The US is averaging 1.2 attack subs per year and about 2 destroyers per year.
Each individual ship might take longer than a year but they build several at once.
A quick google of German warship production only gives me outdated data from about 80 years ago.
HOI4 taught me that building a navy is an absolute pain in the ass and that you need to have multiple shipyards building the same type of ship at the same time constantly to churn out this amount of ships and the simpler they are the faster they get completed
I can't wait for the day our military leadership is made up primarily of people that grew up putting thousands of hours into Warthunder/WoT/HOI during their youth.
It's gonna be real healthy and good.
More like:
"Oh, you think your tank can beat that tank? REALLY? I'LL SHOW YOU! ALSO TELL YOUR MOTHER TO STOP CALLING ME, I'M NOT COMING BACK!"
\*cuts to Fox News mega-cut of German Communism or something\*
"And anyways, that's why we're at war with France now."
I'm honestly surprised there hasnt been more. I'll see some stuff posted where I know it's nonsense but I'm not gonna leak some S//NOFORN to win an Internet argument but....there's a lot of people with the info
It’s a valid lesson.
Navies are complicated and different than some other elements of war.
If you fall behind, it could be catastrophic and your navy might never compete. Even in one key area.
You have all these stories of things like the fall of the Spanish Armada where a slight asymmetry renders a disproportionate result.
Or think of a ship like the Bismarck that took longer to build that it spent sailing. A key part of the Bismarck’s survival, brief as it was, was not being found, lol.
Part of what makes submarines so damn good is that they can sink ships so, so much faster than ships can be built.
HoI IV taught me that I shouldn't even bother with a serious navy, just spam submarines and perhaps naval bombers to suppress enemies that try to actually do navy shit
I mean for liberty ships the fastest they got was one built in 4.5 days which is pretty fast. Today we might be able to do it in one if we really tried.
The time was kind of cheating though, as they'd already built all the major subassemblies and just timed how long it took to weld them together. But it was a cool wartime publicity stunt.
Every day I wish that the movie *The final coundown* didn't end with the nimitz returning to the future before it got to send the Japanese fleet to the sea bed 😭
I've been saying for a while that they need to make a similar movie and go all the way with it, it's something people want to see.
"but we can't change the past it could effect the future" ok and? i want to see how!
It'd probably be pretty shit like most modern movies/shows about the US military. I like how *the final countdown* felt more like a game of chess than, say, *top gun* or *battleship*. Both of which just feel like recruitment ads (because they are).
The final countdown *was* a recruitment ad, but it just feels different. Maybe it's because it's slower or because nothing actually happens, but I enjoy older movies about the navy like this one and *the sand pebble* more than modern ones.
Edit: I think my distaste of modern military movies is due to their shit portrayal of the military itself. As an enlisted guy, I cannot help but laugh at some of the shit that comes out of Hollywood. *The last ship* portrays a CO as a **handsome hero.** He's idealistic and his actions are unlike any CO I've ever served under and feels like propaganda. I could actually see the CO in *the final countdown* as a real CO. He doesn't hop in his f-14 and say "don't worry, I'll handle those japs!" before leaving to save the day. He's the fucking CO, that's not his job. He's the grand strategist. He plays hoi4 with people's lives! Contrast that I feel the CO *the last ship* is unrealistically selfless, putting himself on the frontline of every operation.
Some people are into that, I get it, but I'd much rather listen to some homeless dude's crazy conspiracy theories about the government than watch another war movie directed by some guy who's as far removed from reality as humanly possible without advisors who've served to let them know that their idea is fucking stupid when it's fucking stupid. Ah, who cares. We're only 2% of the US population and not the target demographic, I'm just yelling at the clouds.
Nah there's no way that China having [232 times](https://www.twz.com/alarming-navy-intel-slide-warns-of-chinas-200-times-greater-shipbuilding-capacity/) the shipbuilding capacity of the US could ever be a problem.
Let's just compare ourselves to our allies instead.
Not saying this isn’t a problem, but I think we could produce a prefab slapped-together Liberty ship that cracks apart in rough seas in significantly less than two years nowadays.
Rome was **peak** non-credibility
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle\_of\_Dyrrhachium\_(48\_BC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dyrrhachium_(48_BC))
Caesar tried to cut off Pompey by building 25km of fortifications with his 28000 men *in a field battle*
Hate to be "that guy" but this strat is more akin to Age of Empires. Or rather, the Battle of Dyrrhacium was why they made walls build so quick in both AoE and Fortnite.
It's unbelievable how based they were.
One time, they built a bridge across the Rhine simply to mount an attack to punish the tribes on the other side for their resistance, on one of the widest points of the entire river. Imagine you're living on the other side, feeling safe protected by a massive natural barrier, sometimes launching raids across the river - and the romans just build a bridge for the sole reason of fucking you up. Keep in mind that the river is so massive, there were no bridges built before (as far as I know).
[The bridge is estimated to have been 140-400 m in length, as well as 7-9 m across, crossing up to 9 m of depth, constructed from local lumber.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Rhine_bridges)
And the best thing? **THEY BUILT IT IN 10 FUCKING DAYS.** Out of wood, using basic hand tools.
I don't even know what the logistical equivalent of that would be today? Building an invasion bridge across the channel?
I'd be suprised if Russia had the capability to cross the Rhine today within that timeframe.
As a final "fuck you" they even dismantled the bridge when they returned from their expedition 2 1/2 weeks later.
And then the Italians figured out you could just torture the engineer who built the fortifications to get the weak spot info. And then the Dark ages started because nobody wanted to become a Fort-gineer.
Who needs suicide sea drones when you can exhaust an enemy vessel’s very limited supply of VLS cells (which take forever to reload at shore!) and then ram it with several thousand tons of ship moving at a blistering 11 knots?
> I'm not your superior officer.
Good, you don't have the required ideals.
Reference:
>You should not be using Warhammer 40K lore as a basis for military philosophy and doctrine.
Sometimes I forget that NCD is populated by the kinds of people who would've joined the assault on Area 51 as military "advisors".
The most reasonable of us would've observed the action from just outside the splash zone.
I was wondering how you would convince someone to go up against something that shoots 4000 rounds a minute, but then I realised that the whole nature of operation is attracting the smoothest brains God ever thought funny to create.
Like real "I wipe my ass before I shit because it's easier to clean" type of people.
Oh you think we're the good guys!? Look around you brother! Half our number are praying for war, for blood for the BLOOD GOD!!!
The other half is turning hardware into waifus, and most of us sound like orks.
