Given Kali's idiocy, it is quite unlikely any yard will be built there. Just the minor ecofreakish rules are enough to stop anything of the sort. It could certainly happen on the fresh coast. Militant unionism in Ohio, however, might prevent it. A lot of industry has been driven from Ohio because of it.
I’d fully support a Supreme Court holding that Kali’s eco laws are null and void in so far as they burden interstate commerce. The revenge of Wickard vs Filburn.
Honest to God, some of its needed. Half of us live in a bowl where the air doesn’t move half the year. Its the nimbyism that is palpable. Environmental is one method of the nimbyism.
Not sure how these laws burden interstate commerce when CA is the world's fourth-largest economy. That results in the state contributing about 14-15 percent of the US GDP. Yes, building more shipyards in CA would be nice, but the same could be said of any state adjacent to the Pacific or Atlantic (or path to those oceans). Yet, no significant shipyard construction has occurred.
Even if environmental laws were struck down, where would the workforce come from? The current yards can't meet staffing requirements; CA's high COL would exacerbate this issue.
You need an annual income of like 350k just to buy any house in Orange County now. LA county isn't much better. Something can be done, but I'm not sure it will scale.
I realize that such a law by itself wouldn’t solve the overall problem, but it might show Sacramento that they are not an independent nation, as they often seem to believe, and that they have an obligation to contribute to the the general cause.
Interestingly, CA (at least revenue-wise) contributes significantly to the "general cause," whereas VA (even with the large private shipbuilder) is a significant burden on the federal revenue stream.
Fair enough, but cash shouldn't be the only measuring stick, right? I admit that my point of view may strictly my point of view, but it seems as if the California legislature would rather that the state be politically detached from the rest of the country.
We are no longer a blue state. We aren't really even a swing state anymore. The unions are dying.
You could probably score union support(!) by turning what used to be the Lorain Yard back into a live shipbuilding concern. Yes, unions are crooked and obstructionist, but they're self-interested. Tempt the bosses with a new yard that could be buzzing with union jobs, and even Ohio's rump Democrat minority in the statehouse will fall in line with the Republicans.
I held office in Ohio and saw things from the inside. The Ohio GOP is as establishment as they come. People like DeWine and Kasich are some of the worst sort you can get. The state isn't quite red.
Having said that, I think a yard on the fresh coast would get plenty of support. What the unions would do once the yard is producing is the question. There are plenty of indications that militant unionism is far from dead in the state. I would like to be proved wrong, however.
You'll get no disagreement from me on Kasich, Dewine, or the rest of the Ohio GOP. Hell, just look at what the Central Committee did on Friday.
I suppose the trick with unions at a gov't shipyard is to bake incentives into the cake that motivate even corrupt thugs to behave in ways that benefit the Navy & the nation.
Incentives both positive and negative should be used.
I have no idea what the central committee did as I don't keep up with them anymore. I left at the end of 2004 and moved to the mountains of Western NC. I would not be surprised at anything those morons did.
Historically, no country has reached the point the US has reached that revived and returned to greatness. The US is is simply operating on the prestige it has managed to hold onto since the Vietnam victory was thrown away by the new left. Someone is going to have to deliver, but it won't happen with the current politicos we have in DC, and that includes Trump. The vision simply does not exist among them.
I would like to be wrong. It is, however, interesting to note that the US is found no where in end times prophecy and we entered the end times back in 1948.
For decades now, I have held Kaiser as an example of how modern, fully rigid airships should be built; not as glorified balloons (blimps) or giant Chinese lanterns (dirigibles)........but constructed similarly to geodesic domes, out of solid materials.
Kaiser built a 150' diameter geodesic dome in Honolulu.....in 22 hours.
Whereas now, "building" blimps or dirigibles takes months and months and requires a hangar to do the work in..........modern airships, constructed in the same manner as Kaiser's dome.....can be built in less than two weeks, outside in a yard.
THAT is the future for Navy airships.
( I have also held out the geodesic dome at the South Pole which served for years.....as an example of how robust modern airships can be; if such a structure can withstand the most extreme weather on Earth; then airships built in the same manner can be just as strong )
Is it possible to incorporate low observable technology into these? Intriguing concept that I am largely ignorant of. Providing lift / platform capability without being a very large, vulnerable target seems...transformational (bad speak, I know). Perhaps an alternative to direct frontal assault against a fortified position (existing vested interests Iron Triangle defending their current self-licking good deal ice cream cone).
" Is it possible to incorporate low observable technology into these? "
YES! unlike airplanes (or rotor craft), airships can be made in any shape whatsoever;...the original "hopeless diamond" shape precursor to the F-117 will do. Or, more easily envisioned.....simply enlarge a B-2 about four times. size matters, of course, but shaping is a huge part of making something "stealthy" to radar.
Unlike airplanes, which have to rely on radar absorbent materials contained within a thin wing/fuselage surface material, airships have immensely large hulls; which can be made extraordinarily "thick" ; and contain that much more RAM (and RAM structure) inside their hull
Infra red? Never a problem. engines can be placed HUNDREDS of feet inside an airship's hull, mixed with ambient air in wildly serpentine duct without effecting flight. airships can also be made to fly on solely electric power.....no heat signature at all. the admittedly slower speeds of airships (0-250mph) also means less friction across surfaces; lessening infra-red signature.
yes airships are large and can be seen by the naked eye.....but if you're the target.....seeing them is too late.
We have heard this narrative for years about aerostats. Myth busters: They are hard to detect due to lower than expected RCS (study has been done many years ago), pretty resilient and survivable. (I love when the USG says that they can be easily shot down, as if other way more expensive elevated ISR fixed wing assets can't be easily shot down as well.....hmmm...how many of ours UAS have been shot down in Yemen??). Aerostats provide survivable persitent elevated ISR at a lower cost point and are currently working reasonably well in other countries worldwide. JLENS got a bad rap due to the breakaway in MD, but today those issues have been rectified. Just think about the deterrence value alone if the USG incorporated tethered aerostats with incredibly powerful I&W payloads (which exist) along the 1st and 2nd Island Chain "picket line", Guam point defense, or for lower tiered IAMD "Golden Dome" capabilities. Oh.... also currently TRL9 and ready to go.
