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

How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

construction-physics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 531 posts

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#391

Post by dijit »

pfdietz wrote: post #377
dijit wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ehhhh, lets be real. I’m a dyed in the wool meat eating junk eater. But, a lot of how we produce food today is not humane or sustainable, and a lot of the food itself is so poor in nutrition that it leaves us unhealthy and unbalanced. This isn’t a lecture, just an observation, I am guilty of eating (almost exclusively) poor quality, over processed, mass produced foods. But realistically speaking, if we solve the worl…

Why isn't it sustainable? All the inputs can be derived from non-fossil sources. Maybe N2O emission? But I think that could be addressed technically.

Not sustainable due to the fossil-fuel laden garbage we feed to bovine stock.

Not sustainable because it causes major health issues which stress the healthcare system and limits quality of life - especially the affordable stuff that people tend to think is “normal value”

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#392

Post by Symbiote »

nradov wrote: post #384
pjc50 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to talk about Edinburgh (I could almost see the Tasman ferry from my house), may I introduce you to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_ferry_fiasco "Originally intended to come into service in 2018 and 2019 respectively, both ferries have been delayed by over five years, and costs have more than quadrupled to £460 million" The Scottish government tried to do what commentators here are saying is t…

There are multiple causes behind that that scandal. But if the buyer had specified the ships to use cheap and simple diesel engines instead of requiring LNG fuel over silly concerns about emissions then they could have been build much faster at a fraction of the cost.

The ferries in Denmark that funny use diesel are nice. No awful fumes for passengers, crew or local residents.

Why shouldn't Scotland also enjoy this improvement?

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#393

Post by mmooss »

rhubarbtree wrote: post #89
mmooss wrote: post #57

There's a presumption that it would be beneficial to return mid-20th century manufacturing economies. If you look at economic output and productivity, and quality of life for labor (physical labor, especially repetitive physical labor, is hard to do for decades), we want to move forward and we did. We want to plan for a mid-21st century economy. The problem is a small group seizing the benefits for themselves.

Unfortunately, neoliberal bullshit only works out the long term in a political fantasy world.

The impression is that you must know nothing about the merits and this is all you have - name-calling, swearing, condescension. But most of that is unnecessary and definitely inappropriate to HN: What makes you think you can treat people this way? Because they have economic ideas you don't like - and, it seems, don't understand?

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#394

Post by nradov »

michaelt wrote: post #97
jacquesm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a country that is an Island you'd think that the question of whether or not it is 'national-strategic' would have been answered in the affirmative.

If shipbuilding is a strategic national industry, doesn't that also make all the inputs to a shipyard strategic industries? After all, if a war broke out and our normal trading partners weren't willing to sell us ships, presumably they wouldn't sell us steel or engines or ball bearings or paint or radar modules or computer chips or plastics.

Even back during the Age of Sail when Britain was the dominant naval power with a worldwide empire, they had to import many of the inputs for their domestic shipbuilding industry. This included basic stuff like timber, tar, hemp, cotton, etc. If you have enough warships to secure your sea lines of communication then depending on imports is less of a concern. But the UK Royal Navy today is a shadow of its former self and can barely serve as a local defense force.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#395

Post by giorgioz »

diego_moita wrote: post #263
giorgioz wrote: post #172

Italy is barely mentioned in the whole article. Today Italy is the biggest shipbuilding manufacturer in Europe: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-dominate-global-s... I feel the double standard of such articles quick in pointing out Italy being behind in many statistics (which it is and is fair to point it out). When it's Britain behind the whole article is written only from the point of view of the UK and a…

England is an island, both geographically and culturally. This is the culture from where Brexit comes. They still think that the world spins around their navel, that football (soccer) is their game and the sun never sets in their empire. At the end of WWI, 4 empires collapsed: the Austro-Hungarian, the Russian tzar, the Ottoman Empire and the British. The Austrians accepted it and moved on. The Russians and Turkish a…

I respect you for your knowledge of Beretta, La Marzocco, De Longhi and Carpiggiani. I was not aware of Carpiggiani. Ferrero is also Italian. Kinder Surprise is Italian (from German branch) and Ferrero Roché is Italian (from French branch). Italy has also a massive monopoly of glasses lenses in Luxotica.

I deeply admire the UK, the USA and anything great in any other country. Even when I disagree with their leaders I still admire their technical achievements and the great men that work hard for it. We should strive to admire, applaud and copy the best in each other. Pushing each other forward in a upgoing spiral of betterment.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#396

Post by mandevil »

deadbunny wrote: post #294
pjc50 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to talk about Edinburgh (I could almost see the Tasman ferry from my house), may I introduce you to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_ferry_fiasco "Originally intended to come into service in 2018 and 2019 respectively, both ferries have been delayed by over five years, and costs have more than quadrupled to £460 million" The Scottish government tried to do what commentators here are saying is t…

This is the problem with destroying industries then trying to keep small remaining pockets of it/restarting it. You lose all of the institutional knowledge, the stuff that isn't written down, the stuff that comes from experience. This is only exacerbated when those projects you're trying to do become massively over budget and late. People decry it as a waste and a failure, leading to any hard won knowledge being lost…

This is what has crippled the Nuclear power plant building industry in most countries (ROK, China, Russia excepted). France built dozens of reactors in the 1970's and into the 1980's, then that slowed and then finally stopped for a decade after Chernobyl. When they tried to build the EPR it's been a huge fiasco of delays and cost overruns. Similarly for the US after 3 Mile Island, the AP1000 in Georgia are the first two power reactors built in the US in 40 years, and massively over-budget and behind schedule. Japan hasn't tried anything since Fukushmia Dai Ichi, but I expect that they will have the exact same problem. The ability to deliver on time and budget was just gone because they didn't have a workforce, and so are having to build that from scratch.