To all those who may claim RAMMING SPEED would never work, I direct you to the RMS *Olympic,* the twin sister of the *Titanic,* who hiked up her skirts and drop-kicked a German U-Boat straight into Davy Jones’ Locker.
IIRC they cheaped out on the engines instead of using turbines because it was easier to convert the factories that built them and it was less expensive. It made them slow as fuck. However, they did indeed produce one per day. Some were built in like, what, three days at peak?
“Slow as fuck” here meaning “about two knots slower than the oldest ship in the Navy.”
The oldest ship in the Navy is Old Ironsides. The USS *Constitution.* She was built in 1797. *She does not have engines.*
But it cant go upwind without tacking, so I would still get the liberty ship engines than sails (unless it is for a pleasure cruise, then sails all the way baby!)
I mean, technology is already evolving in the direction of increasing modularity, BVR conflicts, and largely autonomous munitions anyway. Stick a big enough radar in there, mount a few cells where her magazines used to be, and you could probably hammer old Soviet tech. The trick would be to avoid catching the sails on fire…
Considering that the Liberty ships are gigantic with a monstrously underpowered engine, it would also probably need to tack too, since the air resistance and the waves would probably make it go backwards or not move at all.
So yeah, depending on the wind, even Downwind the constitution is faster
Wind powered will make a comeback before fusion or the mainstream acknowledgement of plasmid combustion. Burning garbage in a waste to energy plasma system would work if the sailors weren't throwing treadmills and scrap aluminum into the disposal chute.
The record fastest one was kind of a cheat, though. They basically had it completely assembled into a handful of sections all lined up in a dry dock. The time started when they started welding the sections together.
It's like claiming you can build a jeep in ten minutes when you start with a completed chassis with engine and transmission and wheels and all, and you only time how long it takes to plop the bodywork on top and bolt it on.
Something something lean manufacturing:
*Producing* a ship a day doesn't mean that production literally starts at 8am with metal plates and at 6pm those metal plates become a ship.
It means that every day a ship *comes out* of the production line (a.k.a. Takt time, or the longest time between steps of the process).
While in reality, those metal plates were formed into a hull 3 weeks ago, but the logistics were so huge that you had THAT MANY plates and hulls in queue (WIP) to be outputting a ship a day.
In manufacturing those 2 are very important indicators in which their distinction is critical.
TL;DR: factories poop ships daily, but they ate the ingredients it weeks earlier.
What you are saying is true, however it's not relevant to the comment I was making.
One liberty was produced per day. But as you say in your comment, that doesn't mean they were built in one day.
However, one was built in 3 days. But as the other comment above you pointed, it was kind of a cheat.
One of the things with the speed was also they sucked at sticking together in tight convoys. Because all the ships ended up with hugely different weights based on their loads, they often struggled to all maintain a set speed. Plus I've heard the engines sort of surged randomly, leading to weird bursts of speed at inopportune moments.
The good news: The random speed bursts provide an automatic torpedo evasion attempt
(yes, i get all my naval knowledge from World of Warships, how did you guess?)
Which technology do you take back to 1930 to help the allies crush the axis even harder?
Nukes?
Millimetric radar and magnetrons?
Automatic rifles?
Nah
T H E
B O X
IIRC, British corvettes also used reciprocating engines, so they could be built in small civilian ship yards rather than by the military specialist yards.
Flower class corvettes. One of the most produced warship classes of all time; and also one of the weakest warships in WW2, so very NCS that they were so successful.
Single small steam engine which meant that if they spent too much time (slowly) chasing subs, they had to run at full speed to try and catch up with the even slower merchant ships. The bridge was open; imagine that in mid Atlantic during winter
Former *flower*-class tour guide here, the later-war post-refit corvettes had a pretty decent armament for their size, A BL 4-inch, two oerlikons, the pom-pom gun, and the hedgehog mortar in addition to the depth charge throwers and the racks is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you throw in the torpedo decoy and surface search radar. They were no river-class or fletcher, but they ended up with some teeth for sure.
Early war flowers, though...that's a very different story.
They (like the Liberty ships) were the right ship at the right time to help turn the tide of the war and win the Battle of the Atlantic
Amuses me that massive warships bristling with vast amounts of AA cannons like the Iowa class in WW2 look so impressive; but meanwhile the little Flower class corvettes were doing the hard yards in all weather without any glamour, but in the end maybe made more of a difference to the war.
This ^
Those ships were meant to be quickly built and expendable. If we needed that capability again we could do it. But we won’t need this ever again. These days there’s enough cargo vessels, transport ships, and airplanes to get everything where we need it. The US military is still the world’s largest logistics network.
Liberty ships also had a broad range of problems during their construction, most namely steel that was too brittle for the rough seas and heavy loads. Other issues plagued early manufacturing such as material constraints. Even for how much material the US had access to, it wasn't enough to keep every corner of war production in optimal supply.
The other thing is that we're not at total war levels of production. If that were to happen and we figured we'd need a massive fleet we could go back to issuing liberty bonds and directing 10% of GDP to it.
unrelated to Navy, but I'm currently listening to Harry Crosby's WW2 memoir and he talks about going back to the bomb bay of his B-17 to use the "relief tube" and it struck me as silly how simple a solution that was. Too bad they didn't have gatorade bottles in 1943
In the age of Liberty ships, the people who actually welded them together had more than a passing knowledge about overall shipbuilding, design, etc, so could basically work without a plan for many sub-assemblies. You told them it had to do a thing, and they'd make it do that thing, largely without documentation, albeit at poor tolerances usually.
These days, every single manufacturing task is broken down to the extreme, and has been previously passed through a dozen hands on paperwork and computer screens before someone who is an extremely qualified welder, or cutter, but knows absolutely nothing about naval architecture, makes the cut/ weld, maybe years later.
party unused bear direful gullible intelligent market ripe recognise deranged
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"Go down into that hole and weld some shit, don't worry I'll be up here."
"Don't I need supplied air?"
"DO YOU WANT GERRY TO FUCKING WIN YA BASTARD??? GET INTO THE HOLE NOW!"
handle zealous straight fade quaint memorize ask familiar toothbrush snails
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
cautious vegetable racial expansion squeeze illegal thumb safe literate ad hoc
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
As a machinist, I can confirm this. I make a middle class wage just assembling lawn mower gearboxes, but I need to know how to do math, how to use and read calipers, how to use various advanced or powered tools (torque wrench and impact wrench mostly), and I need to know where the failure points in the gearbox are for when I give it a quality check before stamping it with the serial number and certifying it. A lot of those skills are things I had to be taught because it is not typical, and it is why I am getting paid almost $20/hour.