I read somewhere that the Chinese still use balloons for intel gathering. Might just be urban myth, but rumor is that a balloon can fly all over USA without being detected until too late. (//s//)
We at Elizabeth City, NC have been pushing this for years.....but the same old negative perceptions by the USG continues to plague progress.
However, eyes wide open is required here. Physics still plays a great deal in building dirigibles (aerostats, balloons) due to factors such as SWAP and integration of payloads to support particular mission sets. If your airship design is for people transport and cargo, sure, very manageable and can be done in a couple of months with a good sourse for material. But for AEW, Cruise Missile Defense, I&W mission sets, a bit more is required.
As amazing as the Hawaiian Village Hotel construction was, Henry Kaiser would be vexed by the decade required for planning, enviromental impact statements, and comprehensive plan harmonization required in 2025. The construction is the easy part while the paperwork, consensus building, and campaign contributions are complex, time consuming, and ultimately expensive.
During WWII (but not because of WWII) we didn't have EPA limitations. We had far, far less union interference, and no OSHA at all.
It doesn't matter WHO tries to build a shipyard. Some beneficent Jinn could pop out of a bottle and decide to fully fund such an enterprise, and it will be ten years before the first keel is laid, if then because of environmental and social-justice lawfare.
Write a law that building this shipyard is a matter of national security and cannot be challenged on any grounds and all those other laws do not apply.
These little dictators are the biggest threat to our democracy.
They are telling the people that their votes do not count.
I wish Trump would tell these district judges that only the SCOTUS is mentioned in the Constitution and therefore only it can declare an order or law unconstitutional.
The former Lorain Yard (went belly up in 1984) on the shore of Lake Erie is now a combination brewery and event center. It was once a bustling shipyard for the American Ship Building Company (a company run by some guy named Steinbrenner). Several of the 1000'+ long ore carriers still operating on the Great Lakes were built there, including the M/V Paul Tregurtha.
Here are its coordinates:
41° 28.0308' N
82° 10.1664' W
Turning it back into a shipyard is possible. Uncle Sam need only get off his ample posterior and exercise eminent domain.
Back when I read AT Mahan & Influence of Sea Power, my takeaway was not so much the maxim of "don't divide the Fleet." Frankly, very little of Mahan's 1890s-era tactical or operational approach has any current relevance.
But... I did take away from Mahan the concept of strategic application of national industrial power toward the goal of building out national military power. That's exactly why his book appealed to people in power in his day. He told them what they wanted to hear... That military power is first derivative of national industrial power; and that of course involves the upstream ability to generate primary energy (coal, oil, gas, etc.), as well as ores, mines, mills, refineries, etc.
The best time to rethink shipbuilding was 20 years ago. The second-best time is today (stolen from somewhere, perhaps this Substack). For the present threat environment, time is something we just don't have. Why is this important? Assuming we have a big fight in the Pacific and survive it, anything we can do NOW will help us on the other side of that fight (damage repair and new construction). If we don't survive it, well, I guess that's a conversation we don't need to have.
"20 years ago..." Indeed... Do the math and travel back. In hindsight, it's appalling that we had such strategic ignoramuses at the top; both civ & mil. Were they really as dumb then as they appear to be now, from our current perspective? Of course, many of the same players are still around and, per Talleyrand, "have learned nothing and forgotten nothing."
While I'm thinking on history, I recall a tale about the aftermath of the Battle of Borodino (07Sept1812). In both men and equipment/supplies, the fight was quite costly to Napoleon, who had no logistical tail behind him. And post-battle he had to decide whether to march on Moscow or turn back to Poland. So Napoleon called together his generals and said: "Ask me for anything. Anything but time."
Reforming a system requires a lot of...creative destruction. Tearing down existing incentive structures is necessary to avoid the wash-rinse-repeat cycle of seemingly nonsensical decisions that can only be explained by individuals making them for personal gain. Creating a different incentive to perform will require a lot of creative thought and iron will...and willingness to make publicly tough personnel decisions...and prosecutions. And yes, time is not short; it has likely run out.
He directed that the military roads in France be planted with trees so that his armies could march in the shade. His advisors pointed out that the trees would need 20 years to be useful. His reply was that QED, they better get started today...
When is the best time to plant a tree... Unknown when the general phrase came into being. "The exact origin of the quote "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now" is difficult to pinpoint, as it's often attributed to a Chinese proverb or an African proverb."
I remember April 9th. We were all glad to see apparent progress on this front when Donald Trump issued EO 14269. Its title is "Restoring America's Maritime Dominance."
What has happened since? Has anybody checked to see whether Trump's assorted cabinet secretaries are actually carrying out his Maritime Action Plan?
The first deadline was May 9 – see §14(a)(1) – and required the Secretary of Transportation to hire people to upgrade the facilities at the Merchant Marine Academy. Today is May 14.
What has Secretary Duffy done? If nothing, why? If Trump won't enforce the Maritime Action Plan, nobody will.
At USMMA.... The painting of Jesus blessing the stranded sailors remains under wraps, from what I hear. Kings Point superintendent has formed a "committee" to determine when-where-how to pull this perishing piece of artwork out of the humid basement.
There's another brownfield which needs to happen simultaneously: rebuilding steel mills, along with re-learning and improving how to make naval armor. Can't build without steel, can't survive without protection.
We need more steel, aluminum, and large scale composites, but if we spend for old school armor we will go broke using techniques that were changed after the war for a reason.
The postwar change reason was "Baker Test" - rigged demo on a stationary fleet, no countermeasures, no OPFOR. "Build more and cheaper" to replace losses became "less and costly" - no plans, space claims for service upgrades. Time to learn from Army on armor protection, and how to place and space for stability and ship handling. Still need some Class B and C plate.
I live two-hundred miles east of Portland in Washington state. The China-sympathizing communist politicians who control that city -- and the communist politicians who control the state of Oregon -- will never allow a large navy shipyard to be built there. They will do what they have to do to prevent that shipyard from being built, even if it means denying access to the construction site and sending in their antifa goons to intimidate the workforce. Reactivating Charleston in South Carolina is a much better option for the simple reason it is a much friendlier place to do business.
We certainly are! Sometime in the early 90's CNSY won the "most productive shipyard" award, and then BRAC said "close it". But 29 years later the drydocks and waterfront are still there. About 5-6 years ago my IT company re-did the Quarters A, the Admiral's House, with new wiring, fiber internet, intercom system, CCTV and it is now a venue for weddings, events, and overnight stays.
