There is a good contrast between civilian and military construction times. It may be better to modify existing designs rather than go to clean-sheet designs.
The ddg1000 is the design we have for warships bigger than Burkes. We should tweak that rather than doing a ‘new’ design unless there are catastrophic flaws with the ddg1000 that nobody wants to talk about.
How do we know its "working well"? Its now 17 years since Zumwalt was ordered and it still isn't IOC, has barely deployed and has hardly seen real world use. She didn't even make it to her home port without losing power, crashing and having to be towed. Faith in the Zumwalt design is unjustified. Like walking outside mid eclipse and concluding the sun will now be now rising in the afternoon.
The same thought process was used for ordering FREMM, instead NAVSEA found a way to foul that entire process up. We're currently up to a 36-month delay on the lead ship touching water.
Apples to pomegranates. Addressing shipbuilding deals with bureaucratic processes (both in gov and industry) and fiefdom building. The recruiting issue is not primarily about the process - it is demographics and culture. It does need to be addressed open and honestly though.
Banishing the Good Idea Faire will probably take more than this, unfortunately. There'll be a lot of "we need an exception for this" even if we do adopt these improvements.
People don't remember that early WWI and WWII combat ships were adapted from commercial designs. Small passenger ships became troop transports, and heavier cargo ships became combatants because they could carry weapons.
If you can turn out a supertanker in so many months, you should be able to do the same to a carrier or battleship.
The Chinese aren't using straight combat ships. They are using hundreds of commercial fishing trawlers and small cargo ships.
"The Chinese aren't using straight combat ships. They are using hundreds of commercial fishing trawlers and small cargo ships."
The Chinese have a number of small cargo ships and fishing vessels they are preparing for use if a war breaks out. BFD ..... The Chinese are now in the process of building a large bluewater navy which will eventually be the equal of the USN in combat capability and firepower. They are doing all the work they need to do to build a powerful fleet which can push combat action well away from their coastal areas into the blue waters of the Western Pacific. And eventually into the blue waters of the entire world once they have fully assumed the role and responsibility of being world hegemon.
The PLAN is larger than the entire USN, and the entire PLAN is facing less than 1/2 the USN. And it’s getting worse at about 10% per year due the PLAN building more ships that they scrap and the USN scrapping more ships than they build.
The PLAN is probably a few years from mass producing subs as quiet as the LA class (or better) and maybe 10 years from having multiple effective carrier battle groups.
"How could a project fall so far behind schedule so quickly? One reason is that the Navy gave the OK to begin construction when the design was only 80 percent complete. This is a recurring problem for the Navy. Both the much-maligned Littoral Combat Ship and the far-over-budget and much-delayed aircraft carrier Gerald Ford were victims of this “we’ll figure it out later” approach.
What makes the frigate delay so alarming is that the Constellation was to be based on an existing design that the French and Italian navies have successfully deployed for years. In theory, that should have made construction go much more quickly and more smoothly. But apparently unable to abandon their “Americans know best” parochialism, the Navy lengthened, fattened, and up-weaponed the original design. Hence there will be no new Constellation-class frigates deployed for many years to come." https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/4624326-almost-all-navy-shipbuilding-is-hopelessly-behind-schedule-as-war-looms/
The problem starts with the Navy's "Star Trek" mentality. When in the service I argued that LCS was a toothless fairy tale, as well as rail-guns, etc. The WWII priorities of firepower (#1, #2, #3), endurance, maneuverability, with habitability the last to be considered were replaced with today's pretty-looking and abysmally performing cruise-ships. The Navy has to decide to be a fighting force 1st. (Of course, there are other huge problems with a lack of a strategic focus on the part of Congress or the White House, —but then again we long ago abandoned the Constitutional mandate to maintain a Navy and raise Armies.)
It is also a problem with defense contractors. Let's take Boeing (please...) For example, NASA awarded their first Starliner dollar to the company in Februrary of 2010. That was seven months after SpaceX had launched their third Falcon-1. The 2010 awards from NASA went to Boeing, ULA, Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada, and Paragon. SpaceX would not enter into a crew development agreement with NASA until 2014. Boeing fought them tooth-and-nail to end up taking 2/3rds of the total award. Fast forward to last night to what was supposed to be the FIRST manned Starliner launch to the ISS. Fourteen years later since their first dollar and four years after Dragon's first ISS mission. Combining Navy's bipolar swings between ADD for the latest transformational shiny object and their bureacratic catatonia, throw in defense contractors atherosclerotic C-suite management, and we have a recipe for taking four World Wars to get a new large combatant into the fleet.
