Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

Frosted Flake posted:

So, obviously this one shipyard and the ferry line are politically connected. What's the deal here?

You may remember Austal USA from prior "let's paint a passenger ferry grey and hope no one notices" hit the USS Independence-class LCS

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

DancingShade
Jul 26, 2007

by Fluffdaddy
It's simple. Big catamaran = futuristic. Therefore more better.

Another champagne and call girl to help you sign that purchase order sir?

Slavvy
Dec 11, 2012

The Oldest Man posted:

You may remember Austal USA from prior "let's paint a passenger ferry grey and hope no one notices" hit the USS Independence-class LCS



Lol :psyduck:

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

If some of the most successful ships of the Second World War - the Flower Class Corvette, Liberty Ship and Black Swan Class Sloops (via the Egret-class, Bittern-class and HMS Enchantress for the naval architecture heads) - were based on civilian designs and were built in huge numbers by all sorts of shipyards, freeing the large yards to build major combatants - then it makes sense that, because the only shipbuilding we have left are for these ferries, of course we get warships that reflect that based on those civilian ships.

I'm sure South Korea, Japan, China, and whoever else our shipbuilding industries went to could build a proper navy, for what that's worth.









A whaler named Southern Pride being the basis for Allied victory in the Battle of the Atlantic is kind of funny though.

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold
lol the flower class was the only warship I would dare duel on the surface in silent hunter 3

Delta-Wye
Sep 29, 2005
imagining a navy boat that can't sail in moderately heavy seas




lmao

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

Could someone smarter than me at boat stuff and political economy compare the current situation to the use of civilian shipyards to build Prince David, Prince Henry and Prince Robert as auxiliary cruisers that could be quickly converted in wartime?

I know they were Canada's only large warships until we got the purpose-built cruisers HMCS Uganda ("The ship that voted its way home") and HMCS Ontario, and I know they were built to be that way, but I don't know anything about the designs or how the government convinced civilian shipyards and shipping lanes to lay down ships like the Princes and HMS Rawalpindi (Sunk by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau).

I'm assuming the key differences are "shipyards you can tell what to do" and "shipyards that build large, durable, ships"?

Pidgin Englishman
Apr 30, 2007

If you shoot
you better hit your mark
Austal grew out of Incat based in Tasmania, they're famous there for building a catamaran ferry to run the mainland route that was affectionately know as the SPEW Cat or Vomit Comet. Looked just like the Cody.

Was great in smooth seas, cut the 10hr trip to 4 hrs. Unfortunately Bass Strait isn't renowned for calmness. Also nothing like having your ferry trip canned at the last minute 20% of the time!

So great heritage really.

dead gay comedy forums
Oct 21, 2011


I don't understand anything about boat stuff but the old maxim "if you can build tractors, you can build tanks" always applies

In other words, setting up the means to do serious ultra heavy duty stuff means you can do whatever you need from those means. This is can be inferred in general from a country through a thing sometimes called "capital goods production capacity" in some references: this means how much of that country's industry is capable of making industry - capital goods are mainstream economics for industrial means of production, machinery for building capital through more stuff (tools and other machines etc)

So if a bigass shipyard has a foundry and machinery tooling, they can build themselves into military readiness but IDK anything about naval engineering to see what sort of work they need to do to get going and be able to reliably build military navy stuff

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

dead gay comedy forums posted:

I don't understand anything about boat stuff but the old maxim "if you can build tractors, you can build tanks" always applies

In other words, setting up the means to do serious ultra heavy duty stuff means you can do whatever you need from those means. This is can be inferred in general from a country through a thing sometimes called "capital goods production capacity" in some references: this means how much of that country's industry is capable of making industry - capital goods are mainstream economics for industrial means of production, machinery for building capital through more stuff (tools and other machines etc)

So if a bigass shipyard has a foundry and machinery tooling, they can build themselves into military readiness but IDK anything about naval engineering to see what sort of work they need to do to get going and be able to reliably build military navy stuff

Under neoliberal procurement policies, the tractor factory plies the government and military with lobbying dollars and PR campaigns that actually, they don't want tanks at all! What they really want is to buy the tractors no one on the open market wanted to buy, with a coat of grey paint, for three times the price. And the congressional and military leadership are more than happy to chug the poo poo out of that koolaid as long as it comes with a side dish of campaign contributions and lobbying/post-retirement consulting jobs respectively.

