Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

usni.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 469 posts

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#111

Post by Ylpertnodi »

metalman wrote: post #37

Impossible.Beurocracy.Insurance.Unions.No demographic with the skills that must be learned early in life to do the work, hard ,dangerous work that requires trust and inate skills to acomplish quickly and safely. I aprenticed with some of the last marine smiths, and also worked(very briefly) in a shipyard building military frigates, and spent 95‰ of my life next to the salt water. Add to that my repeated attempts to c…

>labour (ha!)

Where are you, and how much are you offering per hour?

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#112

Post by bluGill »

indymike wrote: post #89

I don't share the confidence in large ships being the future of naval anything. Even in the 90s, surface ships were easy pickings for submarines and antiship missiles. Smaller ships acting as drone carriers combined with arsenal ships can allow local power projection to keep shipping lanes open. Submarines and aircraft remain the safest, and best way to deliver offensive firepower. The aircraft carrier does have a ro…

close ship on ship battle is dead but large ships are needed for large long range weapons that can hit opposing targets that cannot be seen. a wwi battleship could ignore a small drone of today - a much larger system is needed to sink a ship.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#113

Post by Yeul »

timewizard wrote: post #20
leoedin wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This will never succeed because the economies of scale are nonexistent without dominance in the commercial shipbuilding market. This is what politicians just don’t seem to realise about industry and engineering. People get good at things by doing them repeatedly and optimising. That’s the only proven way. So of course if we build a couple of naval ships every decade, maybe a giant train line every 30 years or simil…

> get good at things by doing them repeatedly and optimising In an environment where information is shared freely and widely. > So of course if we build a couple of naval ships every decade, maybe a giant train line every 30 years or similar, it will be done terribly. That's a reasonable explanation but it's not exclusive. You can still face these challenges and not do a terrible job. There is plenty of evidence this…

In the 1970s the Netherlands tried to save it's shipyards (from Japan and Korea at the time China was nothing).

There's just no point to it your oil tankers end up more expensive so nobody will want to buy them.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#114

Post by foldr »

hnthrow90348765 wrote: post #95
suraci wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China reunifies Taiwan: 100% US responds militarily: not likely but possible

That's if we had a democratic president. We most certainly won't respond in the next 4 years to anything China or Russia does. The only thing they have to do for that benefit is not attack us directly.

I agree that Trump makes a US military response less likely. But it’s still far from impossible.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#115

Post by throw0101c »

peepeepoopoo105 wrote: post #6

This will never succeed because the economies of scale are nonexistent without dominance in the commercial shipbuilding market. War planners should have pushed to repeal the Jones Act decades ago, but now Chinese shipbuilding capacity is over 230 times greater than ours because of their success in civilian shipbuilding. The proposed measures in this aricle are too little too late. The only logical course of action at…

> This will never succeed because the economies of scale are nonexistent without dominance in the commercial shipbuilding market. War planners should have pushed to repeal the Jones Act decades ago

The US used to subsidize the salaries of US merchant marines on ships (US salaries are higher than Filipino ones) so that there would be a trained population, but that was stopped in the 1980s because subsidies are bad, so there are hardly any US merchant marines any more.

The US government used to own transport boats and lease them to US shipping companies, but they've not bothered to build news ones in decades, and so most transport ships are foreign owned. If there's a war, and you need ship matériel to the war zone, do you think commercial ships will enter it? Perhaps the US government should eschew the Free Market™ a bit and own the means of transportation.

The point of the Jones Act—or at least that one particular section that a lot of folks tend to talk about—is to have US citizens and US ships available in case of war. But given US prices relative to the prices for other countries, it costs more, and the US has not been willing to pay the premium to support that readiness.