Where are the Program Gatekeepers and Program Champions? These are the people who are supposed to ensure stuff is ready for production and to keep the program from suffering from mission creep or other changes that move it away from the program charter and or scope.
Also, it might be time to make whoever the PEO assigned to shepherd the permanently assigned aka Rickover.
Project Champions are the advocates for the project at a higher organizational levels within the program itself. Think of them as the Department Head to the Division Officer.
In the context in looking out for a stronger Navy/military he was, however his comments and sudden departure don't make him look good for the GOP. Luria while a Navy hawk, got herself involved in the impeachment trails, which cast a pall over her overall record.
I am sick of Republicans who say no new taxes and then sock us with new taxes; who denounce Obamacare but don't repeal it when they have the chance; who denounce FISA, but renew it anyway, etc. The two-party system is a hoax.
The Virginia Class SSN is now projected to be 410 months behind schedule. How many WW2’s is that? It’s not pretty and the senior program managers know this. They are higher up the fat ladies dress and therefore closer to the “view”. Lack of fealty to the Navy and their integrity had allowed this.
I have some ideas on how to help fox this. It won’t be fixed overnight or over a decade. We need to bring back some of the former enlisted tender ratings and create a pipeline for career development and trade skills and capitalize on that investment when they choose to leave the Navy. Make it a mainly shore duty intensive group that will be primarily based in our shipyards and repair facilities. Ship fitter, Painter, Pattern Maker, Steel worker, Metalworker, Artificer etc…. A sort of shipyard Seabee in that they would be managed by shipyard and ship building / repair trade skills. We can fix the manpower shortage. Supply and spares is leadership issue.
You are focused on the problem. Our nation's lack of organic shipbuilding capacity.
See where they want "user input?" When we had shipyards, we could send MMC Smith or MPA Lt. Jones to a shipyard for shore duty. Here's a duty path that would create exactly the kind of officer who should be giving "user input. MPA > Shipyard > CEng. The problem is we don't have billets for these folks. Nor do we have spots for the enlisted rates you set out above.
Who can make the case? There was a Democrat, strong on Navy issues, that just got bounced out. Is there a stong, sensible Republican active in naval affairs? Where is the modern Carl Vinson?
It seems that there is space for a young legislator to carve out a place. The problem is Congressmen are expected to buy a committee assignment by meeting a fundraising quota. Who is going to donate to the RNC on behalf of a Congressmen willing to red pencil acquisition requests? Mr. T might toss him a dollar or two. Meanwhile, Lock-Martin is funnelling millions and loading the committee with reps who think private shipbuilders need more funding.
It is a vicious cycle. Only the good fundraisers get in a position to blow the whistle, but, to be a good fundraiser you have to be the kind of guy who would never blow the whistle. And, it is not a question of ending a career, because whistleblowers never really accomplish anything.
It is common to disparage politicians. But, politics is just the process for making official decisions. We need politicians. We need politicians who care for our country and know that an island nation needs a strong Navy. Folks that will roll up their sleeves and work to fix our broken shipbuilding system.
Three things I see from the article and recent history.
1st, that Joint review crap has to go, the Navy needs to be deciding what the Navy needs, not the Army and Air Force.
2nd. The Navy needs to finalize a design before steel is cut, and then stick to it. No changes that are not required due to an actual structural issue of something just not fitting.
3rd. only use tech in a new ship class that has been fully developed and is ready to install. Get the equipment designed and working and then you can include it with the next ship built, meanwhile use what you have that works on the ship being built.
Way too many players with too much power, but almost no responsibility for outcomes. Too many politicians and grifters, and too few warriors (or those who really care about warriors.) Too many concessions to consensus and mollifying special interests to end up with something that will satisfy everyone, but excel at nothing. There are probably more accountants and lawyers involved than welders.
We need to peel back all the accretions added to satisfy "process" priorities, and trust no more than a handful of key players to make swift, intelligent and rational decisions to move a project forward.