Trabisnikof
Dec 24, 2005

The Oldest Man posted:

Under neoliberal procurement policies, the tractor factory plies the government and military with lobbying dollars and PR campaigns that actually, they don't want tanks at all! What they really want is to buy the tractors no one on the open market wanted to buy, with a coat of grey paint, for three times the price. And the congressional and military leadership are more than happy to chug the poo poo out of that koolaid as long as it comes with a side dish of campaign contributions and lobbying/post-retirement consulting jobs respectively.

dont for to upsell them by making them "self driving tractors"

https://defensescoop.com/2023/03/03/space-force-buys-self-driving-smart-tractors-to-support-grounds-maintenance/

quote:

The Space Force recently purchased two autonomous tractors to assist members of its 45th Civil Engineer Squadron combat support group as they maintain the grounds and landscaping of their military base in Florida — a move that officials said demonstrates the young branch’s broader vision to technologically innovate U.S. military operations as it matures.

Built and recently delivered by Illinois-headquartered Sabanto, Inc., those two self-moving units apply technology that can enable one human operator to oversee larger fleets of smaller 60 and 90-horsepower tractors over long distances, sometimes functioning non-stop for multiple days at a time.

“Automating our mowers will allow for the reallocation of labor hours to tackle other base priorities. By maximizing our labor hours, we will be able to complete more tasks in-house to support the space launch mission, our mission partners, and the base populace,” Capt. Andrew Johnson said in the acquisition announcement.

"this technology will allow one human to drive 60-90 tractors, that's why we bought 2 of them"

FuzzySlippers
Feb 6, 2009

I foresee a better future for the space force tractor group than the actual space force in space group.

stephenthinkpad
Jan 2, 2020
Is autonomous tractor a code word for IDF murderdozer?

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001




what weapons are the space force deploying anyway? they have no vehicles at all right?

BearsBearsBears
Aug 4, 2022

Slavvy posted:

I wonder what the Russian and Chinese fighter planes have for uploading mission data or whatever

There was video of Russian fighter pilots using civilian GPSes.

DancingShade
Jul 26, 2007

by Fluffdaddy

BearsBearsBears posted:

There was video of Russian fighter pilots using civilian GPSes.

Those fools! Only bespoke proprietary GPS painted green will do!

With vintage style knobs and everything. Ideally cross branded in a collab with Gucci.

Pidgin Englishman
Apr 30, 2007

If you shoot
you better hit your mark

DancingShade posted:

Those fools! Only bespoke proprietary GPS painted green will do!

With vintage style knobs and everything. Ideally cross branded in a collab with Gucci.

I've heard Hugo Boss is really popular with Western powers

GlassEye-Boy
Jul 12, 2001
The Chinese also adopted the Australian catamaran designs, except they applied it to the much more practical Type 22 litoral water missile boat.

Trabisnikof
Dec 24, 2005

Real hurthling! posted:

what weapons are the space force deploying anyway? they have no vehicles at all right?

space force has the X-37B, and at least one weapon some sort of fancy jammer.

Danann
Aug 4, 2013

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDyQxtg0V2w

someone's doing january six the movie and after watching the trailer i still have no idea what this western alliance of texas and california is supposed to be standing for

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold
I already cracked the case in succzone, it’s the triple alliance of Austin red guards, Floridian swamp Maoists and commiefornia

DancingShade
Jul 26, 2007

by Fluffdaddy

Danann posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDyQxtg0V2w

someone's doing january six the movie and after watching the trailer i still have no idea what this western alliance of texas and california is supposed to be standing for

Should have just recycled the guy fawke narrative.

yellowcar
Feb 14, 2010

lol the scary 'third term as president'

Lostconfused
Oct 1, 2008

A third term means that there's a president people like and that's an unacceptable systemic failure of US democracy.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Lostconfused posted:

A third term means that there's a president people like and that's an unacceptable systemic failure of US democracy.

right?!

if the president were a dictator, then there's no notion of "terms" anymore, he'd just be president-for-life or whatever

a third term implies that he ran for and won a third term, and as a corollary that the Constitution was changed to enable him to run for a third term, which means the on-paper checks-and-balances of the government were leveraged. FDR wasn't doing anything dictatorial by running for a third term, and while that hole was legally closed afterwards, it could be reopened via the same means

and if it was reopened, then there's no foul play there - America simply deserved what it got

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

Lostconfused posted:

A third term means that there's a president people like and that's an unacceptable systemic failure of US democracy.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Frosted Flake posted:

Is it possible that shuttering all state shipyards, and the only remaining shipyards that aren't overseas being limited to ferries had some sort of... consequences?

:thunk:

We're truly the stupidest society.



e: It's very funny that they just painted the ferry grey and that seems to be the extent of it. Surely crossing the pacific in wartime will be nbd.

any data or info on Kaiser shipyards?

FuzzySlippers
Feb 6, 2009

populism is worse than despotism both the nyt and founding fathers would agree.

That movie looks like a funny bad-movie-watch which is really most war movies except for the spectacle factor (which I dunno if anything will ever top the lethal impressiveness of Tora Tora Tora).