They alresdy build msvls there and do maintenance work for esb/esd and lcs among others there. I think they would take some more work. Bigger issue might be the weather at the mouth of the Columbia.
I would love to see a major government-owned and operated shipyard being built in either Portland or in Longview, Washington. But in addition to strong local opposition in the Pacific Northwest to building a major new military facility, the other problem is the federal budget.
It is likely that only limited funding will be available for establishment of new shipbuilding capability in the US.
If we examine the funding-limited options we are forced to live with, the obvious choice for a naval shipbuilding expansion is in Charleston, South Carolina. Charleston is where you get the most bang for your buck in a funding-constrained political enivironment.
The old CNSY is now Detyens Shipyard, and they do a lot of Navy and Coast Guard repair work. So they're a plus as is. Meanwhile, Alabama Shipyard in Mobile *used* to do new construction, now it's just repair (including Navy), conversion and scrapping work. Perhaps that newcon capability could come back if management was offered the right incentives. Also, Ingalls has space to build on the east bank of the Pascagoula River, there are old abandoned slipways there. Ingalls has already refurbed a pier over there for fitting out and added facilities, so perhaps they could do more.
Appreciate your effort to spread the word - BUT - a Navy to do what exactly?
We should not bankrupt the USA 'defending' everyone who wants to sail anywhere on the high seas. We need a coherent statement of need from the Commander in Chief and Congress, then build to suit, emphasis on UAS, remote sensing, MPA and subs.
We aren't paid to be the 'rules based order' globalists' police force. And I suspect the days of engaging in a large, opposed amphibious landing on the other side of the world are as dead as ... well, the LCS.
Given we can daisy chain UAVs and UAV tankers it becomes hard to justify the CV. And no CV, no escorts ...
So, again, a Navy to do what? Then decide how/with what and how big.
China's goal for the last two decades has been to replace the United States as world hegemon. A large navy capable of worldwide maritime operations is one essential element of their long-term plan to achieve that goal. And so predictably, the Chinese are now in the process of building that large navy.
Another essential element of their long-term plan for Chinese world hegemony has been to deindustrialize the United States and to surround the US physically and diplomatically with hostile nations which are mercantile vassal colonies for Chinese trade.
A large navy serves that need as well, just as a large navy served the US in its past role as world hegemon between 1945 and about the year 1993 when a conscious decision was made by US politicians of both parties, egged on by globalist business interests, to both reduce the size of our navy and also to deindustrialize our own economy.
Given that their long-term plan has been very successful so far, the Chinese are not inclined to make the same decisions the US did; i.e. to both deindustrialize and to greatly reduce their ability to deliver maritime military power wherever it directly serves their economic and national interests.
F.S.: Yes, all true and I support reinvigoration of US shipbuilding capacity and a globaly superior US Navy. I also want to question all of our assumptions and believe that newer technologies will change the nature of future maritime conflicts. Indeed, the impact of new technologies is apparent in the Black Sea and the Red Sea, today.
As far as China's 'inclinations', "Unrestricted Warfare" cuts two ways. China's economy depends on US military and industrial secrets in, US citizens buying China produced Volvos and Buicks out. Reagan knew how to use economic forces to destroy the Soviet Union (see NSDD-75). Trump understands it is US economic power - not CVBGs - that can throttle, or kill, the CCP.
Most of our military is irrelevant to opposing our only serious threat, i.e., the CCP. Much of that battle, one initiated by them decades ago as was explained in "Unrestricted Warfare", is in domains apart from military.
So, yes, lets find a niche in shipbuilding, but, a NAVY to do what? Then how/with what, and how big.
Gaffer, we are an island nation utterly dependent on trade. Our Navy keeps the sea lanes open not for other people but for us.
If you were Xi, and ran another nation dependent on trade, you would look to the decaying USN as a threat to your people. The world needs a Navy to keep trade flowing. It is obvious that our rusting fleet can't do the job anymore. That is why China is building a Navy, to keep the seas open for Chinese trade.
Main point on the Liberty Ship relevant to today’s naval acquisition process: A single fixed design, with changes only allowed to increase production throughput.
Which raises the snark-filled yet serious question: If a single fixed frozen unalterable (did I say fixed?) design were to be adopted for, say, a bunch of fleet underway replenishment ships, just to pull a type out of a hat, with changes strictly forbidden unless the floatiness of the thing was at risk until after the class leader was afloat working the job to apply lessons learned at sea, what would half the Pentagon naval bureaucracy have left to do?
But there is this problem .... The ships we build which turn out to be the most useful over some long period of time have enough flexibility in their design and operation to keep up with changes in doctrine and in technology.
OK .... Are underway replenishment ships an exception? Can we build a single design which remains useful over some long period of time, a design which still keeps up with changes in doctrine and in technology?
If we went that route, I would include the requirement that an underway replenishment ship must have enough speed to keep up with a carrier battlegroup, and that it should have enough organic self defense capability to defend itself in the face of significant losses of its escorting vessels.
If you said "fixed" in the same sentence as Liberty Ship, then you didn't mean fixed. Once they were in the water, the Navy and Army made all kinds of modifications to the design.
Fixed until the first one floats, and is in service doing its thing, so lessons learned can feed back into production, as seems to have been done on the USS Puller class, based on lessons from the prior USNS forward basing ships, themselves (ships are “she” so, her selves?) converted from tankers.
Basically outlawing Changes From On High from design freeze until the first one is in-service actually doing it’s job.
Also keeping in mind that even during WW2, the Underway Replenishment between two ships, including that of a Fleet Aircraft Carrier was a lethargic 5 to 6-kts…
Not very likely! Current replenishment at sea is preformed at speed of ~18-kts with a distance of ~80-yards between both ships, which usually takes 10-hours to complete…
Beyond the NIMBYism and lawfare, remember the BRAC supporters want yet another round ... because we have not yet done enough damage to our naval infrastructure.
We do have exceptions in environmental laws for force majeure and acts of war. So, if we declare we are on a war footing, all of this can be done in a "safe, orderly, proficient, military manner" to paraphrase Gunny Highway. I believe the key to the shipbuilding was dispersed manufacturing operations to draw on local workforces. Lots of the parts and ship sections were built off site and then brought on site for assembly. The problem may be ready materials and power. We had steel mills near rivers where we could get the raw materials quickly - not anymore. And of course the power grid isn't ready for extra strain.