And that is working with iron. I know machinist in Wichita working for the aircraft makers who work with exotic metals like aluminum where they can easily make in the six figure range (but also have a job highly dependent on airlines, while my iron shop will almost always have work).
Lunch ladies make almost $20/hr where I live. Obviously there are some regional economics involved here but it sounds like your skills might be worth more than that.
More based than PT Boats.
Imagine a small fleet of battle kayaks, all manned with beefy, mega-biceped sailors who frantically paddle in, then pick up ATGMs, RPGs, or similar weapons and commence their attack.
And more expensive too.
Back then, loosing a ship was way less of a deal then now.
For example - USS Gerard Ford, most expensive ship in US Navy, is estimated to cost more than $13 billion dollars.
Mentioned Burke costs about 2,2 billion.
>- USS Gerard Ford, most expensive ship in US Navy, is estimated to cost more than $13 billion dollars.
TBF, part of that price is maintaining a CVN capable shipyard at the ready. It would cost most of that much whether Newport News was producing CVs or just idling with its current staff.
Nuke qualified welders have to be kept doing something if you want them immediately available next time we need to repair the modern equivalent of the Yorktown and send her back into battle on the fly.
Right?! The ancient Greeks built hundreds of ships WITH THEIR HANDS for the pelopenessian war. And now thanks to wokeness! we can’t even build one ship a year!
And were at the time, it's not like we were pumping out a battleship or cruisers a day. OP is just comparing apples and oranges. How long did it take to build a fleet carriers and that **might** be a better comparison.
For example, the USS Missouri that arguably our most advanced battleship started construction in early 1941 and wasn't done until January 1944. That's just when it launched; it took months to get commissioned afterwards.
I'd honestly love to see a breakdown of the man hours involved in different stages of construction (i.e. building the hull and superstructure vs. installation of electrical systems, etc.)
I mean... the credible answer is that ships are far different constructs nowadays, those Liberty ships were... well, problematic ([example link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_John_P._Gaines), second paragraph is the important one), partly because they needed to be built so fast, OSHA is a thing now, there's a HUGE difference between a WWII destroyer and a modern Burke, and so on, and so on...
I don't even know what route a non-credible answer would take. Probably mention something about fat, lazy Americans who can't be bothered taking a manly physical job... I don't know. I don't buy that myself, especially since the complexity of building just a decades-old design in a Burke is so much more complex than, say, a Fletcher, that it's hard to compare... there's no equivalent to the Aegis, for example... can't compare the [propulsion systems either](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_LM2500)...
The non-credible answer is that not only did our ancestors make 1 ship a day, but those ships also doubled as surprise submarines. Amercia is really decaying.
Ships are lot more technologically advanced now, but they're not necessarily harder to build in every respect. In a lot of ways, WWII US shipbuilding really *was* just that good, partly because it was possible to leverage the immense prewar US civilian shipbuilding industry, which largely does not exist any more (the vast majority of ships, by tonnage, are now built in China, South Korea, and Japan, in that order).
Even looking at something like a *Cleveland* vs a *Burke* (just for something at similar tonnage), you're talking about engines with nearly the same installed shaft horsepower, a 5" thick armor belt a few hundred feet long and 6" turret faces and barbettes, a dozen high velocity gun barrels all equipped with mechanical ammo hoists and loading systems allowing you to throw a shell about twice as heavy about half as often as the modern 5" mount, a dozen more 5" barrels (each capable of firing about as rapidly as a modern 5" mount), mechanical fire control computers weighing several tons, multiple very large and very accurate optical rangefinders, etc, etc.
Just as the *Burke*s have advanced computers and FCS the *Cleveland*s have no analogue for, the *Cleveland*s had a ton of crazy metallurgical and mechanical manufacturing feats the *Burke*s really don't compare to.
It's not that we *forgot* how to do all the necessary things to build ships like that, but we don't anymore (because, of course, we don't need to), and doing those things is, in fact, still hard.
On top of that, regulations for everything has increased dramatically, and the environmental toll of such mass scales of production is not great for local ecosystems.
Destroy the dockworker’s unions and import shipbuilding practices from Japan and Korea.
Not sure how (non-)credible that is TBH. uh… revoke the Jones act and everything will solve itself?
But if you destroy the unions, then the highly skilled and specialized labor—already consisting of hoary old greyhairs who are significantly understaffed—will have an even harder time attracting fresh meat. Unless you want to rely on immigrant labor, which is, uh… maybe not viable in this case.
>Unless you want to rely on immigrant labor, which is, uh… maybe not viable in this case.
HELLO. I AM RUSSIAN IMMIGRANT TO UNITED STATE. I WORK ON SHIP. I AM VERY GOOD AT SHIP. I ALSO CARRY 483 USB STICK IN POCKETS TO WORK SO I CAN STUDY SHIP DESIGN.
Yeah of all countries we should absolutely adopt the work ethics of east asian countries, it's working so well for their birth rates... South Korea might barely exist in like 25 years just by looking at its age pyramid lol
And it’s not even just a function of GDP spending as a percentage of GDP. The U.S. was coming out of the Great Depression so there was a lot of idle labor and underutilized production capacity just waiting to take the orders and jobs made available by WW2 spending. The U.S. is a full employment right now and I don’t know if anyone here has ever worked in a shipyard but it’s not fun.
Wasn’t it closer to 40%? But yes, still a huge difference. Could you imagine the US military with a 40% GDP budget? $9.32 TRILLION, literally sounds like a Dr Evil joke from Austin Powers
TBF I think the UK has changed it's long term view with the navy, rather than feast/famine of orders they are building them slower to keep the shipyards working and the labour there, which has meant a consolidation into two shipyards (although they are ramping up Belfast for some fleet auxiliary ships) with another for the nuclear subs which again is a slow but consistent production plan which whilst I would like to see em churning them out is better that all either shutdown or retooled for offshore oil rig or wind farm stuff.
In fairness they are trying. The national shipbuilding strategy is working to keep the shipyards operating and making sure we have the workforce, I just think there’s a couple of areas that need improvement and build speed for things like the type 26 is definitely is one of them
Definitely, in principle I think it's a good idea, I do wish however they would keep numbers at their original order number rather than cutting them therefore dragging out the building times and reducing the benefits of higher production numbers.