Trabisnikof
Dec 24, 2005

gradenko_2000 posted:

right?!

if the president were a dictator, then there's no notion of "terms" anymore, he'd just be president-for-life or whatever

a third term implies that he ran for and won a third term, and as a corollary that the Constitution was changed to enable him to run for a third term, which means the on-paper checks-and-balances of the government were leveraged. FDR wasn't doing anything dictatorial by running for a third term, and while that hole was legally closed afterwards, it could be reopened via the same means

and if it was reopened, then there's no foul play there - America simply deserved what it got

fact check: Xi Jinping was just elected for his 3rd term and he's a dictator

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001




https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/why-indian-ocean-could-be-chinas-achilles-heel-taiwan-war-2023-12-14/

reuters thinks war with china will be no problem lol

BadOptics
Sep 11, 2012

Trabisnikof posted:

fact check: Xi Jinping was just elected for his 3rd term and he's a dictator

I heard he even jailed some rich people. Unreal levels of authoritarianism.

FuzzySlippers
Feb 6, 2009

building public housing directly is cheating populist authoritarian red brownism.

Stairmaster
Jun 8, 2012


i like how they flat out say china is surrounded by the united states

Rodney The Yam II
Mar 3, 2007




Frosted Flake posted:


I know they were Canada's only large warships until we got the purpose-built cruisers HMCS Uganda ("The ship that voted its way home")

What an amazing story. I can't believe my Navy cousin didn't tell me about the Uganda.

It was commanded by Captain Edmond Rollo Mainguy

Captain Edmond Rollo Mainguy was in command

Cerebral Bore
Apr 21, 2010


Fun Shoe
main character syndrome has been a thing for that long, huh?

Lostconfused posted:

A third term means that there's a president people like and that's an unacceptable systemic failure of US democracy.

i don't think its a coincidence that the only time i've ever seen anybody actually profess to care about term limits is when shitlibs need an excuse to justify a fascist coup in the global south

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️

Stairmaster posted:

i like how they flat out say china is surrounded by the united states

houthis: ah yes we are also not totally surrounded by US bases as i light zionist ships on fire

Oneiros
Jan 12, 2007




china blew up all of its own oil tankers in the indian ocean, to prove that they could

ModernMajorGeneral
Jun 25, 2010

Trabisnikof posted:

dont for to upsell them by making them "self driving tractors"

https://defensescoop.com/2023/03/03/space-force-buys-self-driving-smart-tractors-to-support-grounds-maintenance/

"this technology will allow one human to drive 60-90 tractors, that's why we bought 2 of them"

I was trying to find something about how the space force is spending millions on tractors to laugh about but I guess this might be normal (I have no idea how much tractors should cost though)

https://www.producer.com/crops/a-fresh-look-at-driverless-tractors-using-proven-technology/

quote:

For example, a 600 horsepower Quadtrac, 20-ton tractor carries a price tag of about $750,000. If I want to deploy the same amount of horsepower in the field, I can use maybe five or six autonomous Kubota M5s.

They list for about $60,000. So just the capital cost of the tractor is a 40 plus percent capital reduction.

They reveal where all the money is going to come from at the end though. The US military is going to fall victim to the same problems of the American farmer needing to jail break their tractor software

quote:

Hesse: The farmer owns the hardware. We charge an annual subscription for the command and control and for additional features that are delivered as we continue to develop. Price is going to be in the ballpark of something south of $100,000.

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️
very useful hardware you own without the DRM

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
Facing A Navy-Wide Sailor Shortage, USS Ford Sheds 500-600 Crew

quote:

In the face of a massive shortage of Navy sailors, America’s newest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), has downsized, cutting the crew aboard by hundreds of sailors.

The cuts appear to be deep and dramatic. Over the past six months to a year, some 500 to 600 sailors have left the USS Ford and not been replaced. In fact, the USS Ford has shed so many crew members that the ship’s company (core crew members that operate the vessel) is now below the Ford-class Carrier Program’s original Acquisition Program Baseline objective of 2,391 billets—a goal set back in 2004 that many observers considered unrealistic.

In an emailed statement attributed to the commanding officer of the USS Ford, Captain Rick Burgess, the carrier is now “home to approximately 4,070 sailors: 2,380 ship’s company, 1,550 assigned to Carrier Wing EIGHT, and 140 embarked with Carrier Strike Group TWELVE and Destroyer Squadron TWO staffs.”

That represents an enormous reduction in the carrier’s workforce.

Just one year ago, the carrier’s previous commander, Captain Paul Lanzilotta, led far larger crew of between 4,600 and 4,700 sailors through a short shakedown deployment, telling Naval News, “the crew assigned to the ship is 2,700 personnel. That’s just the ship’s company. The airwing adds about 1,700 people on top of that, and we would embark normally 200-300 additional folks for the strike group staff and destroyer squadron staff.”