Shayam's Lesson 3: "Stop worrying about workforce, just hire and train whoever is willing to show up" - is far too flippant. We have been having trouble getting sufficient craftsmen in every trade since the 1990s, and it is at a danger point today. The workforce is steadily greying out: new entrants are not keeping pace with the retirees. Industries and construction across the board are crying for willing labor; many of them pay for apprenticeship programs, and even fund their employees' schooling to journeyman licensing.
Adding to the distress are the turnover rates for those who do show up. Wages are good, but the jobs do require that you be there to work - and that proves to be a difficult bridge for far too many people.
Speaking of being flippant - not enough hunger. A growling stomach was something Walter the Welder and Rosie the Riveter, their parents, and/or their children could grok in 1940. You miss a meal today and you're "food insecure". Live more than a couple miles away from a supermarket and you're in a "food desert".
Drive on the interstates and notice how many semis have "we're hiring" signs on the back of them. That's another profession which is hurting badly for people. But the hours can be long, and absences can be frequent. As you say, they're just not hungry enough.
Keep losing ground against skilled craftsmen and against the transportation industry and one day they WILL be hungry enough.
And yet they are becoming very vulnerable to automation. I have an uncle just finishing his career with a new carrier and hates it because the truck mostly drives itself.
Yeah, it's hard to say where that's going over the next 20 years. On the other hand, autopilot mostly flies the airplanes, but it has not diminished the need for pilots.
are you advocating for worse living conditions for your fellow americans? Seems like an odd hope.... shouldn't every generation wish for better/easier life?
If your hope for more willing workforce is worse economic conditions....what the actual f...
I have worked in the "Submarine Industrial Base (SIB) workforce development industry" it is a great example of the military industrial complex industry run amuck. The company I directly worked for is a $10M-$30M annual burden on taxpayers, we also worked closely with another company that enjoys taxpayer contributions north of $500M annually. TV Commercials and a bit of financial support to students who have already chosen a career in the trades were the only real outcomes, arguably worthwhile but extremely inefficient. Neither has managed to move the workforce needle the slightest, unless you are measuring wealth of several key individuals and their families. From my experience and observations, lesson 3: "...hire and train whoever is willing to show up" is the solution, the unstated corollary is that we need to make shipbuilding a better job than working at the local Starbucks, University, or sitting at home doing nothing. Things like pay, working conditions, career potential, long term local & regional job stability, the things that are needed to help you attract a mate and support a family are key.
The majority of people who are teachable can be taught, for example, to weld (that's why Kaiser choose welding over riveting for the Liberty fleet), the biggest indicator of teachability is subtly hidden in Lesson 3, "whoever is willing to show up" we just need to make it sufficiently more desirable to show up for work at a shipyard than the alternatives. Stop valuing BS careers that are burdens rather than contributors to our nation's wealth. Stop hiring consultants to tell you the answer you want to hear, spend that money on wages, commit to building the physical infrastructure for ships that are needed, over the long term so people can depend on the industry for a career. Don't talk about it, do it.
You may have a point in ship-building. I recently looked at the pay rates around Newport News and was frankly appalled. Maybe it's just Virginia and the eastern seaboard, but in the civilian construction industry welders are frequently the 2nd-highest paid craft, just behind heavy-lift operators. High 5-digit salaries are common there. I don't know why shipbuilding has such abysmal wages.
But even with these salary levels we have trouble staffing our projects, and we've been tearing out what little hair we have left to keep abreast. Wages are surely a factor, but there is more to it than that. There is an ethic of dedication which is coming up short, too. We have a couple generations where kids were inevitably steered toward college, college, college and blue-collar jobs just slipped entirely off the radar. There are noises that crafts and trades are regaining currency, but it's going to take this next generation or better to ease the crunch. Meanwhile, we still have the problem of "showing up for work."
Well, Lorain Ohio wants shipbuilding back, and there's some folks in California who have a spot set aside where they want a shipyard....
Given Kali's idiocy, it is quite unlikely any yard will be built there. Just the minor ecofreakish rules are enough to stop anything of the sort. It could certainly happen on the fresh coast. Militant unionism in Ohio, however, might prevent it. A lot of industry has been driven from Ohio because of it.
I’d fully support a federal law defining Kali’s eco laws as null and void in so far as they might pertain to federal facilities.
I’d fully support a Supreme Court holding that Kali’s eco laws are null and void in so far as they burden interstate commerce. The revenge of Wickard vs Filburn.
Honest to God, some of its needed. Half of us live in a bowl where the air doesn’t move half the year. Its the nimbyism that is palpable. Environmental is one method of the nimbyism.
Not sure how these laws burden interstate commerce when CA is the world's fourth-largest economy. That results in the state contributing about 14-15 percent of the US GDP. Yes, building more shipyards in CA would be nice, but the same could be said of any state adjacent to the Pacific or Atlantic (or path to those oceans). Yet, no significant shipyard construction has occurred.
Even if environmental laws were struck down, where would the workforce come from? The current yards can't meet staffing requirements; CA's high COL would exacerbate this issue.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/25/business/california-japan-economy-tariffs-intl-hnk
https://usafacts.org/articles/which-states-contribute-the-most-and-least-to-federal-revenue/
https://aedghi.assembly.ca.gov/sites/ajed.assembly.ca.gov/files/Internation%20Trade%20Fast%20Facts%20July%2018%202022.pdf
Where would you get the workforce? -- hire and train like Kaiser did in 1941 and stop the handwringing!
You need an annual income of like 350k just to buy any house in Orange County now. LA county isn't much better. Something can be done, but I'm not sure it will scale.
Then you have a baval shipyard with all the fun that has created the maintenance issues on subs.
I realize that such a law by itself wouldn’t solve the overall problem, but it might show Sacramento that they are not an independent nation, as they often seem to believe, and that they have an obligation to contribute to the the general cause.