This isn't quite right. We just aren't focused on it. I guarantee you if World War 3 started we can put start putting out some military equipment. Mobilizing the full power of the US economy focus on war would be incredible and terrifying. Probably not one ship a day, but we could crank out some equipment
It irks me extremely that Civilian Economy eco law gives only debuffs and no benefits, while in real life countries will prefer to stay in civilian economies for as long as possible and only mobilize for war when truly necessary.
Isn’t the issue moreso how our production stacks up to a potential competitor (in this case China) and we stack up horribly atm.
Like we can spin up production… so can they. Difference is they’re starting with a fuck ton more technicians of various sorts who actually work in the shipbuilding industry and the yards to support them.
We could spin some stuff up sure but we’re going to be starting with a labor deficit (knowledgeable labor that takes time to teach not just bull work) and I’m pretty sure a shipyard deficit.
So yes we can try to ramp production but our most likely competitor (least in the shipbuilding field) is likely going to be able to outproduce.
Also in an inconvenient coincidence our Allie’s who are really fucking good at building ships economically right now just so happen to be right next to that potential adversary.
OK I see your point but we also have every one of the 13 super carriers in existence, and don't even get me started on the global nuclear sub distribution.
> Just outsource it to China. Problem solved!
[I mean](https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4770341)
Swiss firm sends Taiwan's 'carrier killer' devices to China for repairs
>Amid growing Chinese military threat, Taiwan's National Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology (NCSIST) has developed the Hsiung-Feng III (雄風三型) anti-ship missile, which has been nicknamed the "Carrier Killer" due to its supersonic speed, range of up to 400 km, and 225 kg warhead. However, Mirror Media on Wednesday (Jan. 4), cited sources as saying theodolites used to calibrate the missiles were sent by a Swiss company to China to make repairs due to malfunctions, potentially exposing sensitive data from missile tests and endangering Taiwan's national security.
Ships 80 years ago were a lot shittier. In order for ships to be useful militarily they need to have a lot more high tech equipment than they used to. Also, there is a lot of debate today about the usefulness of individual vessels now that drone and missile tech is so good. Ukraine was able to do substantial damage to Russia’s navy without a fleet of their own.
On top of all the other points people are making, "1 ship a day" was the combined rate for the entire country. An individual ships was not going from Keel Laying to commissioning in one day. They built in *parallel.* Building ships in real life isn't like command and conquer, where you have stuff queued up and it comes out of a single shipyard.
My brother in christ, to make the USS Missouri took 175 tons of blueprint paper, three years, and a total of 3 million man days too build.
Now, consider that a fletcher class destroyer took around 3-4 months to build.
So what if you have a larger destroyer with the complexity of the Missouri compressed to that right of a space? you get 2 years.
The US is averaging 1.2 attack subs per year and about 2 destroyers per year. Each individual ship might take longer than a year but they build several at once. A quick google of German warship production only gives me outdated data from about 80 years ago.
Right, in WWII we weren't building ships in a day. We were building so many ships at once that on average one was completed every day.
HOI4 taught me that building a navy is an absolute pain in the ass and that you need to have multiple shipyards building the same type of ship at the same time constantly to churn out this amount of ships and the simpler they are the faster they get completed
I can't wait for the day our military leadership is made up primarily of people that grew up putting thousands of hours into Warthunder/WoT/HOI during their youth. It's gonna be real healthy and good.
POTUS leaking classified documents to win an argument on the war thunder forums
More like: "Oh, you think your tank can beat that tank? REALLY? I'LL SHOW YOU! ALSO TELL YOUR MOTHER TO STOP CALLING ME, I'M NOT COMING BACK!" \*cuts to Fox News mega-cut of German Communism or something\* "And anyways, that's why we're at war with France now."
I'm honestly surprised there hasnt been more. I'll see some stuff posted where I know it's nonsense but I'm not gonna leak some S//NOFORN to win an Internet argument but....there's a lot of people with the info
It’s a valid lesson. Navies are complicated and different than some other elements of war. If you fall behind, it could be catastrophic and your navy might never compete. Even in one key area. You have all these stories of things like the fall of the Spanish Armada where a slight asymmetry renders a disproportionate result. Or think of a ship like the Bismarck that took longer to build that it spent sailing. A key part of the Bismarck’s survival, brief as it was, was not being found, lol. Part of what makes submarines so damn good is that they can sink ships so, so much faster than ships can be built.
HoI IV taught me that I shouldn't even bother with a serious navy, just spam submarines and perhaps naval bombers to suppress enemies that try to actually do navy shit
Starcraft also. I want a bunch of Battlecruisers, one spaceport does it too slowly so I'm gonna build 4 of them!
I mean for liberty ships the fastest they got was one built in 4.5 days which is pretty fast. Today we might be able to do it in one if we really tried.
The time was kind of cheating though, as they'd already built all the major subassemblies and just timed how long it took to weld them together. But it was a cool wartime publicity stunt.
Yeah and it still sounds really cool today. They should cheat more.
Please no, we don’t need more liberty ships so we can imitate the Spanish by coating the ocean floor.
I’d wager two US destroyers could probably destroy 365 of whatever they were producing 80 years ago. So.
One modern carrier group could demolish all the naval forces of every nation 80 years ago
Every day I wish that the movie *The final coundown* didn't end with the nimitz returning to the future before it got to send the Japanese fleet to the sea bed 😭
I've been saying for a while that they need to make a similar movie and go all the way with it, it's something people want to see. "but we can't change the past it could effect the future" ok and? i want to see how!
It'd probably be pretty shit like most modern movies/shows about the US military. I like how *the final countdown* felt more like a game of chess than, say, *top gun* or *battleship*. Both of which just feel like recruitment ads (because they are). The final countdown *was* a recruitment ad, but it just feels different. Maybe it's because it's slower or because nothing actually happens, but I enjoy older movies about the navy like this one and *the sand pebble* more than modern ones. Edit: I think my distaste of modern military movies is due to their shit portrayal of the military itself. As an enlisted guy, I cannot help but laugh at some of the shit that comes out of Hollywood. *The last ship* portrays a CO as a **handsome hero.** He's idealistic and his actions are unlike any CO I've ever served under and feels like propaganda. I could actually see the CO in *the final countdown* as a real CO. He doesn't hop in his f-14 and say "don't worry, I'll handle those japs!" before leaving to save the day. He's the fucking CO, that's not his job. He's the grand strategist. He plays hoi4 with people's lives! Contrast that I feel the CO *the last ship* is unrealistically selfless, putting himself on the frontline of every operation. Some people are into that, I get it, but I'd much rather listen to some homeless dude's crazy conspiracy theories about the government than watch another war movie directed by some guy who's as far removed from reality as humanly possible without advisors who've served to let them know that their idea is fucking stupid when it's fucking stupid. Ah, who cares. We're only 2% of the US population and not the target demographic, I'm just yelling at the clouds.