ROK found it easier to become world-class in building power reactors from zero than the US, UK, France and Germany has found it to re-build their capability after a decade (or more) of not constructing any power reactors. And that's true for a lot of these post-industrial industrial policy stuff. It is a lot harder to rebuild once lost than to build the first time.

Russia never stopped producing reactors after Chernobyl, because the USSR was a command economy and the Five Year Plan said that they needed to build a reactor here right now, and so the workers kept working even after the disaster, and now they are one of the few countries that can still deliver nuclear reactors. Note that this is NOT an endorsement of a command economy.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#397

Post by nradov »

robbie-c wrote: post #293
iso1631 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sensible thing would be deep integration with a continent-spanning economy. Sure the UK is an island, but the channel isn't exactly wide (not to mention the tunnel). It's hardly Iceland - even Ireland is more detached. But the UK decided against that in 2016, and despite demographics having shifted the views, there is no general "rejoin" campaign.

I've wondered about this too. I live in the UK and have been idly daydreaming about my next startup, and it seems like Brexit, and therefore having a small market / uncooperative EU, is such a headwind for some of the things I'd like to do. Seems like many UK startups just pretend to be based in SF. I think rejoin is going to be politically unpopular for a while, as there's no way we could rejoin the EU on anything l…

The UK is obviously too small and poor to go it alone forever. The other option for them would be economic integration with North America. They could probably join up with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on relatively favorable terms.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#398

Post by giorgioz »

hexbin010 wrote: post #315
diego_moita wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

England is an island, both geographically and culturally. This is the culture from where Brexit comes. They still think that the world spins around their navel, that football (soccer) is their game and the sun never sets in their empire. At the end of WWI, 4 empires collapsed: the Austro-Hungarian, the Russian tzar, the Ottoman Empire and the British. The Austrians accepted it and moved on. The Russians and Turkish a…

The Premier is the largest soccer league by revenue. England also spends the most on players. So yes, soccer is 'our' game currently. And the sun still doesn't set on our Commonwealth. Also, Great Britain is an island, not England. We can't win in the UK: if we cheer on our achievements and be positive, we're accused of being stuck in a "Downtown Abbey" fantasy. If we get depressed about our economy, we're told we're…

> We can't win in the UK: if we cheer on our achievements and be positive, we're accused of being stuck in a "Downtown Abbey" fantasy. If we get depressed about our economy, we're told we're not being positive enough and are 'talking down' the UK.

If you want others to cheer you on when you do great you should do the same to others (when they deserve it). Human behaviour is mostly imitation.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#399

Post by dukeyukey »

webdevver wrote: post #6
yanhangyhy wrote: post #4

This is called mean reversion in history. The UK and Japan are small island countries. They lack the resources and manpower to sustain long-term industrial prosperity. Everything they have is temporary. In the end these industries flow to large nations with vast resources and large pools of technical talent. It used to be the United States. Now it is China absorbing Japan and Korea. This applies not only to shipbuild…

ive long held this take aswell. a lot of people point back at history, with the argument of "we did it before, we can do it now!" but whats to say it wasn't a transient? transients can last 1 year or 100 years, but in the latter case i think its 'hard' for us to believe that it was a fluke, because we view transients that last longer than a human lifespan with a bias of perceived permanence. how could the UK ever com…

England (and the Netherlands, Belgium, Northern Italy, and a few other regions) have been some of the richest parts of the world for centuries. Not quite millenia, but not far from it. That's hardly transient.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#400

Post by dboreham »

I've been watching this thread. Almost everything posted makes me say "no I don't think it was that", but also "I suppose that was something of a factor". This probably tells us there are many reasons not one.

I will say that having lived through this time, it seemed that the message was "there aren't the things we want to do". Thatcherites said there would be a new services based economy. Nobody said "we could have an excellent heavy industry economy if only the pesky unions weren't involved".

Also, at the time (1970s) it felt like the industry was pretty much already gone. In my family the end was the cancelation of the TSR-2 (which my Dad worked on as an avionics designer). That was in the mid-60s. So by the 80s it wasn't that there was an industry that might be saved/preserved, rather the unsavable rump of what once was.

Lastly, I'm unconvinced unions are the cause. I think they're the symptom. Business is in decline, management doesn't know what to do, so begins laying off workers. Unions respond. Death spiral.

Anyway, for me it seemed like the class running the country just didn't understand nor like the engineering/manufacturing world. They were arts graduates.

Post reply on HN