Interestingly, CA (at least revenue-wise) contributes significantly to the "general cause," whereas VA (even with the large private shipbuilder) is a significant burden on the federal revenue stream.
https://usafacts.org/articles/which-states-contribute-the-most-and-least-to-federal-revenue/
Fair enough, but cash shouldn't be the only measuring stick, right? I admit that my point of view may strictly my point of view, but it seems as if the California legislature would rather that the state be politically detached from the rest of the country.
what does that have to do with this subject?
We are no longer a blue state. We aren't really even a swing state anymore. The unions are dying.
You could probably score union support(!) by turning what used to be the Lorain Yard back into a live shipbuilding concern. Yes, unions are crooked and obstructionist, but they're self-interested. Tempt the bosses with a new yard that could be buzzing with union jobs, and even Ohio's rump Democrat minority in the statehouse will fall in line with the Republicans.
I held office in Ohio and saw things from the inside. The Ohio GOP is as establishment as they come. People like DeWine and Kasich are some of the worst sort you can get. The state isn't quite red.
Having said that, I think a yard on the fresh coast would get plenty of support. What the unions would do once the yard is producing is the question. There are plenty of indications that militant unionism is far from dead in the state. I would like to be proved wrong, however.
You'll get no disagreement from me on Kasich, Dewine, or the rest of the Ohio GOP. Hell, just look at what the Central Committee did on Friday.
I suppose the trick with unions at a gov't shipyard is to bake incentives into the cake that motivate even corrupt thugs to behave in ways that benefit the Navy & the nation.
Incentives both positive and negative should be used.
I have no idea what the central committee did as I don't keep up with them anymore. I left at the end of 2004 and moved to the mountains of Western NC. I would not be surprised at anything those morons did.
No government agency should recognize a union.
You made the right move.
And if Vivek is the Governor in 2027 he will be a force to reckon with.
They've finally learned their lesson.
Hunter's Point still sitting next to the Bay. 37°43'24.2"N 122°21'47.4"W
https://www.foundsf.org/images/6/6c/HP-shipyards-and-all-of-SF-to-Marin-north-westerly-aerial-1957.jpg
Contamination and shrinking space. I like the idea of using the closed airfield across the bay in Alameda.
Industrial sites are not where you should have a three year old playing in the dirt. Why not build ships in a shipyard?
I'd like to repo Mare Island.
Who and where in CA?
I brainfarted and forgot to mark the post on X, it was an economic development group in a coastal city out there, Andy.
I think this is the one you are referring to. https://californiaforever.com/
Believe that's it, thanks Ron!
My pleasure.
Historically, no country has reached the point the US has reached that revived and returned to greatness. The US is is simply operating on the prestige it has managed to hold onto since the Vietnam victory was thrown away by the new left. Someone is going to have to deliver, but it won't happen with the current politicos we have in DC, and that includes Trump. The vision simply does not exist among them.
God. Please let him be wrong.
I would like to be wrong. It is, however, interesting to note that the US is found no where in end times prophecy and we entered the end times back in 1948.
For decades now, I have held Kaiser as an example of how modern, fully rigid airships should be built; not as glorified balloons (blimps) or giant Chinese lanterns (dirigibles)........but constructed similarly to geodesic domes, out of solid materials.
Kaiser built a 150' diameter geodesic dome in Honolulu.....in 22 hours.
Whereas now, "building" blimps or dirigibles takes months and months and requires a hangar to do the work in..........modern airships, constructed in the same manner as Kaiser's dome.....can be built in less than two weeks, outside in a yard.
THAT is the future for Navy airships.
( I have also held out the geodesic dome at the South Pole which served for years.....as an example of how robust modern airships can be; if such a structure can withstand the most extreme weather on Earth; then airships built in the same manner can be just as strong )
Is it possible to incorporate low observable technology into these? Intriguing concept that I am largely ignorant of. Providing lift / platform capability without being a very large, vulnerable target seems...transformational (bad speak, I know). Perhaps an alternative to direct frontal assault against a fortified position (existing vested interests Iron Triangle defending their current self-licking good deal ice cream cone).
" Is it possible to incorporate low observable technology into these? "
YES! unlike airplanes (or rotor craft), airships can be made in any shape whatsoever;...the original "hopeless diamond" shape precursor to the F-117 will do. Or, more easily envisioned.....simply enlarge a B-2 about four times. size matters, of course, but shaping is a huge part of making something "stealthy" to radar.
Unlike airplanes, which have to rely on radar absorbent materials contained within a thin wing/fuselage surface material, airships have immensely large hulls; which can be made extraordinarily "thick" ; and contain that much more RAM (and RAM structure) inside their hull
Infra red? Never a problem. engines can be placed HUNDREDS of feet inside an airship's hull, mixed with ambient air in wildly serpentine duct without effecting flight. airships can also be made to fly on solely electric power.....no heat signature at all. the admittedly slower speeds of airships (0-250mph) also means less friction across surfaces; lessening infra-red signature.
yes airships are large and can be seen by the naked eye.....but if you're the target.....seeing them is too late.
We have heard this narrative for years about aerostats. Myth busters: They are hard to detect due to lower than expected RCS (study has been done many years ago), pretty resilient and survivable. (I love when the USG says that they can be easily shot down, as if other way more expensive elevated ISR fixed wing assets can't be easily shot down as well.....hmmm...how many of ours UAS have been shot down in Yemen??). Aerostats provide survivable persitent elevated ISR at a lower cost point and are currently working reasonably well in other countries worldwide. JLENS got a bad rap due to the breakaway in MD, but today those issues have been rectified. Just think about the deterrence value alone if the USG incorporated tethered aerostats with incredibly powerful I&W payloads (which exist) along the 1st and 2nd Island Chain "picket line", Guam point defense, or for lower tiered IAMD "Golden Dome" capabilities. Oh.... also currently TRL9 and ready to go.
I read somewhere that the Chinese still use balloons for intel gathering. Might just be urban myth, but rumor is that a balloon can fly all over USA without being detected until too late. (//s//)
We at Elizabeth City, NC have been pushing this for years.....but the same old negative perceptions by the USG continues to plague progress.
However, eyes wide open is required here. Physics still plays a great deal in building dirigibles (aerostats, balloons) due to factors such as SWAP and integration of payloads to support particular mission sets. If your airship design is for people transport and cargo, sure, very manageable and can be done in a couple of months with a good sourse for material. But for AEW, Cruise Missile Defense, I&W mission sets, a bit more is required.