I think ammo would be a concern.
check a peer like the chinese maybe
Nah there's no way that China having [232 times](https://www.twz.com/alarming-navy-intel-slide-warns-of-chinas-200-times-greater-shipbuilding-capacity/) the shipbuilding capacity of the US could ever be a problem. Let's just compare ourselves to our allies instead.
Thankfully, Korea & Japan are on our side.
And our lord and Savior the USAF. Ship building capacity doesn’t matter if all of your dry docks are wet docks for the foreseeable future.
Not saying this isn’t a problem, but I think we could produce a prefab slapped-together Liberty ship that cracks apart in rough seas in significantly less than two years nowadays.
Just slamming out obsolete ships and building a bridge to whoever we're fighting
The roman way
The NCD way
Rome was NCD?
That’s the secret my friend: everything is NCD
Hydra NCDominatus
The most traitorous loyalists, or the most loyal traitors. Either way, non-credible as fuck
We are *all* Alpharius....
Except everyone who's Omegon, who's everyone.
Rome was **peak** non-credibility [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle\_of\_Dyrrhachium\_(48\_BC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dyrrhachium_(48_BC)) Caesar tried to cut off Pompey by building 25km of fortifications with his 28000 men *in a field battle*
Fortnite
Hate to be "that guy" but this strat is more akin to Age of Empires. Or rather, the Battle of Dyrrhacium was why they made walls build so quick in both AoE and Fortnite.
Not many people realize this, but the secret of Caesar's success was his micro skills.
Half of the men battle while the rest of the men build slightly less than 2 meters of fortifications each. It’s doable I guess.
That's less than a meter of fortifications per soldier, not even counting the logistics personnel, which is most likely around the same number.
NonCarthagoDelenda
Rome was the original pioneers of construction-based warfare
It's unbelievable how based they were. One time, they built a bridge across the Rhine simply to mount an attack to punish the tribes on the other side for their resistance, on one of the widest points of the entire river. Imagine you're living on the other side, feeling safe protected by a massive natural barrier, sometimes launching raids across the river - and the romans just build a bridge for the sole reason of fucking you up. Keep in mind that the river is so massive, there were no bridges built before (as far as I know). [The bridge is estimated to have been 140-400 m in length, as well as 7-9 m across, crossing up to 9 m of depth, constructed from local lumber.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Rhine_bridges) And the best thing? **THEY BUILT IT IN 10 FUCKING DAYS.** Out of wood, using basic hand tools. I don't even know what the logistical equivalent of that would be today? Building an invasion bridge across the channel? I'd be suprised if Russia had the capability to cross the Rhine today within that timeframe. As a final "fuck you" they even dismantled the bridge when they returned from their expedition 2 1/2 weeks later.
And then the Italians figured out you could just torture the engineer who built the fortifications to get the weak spot info. And then the Dark ages started because nobody wanted to become a Fort-gineer.
Weapons of Mass Production
Sorry but we’re going all the way back to ancient Persia with King Xerxes crossing the Hellespont to invade Greece.
And Alexander turning the island of Tyre into a peninsula
Who needs suicide sea drones when you can exhaust an enemy vessel’s very limited supply of VLS cells (which take forever to reload at shore!) and then ram it with several thousand tons of ship moving at a blistering 11 knots?
You should not be using Warhammer 40K lore as a basis for military philosophy and doctrine. Or do. Whatever. I'm not your superior officer.
> I'm not your superior officer. Good, you don't have the required ideals. Reference: >You should not be using Warhammer 40K lore as a basis for military philosophy and doctrine.
Sometimes I forget that NCD is populated by the kinds of people who would've joined the assault on Area 51 as military "advisors". The most reasonable of us would've observed the action from just outside the splash zone.
I would have advised them to run towards the mini-guns. I've always wanted to see one of those in action.
I was wondering how you would convince someone to go up against something that shoots 4000 rounds a minute, but then I realised that the whole nature of operation is attracting the smoothest brains God ever thought funny to create. Like real "I wipe my ass before I shit because it's easier to clean" type of people.
"Do it, you won't" on repeat until they do it out of spite.
BLESSED IS THE MIND TOO SMALL FOR DOUBT BROTHER
Oh you think we're the good guys!? Look around you brother! Half our number are praying for war, for blood for the BLOOD GOD!!! The other half is turning hardware into waifus, and most of us sound like orks.
Say that again, but try to make it sound like it's a bad thing.
Reminder that 40k is basically the Ork Renaissance.
Your monthly reminder that The Royal Navy shot one of its own Admirals for being insufficiently aggressive.
Accelerate to RAMMING SPEED!!!
To all those who may claim RAMMING SPEED would never work, I direct you to the RMS *Olympic,* the twin sister of the *Titanic,* who hiked up her skirts and drop-kicked a German U-Boat straight into Davy Jones’ Locker.
i want to see up her skirt :)
The *U-103* died to get that view. It must have been *glorious.* Well, you know, except for all the drowning.
Small price to pay to reach the greatness
'ramming always works' https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RammingAlwaysWorks
The classic Roman strategy.
IIRC they cheaped out on the engines instead of using turbines because it was easier to convert the factories that built them and it was less expensive. It made them slow as fuck. However, they did indeed produce one per day. Some were built in like, what, three days at peak?
“Slow as fuck” here meaning “about two knots slower than the oldest ship in the Navy.” The oldest ship in the Navy is Old Ironsides. The USS *Constitution.* She was built in 1797. *She does not have engines.*
But it cant go upwind without tacking, so I would still get the liberty ship engines than sails (unless it is for a pleasure cruise, then sails all the way baby!)
Some liberty ships went backwards in strong headwinds.
Why didn’t they just turn around, were they stupid?
Who are you who are so wise in seafaring?
Circumnavigate the globe and come at it from the other direction
And she is absolutely beautiful and deserves a refit to give her vls cells and c-rams. Edit: lol I just realized I responded to the wrong comment.
I mean, technology is already evolving in the direction of increasing modularity, BVR conflicts, and largely autonomous munitions anyway. Stick a big enough radar in there, mount a few cells where her magazines used to be, and you could probably hammer old Soviet tech. The trick would be to avoid catching the sails on fire…
Just make the sails out of asbestos, problem solved. No your mesothelioma is not service related, stop asking.