-- What did Kelley Johnson do?
-- What was Ed Heineman's focus?
-- How did Henry Kaiser build more than 140 ships including 50 escort carriers. plus Liberty ships, LSTs, troop transports, cargo ships and 2 drydocks in THREE years, from a shipyard in Vancouver which was swampland two years earlier?
-- John Ericcson did not need a NAVSEA empire to build Monitors.
-- Rickover was a SOB, but he delivered nuclear submarines a lot more efficiently and effectively than the hordes of managerial incompetence which birthed the LCS fiasco.
-- And those were done before we had computers.
All the layers of reports, meetings and reviews add cost and delays, but not value added. Pick someone good for the job, give them the power to make decisions, back their decisions, and clear roadblocks out of their way.
If all else fails, why not look at how the Chinese are running their shipbuilding programs? They are doing a heck of a lot better, faster, cheaper, with more capable ships than we are getting for our bloated bureaucracy.
Our immigration laws seem to discourage Swedes like Ericcson and encourage Palestinians who yell "death to America and Israel" at Ivy League colleges.
Kaiser didn't have to worry about environmental impacts statements or diversity in hiring when he built shipyards the size of several football fields
FADM Nimitz backed Captain Rickover's plan to develop a submarine powered by the atom. The current CNO is a journalism major. Her predecessor liked to read Karl Marx.
Back in my day of Naval Nuclear Propulsion, when reactors were made of wood and ROs like myself were made of Inconel, I wondered why the US didn't adopt the French approach to civilian nuclear power. Basically, they had 3 nuclear plant designs: small, medium, and large, based on demand and cooling water availability. Seemed like it streamlined the cumbersome certification process that has all but killed the US nuclear industry. The same approach seems sensible for ships. Baseline hull designs and hotel features and leave the innovations to tactical improvements.
A little personal history: In 1971 just out of engineering school I was hired by the Navy as a civilian engineer in the CASDAC program. What's CASDAC? Computer Aided Ship Design and Construction. The program had just started. My first year was spent developing plans and budgets for ramping up my assigned area -- piping -- but we got only enough money in the next FY to spend the year developing plans and budgets. And so it went for the eight years I was there. Some really smart men and women in that program but we never really had the interest of those above us.
"The Secretary of the Navy should develop a robust digital ship design library to enhance the Navy's ability to leverage existing designs and expedite design and construction. (Recommendation 4)"
The USN doesn't have such already?
Does Naval Intelligence or Sub force not have plans on various ship designs from foreign services as well as those transiting the oceans in their data bases?
Is USN simply relying on designers like Gibbs & Cox and others for the design ideas?
So who is designing ships that can be built if we get into a hot war with the Chinese? You know something that floats, can make it to china and back and carries things that go boom. Oh, and can be built in 12 months from saying go to heading West.
It sure would be nice to have several designs in our back pocket that we can actually build before the war is over. It would be better if we would build ships before things pop off but that does not seem very likely.
Yeah, I'm making that my job pending someone acknowledging the need. Our Overlord/MUSV work is really the only small combatant in a hurry option we have. We could be mass producing them at Gulf Coast yards.
I'd also throw out the idea of grabbing Damen's Offshore Support Vessels / Yacht Tenders. There are 2 67x11m ships and their sisters 69 x 11. UAE bought 2 6711s for their Arialah OPCs. Damen also has Aqua Helix, a 70+ meter aluminum fast crew vessel with shaft mounted generators (on waterjets). These basic designs could easily be adapted to a variety of useful small combatants. Lilly pad AH-1, MH-60, haul MCM USVs or RHIBs, Deck load Mk 70 or ADL launchers. Better range and maybe better seakeeping as compared to LCS. Certainly easier to mass produce for less money. I look at this as our "Flower Class" solution.
I'm not sure I believe a limited conflict with China is on the table.
By "limited" I mean one where our power grid doesn't disappear in the first week (or day) and we fight with what we have while the civilian population wanders around eating each other for a few months before we have the capability to get power back and start thinking about finding people and facilities capable of building a ship again.
I think there is a good chance whatever we have day 1 is what we're going to have for the duration. There is no harm in trying to improve the situation, and maybe they will choose a limited conflict, but it's not certain that our remaining industrial capacity, such as it is, will come into paly at all.