At the time of publication, the Navy’s “Fact File” says the Ford-class’s normal crew, air wing and staff compliment should be at around 4,539 sailors, within 90 percent of the 5,000 to 5,200 sailors aboard older Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. But now, after the apparent crew cuts, the USS Ford is apparently living up to the marketing rhetoric, and operating with a crew 20 percent smaller than a fully-staffed legacy Nimitz class carrier.

The current complement appears to be unusually low. Even the aircraft carrier’s December 2021 Selected Acquisition Report projected a “ship’s force” of 2716 billets, far higher than the 2,380 sailors currently aboard.

To put things in perspective, the USS Ford has apparently shed almost enough sailors to staff two Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. And, according to a string of Navy statements over the past several months, the cuts didn’t happen after a long run of analysis and tests. Most of the cuts appear to be organic, occurring while the USS Ford was on an active deployment, as the carrier operates on the fringes of a major conflict.

Since Captain Burgess took command of the USS Ford at the end of April, leading the carrier off to it’s first deployment in early May, a good segment of the aircraft carrier’s crew appears to have vanished.

While publicly released documents from the Navy and the USS Ford suggest the deployed crew on the USS Ford has shrunk, a Navy public affairs official would not confirm any firm figures, saying only that the ship deployed with “a full compliment and has maintained it.”

But the Navy’s own statements suggest steady attrition. As the USS Ford left Norfolk in May for the aircraft carrier’s first official deployment, the aircraft carrier’s very own magazine, The Wolverine, described the effort put into feeding a crew of “approximately 4,500 sailors.”

Then, in August, The Wolverine reported the crew size was “over 4,200 people.”

By September, The Wolverine said the crew size was 4,200
.

Then, in October, a Navy story, detailing the USS Ford’s dedicated cadre of stationary bicycle “Spin” aficionados, reported the Ford’s crew had reportedly dwindled to 4,179.

And now, after barely two months—and if the figures from the Ford’s Skipper are accurate—the USS Ford appears to have lost about another 100 sailors.

Desertion, disease or even a mysterious, sailor-eating monster might be to blame for the USS Ford’s vanishing workforce, but the most likely scenario, according to long-time Navy observers in Washington DC, is that, after the Navy’s massive 20 percent miss in FY 2023 enlisted sailor recruitment goals, the Navy simply has no sailors to spare.

An alternative scenario is that the ship has enjoyed an incredible uptick in efficiency, defying predictions based upon the USS Ford’s last six and a half years of commissioned service.

It could be a bit of both. The Navy desperately wants to position the Ford carrier program for success, and, given that the extended deployment will delay key, high-profile testing events, shedding crew offers an immediate boost to the platform’s lifetime operational and maintenance savings, making the platform’s ragged business case far more viable.

Unfortunately, as this article went to press, the Navy had yet to respond to a query asking if the current staffing level was a temporary transient due to recruiting problems or if it was a more permanent change, reflecting an optimized crew.

The future size of the Ford’s crew may well be a moot point. Even if the massive cut to the USS Ford’s crew is temporary, and the Navy gradually fixes recruitment problems and increases the Ford’s compliment back to 4,600 to 4,700 sailors, this is a huge victory for the Ford-class carrier program.

Nobody—outside of a few stalwart carrier advocates—thought the USS Ford could operate effectively with fewer than 2,391 sailors. Many Navy observers thought the carrier was understaffed. A few years ago, the Pentagon’s testing arm even worried that “recent estimates of expected combined manning of CVN 78, its air wing, embarked staffs, and detachments range from 4,656 to 4,758.” As such, the Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) wondered if the crew would end up outstripping the ship’s 4,666 berths.

This is a big deal.

Major and rapidly implemented crew cuts usually come with serious consequences, reducing vessel endurance, readiness and survivability. It doesn’t seem to be the case right now. The USS Ford might be understaffed—or, as a platform that is at the tail end of a deployment and still working out operational kinks, it may be serving as, essentially, a billet donor to other, more battle ready aircraft carriers.

But, rather than break down, the carrier is breaking performance records. In fact, the ship recently spent ten weeks away from port, in what appears to be the vessel’s longest uninterrupted period at sea since it was launched.

The aircraft carrier is performing, too. According to Captain Burgess, “Since October 9th, Carrier Air Wing EIGHT has flown more than 2,500 sorties without interruption from FORD while stationed in the Mediterranean Sea.”

While 2,500 sorties in nine weeks is still far less than the Navy’s old-school sortie generation testing goal of around 4,800 sorties over the course of thirty days, it isn’t half bad. And though USS Ford is still generating far fewer sorties than the 3383 strikes 4,104 Sailors aboard the World War II-era carrier USS Midway (CV-41) generated over the course of 42 nights of Desert Storm, USS Ford and its diminished crew are clearly holding their own.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply