Discussion about this post

User's avatar
cfrog's avatar

Something that I think those of us not in the Merchant Marine and Maritime industry do not appreciate is just how worn ships over 20+ years can be. There are significant problems with fielding a class of ships over 20-30 years. The Navy will have ships going offline as they are bringing new hulls of the class into service. So knuckledraggers like me think budgeting for 8 ships of the same class means we'll have 8 ships (LHAs) worth of capability at the same time. We say 'Thank you, Navy'. In reality, 8 LHAs planned between 2019 and 2052 means we never have more than maybe 60 percent (4-5) of those LHAs in service (cut that by 30-41% readiness), with the first of the class going into pasture around 10 years before the the last ship is slated to be built. I understand some of the nuance here (balancing cost and resources available with need to maintain production yards). At least the references currently show 4 LPDs between 2040 and 2044....(eye roll). [Source for numbers: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61240]

Expand full comment
Polarbear's avatar

“Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth calls on his defense leaders to accelerate their workforce and recapitalization plans by the end of the week, our national security ecosystem has an unprecedented opportunity to radically restructure and set itself not for yesterday’s wars, but tomorrow’s security.” – April 14, 2025

I caught this article the other day recognizing that this might help the US Navy’s amphibious ship building and maintenance problem. https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2025/04/14/hegseths_memo_what_to_do_next_1103761.html The above article mentions the “infamous 1993 Last Supper” dinner/meeting where a Deputy SecDef told defense contractors to consolidate in order to maintain profits. Apparently, consolidate they did, and DOD went from more than fifty major contractors to five. This move “reshaped” the Nation Defense Industry. https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2023/03/01/the-last-supper-how-a-1993-pentagon-dinner-reshaped-the-defense-industry

Of course competition breeds “agility, innovation, and responsiveness” and that evaporated from the process with this consolidation. The congressional mandated cost-plus contracts of 10 to 12 percent profit margins resulted in a process where “cost overruns and delays were tolerated and helped increase profits”. In other words, we innovate too slow and build too expensive.

The article concludes it is time to change. “Industry must be measured on how fast they can deliver real-world results, not how well they check the boxes of a static requirements document (which they often help write). The risks of under delivering and overspending are best mitigated by embracing a minimum viable product (MVP) mindset that focuses on rapidly fielding operating prototypes, and continually improving and adapting them. These are hallmarks of modern software development, but the mindset has a place in even the largest hardware-focused projects as well.”

I appreciate the guidance issued by the SECDEF and the implementation in the Department of the Navy is going to be interesting to watch. S/F

Expand full comment
17 more comments...

No posts