Each recommendation begins with "Congress should..." or "The Secretary of the Navy should..." and that is precisely the problem.
Since 1987, the Secretaries of the Navy have been - for the most part - a collection of nonentities and our elected representatives have been even worse. Let me point out but one example. Senator Mark Kelly is a graduate of the USMMA and the NPS. He was a naval aviator and an astronaut. What has he done for the Navy or merchant marine since being elected in 2020? Nothing. His main concerns seem to be abortion and gun control. If he isn't going to do anything, what can you expect from the others in Congress with no military backgrounds?
I agree. His number one concern appears to be civilian disarmament and fighting the Constitution. An immense disappointment in someone who once took an oath to support and defend it.
I think you missed my point. Kelly knows ships. He won't be flying anywhere without a CVN and a battle group to protect her as well as MSC to resupply all those ships. Besides, there already are enough Democrats who want to squash the Second Amendment.
"a bullet in your wife's head and you might be a bit bullish on gun control too"
Late 2011 or early 2012 and still living in Houston, I was eating breakfast at a little diner called Skippers Cafe in Kemah Tx., on the way to the LPTB.
A big gaggle came into the little place. Per the pic here (thats not me, but I remember I was having their very good biscuits and gravy along with eggs like this gent!), you can see its pretty cozy...
Taking the table where the guy in the orange shirt is sitting, was Capt. Kelley, Gabrielle Gifford, her apparent nurse, and some other friends/acquaintances. This may well have been one of her very first outings (they lived up the street in League City). Ms. Giffords did well at first, but over the course of a half hour or so, she started to fade. Her nurse and Capt. Kelley started to get concerned looked like, so they left. What was remarkable about the vignette was it was being reported in the news at the time that she was doing well, and about to go back to work....
Brownshoes don't seem to make particularly effective politicians....
Remember ABSCAM? 'Duke' in prison garb?
"Aviators are never going to carry water for the surface fleet. "
Into WWII, Brownshoes were required to spend an initial tour at sea...
Frank Ault was an Ensign in the Gunnery Dept. aboard the Astoria at Savo.
May help explain his sense of "Battlemindedness" later on...
Can't pass up the chance to reiterate that lack of institutional focus today's USN (run by some Really Smart Guys!) on any appreciation of "Being of the Sea".
Before anything else, SWO's (of course), but also, Bubbleheads, and yes....Brownshoes should have the sense of "Being of the Sea"...
But this is a telling look that being a "Mariner" in the USN isn't that important...
(actually the "bobstay" script and afterburner spiel is nonsensical...but its a movie)
Its not about sailing specifically per se (although look at what the Indian Navy emphasizes for their officers of all branches)...but a lack of appreciation of "All Things Nautical".
USN Leadership likes to mimic the Army and Air Force...
According to the other Sal the Army and Marines have decided how to solve their prepositioning afloat issues. By getting rid of their afloat proposition fleet and laying them up as part of the reserve.
There is a good contrast between civilian and military construction times. It may be better to modify existing designs rather than go to clean-sheet designs.
The ddg1000 is the design we have for warships bigger than Burkes. We should tweak that rather than doing a ‘new’ design unless there are catastrophic flaws with the ddg1000 that nobody wants to talk about.
I have been saying that as well, the basic ship works and seems to work well now. Just outfit as needed.
How do we know its "working well"? Its now 17 years since Zumwalt was ordered and it still isn't IOC, has barely deployed and has hardly seen real world use. She didn't even make it to her home port without losing power, crashing and having to be towed. Faith in the Zumwalt design is unjustified. Like walking outside mid eclipse and concluding the sun will now be now rising in the afternoon.
If we are going to do a new design we should start fighting climate change (and the lack of fuel reserves in the Pacific) and go with nuclear power.
The same thought process was used for ordering FREMM, instead NAVSEA found a way to foul that entire process up. We're currently up to a 36-month delay on the lead ship touching water.
OK now do Recruiting, because we're having trouble manning the ships we have now, much less crewing the hulls of sped up acquisitions.
Apples to pomegranates. Addressing shipbuilding deals with bureaucratic processes (both in gov and industry) and fiefdom building. The recruiting issue is not primarily about the process - it is demographics and culture. It does need to be addressed open and honestly though.