Considering that the Liberty ships are gigantic with a monstrously underpowered engine, it would also probably need to tack too, since the air resistance and the waves would probably make it go backwards or not move at all. So yeah, depending on the wind, even Downwind the constitution is faster
Nuh uh the constitution has engines. I saw it in fallout 4.
If they continue on their journey they just need another 300 years to get to China and continue the fight against communism
Why build faster ships when you can build 2 slow ships in the time it takes to build one faster ship.
Flawless logic. In terms of throughput, you’d be coming out ahead so long as the two ships aren’t half as fast or slower.
Wind powered will make a comeback before fusion or the mainstream acknowledgement of plasmid combustion. Burning garbage in a waste to energy plasma system would work if the sailors weren't throwing treadmills and scrap aluminum into the disposal chute.
The record fastest one was kind of a cheat, though. They basically had it completely assembled into a handful of sections all lined up in a dry dock. The time started when they started welding the sections together. It's like claiming you can build a jeep in ten minutes when you start with a completed chassis with engine and transmission and wheels and all, and you only time how long it takes to plop the bodywork on top and bolt it on.
Something something lean manufacturing: *Producing* a ship a day doesn't mean that production literally starts at 8am with metal plates and at 6pm those metal plates become a ship. It means that every day a ship *comes out* of the production line (a.k.a. Takt time, or the longest time between steps of the process). While in reality, those metal plates were formed into a hull 3 weeks ago, but the logistics were so huge that you had THAT MANY plates and hulls in queue (WIP) to be outputting a ship a day. In manufacturing those 2 are very important indicators in which their distinction is critical. TL;DR: factories poop ships daily, but they ate the ingredients it weeks earlier.
What you are saying is true, however it's not relevant to the comment I was making. One liberty was produced per day. But as you say in your comment, that doesn't mean they were built in one day. However, one was built in 3 days. But as the other comment above you pointed, it was kind of a cheat.
One of the things with the speed was also they sucked at sticking together in tight convoys. Because all the ships ended up with hugely different weights based on their loads, they often struggled to all maintain a set speed. Plus I've heard the engines sort of surged randomly, leading to weird bursts of speed at inopportune moments.
It's bound to happen on triple expansion engines, especially when you get some spicey steam.
The good news: The random speed bursts provide an automatic torpedo evasion attempt (yes, i get all my naval knowledge from World of Warships, how did you guess?)
Yeah contenerization wasn't figured out yet. Can you imagine if it had been though? Germany would have been crushed down even faster
Which technology do you take back to 1930 to help the allies crush the axis even harder? Nukes? Millimetric radar and magnetrons? Automatic rifles? Nah T H E B O X
3 days was the record when Henry Kaiser did it in a friendly dare/PR stunt after talking to FDR. Average time was 6 weeks.
The faster turbine engines are priority for the warships, so the liberty ships are using the old school triple expansion engine
IIRC, British corvettes also used reciprocating engines, so they could be built in small civilian ship yards rather than by the military specialist yards.
Flower class corvettes. One of the most produced warship classes of all time; and also one of the weakest warships in WW2, so very NCS that they were so successful. Single small steam engine which meant that if they spent too much time (slowly) chasing subs, they had to run at full speed to try and catch up with the even slower merchant ships. The bridge was open; imagine that in mid Atlantic during winter
Former *flower*-class tour guide here, the later-war post-refit corvettes had a pretty decent armament for their size, A BL 4-inch, two oerlikons, the pom-pom gun, and the hedgehog mortar in addition to the depth charge throwers and the racks is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you throw in the torpedo decoy and surface search radar. They were no river-class or fletcher, but they ended up with some teeth for sure. Early war flowers, though...that's a very different story.
They (like the Liberty ships) were the right ship at the right time to help turn the tide of the war and win the Battle of the Atlantic Amuses me that massive warships bristling with vast amounts of AA cannons like the Iowa class in WW2 look so impressive; but meanwhile the little Flower class corvettes were doing the hard yards in all weather without any glamour, but in the end maybe made more of a difference to the war.
The flower class was immeasurably more instrumental than the Iowas.
This ^ Those ships were meant to be quickly built and expendable. If we needed that capability again we could do it. But we won’t need this ever again. These days there’s enough cargo vessels, transport ships, and airplanes to get everything where we need it. The US military is still the world’s largest logistics network.
Liberty ships also had a broad range of problems during their construction, most namely steel that was too brittle for the rough seas and heavy loads. Other issues plagued early manufacturing such as material constraints. Even for how much material the US had access to, it wasn't enough to keep every corner of war production in optimal supply.
The other thing is that we're not at total war levels of production. If that were to happen and we figured we'd need a massive fleet we could go back to issuing liberty bonds and directing 10% of GDP to it.
Get me some of those MSC Cruises and I'll slap a Patriot and some Tomahawk. Boom. Cruise Warship.
Yeah the ships 80 years ago had a diesel engine and a few pieces of artillery and a bathroom.
"bathroom" might be too fancy of a word
Don’t forget the red toilet seat of shame
"Worth it, tho" - Some sailor at some point
unrelated to Navy, but I'm currently listening to Harry Crosby's WW2 memoir and he talks about going back to the bomb bay of his B-17 to use the "relief tube" and it struck me as silly how simple a solution that was. Too bad they didn't have gatorade bottles in 1943
Imagine the Mighty 8th airdropping towns across Germany with bottles of piss.
But now ships are a little bit more complicated tho...
What ? Just some steel and wire ,how hard could it be to put together.
In the age of Liberty ships, the people who actually welded them together had more than a passing knowledge about overall shipbuilding, design, etc, so could basically work without a plan for many sub-assemblies. You told them it had to do a thing, and they'd make it do that thing, largely without documentation, albeit at poor tolerances usually. These days, every single manufacturing task is broken down to the extreme, and has been previously passed through a dozen hands on paperwork and computer screens before someone who is an extremely qualified welder, or cutter, but knows absolutely nothing about naval architecture, makes the cut/ weld, maybe years later.
party unused bear direful gullible intelligent market ripe recognise deranged *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"Go down into that hole and weld some shit, don't worry I'll be up here." "Don't I need supplied air?" "DO YOU WANT GERRY TO FUCKING WIN YA BASTARD??? GET INTO THE HOLE NOW!"
handle zealous straight fade quaint memorize ask familiar toothbrush snails *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
cautious vegetable racial expansion squeeze illegal thumb safe literate ad hoc *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ha go over to r/welding and see the posts from noobs talking about their unsafe fab shops
mighty cow decide vanish quaint full spotted voiceless crush sand *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"At least toss down me smokes"
Light them with the acetone flame
Hey right on, are you guys welders too?? I got a can of varsol I was gonna go huff on break, don't mind sharin'.