As amazing as the Hawaiian Village Hotel construction was, Henry Kaiser would be vexed by the decade required for planning, enviromental impact statements, and comprehensive plan harmonization required in 2025. The construction is the easy part while the paperwork, consensus building, and campaign contributions are complex, time consuming, and ultimately expensive.
https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/who-we-are/our-history/henry-j-kaiser-geodesic-dome-pioneer
Kaiser was a great success when it came to building bridges or shipyards.
He also had a president and the national will in support.
We do have such a president but not the national will.
If Elon Musk tried to build a shipyard he would encounter years of litigation protests, sabotage, etc.
How many requests for permits by companies from MARAD and other government agencies are waiting for approval?
We are a house badly divided.
Desuetude is a choice. So is decline.
During WWII (but not because of WWII) we didn't have EPA limitations. We had far, far less union interference, and no OSHA at all.
It doesn't matter WHO tries to build a shipyard. Some beneficent Jinn could pop out of a bottle and decide to fully fund such an enterprise, and it will be ten years before the first keel is laid, if then because of environmental and social-justice lawfare.
Write a law that building this shipyard is a matter of national security and cannot be challenged on any grounds and all those other laws do not apply.
Hang a few wack job environmentalists too.
There would undoubtedly be Federal Judges who would be happy to support almost any woke or anti-American litigation.
These little dictators are the biggest threat to our democracy.
They are telling the people that their votes do not count.
I wish Trump would tell these district judges that only the SCOTUS is mentioned in the Constitution and therefore only it can declare an order or law unconstitutional.
Bravo. Images of Bethlehem Steel’s Sparrows Point yard would be pretty similar.
The former Lorain Yard (went belly up in 1984) on the shore of Lake Erie is now a combination brewery and event center. It was once a bustling shipyard for the American Ship Building Company (a company run by some guy named Steinbrenner). Several of the 1000'+ long ore carriers still operating on the Great Lakes were built there, including the M/V Paul Tregurtha.
Here are its coordinates:
41° 28.0308' N
82° 10.1664' W
Turning it back into a shipyard is possible. Uncle Sam need only get off his ample posterior and exercise eminent domain.
Hell, sounds like Lorain will kick them out if it means getting a yard!
Back when I read AT Mahan & Influence of Sea Power, my takeaway was not so much the maxim of "don't divide the Fleet." Frankly, very little of Mahan's 1890s-era tactical or operational approach has any current relevance.
But... I did take away from Mahan the concept of strategic application of national industrial power toward the goal of building out national military power. That's exactly why his book appealed to people in power in his day. He told them what they wanted to hear... That military power is first derivative of national industrial power; and that of course involves the upstream ability to generate primary energy (coal, oil, gas, etc.), as well as ores, mines, mills, refineries, etc.
The best time to rethink shipbuilding was 20 years ago. The second-best time is today (stolen from somewhere, perhaps this Substack). For the present threat environment, time is something we just don't have. Why is this important? Assuming we have a big fight in the Pacific and survive it, anything we can do NOW will help us on the other side of that fight (damage repair and new construction). If we don't survive it, well, I guess that's a conversation we don't need to have.
"20 years ago..." Indeed... Do the math and travel back. In hindsight, it's appalling that we had such strategic ignoramuses at the top; both civ & mil. Were they really as dumb then as they appear to be now, from our current perspective? Of course, many of the same players are still around and, per Talleyrand, "have learned nothing and forgotten nothing."
While I'm thinking on history, I recall a tale about the aftermath of the Battle of Borodino (07Sept1812). In both men and equipment/supplies, the fight was quite costly to Napoleon, who had no logistical tail behind him. And post-battle he had to decide whether to march on Moscow or turn back to Poland. So Napoleon called together his generals and said: "Ask me for anything. Anything but time."
Reforming a system requires a lot of...creative destruction. Tearing down existing incentive structures is necessary to avoid the wash-rinse-repeat cycle of seemingly nonsensical decisions that can only be explained by individuals making them for personal gain. Creating a different incentive to perform will require a lot of creative thought and iron will...and willingness to make publicly tough personnel decisions...and prosecutions. And yes, time is not short; it has likely run out.
I think your time quote is stolen from Napoleon.
He directed that the military roads in France be planted with trees so that his armies could march in the shade. His advisors pointed out that the trees would need 20 years to be useful. His reply was that QED, they better get started today...
When is the best time to plant a tree... Unknown when the general phrase came into being. "The exact origin of the quote "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now" is difficult to pinpoint, as it's often attributed to a Chinese proverb or an African proverb."
I remember April 9th. We were all glad to see apparent progress on this front when Donald Trump issued EO 14269. Its title is "Restoring America's Maritime Dominance."
What has happened since? Has anybody checked to see whether Trump's assorted cabinet secretaries are actually carrying out his Maritime Action Plan?
The first deadline was May 9 – see §14(a)(1) – and required the Secretary of Transportation to hire people to upgrade the facilities at the Merchant Marine Academy. Today is May 14.
What has Secretary Duffy done? If nothing, why? If Trump won't enforce the Maritime Action Plan, nobody will.
We are not a serious maritime nation.
At USMMA.... The painting of Jesus blessing the stranded sailors remains under wraps, from what I hear. Kings Point superintendent has formed a "committee" to determine when-where-how to pull this perishing piece of artwork out of the humid basement.
There's another brownfield which needs to happen simultaneously: rebuilding steel mills, along with re-learning and improving how to make naval armor. Can't build without steel, can't survive without protection.
We need more steel, aluminum, and large scale composites, but if we spend for old school armor we will go broke using techniques that were changed after the war for a reason.
The postwar change reason was "Baker Test" - rigged demo on a stationary fleet, no countermeasures, no OPFOR. "Build more and cheaper" to replace losses became "less and costly" - no plans, space claims for service upgrades. Time to learn from Army on armor protection, and how to place and space for stability and ship handling. Still need some Class B and C plate.
A new aluminum smelter is going in at Inola, OK.
https://www.okcommerce.gov/oklahoma-selected-for-4-billion-investment-from-emirates-global-aluminium/
Not in love with the Emirates angle, but better than nothing.
That makes me twitch as well, but I'm not too concerned about the UAE. They need us.