Banishing the Good Idea Faire will probably take more than this, unfortunately. There'll be a lot of "we need an exception for this" even if we do adopt these improvements.
Procurement has become very byzantine. Something needs to be done to improve, I'm not sure if this is it or not.
People don't remember that early WWI and WWII combat ships were adapted from commercial designs. Small passenger ships became troop transports, and heavier cargo ships became combatants because they could carry weapons.
If you can turn out a supertanker in so many months, you should be able to do the same to a carrier or battleship.
The Chinese aren't using straight combat ships. They are using hundreds of commercial fishing trawlers and small cargo ships.
"The Chinese aren't using straight combat ships. They are using hundreds of commercial fishing trawlers and small cargo ships."
The Chinese have a number of small cargo ships and fishing vessels they are preparing for use if a war breaks out. BFD ..... The Chinese are now in the process of building a large bluewater navy which will eventually be the equal of the USN in combat capability and firepower. They are doing all the work they need to do to build a powerful fleet which can push combat action well away from their coastal areas into the blue waters of the Western Pacific. And eventually into the blue waters of the entire world once they have fully assumed the role and responsibility of being world hegemon.
The PLAN is larger than the entire USN, and the entire PLAN is facing less than 1/2 the USN. And it’s getting worse at about 10% per year due the PLAN building more ships that they scrap and the USN scrapping more ships than they build.
The PLAN is probably a few years from mass producing subs as quiet as the LA class (or better) and maybe 10 years from having multiple effective carrier battle groups.
eventually?
"How could a project fall so far behind schedule so quickly? One reason is that the Navy gave the OK to begin construction when the design was only 80 percent complete. This is a recurring problem for the Navy. Both the much-maligned Littoral Combat Ship and the far-over-budget and much-delayed aircraft carrier Gerald Ford were victims of this “we’ll figure it out later” approach.
What makes the frigate delay so alarming is that the Constellation was to be based on an existing design that the French and Italian navies have successfully deployed for years. In theory, that should have made construction go much more quickly and more smoothly. But apparently unable to abandon their “Americans know best” parochialism, the Navy lengthened, fattened, and up-weaponed the original design. Hence there will be no new Constellation-class frigates deployed for many years to come." https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/4624326-almost-all-navy-shipbuilding-is-hopelessly-behind-schedule-as-war-looms/
The problem starts with the Navy's "Star Trek" mentality. When in the service I argued that LCS was a toothless fairy tale, as well as rail-guns, etc. The WWII priorities of firepower (#1, #2, #3), endurance, maneuverability, with habitability the last to be considered were replaced with today's pretty-looking and abysmally performing cruise-ships. The Navy has to decide to be a fighting force 1st. (Of course, there are other huge problems with a lack of a strategic focus on the part of Congress or the White House, —but then again we long ago abandoned the Constitutional mandate to maintain a Navy and raise Armies.)
Concur 100% Requirements creep due to "USN knows best" mentality.
It is also a problem with defense contractors. Let's take Boeing (please...) For example, NASA awarded their first Starliner dollar to the company in Februrary of 2010. That was seven months after SpaceX had launched their third Falcon-1. The 2010 awards from NASA went to Boeing, ULA, Blue Origin, Sierra Nevada, and Paragon. SpaceX would not enter into a crew development agreement with NASA until 2014. Boeing fought them tooth-and-nail to end up taking 2/3rds of the total award. Fast forward to last night to what was supposed to be the FIRST manned Starliner launch to the ISS. Fourteen years later since their first dollar and four years after Dragon's first ISS mission. Combining Navy's bipolar swings between ADD for the latest transformational shiny object and their bureacratic catatonia, throw in defense contractors atherosclerotic C-suite management, and we have a recipe for taking four World Wars to get a new large combatant into the fleet.
Where are the Program Gatekeepers and Program Champions? These are the people who are supposed to ensure stuff is ready for production and to keep the program from suffering from mission creep or other changes that move it away from the program charter and or scope.
Also, it might be time to make whoever the PEO assigned to shepherd the permanently assigned aka Rickover.
Recently departed Rep. Mike Gallagher (WI) was our champion, prior to him was Rep Elaine Luria (VA), both recognized the issues.
Who is our champion in the halls of government today?
