long will this new yard last once the USN contracts disappear?"
Barring a collapse of the US Government, those contracts won't disappear. The previous tenant of that property has plenty of Navy work, as does the BAE yard (formerly Atlantic Marine) upriver from Mayport. BAE has civilian work to go along with the Navy contracts. Barges, tugs, fishing vessels, the like.
A 500' drydock in Jax would be a big plus. It's a long haul between the drydocks of the Detyens yard in Charleston (former Charleston Naval Shipyard) and the ones at Tampa Ship. Fincantieri wouldn't be making the investment if they didn't think the business would be there.
Thanks for the both the gouge and the correction. Sometimes the cynicism takes hold.
Mostly good but this yard is not new. North Florida has been there for decades . Fincantieri bought them out. And BTW the city now wants to "revitalize" that part of the land where the yard is. Want to bet who get money?
Yep, but Fincantieri is planning to do much more with that plot than NF Ship did. If that works out, it'll involved significant infrastructure improvements. JAXPORT won't kick them out to build a park or something; the yard will be a boost to the tax base and jack up employment.
I dont think JAXPORT owns the land??? And now the downtown development commission is blathering about putting in residential in that area between stadium and JAXPORT
I may be wrong, but I'm under the opinion that either JAXPORT or the company owns the land, not the city. If you look at the aviation side of Jacksonville city government, JAA owns everything airside and companies there lease from JAA. That's the way it is at all the JAA airports.
They can still develop the area between The Bank and Fincantieri without messing with the latter. More power to them if that's the plan. But there's a lot of private industrial property between Talleyrand and the river that the city would have to buy out if they want to go whole hog there. I don't see it. They should concentrate on the area south of Bay Street anyway.
P.S. I checked the Property Appraiser's site, Fincantieri owns the property.
https://paopropertysearch.coj.net/Tangible/Detail.aspx?TPP=9714600100
Under the doctrine of freed trade, capital will flow to wherever it can earn the highest return.
If you lent money, would you prefer a country with our education, tax, legal and regulatory systems or Japan and the ROK and their systems?
Don't forget to factor in the critical energy and transportation infrastructure.
The deindustrialization of the West was not just the sole fault of greedy hedge fund managers.
The distinction that Fincatieri brings to the table is that they already know how to do the automation part. Now they are making those capital investments in the U.S. and that would suggest that the rest of the U.S. shipbuilding industry is going to have to take notice. Should the numbers, diversity and size of uncrewed surface vessels come as expected, how content are U.S. shipbuilders going to be content to let a European transplant soak up marketshare? They will either evolve technically for the age or they will die. Automation is coming to this industry and so is additive mfg (see statements from the PEOs for the Ford and Columbia programs). There is a lot of industrial waterfront that goes begging for revitalization and I suspect the southern coastal states will be far more accomodating to making that happen. In other regions of the country, question would likely be why even bother trying?
You forgot a third response to Fincatieri being successful, and one that has a fair bit of precedent behind it: The US shipbuilders will go to their bought representatives to have laws and regulations passed that will cripple the competition.
Agreed, but the Navy is better at doing that themselves with how they regulate their work with shipbuilders.
"But our valuable tourism and recreational lifestyle dollars will be hurt"!
MMC(SW) Retired mentioned closures before. I have always thought developers would goad the greenies into cleaning up the coffee cans, beef bones and WWII detritus from Pearl Harbor's mucky bottom and then turn that whole area into a family friendly theme park replete with paddle boats, roller coasters, hula girls in grass skirts (for lecherous dads) and Primo beer & pizzas with pineapple topping served in nipa huts. Ford Island could be Las Vegas West. Renminbi and Yen accepted.
Not in San Diego or Honolulu.
I wonder what our shipfitter friend Byron thinks about this?
While this site can be saved, most of the other ship building yards which have been shut down, both public and private are irrevocably gone forever. The land has been converted to other, mostly non-industrial uses, under private ownership. Given the maze of environmental and other regulations involved with any construction today, it would take years or decades to obtain the land and build a new yard on the site of an old one.
Then, of course, there is the problem of a surplus of gender studies graduates, and a shortage of certified welders if you want to find a workforce to actually build a ship. Not to mention the hatred for anything mechanical which burns carbon fuels.
But, let's celebrate a small victory. Although it would be better if the PR photo had real ships instead of a crappy little ship pier side.
here is a real photo of the yard from 2022
https://www.marinelog.com/shipbuilding/shipyards/shipyard-news/fincantieri-begins-work-in-northeast-florida/
The Philly Naval Shipyard would also be a great place to revitalize.
Sparrows Point in Baltimore might have potential too. The SecNav visit to Mare Island might mean there is hope. We see lots of signs but very little in terms of commitments.
Local Rep Garamendi (D) seems to have it in mind to revitalize MINSY as he invited and accompanied SECNAV on this tour last year.
https://www.instagram.com/repgaramendi/p/CyBVNLMg3eu/?img_index=1
https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2023/10/05/tommy-tuberville-hands-bidens-navy-secretary-carlos-del-toro-new-relevance/?sh=715973f61a33
https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2023/10/10/desperate-for-new-west-coast-shipyards-navy-eyes-san-francisco-bay-national-park/?sh=7bbfb1a76d4a
There is NO more shipbuilding facilities at SP
But it is not blocked from being revived. The graving dock is good and I think the land still has options, meaning not environmentally non-viable.
Let’s not forget about the damage over-consolidation has done to shipbuilding. When HII bought Avondale, the first thing they did was sell the huge floating dry/launching dock so the yard couldn’t be used for new construction or repair.
"If you live near any major coastal town, you most likely see the waterfront version of the collapse of the civilian and military shipyard industry across our nation - now just holding on in concentrated pockets."
Classic case study is the SF Bay Area. Where shipyards of varying sizes were scattered all about, with all the supporting industries, today there's one heavy yard (Mare Island) that handles USNS & USCG contracts and a smattering of small maintenance yards (Alameda, Sausalito & Richmond) that repair barges, ferries and restoration of historical vessels. Everywhere else has been regentrified into housing (who doesn't like a waterfront view), converted into marinas or, designated wetlands/watershed/nature preserves. All of the three are irreversible. Coastal space and availability are being snatched up, look at San Diego, they've max'd-out all their usable waterfront space for industry. Los Angeles is entirely dedicated to container terminals. Seattle and Portland would require a massive change in their governments for any expansion or creation of commercial industry beyond what currently exists. Vigor in Portland I believe handles all West Coast cruise ship contracts now since BAE closed its SF yard.
There is space at San Diego. but it would require taking over the wildlife refuge south of Sweetwater Channel or the big marina/industrial complex south of that. Or shoreline Park and the multiple marinas south of the Point Loma annex. Eminent domain combined with legislation limiting legal appeals. Not cheap, but neither are $9 billion destroyers without any ammo.
The greenies will tie-up in the courts any attempts to turn any nature refuge/preserve into a ship yard or, base, they'd go apoplectic. Just getting a telescope built on top of a Hawaiian volcano, were ten other instruments currently exist, was met by months long protests, joined by high-profile celebrities in an effort to eek-out a victory that didn't amount to anything other than NIMBYism wrapped around cultural/religious reasoning.
Theres still some new space opportunities around Portland... And theres still a decent chunk of the Vancouver Kaiser yard that is industrial and has potential. The slipways and even the deep water is gone...but dredging a lil bit is your last worry when considering opening somthing blue collar industrial in this transgender soy boy paradise.
Nice to daydream... At least the Vigor Vancouver facility is building boats for the Army now LOL
I remember when China bought the cranes. It was over then.