Edit: The channel What's Going on with Shipping? has a number of videos on the topic of the what people call "the Jones Act", but more specifically about Section 27, the cabotage rules. See perhaps these to get a good overview of the topic:

* "The pros and cons of The Jones Act", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOIx-OAvxqQ

* "The Jones Act Makes Shipping More Expensive?", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95om9PGI758

* "Jones Act Debate | Center for Maritime Strategy & Heritage Foundation", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWKz3psejb0

* "The Passage of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920: The Jones Act", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O_EhPbmr74

* Optional more: https://www.youtube.com/@wgowshipping/search?query=jones%20a...

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#116

Post by jabl »

nickff wrote: post #54
pzo wrote: post #30

Didn't warfare changed big enough that big navy might be more obsolete? Ukraine-Russia conflict showed that you can make hordes of cheap naval drones that can easily harass your very expensive ships or put them out of combat. By now probably you can still make more advanced but cheaper underwater drones, smart torpedos etc.

The jeune ecole thought that torpedoes and small torpedo boats would doom battleships; they were wrong. People thought SAMs would end bombers, and anti-tank missiles would end tanks. There’s always a new weapon, but it doesn’t mean the old ones are obsolete.

Not always, but sometimes it does. Cavalry charges aren't a thing anymore, for instance.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#117

Post by fuzzfactor »

p00dles wrote: post #88
peepeepoopoo105 wrote: post #6

This will never succeed because the economies of scale are nonexistent without dominance in the commercial shipbuilding market. War planners should have pushed to repeal the Jones Act decades ago, but now Chinese shipbuilding capacity is over 230 times greater than ours because of their success in civilian shipbuilding. The proposed measures in this aricle are too little too late. The only logical course of action at…

All kinds of people from all kinds of places read HN, so maybe better to use more general language - referring to “Chinese shipbuilding capacity is over 230 times greater than _ours_”

>maybe better to use more general language

Unless a visitor is unaware that this is a US website, then it would actually help be more informative than otherwise.

And if a visitor is already aware, what difference does it make?

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#118

Post by bluGill »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #67
pas wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just politicians in general, but people, of course, are always surprised how expensive housing is, but then reject any kind of streamlined mass-manufactured option. They are conditioned to worship at the altar of small businesses and good ol' craftsmanship. (And plot after plot they blindly erect yet another replica of the standard American Dream with the compulsory backyard where they truly can be free, and cond…

The standard tract built house erected in 100 days by DR Horton/Lennar/etc is the streamlined, mass manufactured option. Any more streamline than that is apparently more costly or otherwise unappealing to people. It isn’t not small businesses building most homes in the US, they are large, and sometimes publicly traded businesses.

Every once in a while someone will bulid a house in a day. However it is more costly to do this. you either need expensive really fast cure concrete or a low quality wood foundation. You need to carefully plan who is where and when so plumbers and electritions are no standing in the same spot (think sink with an outlet nearby). You need to specify where everything is to a pipe and wire are not in the same place with enough slack that the pipe can be put in. You pay your crews to arrive early so as soon as the last crew is done with a section next con start.

your 100 day house has slack built in so if one crew is running late the next isn't affected. This means you can tightly schedule the labor a month in advance.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#119

Post by wffurr »

scandox wrote: post #52
suraci wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we ever did get in a war with them is that normal to think like this? do most americans think like this?

Well if you look at history it is a story of almost continuous war so it would be very optimistic indeed not to consider it.

The returns to warfare changed significantly with the Industrial Revolution. Greater economic growth is now possible in times of peace rather than war.

The Paradox game Victoria 2 does a good job simulating this dynamic. Highest score is possible by sitting out ww2. https://acoup.blog/2021/08/20/collections-teaching-paradox-v... Is a nice write up.

Re: The U.S. needs a shipbuilding revolution

#120

Post by jabl »

suraci wrote: post #96
davemp wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> even the most hawks Americans can only think about how to defend and A2/AD if the Chinese intervene in taiwan Works both ways.

i don't know which one is more crazier you don't know where taiwan is or you know it well but still think it's totally normal and reasonable to do that

Perhaps Xi Jinping and his henchmen should also look at a map? In case they have trouble understanding, here's a hint: Taiwan belongs to that large part of the globe which is "not China".
Post reply on HN