Project Champions are the advocates for the project at a higher organizational levels within the program itself. Think of them as the Department Head to the Division Officer.
Gallagher is no hero. He resigned at a time to inflict as much damage on the Republicans as possible and now works for Palantir.
In the context in looking out for a stronger Navy/military he was, however his comments and sudden departure don't make him look good for the GOP. Luria while a Navy hawk, got herself involved in the impeachment trails, which cast a pall over her overall record.
I am sick of Republicans who say no new taxes and then sock us with new taxes; who denounce Obamacare but don't repeal it when they have the chance; who denounce FISA, but renew it anyway, etc. The two-party system is a hoax.
The Virginia Class SSN is now projected to be 410 months behind schedule. How many WW2’s is that? It’s not pretty and the senior program managers know this. They are higher up the fat ladies dress and therefore closer to the “view”. Lack of fealty to the Navy and their integrity had allowed this.
I have some ideas on how to help fox this. It won’t be fixed overnight or over a decade. We need to bring back some of the former enlisted tender ratings and create a pipeline for career development and trade skills and capitalize on that investment when they choose to leave the Navy. Make it a mainly shore duty intensive group that will be primarily based in our shipyards and repair facilities. Ship fitter, Painter, Pattern Maker, Steel worker, Metalworker, Artificer etc…. A sort of shipyard Seabee in that they would be managed by shipyard and ship building / repair trade skills. We can fix the manpower shortage. Supply and spares is leadership issue.
You are focused on the problem. Our nation's lack of organic shipbuilding capacity.
See where they want "user input?" When we had shipyards, we could send MMC Smith or MPA Lt. Jones to a shipyard for shore duty. Here's a duty path that would create exactly the kind of officer who should be giving "user input. MPA > Shipyard > CEng. The problem is we don't have billets for these folks. Nor do we have spots for the enlisted rates you set out above.
A Navy that can't build ships isn't a Navy.
I guess even drunks and fools can agree once in a while.
We need to make the spots. If we want to create a bountiful crop with our own seed corn.
Who can make the case? There was a Democrat, strong on Navy issues, that just got bounced out. Is there a stong, sensible Republican active in naval affairs? Where is the modern Carl Vinson?
It seems that there is space for a young legislator to carve out a place. The problem is Congressmen are expected to buy a committee assignment by meeting a fundraising quota. Who is going to donate to the RNC on behalf of a Congressmen willing to red pencil acquisition requests? Mr. T might toss him a dollar or two. Meanwhile, Lock-Martin is funnelling millions and loading the committee with reps who think private shipbuilders need more funding.
You nailed the fundraising quota thing. Someone needs to accept their career in Congress isn't worth it and blow the whistle.
It is a vicious cycle. Only the good fundraisers get in a position to blow the whistle, but, to be a good fundraiser you have to be the kind of guy who would never blow the whistle. And, it is not a question of ending a career, because whistleblowers never really accomplish anything.
It is common to disparage politicians. But, politics is just the process for making official decisions. We need politicians. We need politicians who care for our country and know that an island nation needs a strong Navy. Folks that will roll up their sleeves and work to fix our broken shipbuilding system.
410 (33 years) or 41 months? Sadly I'd believe either
Good catch. 41 months.
Three things I see from the article and recent history.
1st, that Joint review crap has to go, the Navy needs to be deciding what the Navy needs, not the Army and Air Force.
2nd. The Navy needs to finalize a design before steel is cut, and then stick to it. No changes that are not required due to an actual structural issue of something just not fitting.
3rd. only use tech in a new ship class that has been fully developed and is ready to install. Get the equipment designed and working and then you can include it with the next ship built, meanwhile use what you have that works on the ship being built.
You mean don't develop the world's most complex ship gear and mate it to the world's largest, one of a kind water jet? Why not?
Or plan your Carrier around EMALs and magnetic weapons elevators that are still in development?
And then decide you don’t need a full scale test facility, just install it on the ship and it will be sure to work fine as soon as it is powered up.
Exactly, what could go wrong?
Way too many players with too much power, but almost no responsibility for outcomes. Too many politicians and grifters, and too few warriors (or those who really care about warriors.) Too many concessions to consensus and mollifying special interests to end up with something that will satisfy everyone, but excel at nothing. There are probably more accountants and lawyers involved than welders.