I live two-hundred miles east of Portland in Washington state. The China-sympathizing communist politicians who control that city -- and the communist politicians who control the state of Oregon -- will never allow a large navy shipyard to be built there. They will do what they have to do to prevent that shipyard from being built, even if it means denying access to the construction site and sending in their antifa goons to intimidate the workforce. Reactivating Charleston in South Carolina is a much better option for the simple reason it is a much friendlier place to do business.
We certainly are! Sometime in the early 90's CNSY won the "most productive shipyard" award, and then BRAC said "close it". But 29 years later the drydocks and waterfront are still there. About 5-6 years ago my IT company re-did the Quarters A, the Admiral's House, with new wiring, fiber internet, intercom system, CCTV and it is now a venue for weddings, events, and overnight stays.
Come on down!
They alresdy build msvls there and do maintenance work for esb/esd and lcs among others there. I think they would take some more work. Bigger issue might be the weather at the mouth of the Columbia.
I would love to see a major government-owned and operated shipyard being built in either Portland or in Longview, Washington. But in addition to strong local opposition in the Pacific Northwest to building a major new military facility, the other problem is the federal budget.
It is likely that only limited funding will be available for establishment of new shipbuilding capability in the US.
If we examine the funding-limited options we are forced to live with, the obvious choice for a naval shipbuilding expansion is in Charleston, South Carolina. Charleston is where you get the most bang for your buck in a funding-constrained political enivironment.
Who said a naval shipyard?
The old CNSY is now Detyens Shipyard, and they do a lot of Navy and Coast Guard repair work. So they're a plus as is. Meanwhile, Alabama Shipyard in Mobile *used* to do new construction, now it's just repair (including Navy), conversion and scrapping work. Perhaps that newcon capability could come back if management was offered the right incentives. Also, Ingalls has space to build on the east bank of the Pascagoula River, there are old abandoned slipways there. Ingalls has already refurbed a pier over there for fitting out and added facilities, so perhaps they could do more.
Appreciate your effort to spread the word - BUT - a Navy to do what exactly?
We should not bankrupt the USA 'defending' everyone who wants to sail anywhere on the high seas. We need a coherent statement of need from the Commander in Chief and Congress, then build to suit, emphasis on UAS, remote sensing, MPA and subs.
We aren't paid to be the 'rules based order' globalists' police force. And I suspect the days of engaging in a large, opposed amphibious landing on the other side of the world are as dead as ... well, the LCS.
Given we can daisy chain UAVs and UAV tankers it becomes hard to justify the CV. And no CV, no escorts ...
So, again, a Navy to do what? Then decide how/with what and how big.
The Gaffer: You ask the right question. China hugely over-built real estate. They can do the same thing with their navy.
China's goal for the last two decades has been to replace the United States as world hegemon. A large navy capable of worldwide maritime operations is one essential element of their long-term plan to achieve that goal. And so predictably, the Chinese are now in the process of building that large navy.
Another essential element of their long-term plan for Chinese world hegemony has been to deindustrialize the United States and to surround the US physically and diplomatically with hostile nations which are mercantile vassal colonies for Chinese trade.
A large navy serves that need as well, just as a large navy served the US in its past role as world hegemon between 1945 and about the year 1993 when a conscious decision was made by US politicians of both parties, egged on by globalist business interests, to both reduce the size of our navy and also to deindustrialize our own economy.
Given that their long-term plan has been very successful so far, the Chinese are not inclined to make the same decisions the US did; i.e. to both deindustrialize and to greatly reduce their ability to deliver maritime military power wherever it directly serves their economic and national interests.
F.S.: Yes, all true and I support reinvigoration of US shipbuilding capacity and a globaly superior US Navy. I also want to question all of our assumptions and believe that newer technologies will change the nature of future maritime conflicts. Indeed, the impact of new technologies is apparent in the Black Sea and the Red Sea, today.
As far as China's 'inclinations', "Unrestricted Warfare" cuts two ways. China's economy depends on US military and industrial secrets in, US citizens buying China produced Volvos and Buicks out. Reagan knew how to use economic forces to destroy the Soviet Union (see NSDD-75). Trump understands it is US economic power - not CVBGs - that can throttle, or kill, the CCP.
Most of our military is irrelevant to opposing our only serious threat, i.e., the CCP. Much of that battle, one initiated by them decades ago as was explained in "Unrestricted Warfare", is in domains apart from military.
So, yes, lets find a niche in shipbuilding, but, a NAVY to do what? Then how/with what, and how big.
Gaffer, we are an island nation utterly dependent on trade. Our Navy keeps the sea lanes open not for other people but for us.
If you were Xi, and ran another nation dependent on trade, you would look to the decaying USN as a threat to your people. The world needs a Navy to keep trade flowing. It is obvious that our rusting fleet can't do the job anymore. That is why China is building a Navy, to keep the seas open for Chinese trade.
Main point on the Liberty Ship relevant to today’s naval acquisition process: A single fixed design, with changes only allowed to increase production throughput.
Which raises the snark-filled yet serious question: If a single fixed frozen unalterable (did I say fixed?) design were to be adopted for, say, a bunch of fleet underway replenishment ships, just to pull a type out of a hat, with changes strictly forbidden unless the floatiness of the thing was at risk until after the class leader was afloat working the job to apply lessons learned at sea, what would half the Pentagon naval bureaucracy have left to do?
But there is this problem .... The ships we build which turn out to be the most useful over some long period of time have enough flexibility in their design and operation to keep up with changes in doctrine and in technology.
OK .... Are underway replenishment ships an exception? Can we build a single design which remains useful over some long period of time, a design which still keeps up with changes in doctrine and in technology?
If we went that route, I would include the requirement that an underway replenishment ship must have enough speed to keep up with a carrier battlegroup, and that it should have enough organic self defense capability to defend itself in the face of significant losses of its escorting vessels.
We have two of those in some sort of storage, and they were designed with minimal self-defense capability. But they were ‘too expensive’ to operate.
If you said "fixed" in the same sentence as Liberty Ship, then you didn't mean fixed. Once they were in the water, the Navy and Army made all kinds of modifications to the design.
Need a troopship?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/22/22165.htm
Need a hospital ship?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/30/08/0807.htm
Need a submarine net tender?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/15/1501.htm
Need a tanker disguised as a freighter to appear less valuable?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/46/46126.htm
Need an aviation repair platform?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/29/2902.htm
Need radar pickets?