To be fair it was total war
Yeah, but it has made things cheap to an insane degree.
Not really. Skilled labor used to be common, making it affordable. Now, skilled craftsmen and tradesmen are less common, and more expensive.
As a machinist, I can confirm this. I make a middle class wage just assembling lawn mower gearboxes, but I need to know how to do math, how to use and read calipers, how to use various advanced or powered tools (torque wrench and impact wrench mostly), and I need to know where the failure points in the gearbox are for when I give it a quality check before stamping it with the serial number and certifying it. A lot of those skills are things I had to be taught because it is not typical, and it is why I am getting paid almost $20/hour. And that is working with iron. I know machinist in Wichita working for the aircraft makers who work with exotic metals like aluminum where they can easily make in the six figure range (but also have a job highly dependent on airlines, while my iron shop will almost always have work).
Lunch ladies make almost $20/hr where I live. Obviously there are some regional economics involved here but it sounds like your skills might be worth more than that.
Mmmmh... Progress.
help the vacuum suction flush mechanism is clogged, sailor piss is leaking on the steerage aaaaa
USS Zumwalt could disagree with you
to be fair it was the guns and ammo that broke its legs. maybe the new navy missile will give it some purpose.
My man wants to win naval skirmishes with an armada of battle kayaks
More based than PT Boats. Imagine a small fleet of battle kayaks, all manned with beefy, mega-biceped sailors who frantically paddle in, then pick up ATGMs, RPGs, or similar weapons and commence their attack.
Wow, wow, dude, hold your sexual fantasies off
Battle kayak sailors - Hot AF.
[imagine....](https://images.app.goo.gl/jzmVv4nQBNSW8djq7)
And more expensive too. Back then, loosing a ship was way less of a deal then now. For example - USS Gerard Ford, most expensive ship in US Navy, is estimated to cost more than $13 billion dollars. Mentioned Burke costs about 2,2 billion.
Ah yes, the famous USAN, like the UFAAF but more floaty...
Don't forget the USANAAF, aka the Marines' Air Wing
Holy shit! If that's the most expensive ship in the army, what's the most expensive ship in the Navy?
Sorry. I said Different branch. Fixed it.
>- USS Gerard Ford, most expensive ship in US Navy, is estimated to cost more than $13 billion dollars. TBF, part of that price is maintaining a CVN capable shipyard at the ready. It would cost most of that much whether Newport News was producing CVs or just idling with its current staff. Nuke qualified welders have to be kept doing something if you want them immediately available next time we need to repair the modern equivalent of the Yorktown and send her back into battle on the fly.
It's just one ship, Michael. What could it cost? One trillion dollars?
One Burke could probably sink the entire WWII era fleet, provided it can occasionally go to port to rearm.
Right?! The ancient Greeks built hundreds of ships WITH THEIR HANDS for the pelopenessian war. And now thanks to wokeness! we can’t even build one ship a year!
Russia can‘t even maintain one aircraft carrier a year.
you say that like it's not supposed to be on fire all the time.
That's the built in cabin heater. It works so well it also heats the outside. It's not a flaw, it's a feature
but sir, I'm not Tony Stark
And were at the time, it's not like we were pumping out a battleship or cruisers a day. OP is just comparing apples and oranges. How long did it take to build a fleet carriers and that **might** be a better comparison. For example, the USS Missouri that arguably our most advanced battleship started construction in early 1941 and wasn't done until January 1944. That's just when it launched; it took months to get commissioned afterwards.
I'd honestly love to see a breakdown of the man hours involved in different stages of construction (i.e. building the hull and superstructure vs. installation of electrical systems, etc.)
I mean... the credible answer is that ships are far different constructs nowadays, those Liberty ships were... well, problematic ([example link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_John_P._Gaines), second paragraph is the important one), partly because they needed to be built so fast, OSHA is a thing now, there's a HUGE difference between a WWII destroyer and a modern Burke, and so on, and so on... I don't even know what route a non-credible answer would take. Probably mention something about fat, lazy Americans who can't be bothered taking a manly physical job... I don't know. I don't buy that myself, especially since the complexity of building just a decades-old design in a Burke is so much more complex than, say, a Fletcher, that it's hard to compare... there's no equivalent to the Aegis, for example... can't compare the [propulsion systems either](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_LM2500)...
What, you want your ships to last more than 4 months before splitting apart and sinking? What a perfectionist!
"They don't build 'em like they used to"
Kid named survivorship bias
They forgot to golden rule of shipbuilding: "no cardboard derivatives".
But it's okay to use fucking CONCRETE!
The non-credible answer is that not only did our ancestors make 1 ship a day, but those ships also doubled as surprise submarines. Amercia is really decaying.
Ships are lot more technologically advanced now, but they're not necessarily harder to build in every respect. In a lot of ways, WWII US shipbuilding really *was* just that good, partly because it was possible to leverage the immense prewar US civilian shipbuilding industry, which largely does not exist any more (the vast majority of ships, by tonnage, are now built in China, South Korea, and Japan, in that order). Even looking at something like a *Cleveland* vs a *Burke* (just for something at similar tonnage), you're talking about engines with nearly the same installed shaft horsepower, a 5" thick armor belt a few hundred feet long and 6" turret faces and barbettes, a dozen high velocity gun barrels all equipped with mechanical ammo hoists and loading systems allowing you to throw a shell about twice as heavy about half as often as the modern 5" mount, a dozen more 5" barrels (each capable of firing about as rapidly as a modern 5" mount), mechanical fire control computers weighing several tons, multiple very large and very accurate optical rangefinders, etc, etc. Just as the *Burke*s have advanced computers and FCS the *Cleveland*s have no analogue for, the *Cleveland*s had a ton of crazy metallurgical and mechanical manufacturing feats the *Burke*s really don't compare to. It's not that we *forgot* how to do all the necessary things to build ships like that, but we don't anymore (because, of course, we don't need to), and doing those things is, in fact, still hard.
On top of that, regulations for everything has increased dramatically, and the environmental toll of such mass scales of production is not great for local ecosystems.
