Us Navy Ship Number Increase Goal Announced

[PaulFormerlyinSaudi]

I am surprised we are not talking about the need for two more SSGNs. These things can break nations with conventional weapons. 

[Ol Paint]

The idea, I believe, is to distribute the capability across the SSN fleet via the Virginia Payload Module (VPM).  The Block 1/2 Virginias had 12 individual vertical launch tubes.  Blocks 3 & 4 replaced that with two large diameter tubes--Virginia Payload Tubes--carrying six tubes each.

Block 5 added an 84' plug with 4 more VPTs, capable of fitting 7 rounds each.  Bringing the missile count up to 40.

https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2023/4/10/virginia-payload-module-to-give-subs-more-firepower

The VPTs also give a capability to change the tube internals out to support larger items without requiring pressure hull modifications, I believe.

For once, the Navy is actually adding weapons capability and magazine depth to a platform.

Doug 

[Ol Paint]

5 hours ago, Burncycle360 said:

I'm still fascinated that number of ships minus context matters one little bit.

What makes you think there's no context?

Doug 

[Ivanhoe]

Before the USN dives into the deep end of the pool and blows another trillion on a canceled warship, I'd like to see a joint USN/USCG project to build a new class of fast attack craft vaguely similar to this;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrköping-class_missile_boat

I'd downsize the gun to maybe 35mm, two mounts perhaps, some kind of smaller AShM like the old Penguin. Have one or two RIBs to support spec-ops, enforcement ops, etc.

When NAVSEA proves it can manage this sort of thing, then maybe Congress can trust them to develop larger platforms.

[Ol Paint]

Those are nice boats.  I've always been partial to the Ashevilles as a valuable, if unheralded class that should've been followed up by something less "gee-whiz-bang" than the PHMs.  Better weapons than the PC-1 Cyclones, but fitting in a similar size bracket.

I've got to ask, what trillion spent on a cancelled warship? 

The SCN budget line (Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy) averages around $22 billion.  A trillion dollars would represent 45 years worth of ship programs, unadjusted for inflation.

Doug

Edited May 7, 2025 by Ol Paint

[Ol Paint]

Interesting choice:

Quote

https://news.usni.org/2025/05/30/hiis-newport-news-shipbuilding-furloughs-471-shipbuilders

HII Newport News Shipbuilding furloughed 471 workers, a company spokesperson told USNI News on Friday.

--SNIP--

Unlike a layoff, employees who are furloughed remain hired by the company but are not paid and do not work. HII does not expect the furlough to extend past five months, but the company will evaluate during the furlough period, Corillo said.

The furlough news was first reported by local news station WAVY.

Hiring and retaining shipyard workers are issues that plague companies like HII. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, shipyards struggled to bring in the workforce required to build submarines and ships for the Navy.

Last month, HII CEO Chris Kastner told reporters that the shipbuilder is no longer looking to hire green workers off the street, instead focusing on attracting those who already have experience.

This came after private shipyards found that the younger workforce left after a year on the job.

HII hires about 6,000 people a year, Kastner said.

“We’re repositioning our hiring programs to hire less entry-level people, get more experienced people, which means you’re going to hire less and you’re going to have to figure out how to get the work done,” Kastner said in April.

HII and submarine builder General Dynamics Electric Boat have been in negotiations with the Navy and the Office of Management and Budget over the next 15 submarines for the service split over two anticipated multi-year contracts. A major negotiating point has been how to pay for an increase in wages for workers, USNI News has previously reported.

Quote

https://www.marineinsight.com/shipping-news/shipbuilding-giant-hii-furloughs-471-employees-to-boost-performance/

According to internal communication, the company chose who to furlough based on several factors, including ongoing and upcoming work needs, along with individual performance. The company has said it is realigning its workforce to match the evolving demands of Navy contracts and improve overall delivery timelines.

--SNIP--

In 2024 alone, HII added around 3,000 workers and aims to bring in approximately 16,000 new employees over the next decade to support Navy shipbuilding programs. However, hiring and retention challenges continue to affect the shipbuilding sector, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic.

I'd be interested to know what functions the furloughed employees performed.  Furloughing employees rarely helps retention or recruiting.  Finding skilled/experienced personnel in volume generally relies on either offering much higher wages or hoping people are fed up of working for one of your competitors.  By the time someone is experienced they often have families and ties to a particular location and often have a stable work situation.  

Maybe they're trying to hire the government workers that took the DRP/VERA?

In my experience, if a company has issues with retention, it isn't going to matter whether your new-hire is straight out of college or has significant career experience. The people hiring in aren't invested in your company and are equally likely to leave if the money and benefits (including things like work environment, not just insurance and leave benefits) aren't there.