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/62/6201.htm
Need water for all those troops and sailors in the Pacific (Water, water everywhere but not a from to drink)
https://www.navsource.org/archives/09/45/4501.htm
Fixed until the first one floats, and is in service doing its thing, so lessons learned can feed back into production, as seems to have been done on the USS Puller class, based on lessons from the prior USNS forward basing ships, themselves (ships are “she” so, her selves?) converted from tankers.
Basically outlawing Changes From On High from design freeze until the first one is in-service actually doing it’s job.
Also keeping in mind that even during WW2, the Underway Replenishment between two ships, including that of a Fleet Aircraft Carrier was a lethargic 5 to 6-kts…
Okay, what do they do now, UNREP at 30 kts?
Not very likely! Current replenishment at sea is preformed at speed of ~18-kts with a distance of ~80-yards between both ships, which usually takes 10-hours to complete…
Beyond the NIMBYism and lawfare, remember the BRAC supporters want yet another round ... because we have not yet done enough damage to our naval infrastructure.
We do have exceptions in environmental laws for force majeure and acts of war. So, if we declare we are on a war footing, all of this can be done in a "safe, orderly, proficient, military manner" to paraphrase Gunny Highway. I believe the key to the shipbuilding was dispersed manufacturing operations to draw on local workforces. Lots of the parts and ship sections were built off site and then brought on site for assembly. The problem may be ready materials and power. We had steel mills near rivers where we could get the raw materials quickly - not anymore. And of course the power grid isn't ready for extra strain.
No new shipyards will be built in blue states until enough palms are greased to smother the NIMBY/Green types.
I'm starting to think we should base the fleet in Pusan, Sasebo, and Yokosuka so we can keep the ships maintained by local assets.
That is somewhat what happens with the ships that are there. It might be worth playing that game in the Philippines.
Blue States:
EB
Bath
NASSCO
NNS
All 4 remaining naval shipyards
Check your divisiveness and work on a plan.
Hang tight and let me correct my post. Thanks!
There's nothing for you to change. You're right.
All those yards have been around awhile. Long before their states turned Commie. Try building one in any of those places now.
I will, but you need help.
Shayam's Lesson 3: "Stop worrying about workforce, just hire and train whoever is willing to show up" - is far too flippant. We have been having trouble getting sufficient craftsmen in every trade since the 1990s, and it is at a danger point today. The workforce is steadily greying out: new entrants are not keeping pace with the retirees. Industries and construction across the board are crying for willing labor; many of them pay for apprenticeship programs, and even fund their employees' schooling to journeyman licensing.
Adding to the distress are the turnover rates for those who do show up. Wages are good, but the jobs do require that you be there to work - and that proves to be a difficult bridge for far too many people.
Speaking of being flippant - not enough hunger. A growling stomach was something Walter the Welder and Rosie the Riveter, their parents, and/or their children could grok in 1940. You miss a meal today and you're "food insecure". Live more than a couple miles away from a supermarket and you're in a "food desert".
Drive on the interstates and notice how many semis have "we're hiring" signs on the back of them. That's another profession which is hurting badly for people. But the hours can be long, and absences can be frequent. As you say, they're just not hungry enough.
Keep losing ground against skilled craftsmen and against the transportation industry and one day they WILL be hungry enough.
Cheers!
And yet they are becoming very vulnerable to automation. I have an uncle just finishing his career with a new carrier and hates it because the truck mostly drives itself.
Yeah, it's hard to say where that's going over the next 20 years. On the other hand, autopilot mostly flies the airplanes, but it has not diminished the need for pilots.
No autopilot doesn't fly the plane, just automates some functions.
"We're hiring" people who want to work cheaper than our current workforce is a lot of the problem for trucking.
are you advocating for worse living conditions for your fellow americans? Seems like an odd hope.... shouldn't every generation wish for better/easier life?
If your hope for more willing workforce is worse economic conditions....what the actual f...
Then don't go OTR, but we still need the craftsmen - how is that 'worse economic conditions"? How are blue-collar jobs "worse"?
I have worked in the "Submarine Industrial Base (SIB) workforce development industry" it is a great example of the military industrial complex industry run amuck. The company I directly worked for is a $10M-$30M annual burden on taxpayers, we also worked closely with another company that enjoys taxpayer contributions north of $500M annually. TV Commercials and a bit of financial support to students who have already chosen a career in the trades were the only real outcomes, arguably worthwhile but extremely inefficient. Neither has managed to move the workforce needle the slightest, unless you are measuring wealth of several key individuals and their families. From my experience and observations, lesson 3: "...hire and train whoever is willing to show up" is the solution, the unstated corollary is that we need to make shipbuilding a better job than working at the local Starbucks, University, or sitting at home doing nothing. Things like pay, working conditions, career potential, long term local & regional job stability, the things that are needed to help you attract a mate and support a family are key.
The majority of people who are teachable can be taught, for example, to weld (that's why Kaiser choose welding over riveting for the Liberty fleet), the biggest indicator of teachability is subtly hidden in Lesson 3, "whoever is willing to show up" we just need to make it sufficiently more desirable to show up for work at a shipyard than the alternatives. Stop valuing BS careers that are burdens rather than contributors to our nation's wealth. Stop hiring consultants to tell you the answer you want to hear, spend that money on wages, commit to building the physical infrastructure for ships that are needed, over the long term so people can depend on the industry for a career. Don't talk about it, do it.
You may have a point in ship-building. I recently looked at the pay rates around Newport News and was frankly appalled. Maybe it's just Virginia and the eastern seaboard, but in the civilian construction industry welders are frequently the 2nd-highest paid craft, just behind heavy-lift operators. High 5-digit salaries are common there. I don't know why shipbuilding has such abysmal wages.
But even with these salary levels we have trouble staffing our projects, and we've been tearing out what little hair we have left to keep abreast. Wages are surely a factor, but there is more to it than that. There is an ethic of dedication which is coming up short, too. We have a couple generations where kids were inevitably steered toward college, college, college and blue-collar jobs just slipped entirely off the radar. There are noises that crafts and trades are regaining currency, but it's going to take this next generation or better to ease the crunch. Meanwhile, we still have the problem of "showing up for work."
Cheers!