Shipbuilders in Japan, Korea, and (to a lesser estent) the Eurozone are SpaceX. They are forged from competition.
Everyone with technical and math sense knows SpaceX is ~10x cheaper than NASA per Kg of mass to low earth orbit.
Foreign shipbuilders are 2-3x more efficient than US yards. And these nations are our ALLIES.
Fer cryin out load, requisition an allied Icebreaker (or two). And maybe an allied Frigate or Destroyer every year.
I honestly think these Jones Act and Buy 'Merica! cement heads would rather lose a war with China than properly build out sufficient naval capability. They are not patriots, they are grifters.
To be fair, there is some government assistance and support to shipyards and other key industries in Europe. In some of the Finnish companies, the government stepped in to ensure that it remained in Finnish hands. Even Davie's recent purchase of Helsinki Shipyard was done with the assistance of the Quebec Government.
Part of the problem is our procurement process. The USCG and USN share part of this blame, as they demand changes and that the project meet with certain specifications without adequately considering the trade-off in time, cost, and other function. There was a mentality that this ship will be in the fleet for 50+ years, so it's worth getting all the bells and whistles we want. But the flip side of that is high cost, low numbers, and long processes. In that tradeoff today, we lose.
There are enough ships to build. Claude Berube has a great chart in his recent post about the numbers of Chinese surface combatants being built. We all know that there is no U.S. merchant fleet. Savy U.S. shipbuilder will see that is where they should focus- in orders for tens to hundreds of vessels that we know how to build- not in trying to build a couple of specialized vessels.
It pains me to write this...
US shipbuilding is NASA. Mostly a jobs program.
Shipbuilders in Japan, Korea, and (to a lesser estent) the Eurozone are SpaceX. They are forged from competition.
Everyone with technical and math sense knows SpaceX is ~10x cheaper than NASA per Kg of mass to low earth orbit.
Foreign shipbuilders are 2-3x more efficient than US yards. And these nations are our ALLIES.
Fer cryin out load, requisition an allied Icebreaker (or two). And maybe an allied Frigate or Destroyer every year.
I honestly think these Jones Act and Buy 'Merica! cement heads would rather lose a war with China than properly build out sufficient naval capability. They are not patriots, they are grifters.
To be fair, there is some government assistance and support to shipyards and other key industries in Europe. In some of the Finnish companies, the government stepped in to ensure that it remained in Finnish hands. Even Davie's recent purchase of Helsinki Shipyard was done with the assistance of the Quebec Government.
Part of the problem is our procurement process. The USCG and USN share part of this blame, as they demand changes and that the project meet with certain specifications without adequately considering the trade-off in time, cost, and other function. There was a mentality that this ship will be in the fleet for 50+ years, so it's worth getting all the bells and whistles we want. But the flip side of that is high cost, low numbers, and long processes. In that tradeoff today, we lose.
There are enough ships to build. Claude Berube has a great chart in his recent post about the numbers of Chinese surface combatants being built. We all know that there is no U.S. merchant fleet. Savy U.S. shipbuilder will see that is where they should focus- in orders for tens to hundreds of vessels that we know how to build- not in trying to build a couple of specialized vessels.