Also, retention of inexperienced personnel is the easiest to rectify, since the career ladder can be manipulated to offer rapid advancement as the new employee gains skills. 

Doug

[Ol Paint]

Additional story:

Quote

https://www.13newsnow.com/article/news/national/military-news/newport-news-shipbuilding-furloughs-more-than-400-employees-internal-email-states/291-5727bb63-9a93-4566-a28b-756a93c0b1a7

In the email sent to shipyard workers just after 10 a.m., Newport News Shipbuilding President Kari Wilkinson said that 471 salaried shipbuilders were affected. She described the furloughs as a "necessary next step" in the shipyard's efforts to improve its "commitment to supporting the needs of our nation."

--SNIP--

Wilkinson referenced wage increases for shipbuilders, better support to the team on the waterfront and reducing distraction from phones during work hours as other steps the company has made recently to improve performance.

The shipyard has also restarted random security checks, the email said.

A Newport News shipbuilding employee impacted by the furlough, who wishes to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation, tells 13News Now in an exclusive interview Friday afternoon it was a very somber morning for the impacted workers.

"You have employees crying for their coworkers, people they've seen every day for the past five or six years, even working together for 10-plus years, and to see everyone slowly get pulled out one by one, not even getting a moment to say goodbye," said the shipbuilder. 

--SNIP--

The furloughed shipbuilder told 13News Now that to call what happened for hundreds of workers a "furlough" and not a "firing" is a tactic that only benefits the company.

"Call a spade a spade, it's a firing, and you won't call it a firing so you don't have to pay out severance or go through those different things with the state and Navy contracts," said the shipbuilder.

If the statement is true that the affected employees are in the 5-10 year experience range (keeping in mind that this is a single anecdote), then I'm not sure how this helps retention.  The shipyard cites performance as one rationale, but using the cover of a furlough to shed those employees implies they were performing well enough that you hadn't believed there was reason to terminate them, previously.

Doug

Edited June 1, 2025 by Ol Paint
Added comment per forum rules.

[Rick]

Do not wish to start a new U.S. Navy thread.

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5330963-navy-ships-rename-harvey-milk

"A John Lewis-class oiler — a group of ships specifically to be named after prominent civil rights leaders and activists —"

In that case they should re-name this ship the U.S.N.S. Rush Limbaugh, a prominent conservative civil rights leader, activist, and, more importantly, not a government official but a private citizen!

[Stuart Galbraith]

Just yet more Kabuki theatre to distract from the important point, you dont have enough ships, and its not getting noticably better.

Personally  I hardly care what the Royal Navy call the Type 31s, they could name them after Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith. Makes no difference, we need hulls in the water, and what they are called is an utter irrelevance to that end.

[Ol Paint]

14 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Just yet more Kabuki theatre to distract from the important point, you dont have enough ships, and its not getting noticably better.

Personally  I hardly care what the Royal Navy call the Type 31s, they could name them after Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith. Makes no difference, we need hulls in the water, and what they are called is an utter irrelevance to that end.

And, yet, you are quite worried about the name of the F-47...

Doug

[Laser Shark]

On 6/4/2025 at 1:32 PM, Stuart Galbraith said:

Personally  I hardly care what the Royal Navy call the Type 31s, they could name them after Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith. Makes no difference, we need hulls in the water, and what they are called is an utter irrelevance to that end.

Speaking of Type 31, here's hoping they'll fare better than the class they're based on.

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

And, yet, you are quite worried about the name of the F-47...

Doug

Im pretty sure it was clear to all but the absolutely humourless that I was blatently taking the piss. If I was really being serious, I would have suggested returning to the century series, which after all had all the best names going with it.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

6 minutes ago, Laser Shark said:

Speaking of Type 31, here's hoping they'll fare better than the class they're based on.

They probably want to buy Type 26's.....

[Laser Shark]

13 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

They probably want to buy Type 26's.....

Well, the Iver Huitfeldts are AAW frigates, so in that case it would have to be something similar to the Canadian configuration. The F127-class should also be interesting to them.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Or they could just by Type 31's, being a product of British maritime engineering will clearly be flawless...

Well, I exaggerate. but I dont remember anyone complaining about the Leanders.

[Laser Shark]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Or they could just by Type 31's, being a product of British maritime engineering will clearly be flawless...

Well, I exaggerate. but I dont remember anyone complaining about the Leanders.

From the article it seems clear that the Danes want new AAW frigates, and they want them as soon as possible, even if it means producing them abroad. In my mind, that makes it more likely that they’ll pick something that’s already in (or at least about to enter) production rather than resigning an existing class like the Type 31. Having a smaller navy like Norway's, they’ll also benefit from adopting a configuration that’s similar to that of another, preferably larger navy.