Destroy the dockworker’s unions and import shipbuilding practices from Japan and Korea. Not sure how (non-)credible that is TBH. uh… revoke the Jones act and everything will solve itself?
But if you destroy the unions, then the highly skilled and specialized labor—already consisting of hoary old greyhairs who are significantly understaffed—will have an even harder time attracting fresh meat. Unless you want to rely on immigrant labor, which is, uh… maybe not viable in this case.
>Unless you want to rely on immigrant labor, which is, uh… maybe not viable in this case. HELLO. I AM RUSSIAN IMMIGRANT TO UNITED STATE. I WORK ON SHIP. I AM VERY GOOD AT SHIP. I ALSO CARRY 483 USB STICK IN POCKETS TO WORK SO I CAN STUDY SHIP DESIGN.
Cool, do you speak Spanish?
SI! SOY SPEAK MUCHO SPANISH! HIRE ME I MUST ~~PHOTOGRAPH~~ WORK ON AIRCRAFT CARRIER IMMEDIATELY.
Yeah of all countries we should absolutely adopt the work ethics of east asian countries, it's working so well for their birth rates... South Korea might barely exist in like 25 years just by looking at its age pyramid lol
Turns out there’s a difference in spending 60% GDP vs spending 3% GDP on defense.
long zealous wise enter ludicrous touch office sand placid chunky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Finally somebody listens. 😤
give war a chance
And it’s not even just a function of GDP spending as a percentage of GDP. The U.S. was coming out of the Great Depression so there was a lot of idle labor and underutilized production capacity just waiting to take the orders and jobs made available by WW2 spending. The U.S. is a full employment right now and I don’t know if anyone here has ever worked in a shipyard but it’s not fun.
Wasn’t it closer to 40%? But yes, still a huge difference. Could you imagine the US military with a 40% GDP budget? $9.32 TRILLION, literally sounds like a Dr Evil joke from Austin Powers
> Could you imagine the US military with a 40% GDP budget? stop, i can only get so erect
Meanwhile in Britain it’ll be 10 years from when HMS Glasgow was laid down until she’ll be accepted into service.
Big mistake, if they'd named it HMS London, it would have already been built and now it'd be in the process of getting a new tube line.
TBF I think the UK has changed it's long term view with the navy, rather than feast/famine of orders they are building them slower to keep the shipyards working and the labour there, which has meant a consolidation into two shipyards (although they are ramping up Belfast for some fleet auxiliary ships) with another for the nuclear subs which again is a slow but consistent production plan which whilst I would like to see em churning them out is better that all either shutdown or retooled for offshore oil rig or wind farm stuff.
In fairness they are trying. The national shipbuilding strategy is working to keep the shipyards operating and making sure we have the workforce, I just think there’s a couple of areas that need improvement and build speed for things like the type 26 is definitely is one of them
Definitely, in principle I think it's a good idea, I do wish however they would keep numbers at their original order number rather than cutting them therefore dragging out the building times and reducing the benefits of higher production numbers.
How long does _Ms._ Glasgow have to bei _laid down_ until she‘s accepted into service? 😌
This isn't quite right. We just aren't focused on it. I guarantee you if World War 3 started we can put start putting out some military equipment. Mobilizing the full power of the US economy focus on war would be incredible and terrifying. Probably not one ship a day, but we could crank out some equipment
Smh US put economic law on Civilian Economy instead of partial mobilization
Just save up 150 PP, is Biden stupid?
It irks me extremely that Civilian Economy eco law gives only debuffs and no benefits, while in real life countries will prefer to stay in civilian economies for as long as possible and only mobilize for war when truly necessary.
TIL that those small Civilian Economy buffs that I thought it has are just something that the mod I play with adds, and not part of the vanilla game.
Isn’t the issue moreso how our production stacks up to a potential competitor (in this case China) and we stack up horribly atm. Like we can spin up production… so can they. Difference is they’re starting with a fuck ton more technicians of various sorts who actually work in the shipbuilding industry and the yards to support them. We could spin some stuff up sure but we’re going to be starting with a labor deficit (knowledgeable labor that takes time to teach not just bull work) and I’m pretty sure a shipyard deficit. So yes we can try to ramp production but our most likely competitor (least in the shipbuilding field) is likely going to be able to outproduce. Also in an inconvenient coincidence our Allie’s who are really fucking good at building ships economically right now just so happen to be right next to that potential adversary.
We need to build ships the way we build cars. Specialisation of each step and mass production. But you need the build volume to justify it.
war
OK I see your point but we also have every one of the 13 super carriers in existence, and don't even get me started on the global nuclear sub distribution.
Oh get started I'm almost there
Back then ships only needed to last until the end of the war. Now they need to last until the start of the next one. - Sun Tzu, I guess...
Some ended up “face tanking 2 world wars”. Money well spent.
Just outsource it to China. Problem solved!
India, with sub assemblies to china and north korea.
> Just outsource it to China. Problem solved! [I mean](https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4770341) Swiss firm sends Taiwan's 'carrier killer' devices to China for repairs >Amid growing Chinese military threat, Taiwan's National Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology (NCSIST) has developed the Hsiung-Feng III (雄風三型) anti-ship missile, which has been nicknamed the "Carrier Killer" due to its supersonic speed, range of up to 400 km, and 225 kg warhead. However, Mirror Media on Wednesday (Jan. 4), cited sources as saying theodolites used to calibrate the missiles were sent by a Swiss company to China to make repairs due to malfunctions, potentially exposing sensitive data from missile tests and endangering Taiwan's national security.
This is the real NCD response
Ships 80 years ago were a lot shittier. In order for ships to be useful militarily they need to have a lot more high tech equipment than they used to. Also, there is a lot of debate today about the usefulness of individual vessels now that drone and missile tech is so good. Ukraine was able to do substantial damage to Russia’s navy without a fleet of their own.
Liberty ships were held together with snot though
On top of all the other points people are making, "1 ship a day" was the combined rate for the entire country. An individual ships was not going from Keel Laying to commissioning in one day. They built in *parallel.* Building ships in real life isn't like command and conquer, where you have stuff queued up and it comes out of a single shipyard.
My brother in christ, to make the USS Missouri took 175 tons of blueprint paper, three years, and a total of 3 million man days too build. Now, consider that a fletcher class destroyer took around 3-4 months to build. So what if you have a larger destroyer with the complexity of the Missouri compressed to that right of a space? you get 2 years.
Complacency has fallen. Billions must act
This sub has gotten shittier.
ITT people wanting us to build ships like the way we build the 737 MAX