USN Shipbuilding Woes
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
USN Shipbuilding Woes
Relevance is the slippage in aircrfat carrier deliveries as well as impact on AUKUS subs…
Reading that the navy's response to ******* up at breathtaking scale is to simply refuse to talk about it, my impulse is to refamiliarize the admiralty with the tale of Viscount John Byng.
Full story is here, just a ******* mess, apparently no one is taking this seriously….
https://archive.is/2024.04.07-214137...eport-00150879
Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report
As China’s fleet grows, the U.S. is struggling with fresh delays in building new subs and warships.
Reading that the navy's response to ******* up at breathtaking scale is to simply refuse to talk about it, my impulse is to refamiliarize the admiralty with the tale of Viscount John Byng.
Full story is here, just a ******* mess, apparently no one is taking this seriously….
https://archive.is/2024.04.07-214137...eport-00150879
Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report
As China’s fleet grows, the U.S. is struggling with fresh delays in building new subs and warships.
The following 3 users liked this post by Biggus:
The inevitable consequence of sticking with Arleigh Burke - a mid 80s design, which while admittedly very capable, means that there's no-one in NAVSEA who knows how to specify and/or design a ship anymore. Which leaves them dependent BIW and HII for continuation of that line, while begging Fincantieri / MM to dig them out of a hole.
They're deeply scarred by the Zumwalt and LCS experiences. Strangely, the UK might be in a marginally better position in that we have actually conducted 2 (and a half if you count T31) surface combatant designs this century.
Same lesson the US are learning on aircraft design. Long duration slow burn programmes result in huge programme costs and loss of skills over time. Short, sharp design efforts generate wider cadres of people and get to the result quicker.
They're deeply scarred by the Zumwalt and LCS experiences. Strangely, the UK might be in a marginally better position in that we have actually conducted 2 (and a half if you count T31) surface combatant designs this century.
Same lesson the US are learning on aircraft design. Long duration slow burn programmes result in huge programme costs and loss of skills over time. Short, sharp design efforts generate wider cadres of people and get to the result quicker.
Former RN frigate CO compares USN destroyers to RN frigates - and the role of Merlin.
Earlier batches of USN Arleigh-Burke class have an inferior ASW capability due to only having bow-mounted sonar and the ships be optimized for AD.
US Navy destroyer or Royal Navy frigate – what's best for hunting Russian submarines? (archive.ph)
Earlier batches of USN Arleigh-Burke class have an inferior ASW capability due to only having bow-mounted sonar and the ships be optimized for AD.
US Navy destroyer or Royal Navy frigate – what's best for hunting Russian submarines? (archive.ph)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Not just the RN then….
To sail no more: the US Navy has ended all work on cruisers COWPENS CG63 and VICKSBURG CG69 and now, after hundreds of millions of $$$ with zero ROI, both will be decommissioned this year. Another "tough decision." 63 seen at San Diego in Feb; 69 at Norfolk in April
To sail no more: the US Navy has ended all work on cruisers COWPENS CG63 and VICKSBURG CG69 and now, after hundreds of millions of $$$ with zero ROI, both will be decommissioned this year. Another "tough decision." 63 seen at San Diego in Feb; 69 at Norfolk in April
Indeed, not just the RN.
Prima facie evidence of what happens when you dither and defer programmes for replacements because you have institutionally forgotten how to conduct design programmes and therefore deem it "risky".
Those ships have been worked very hard for a late 70s design. Not helped by binning the early non-VLS ones in the noughties. Certification will be an ongoing nightmare, pouring money into a bottomless hole (or nearly bottomless hull......)
Prima facie evidence of what happens when you dither and defer programmes for replacements because you have institutionally forgotten how to conduct design programmes and therefore deem it "risky".
Those ships have been worked very hard for a late 70s design. Not helped by binning the early non-VLS ones in the noughties. Certification will be an ongoing nightmare, pouring money into a bottomless hole (or nearly bottomless hull......)
The following users liked this post:
THE PENTAGON – The lead ship in a new class of guided-missile frigates for the U.S. Navy may be up to three years late, USNI News has learned.
Constellation (FFG-62), under construction at Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin, may not deliver to the fleet until 2029, three years later than the original 2026 delivery goal, according to a service shipbuilding review.
The program’s delay came to light as part of the 45-day shipbuilding review that Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro ordered earlier this year.
Source: USNI News: April 2, 2024 updated April 3, 2024
Constellation (FFG-62), under construction at Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin, may not deliver to the fleet until 2029, three years later than the original 2026 delivery goal, according to a service shipbuilding review.
The program’s delay came to light as part of the 45-day shipbuilding review that Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro ordered earlier this year.
Source: USNI News: April 2, 2024 updated April 3, 2024
Well, as mentioned in the linked POLITICO article their experience with 'doing a (UK) MOD' on a foreign design isn't exactly going well. I posted a link to an article about a year's delay to the FREMM based Constellation in January (I think on the AUKUS thread), thing appear to have got worse. A bit like the Hunters, taking an existing design and changing it, I wait with interest progress on the Canadian Serviuce Combatant (also T26 based)
HMS Venturer was originally planned to be in the water at the end of last year. Current estimate is that she'll be "launched" towards the back end of this year. Not necessarily a problem (can do an awful lot more up to a point), but indicative of the difficulties involved for a yard that has never built a ship before.
WodS (Word on da Street) is that using a near-twenty year old "off the shelf" design and trying to get it through RN certification isn't as easy as people thought it would be. Who knew?
