Posted on 09/09/2025 10:22:38 AM PDT by whyilovetexas111
SSN(X) is the Navy’s planned successor to Virginia: a larger, stealthier, longer-legged attack submarine that teams with UUVs, carries more weapons, and is designed for higher availability. Costs will dwarf current boats, and industrial bottlenecks—from single-source suppliers to overloaded yards—are real. Budget trade-offs and shipyard realities have pushed the first procurement to around FY-2040, delaying entry to the fleet.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalsecurityjournal.org ...
Hey Whyilovetexas111
Why are you shilling every day for this anti-military magazine and the ignorant losers who write these stupid, deceitful articles.
.
Fast attack and never come back.
Just proving that the government military industrial complex is alive and well, and that nothing has changed.
Nothing like this happens with government planning.
Saturdays Sundays and Nights.
This is not a stupid deceitful article. We are approaching the singularity known as Augustine’s law [Norm Augustine].
It will be fun to watch 8 billion grow to 24 billion in cost overruns. We didn’t listen, Ike.
We are building a big, expensive Social Security Number?
Trump needs a War Resources Board to set priorities, identify bottlenecks, sack huge numbers of bureaucrats and threaten nationalization of defense contractors if they don't straighten themselves out.
Navy submarine procurement is pretty much a sole source disaster.
There is no competition and established contractors often provide shoddy or obsolete technology at a premium price
The industry likes “ proven” technology even if the tech was proven in the 1960s.
Is Harry still writing from his bunker in Kiev?
Which communist dictator are you related to?
They only continue to exist because they are supposedly more efficient than government run enterprises, a dubious assertion in light of current conditions.
The Navy used to have its own shipyards, for example, which it could sorely use now, and defense contractors were threatened with nationalization in WWII if they started price gouging. The whole corrupt procurement system is such a mess that it itself is a primary threat to national security.
Thats BS. They are companies that have investors, stock holders, have to be able to show a profit to stay in business, employ tens of thousands of white and blue collar workers.
You might want to look at some history and understand how the US mobilized for WWII and how the industry that rallied for the US in that war dealt with the end of the war and downsizing.
You might want to study the impacts of the downsizing, including the reduction of shipyards.
You might want to look at how industry has consolidated because the 'peace' has reduced the need for so much production, yet how we lose or risk losing the critical skills and industrial base to reconstitute if needed.
Govt procurement IS bloated. The contractor industry is about as lean as it can get without losing the ability to build anything going forward given that the govt gives it a shoestring budget and stretches programs over years for single items rather than create production lines that stay open. Some items, like ships last 25 years. You build a batch, then shut down the line for 10 or 15 years, well the expertise and labor goes off to do something more stable. So instead we pay a price to 'maintain' a capability. That is costly and inefficient. But they are private businesses and they are responding to the (US govt) customer.
My take is that the whole system is corrupt, not in the sense that there's payola (although I'm sure there's some of that) but in the sense that vast sums of money are wasted, everyone can see the waste, but no one in the companies, the bureaucracy, or the military does anything to fix it. It's been normalized.
The only thing that can fix this is an 800 pound gorilla like Trump banging his fist on the table and bringing in some people really dedicated to re-organizing it. And frankly, some of it should be nationalized like the shipyards: there is no private US shipbuilding in any amount in the US anymore. Thanks to the Jones Act we still have some ships being built, but smaller commercial vessels are hardly equivalent to warships and submarines. We have even tried to bring in foreign contractors like Fincantieri and some Turkish companies for artillery shell production, but even in those cases our procurement system has left them so FUBAR they're just like the rest. Think about that for a second: artillery shells are (apart from the fuses or guided shells) little different from WWI or WWII. But we can't even setup a factory to make them on time and on budget. It's beyond pathetic.
Apparently the thought of paying for apprenticeship programs to train new employees never occurred to them.
That's typical of American business: you can blame the gov for it's stupidity, but you can blame the companies also for gutting their own capabilities to maintain profits, just like non-defense American companies have done like GE and Boeing's civilian aircraft division.
It's the same everywhere in America.
What you say is true from a legal standpoint. But the remaining weapons contractors & shipyard are in fact government arsenals. Contracts get steered to the company that needs saving the most (Boeing F-47).
“Apparently the thought of paying for apprenticeship programs to train new employees never occurred to them.”
Newport News Shipbuilding has always maintained a school & apprentiship program.
That’s very good. But that’s another reason why General Dynamics behavior is inexcusable. GD owns Electric Boat.
Nationalizing would only make the part that is working, the contractor, dysfunctional. The problem is not the contractor, with rare exception of a dishonest contractor. The problem is a dysfunctional government procurement system.
Try working in an environment where the customer places and order for something and they give you a set of requirements for that item that aren’t complete, and they tell you it’s fixed price. So you and the customer agree to a price and you had to bid only a small profit because it was competed with other contractors. Ok you win the contract then halfway through your build the customer realizes the requirements were not exactly what they wanted so they direct you to make changes. Now the contractor has to either eat the additional cost or explain to the customer it will cost 20% more to make those changes. This happens repeatedly with the government contracts. 50 years ago the government would agree to pay more to get what it wanted. Today they are almost your worst nightmare of a customer. Winning a contract is not necessarily a win anymore and lots of companies are even no-bidding just to stay away from the headache.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.