We need to peel back all the accretions added to satisfy "process" priorities, and trust no more than a handful of key players to make swift, intelligent and rational decisions to move a project forward.
-- What did Kelley Johnson do?
-- What was Ed Heineman's focus?
-- How did Henry Kaiser build more than 140 ships including 50 escort carriers. plus Liberty ships, LSTs, troop transports, cargo ships and 2 drydocks in THREE years, from a shipyard in Vancouver which was swampland two years earlier?
-- John Ericcson did not need a NAVSEA empire to build Monitors.
-- Rickover was a SOB, but he delivered nuclear submarines a lot more efficiently and effectively than the hordes of managerial incompetence which birthed the LCS fiasco.
-- And those were done before we had computers.
All the layers of reports, meetings and reviews add cost and delays, but not value added. Pick someone good for the job, give them the power to make decisions, back their decisions, and clear roadblocks out of their way.
If all else fails, why not look at how the Chinese are running their shipbuilding programs? They are doing a heck of a lot better, faster, cheaper, with more capable ships than we are getting for our bloated bureaucracy.
Our immigration laws seem to discourage Swedes like Ericcson and encourage Palestinians who yell "death to America and Israel" at Ivy League colleges.
Kaiser didn't have to worry about environmental impacts statements or diversity in hiring when he built shipyards the size of several football fields
FADM Nimitz backed Captain Rickover's plan to develop a submarine powered by the atom. The current CNO is a journalism major. Her predecessor liked to read Karl Marx.
Etc.
It might be that Rickover's being an SOB was not an obstacle to overcome, but the key to his success.
Back in my day of Naval Nuclear Propulsion, when reactors were made of wood and ROs like myself were made of Inconel, I wondered why the US didn't adopt the French approach to civilian nuclear power. Basically, they had 3 nuclear plant designs: small, medium, and large, based on demand and cooling water availability. Seemed like it streamlined the cumbersome certification process that has all but killed the US nuclear industry. The same approach seems sensible for ships. Baseline hull designs and hotel features and leave the innovations to tactical improvements.
A little personal history: In 1971 just out of engineering school I was hired by the Navy as a civilian engineer in the CASDAC program. What's CASDAC? Computer Aided Ship Design and Construction. The program had just started. My first year was spent developing plans and budgets for ramping up my assigned area -- piping -- but we got only enough money in the next FY to spend the year developing plans and budgets. And so it went for the eight years I was there. Some really smart men and women in that program but we never really had the interest of those above us.
"The Secretary of the Navy should develop a robust digital ship design library to enhance the Navy's ability to leverage existing designs and expedite design and construction. (Recommendation 4)"
The USN doesn't have such already?
Does Naval Intelligence or Sub force not have plans on various ship designs from foreign services as well as those transiting the oceans in their data bases?
Is USN simply relying on designers like Gibbs & Cox and others for the design ideas?
Go hunt GibbS & Cox in social media. They really don' seem to put their serious foot forward out there.
So who is designing ships that can be built if we get into a hot war with the Chinese? You know something that floats, can make it to china and back and carries things that go boom. Oh, and can be built in 12 months from saying go to heading West.
It sure would be nice to have several designs in our back pocket that we can actually build before the war is over. It would be better if we would build ships before things pop off but that does not seem very likely.
Yeah, I'm making that my job pending someone acknowledging the need. Our Overlord/MUSV work is really the only small combatant in a hurry option we have. We could be mass producing them at Gulf Coast yards.
I'd also throw out the idea of grabbing Damen's Offshore Support Vessels / Yacht Tenders. There are 2 67x11m ships and their sisters 69 x 11. UAE bought 2 6711s for their Arialah OPCs. Damen also has Aqua Helix, a 70+ meter aluminum fast crew vessel with shaft mounted generators (on waterjets). These basic designs could easily be adapted to a variety of useful small combatants. Lilly pad AH-1, MH-60, haul MCM USVs or RHIBs, Deck load Mk 70 or ADL launchers. Better range and maybe better seakeeping as compared to LCS. Certainly easier to mass produce for less money. I look at this as our "Flower Class" solution.
I'm not sure I believe a limited conflict with China is on the table.
