The Nation Needs a Shipbuilding Revolution
22 comments
·February 3, 2025frodo8sam
aprilthird2021
Honest question, is it at all possible for us to have an industrial revitalization given that we have the highest average wages in the world?
roenxi
Probably. The original industrial revolutions were happening in nations that quickly became wealthy, and the US was doing pretty well with high wages vs. Asia for most of its industrial period. Higher wages in theory should be linked in higher productivity and output per worker in the US due to deep skillsets - otherwise where do the high wages come from? But something might have broken that link.
The issue looks from afar like a double-whammy of (1) pushing capital investment offshore to China resulting in most of the productive capital formation happening in Asia and (2) banning a lot of industrial activity in the US for environmental reasons. A lot of what the Chinese did to get ahead was literally illegal in most Western countries - some of it was labour laws mind. Even today there are some questions in my mind whether something like Shenzhen would be legal in the US. If Shenzhen was magically transplanted to the US, what would happen when the lawyers move in?
sgt101
- high wages are not evenly spread geographically in the USA
- high wages are not evenly spread demographically in the USA
- the wage distribution seems to me to be unusual in that it has a very long fat tail whereas the UK's is very clustered (I've forgotten the right term) on the median.
- modern industry can be highly automated
- modern logistics mean that industry can be decentralised
I believe that the last two are new since the USA and Europe outsourced large amounts of their industry to China. However the bigger issue is that competitive industries require very significant capitalisation because on the one hand modern products are staggeringly well engineered (with the trade offs of cheap, good and sophisticated taken into account) and on the other hand the processes used to make them require lots of tools, infrastructure, and robots.
gnkyfrg
[dead]
peepeepoopoo105
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 stage would be to seek an alternative that leverages the US's existing strengths. Naval vessels are largely outdated technology and meanwhile the US is the world leader in aerospace manufacturing. If we were to revive the 747 Cruise Missile Carrier concept, or else an equivalent program, it could deliver the same range and operational payload as a guided missile destroyer, but at dramatically lower cost and higher operational tempo. With the ability to rapidly ferry munitions thousands of miles to a conflict zone, one 747 CMC aircraft could replace multiple guided missile destroyers despite costing one fifth the price. This is possible because the 747 CMC is based on a reliable and proven aircraft with existing economies of scale.
Thank you for reading my shameless sales pitch.
leoedin
> 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 similar, it will be done terribly.
Then there’s lots of hand wringing about how we can’t do this any more.
We are so, so far behind China in industrial capacity now. If we ever did get in a war with them they’d outbuild us 10 to 1. Technical advantages would be pretty much irrelevant at that level.
pas
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 conduct HOA approved activities, and complain about the neighbor making a noise with their fucking weedwhacker, and complain about the other neighbor that has a problem with the smoke from the occasional backyard cooking.) Otherwise it's gentrification, more traffic and oh, ew, maybe even affordable-unit-dwellers.
timewizard
> 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 is the case.
> Then there’s lots of hand wringing about how we can’t do this any more.
Of course we can.
> so far behind China in industrial capacity now.
We just don't want to pay first world wages for the work. The arbitrage has been beneficial for a few decades as long as you're not concerned about high quality capacity. Which is what you'd want for a war.
Animats
Huh? The Jones Act was supposed to help American shipbuilding. It's a requirement that vessels which operate between US ports must be made in the US, crewed by the US, and flagged to the US. It didn't help much, but that was the plan.
China's shipbuilding industry is so big that their aircraft carriers are being constructed by shipyards that make large cargo ships. Aerial photos show shipyards with drydocks full of cargo ships, with an warship or two mixed in. US warships are mostly built by Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock, and the Bath Iron Works, which don't make civilian ships. There's little economy of scale in US warship construction. Some years ago, the head of Newport News told Congress that if they'd order two carriers at the same time, the company would throw in a third one for free. Congress declined the offer.
The PLAN now has more warships than the US Navy. Fewer carriers, but that's being fixed. China's carriers are getting better. The type 001 carrier was a refurbished Russian carrier. The type 002 was a smaller ski-jump carrier. The type 003 was comparable to the US Kitty Hawk class. Whether the next carrier will be nuclear powered hasn't been announced.
pbmonster
> the 747 CMC is based on a reliable and proven aircraft with existing economies of scale.
This is no longer true, unfortunately. The assembly line tooling has been decommissioned and scrapped, the supply chain is shut down, essential personnel has retired. If you want to restart the line, you would have to fund the entire 747-8 program over again from the ground up.
pavpanchekha
I think Rapid Dragon, plus recent talk of using the B21 for air combat/to replace NGAD are pointing in this direction: use large, numerous, and cavernous planes for Pacific firepower.
peepeepoopoo105
Rapid Dragon cannibalizes our existing military transport capacity and can't achieve the same kind of economies of scale and high operational tempo that would be possible with a commercial airliner platform. Commercial airliners are designed to land, swap passengers, refuel, and take off with very little down time. Meanwhile, military aircraft are notoriously high maintenance.
paganel
I think when it comes to Naval Power the US's grand strategy throughout the modern era has mostly been based on the fact that the continental US is, de facto, a (very) big island when it comes to the connections with the rest of the world.
So, in the event of a new world war they would have two options: one, maintain naval power superiority and thus ensure that the things that the US needs to come from over-seas still come through, or two, return to autarky and economic isolationism (which, up to a point, they could sustain based on their home resources) and hope for the best. It's interesting that the current US administration is doing a combination of the two, see the debacle for the Panama Canal when it comes to my first point, and the return to economic isolationism and even hints of wanting to incorporate Canada when it comes to my second point.
On the other hand Air Power has never ever won a big war all by itself. The only war that let's say was won via said Air Power alone was the 1999 war against Milosevic's Yugoslavia, and, possibly, the First Gulf War. But the US won't be able to win a conventional war against China or/and Russia based on Air Power alone, never.
SteveVeilStream
Canada as well. We have the longest coastline in the world but buy all or most of our ferries from other countries. It's silly.
codemusings
> [...] if the nation is destined for maritime irrelevance and the laying of its prosperity at the whims of autocrats a world away.
Considering what happened in the last two weeks alone this lack of self-awareness is simply brilliant.
zfg
South Korea can train the US navy. Teach them how to build again:
https://www.voanews.com/a/us-navy-looking-to-s-korean-japane...
senectus1
Look, If you MUST implement Tariff's then do it in a way that triggers explosive manufacturing.
IMHO thats on the only way a tariff can be successful. If you want vertically integrated growth then by logic you should run Tariffs for all the parts and resources needed for triggering that growth. If you decide that ship building needs a shot in the arm thats going to be iron ore and steel (largely).
throwing tariffs around for imaginary slights isnt going to trigger anything useful in your country... (unless thats the idea of course. There is a theory that a collapse is the point)
preisschild
Why would they need to when they get contracts anyway due to tariffs and the Jones act?
suraci
> All said, there are reasons to be optimistic: Consensus on the threat from China has taken hold, galvanizing tentative steps to more forceful and effective actions
lol, i like the tone here
usually i'll question abt what the threat is exactly
but now i only say, wish you have a good luck, little magas
null
aaron695
[dead]
The nation doesn’t just need a shipbuilding revolution—it needs a broader industrial revitalization. Strengthening semiconductor manufacturing, modernizing military and civilian aviation, reinvigorating automotive innovation, and more are all critical. Tackling this alone would be overwhelming, but collaboration with trusted neighbors and reliable allies could make these ambitions achievable. Luckily we have a real bridge builder in cha...