I think they’ll ultimately pick the F127, reasons being that:

a)The Canadian production line for the River-class will likely be busy for quite some time.

b) Similarly, with Norway likely to pick the Type 26, the same holds true for the production line in the UK.

c) Denmark will likely also want closer integration with the EU (and Germany and France in particular) on defence matters due to Trump & co’s bellyaching about taking over Greenland.

[Ol Paint]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Im pretty sure it was clear to all but the absolutely humourless that I was blatently taking the piss. If I was really being serious, I would have suggested returning to the century series, which after all had all the best names going with it.

 

6 of 21 posts on the F-47 name thread are yours, as of this moment, not a single one of which appears to be offered in good faith to the OP. There's humor, then there's just obnoxious noise.

There's a whole forum dedicated to swill.  

Doug 

[Ol Paint]

Hanwha gets approval to increase their stake in AustalUSA:

Quote

https://gcaptain.com/south-koreas-hanwha-cleared-to-boost-control-of-u-s-navy-shipbuilder-austal/

Hanwha Group has received clearance from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to increase its shareholding in Australian shipbuilder Austal Limited up to 100%, marking a significant milestone in the South Korean shipbuilder’s expansion into the U.S. shipbuilding sector.

The company currently holds a 9.9% stake in Austal, acquired in March 2025, and plans to increase this to 19.9%. Austal’s U.S.-based subsidiary Austal USA is a major U.S. military shipbuilder and defense contractor.

Considering Hanwha already took over Philly Ship from Aker, it's a little concerning to me that we're looking at more industry consolidation at the time we need more competition and flexibility.

Doug

[Ol Paint]

Congress adds $16B to Navy shipbuilding:

Quote

https://news.usni.org/2025/06/10/congress-tells-pentagon-20-8b-fy-2026-shipbuilding-funding-is-insufficient-highly-unusual-hac-d-bill-adds-16b-for-ships

In two hearings on Tuesday, legislators in the House and Senate told Pentagon and Navy leadership the planned $20.8 billion budget for shipbuilding in the proposed Fiscal Year 2026 is insufficient, with the House defense appropriators proposing boosting the total to $36.9 billion in a draft spending bill.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) called the funding for the Navy outlined in an appendix to the White House Office of Management and Budget’s so-called “skinny budget” for FY 2026 as overly reliant on shipbuilding money that was included in the reconciliation bill that is currently under consideration in the Senate.

--SNIP--

In his remarks, Wicker said the $20.8 billion proposal from OMB had no money for guided-missile destroyers, guided-missile frigates or Virginia-class attack submarines.

--SNIP--

The House Appropriations Committee defense subcommittee released its own bill this week with a $36.9 billion shipbuilding total that includes:

• $5.27 billion for a Columbia-class nuclear ballistic submarine;
• $5.21 billion for Columbia class advanced procurement;
• $1.65 billion for the future aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-80);
• $1.62 billion for the future aircraft carrier USS Doris Miller (CVN-81);
• $6.24 billion for a Virginia-class attack submarine;
• $5.16 billion for Virginia-class submarine advanced procurement;
• $1.82 billion for aircraft carrier refueling overhauls;
• $52.4 million for Zumwalt class DDG–1000 guided-missile destroyer Program;
• $5.07 billion Arleigh Burke-class DDG–51 guided-missile destroyer;
• $100 million Constellation-class FFG–Frigate program;
• $225 million for the McClung-class Medium Landing Ship program;
• $1.66 billion for the TAO Fleet Oiler program;
• $141.4 million for the Navajo-class Towing, Salvage, and Rescue Ship;
• $424.1 million for a T–AGOS Surtass Ship;
• $48.2 million for the LCU 1700 program;
• $320 million for the Ship to Shore Connector;
• $210 million for Service Craft;
• $56.1 million for LCAC SLEP;
• $206 million for Auxiliary Vessels;
• $734 million for “For outfitting, post delivery conversions, and first destination transportation”;
• $700 million for cost to complete funds for prior shipbuilding programs;

The HAC-D bill was crafted largely without the input of the White House budget request, leaving defense procurement guided by the committee rather than the Pentagon.

--SNIP--

“This year it’s going in reverse and the appropriators are writing their bills in the absence of a budget request from the administration,” Harrison said. “What it means is the administration has missed the opportunity to inform and influence the FY 26 budget. The process is moving on without them.”

During the Tuesday HAC-D hearing, Calvert asked Hegseth for help to get more information.

“We don’t have a luxury of time,” Calvert said. “You might talk to your friends at OMB — if OMB has any friends. I don’t know if they do, but go and see if they can get this going for us because it would be very helpful.”

For context, the previous year's appropriation was $37B, so proposing $21B was a drastic cut.