By "limited" I mean one where our power grid doesn't disappear in the first week (or day) and we fight with what we have while the civilian population wanders around eating each other for a few months before we have the capability to get power back and start thinking about finding people and facilities capable of building a ship again.
I think there is a good chance whatever we have day 1 is what we're going to have for the duration. There is no harm in trying to improve the situation, and maybe they will choose a limited conflict, but it's not certain that our remaining industrial capacity, such as it is, will come into paly at all.
Each recommendation begins with "Congress should..." or "The Secretary of the Navy should..." and that is precisely the problem.
Since 1987, the Secretaries of the Navy have been - for the most part - a collection of nonentities and our elected representatives have been even worse. Let me point out but one example. Senator Mark Kelly is a graduate of the USMMA and the NPS. He was a naval aviator and an astronaut. What has he done for the Navy or merchant marine since being elected in 2020? Nothing. His main concerns seem to be abortion and gun control. If he isn't going to do anything, what can you expect from the others in Congress with no military backgrounds?
I agree. His number one concern appears to be civilian disarmament and fighting the Constitution. An immense disappointment in someone who once took an oath to support and defend it.
But a bullet in your wife's head and you might be a bit bullish on gun control too.
Aviators are never going to carry water for the surface fleet.
I think you missed my point. Kelly knows ships. He won't be flying anywhere without a CVN and a battle group to protect her as well as MSC to resupply all those ships. Besides, there already are enough Democrats who want to squash the Second Amendment.
Pilots don't know shit. They have a job monkeys could do.
Traditionally, "Naval Aviators" considered themselves more than just "Monkeys Playing With a Stick"...
That was the Air Force.
https://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cv62-60/002.htm
Seems that sense of differentiation...and certainly decorum... isn't deemed important these days...
https://d1ldvf68ux039x.cloudfront.net/thumbs/photos/2402/8242374/1000w_q95.jpg
"a bullet in your wife's head and you might be a bit bullish on gun control too"
Late 2011 or early 2012 and still living in Houston, I was eating breakfast at a little diner called Skippers Cafe in Kemah Tx., on the way to the LPTB.
A big gaggle came into the little place. Per the pic here (thats not me, but I remember I was having their very good biscuits and gravy along with eggs like this gent!), you can see its pretty cozy...
https://maps.app.goo.gl/t15ZEMHjbwRovAew6
Taking the table where the guy in the orange shirt is sitting, was Capt. Kelley, Gabrielle Gifford, her apparent nurse, and some other friends/acquaintances. This may well have been one of her very first outings (they lived up the street in League City). Ms. Giffords did well at first, but over the course of a half hour or so, she started to fade. Her nurse and Capt. Kelley started to get concerned looked like, so they left. What was remarkable about the vignette was it was being reported in the news at the time that she was doing well, and about to go back to work....
Brownshoes don't seem to make particularly effective politicians....
Remember ABSCAM? 'Duke' in prison garb?
"Aviators are never going to carry water for the surface fleet. "
Into WWII, Brownshoes were required to spend an initial tour at sea...
Frank Ault was an Ensign in the Gunnery Dept. aboard the Astoria at Savo.
https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/uss-astoria-sunk-the-disaster-off-savo-island/
May help explain his sense of "Battlemindedness" later on...
Can't pass up the chance to reiterate that lack of institutional focus today's USN (run by some Really Smart Guys!) on any appreciation of "Being of the Sea".
Before anything else, SWO's (of course), but also, Bubbleheads, and yes....Brownshoes should have the sense of "Being of the Sea"...
But this is a telling look that being a "Mariner" in the USN isn't that important...
https://youtu.be/IXuszu8V1Xc?si=8mwcLWEjpX5dObPE&t=37
(actually the "bobstay" script and afterburner spiel is nonsensical...but its a movie)
Its not about sailing specifically per se (although look at what the Indian Navy emphasizes for their officers of all branches)...but a lack of appreciation of "All Things Nautical".
USN Leadership likes to mimic the Army and Air Force...
https://www.dvidshub.net/video/911421/interview-with-chief-naval-operations-adm-lisa-franchetti
And these Really Smart Guys -and Gals- can't figure out why nobody really much cares about a "Navy".
According to the other Sal the Army and Marines have decided how to solve their prepositioning afloat issues. By getting rid of their afloat proposition fleet and laying them up as part of the reserve.