The U.S. Navy has been having some pretty bad problems with getting ships and submarines constructed on time, and we reported on the potential impact that might have over a year ago: Delays with New Strategic Nuclear Missile Submarine Program Could Damage National Defense, GAO Reports:
The Government Accountability Office (GAO), which provides “the public with timely, fact-based, non-partisan information that can be used to improve government,” recently released a report raising concerns about the Navy’s Columbia Class ballistic (read nuclear) missile submarine program.
“After more than a year of full-scale construction on the lead Columbia submarine, the shipbuilders are facing delays because of challenges with design, materials, and quality.” Making matters worse, the lead shipbuilder on the project, General Dynamics’ Electric Boat Division (Electric Boat), has not conducted a “schedule risk analysis.” “Both GAO leading practices and Department of Defense (DOD) guidance identify schedule risk analysis as a critical tool for understanding and managing program risks that could impact the schedule.” The GAO explains that without the schedule risk analysis being conducted, “programs have limited insight into how schedule risks could affect the likelihood of achieving key program milestones, including delivery, and the amount of margin—or a reserve of extra time—needed to manage critical risks and avoid delays.” The GAO concludes, “[c]hallenges delivering Columbia class submarines on time could have consequences for the nation’s defense.”
This is not some nice to have submarine, either, because the current Ohio class ballistic missile subs, which are the only “survivable” leg of the U.S. nuclear triad (meaning our adversaries never know where they are, unlike missile silos and bombers), are going out of service starting in 2027.
Now we find out that this problem is not limited to the Columbia class submarine, but is a Navy-wide problem.
From Defense News: US Navy ship programs face years-long delays amid labor, supply woes:
Several of the U.S. Navy’s top shipbuilding programs are running one year to three years behind schedule, as the service and the industrial base grapple with workforce and management challenges.
Navy leaders conducted a 45-day review of its shipbuilding portfolio, following news in January that a first-of-class guided-missile frigate was behind schedule due in part to a workforce shortage at Fincantieri’s Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin.
Coupled with existing delays to the Virginia-class attack submarine construction line and worries those delays might spill over to the top-priority Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro that month ordered an “assessment of national and local causes of shipbuilding challenges, as well as recommended actions for achieving a healthier U.S. shipbuilding industrial base that provides combat capabilities that our warfighters need, on a schedule that is relevant.”
Well, that assessment came in last Tuesday, and the results are ugly:
Based on current performance, the Navy projects the first Columbia-class SSBN will deliver 12 to 16 months later than its contractual delivery date of October 2027.
Remember the current Ohio class goes out of service in 2027, meaning that there could be a gap in nuclear ballistic missile coverage for several years.
And it’s just as bad or worse with every major shipbuilding program:
The review shows the Navy’s Block IV Virginia [attack] submarines, which were bought from fiscal 2014 to 2018, are running 36 months behind schedule….[T]he Block V [Virginia class] boats bought from FY19 to FY23 projected to be about 24 months behind schedule….The Navy’s next nuclear-powered aircraft carrier…is also delayed. The future Enterprise, CVN-80, is expected to deliver 18 to 26 months late….As a result, the Navy is delaying buying subsequent ships CVNs 82 and 83, pushing their procurement from FY28 to FY30….The first Constellation frigate, built in Wisconsin by Fincantieri’s Marinette Marine shipyard, will deliver 36 months later than its contractual delivery date….As for the more mature surface ship production lines — the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock and America-class amphibious assault ships at Ingalls Shipbuilding, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers at Ingalls and General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works and the John Lewis-class oiler at General Dynamics’ NASSCO — the Navy notes these ships are predicted to deliver later than what’s outlined in their contracts.
You get the picture. And I won’t bore you with the Navy’s lame excuses about supply chain and labor shortages.