Doug

[Josh]

On 5/7/2025 at 5:17 AM, PaulFormerlyinSaudi said:

I am surprised we are not talking about the need for two more SSGNs. These things can break nations with conventional weapons. 

They represent a one time large scale strike that could be substituted for a half dozen B-52s. The next SSGNs will be block V virginias, but there will be a capability gap.

[Josh]

On 5/7/2025 at 10:31 AM, Ivanhoe said:

Before the USN dives into the deep end of the pool and blows another trillion on a canceled warship, I'd like to see a joint USN/USCG project to build a new class of fast attack craft vaguely similar to this;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norrköping-class_missile_boat

I'd downsize the gun to maybe 35mm, two mounts perhaps, some kind of smaller AShM like the old Penguin. Have one or two RIBs to support spec-ops, enforcement ops, etc.

When NAVSEA proves it can manage this sort of thing, then maybe Congress can trust them to develop larger platforms.

Pointless. Use aircraft for that role. Surface ships are needed for defense, not offense.

[PCallahan]

2 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

Congress adds $16B to Navy shipbuilding:

For context, the previous year's appropriation was $37B, so proposing $21B was a drastic cut.

Doug

So for some context on this, apparently there was/is an attempt to fund about $180 billion of the FY2026 DOD budget using the reconciliation bill (the "Big Beautiful Bill"), so that may be part of what is going on here, though I can't find any actually breakdown of the numbers in the two funding mechanisms.

[Ivanhoe]

16 hours ago, Josh said:

Pointless. Use aircraft for that role. Surface ships are needed for sea control.

FIFY

 

[Ol Paint]

On 5/3/2025 at 6:50 PM, Ol Paint said:

Incidentally, the reconciliation bill also has significant shipbuilding & procurement items in the HASC/SASC amendment.

https://armedservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hasc_reconciliation_overview.pdf

From the amendment text:

We'll see how much makes it out of conference.

Doug

Reviewing the final text, most of the shipbuilding section stayed the same as the HASC version quoted in my post from 03 May.  Notable exceptions in Section 20002

• Line 26 increased from $695,000,000 to $1,470,000,000 for the implementation of a multi-ship amphibious warship contract
• Line 31 increased from $1,800,000,000 to $2,100,000,000 for development, procurement, and integration of purpose-built medium unmanned surface vessels
• The LPD and LHA (former lines (36) $2,100,000,000 for San Antonio-class Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD); and
• (37) $3,700,000,000 for America-class Amphibious Assault Ship (LHA)) were deleted and replaced by $150,000,000 for retention of inactive reserve fleet ships.
• Section 20003 kept Line 5 for a MDA missile instrumentation range safety ship.

Otherwise, it looks like the specific ship procurements remained the same, along with the industrial base allocations.

Tangentially related, the bill also includes the following provisions for the USCG under Title IV Section 40001:

Quote

‘‘(4) $4,300,000,000 is provided for procurement of Offshore Patrol Cutters, equipment related to such cutters, and program management for such cutters, to provide operational presence and security of the maritime border and for interdiction of persons and controlled substances;
‘‘(5) $1,000,000,000 is provided for procurement of Fast Response Cutters, equipment related to such cutters, and program management for such cutters, to provide operational presence and security of the maritime border and for interdiction of persons and controlled substances;
‘‘(6) $4,300,000,000 is provided for procurement of Polar Security Cutters, equipment related to such cutters, and program management for such cutters, to ensure timely presence of the Coast Guard in the Arctic and Antarctic regions;
‘‘(7) $3,500,000,000 is provided for procurement of Arctic Security Cutters, equipment related to such cutters, and program management for such cutters, to ensure timely presence of the Coast Guard in the Arctic and Antarctic regions;
‘‘(8) $816,000,000 is provided for procurement of light and medium icebreaking cutters, and equipment relating to such cutters, from shipyards that have demonstrated success in the cost-effective application of design standards and in delivering, on schedule and within budget, vessels of a size and tonnage that are not less than the size and tonnage of the cutters described in this paragraph, and for program management for such cutters, to expand domestic icebreaking capacity;
‘‘(9) $162,000,000 is provided for procurement of Waterways Commerce Cutters, equipment related to such cutters, and program management for such cutters, to support aids to navigation, waterways and coastal security, and search and rescue in inland waterways;

Doug

Edited July 6, 2025 by Ol Paint

[Stuart Galbraith]

On 6/5/2025 at 6:06 PM, Ol Paint said:

6 of 21 posts on the F-47 name thread are yours, as of this moment, not a single one of which appears to be offered in good faith to the OP. There's humor, then there's just obnoxious noise.

There's a whole forum dedicated to swill.  

Doug 

Like I said, I address myself to the people that can still recognise the difference.