Every single change in technology in the past 50 years has had “Stop building carriers!” written all over it. And nobody in the navy brass paid any attention. Let me repeat the key sentence here: Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack.

2024-01-22: Here we are, 15 years later, and nothing has changed. Like NASA, congress has focused more on spreading the work around than making it competitive

These suggestions seek to maximize competition between shipbuilders and suppliers. Single-use ships and shorter service lives will increase demand for new hulls and stimulate new supply. Ships with loosely coupled systems and modular components are easier for shipyards to integrate (and repair during a war). Testing components early and often makes it easier to qualify new suppliers. Iterative ship classes reduce program risk and the need for risk-tolerant contract structures like cost plus. These changes also make it easier to ramp up production during war.

Features like void spaces for torpedo and mine protection can only work if these competition measures increase productivity. Steel and air may be cheap, but labor is not.

Letting yards fail may be the most politically sensitive change. It will be a disaster if the Navy decides to toughen up on yards but waits until the ship is delivered in poor condition to lay the hammer down. The earlier Naval officers are in the yards and shops identifying problems, the less painful changes for the shipyard will be. Companies can fire bad managers or exit the business while some value remains.

The bottom line is getting officers out of their offices. The rest will follow.

• Uncategorized