As usual, Commander Salamander, Navy blogger extraordinaire, gets to the root of the problem:
This is not new. This is not shocking….LCS [the Littoral Combat Ship – program canceled and existing ships decommissioned]There was not systemic reform.DDG-1000 [the Navy’s new destroyer program – cancelled]Congress failed to make a substantive change.CG(X) [the Navy’s new cruiser program – canceled]We shrugged, accepted gross failure, and defaulted to building Burkes [the Navy’s current destroyer and fleet workhorse] until the crack of doom.You know the rest of the story, or lack of story. The lack of a story of accountability [and] [i]nstitutional self-reflection resulting in change towards improvement….[We] just papered over the festering rot of systems that are same structures, policies, culture, and in many cases people who brought us here. Why would one expect any difference in outcome?We lied to each other. We lied to Congress. We lied to the world….Eventually the music will stop. We are now on the second generation of leaders who have been happy to ignore this systemic failure of performance as if it is a force of nature to endure, and not a creation of man that can be changed.If you are waiting for the uniformed leadership to speak clearly on this, you simply have not been paying attention.If you think the Executive Branch leadership will address this, you have not been awake the last 26-months….What navalists, the American taxpayer, and more importantly their elected representatives tasked in our Constitution with oversight authority should ask is, “Why?”
And from Naval News, there is a report suggesting that China’s Navy is suffering no shipbuilding delays whatsoever – in fact, China is in major Navy expansion mode, with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), i.e. China’s DOD, building the largest Navy in the world, and the trend is accelerating: Pentagon Assesses The PLA Navy’s Modernization And Growing Aggression:
PLA Navy: The largest Navy in the worldThe PLAN is numerically the largest navy in the world, “with an overall battle force of over 370 ships and submarines, including more than 140 major surface combatants”.What is astounding in this statement is that the total number has risen 30 from the 340 vessels listed in the 2022 report. Nor does this include 60 Houbei-class missile boats. With 140 major surface combatants listed, this number has expanded by 15 compared to 2022. Note that the report essentially covers developments till late 2022 or early 2023.The Chinese naval fleet is “largely composed of modern multi-mission ships and submarines,” and there is little let-up in production either. The US DoD confirmed that more Type 055 cruisers are under construction, plus a fourth Type 075 LHD likely began construction earlier this year…Last year, the PLAN launched China’s third and most capable aircraft carrier, the future CV-18 Fujian. It also noted that the third Type 075 LHD was commissioned in October 2022. A growing carrier fleet extends air coverage of deployed task groups, with China now in the beginning stages of a multi-carrier force. Meanwhile, large amphibious ships enable a wide range of expeditionary operations to protect or advance Chinese interests.With such unrelenting shipbuilding activity, the Pentagon estimates the PLAN will have 395 vessels by 2025, and 435 by 2030…For the submarine fleet, the Pentagon lists a figure of 65 submarines by 2025, and 80 by 2035.
Things have gotten so bad for U.S. shipbuilding that the Navy canceled its normal trade show shipbuilding briefing schedule.
From Politico: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report:
As the Navy’s largest U.S. trade show gets underway on Monday, officers in charge of the service’s marquee shipbuilding programs won’t offer the usual briefings with reporters and analysts about them.
That break from the tradition of sharing program updates at the Navy’s Sea-Air-Space Exposition comes just days after the Navy announced that four of its most critical shipbuilding programs are years behind schedule….
Usually at the trade show at National Harbor, Maryland, Navy program managers provide updates of their shipbuilding programs, giving industry executives and reporters the opportunity to ask questions about their multibillion-dollar projects.The briefings cover the Navy’s most important programs — with new classes of submarines and aircraft carriers always being the most critical. Reporters and other analysts use the briefings and interviews with Navy officers running them to chart progress the service is, or isn’t, making in order to get them out to sea.
Two people familiar with the issue say Navy leaders instructed the program managers not to hold their public briefings because the conference came too close to the release of the shipbuilding study, which is already sure to dominate the three-day event.
People who are paying attention are concerned:
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY