This sounds good on paper but the asian efficiencies aren't a secret. They have the trained workforces and we don't. It's true across the construction space. High speed rail, chip faabs, etc. We offshored all the manufacturing and are now multiple generations removed from having enough institutional knowledge in our workforce. It will similarly take many years (and a lot of money) to build this capacity back up.
It is not just about the workforce. I believe the US has enough skilled labor to match the Chinese and Koreans, but the main issue is the industrial ecosystem. There are a lot components that go into shipbuilding, and it wouldn't do you much good if your skilled labor still has to import chips and other important components all the way from Taiwan, and other Asian countries.
This workforce is also really cheap because all the salaries as well as the cost of living in the country are much lower than even the cheapest US states not to speak of the East and West Coasts where the shipyards are located. Moreover, Koreans, like Japanese and Taiwanese, live in an overtime culture (until 2018 they worked 52-h weeks instead of 40-h). There is no way the US can copy that, hence no way American shipbuilders are competitive in commercial shipbuilding, therefore not much improvement is possible in military shipbuilding as well (those are coupled)
It's not fixable might as well just burn the money, modern "Stock - Buy back" America is incapable of conducting long term industrial projects any attempt inevitably devolves into an MBA infused gift of contractors , outsourcing, downsizing etc.... see Boeing and Intel. The trend started in the 80's.
The US should and could be building those ships domestically. RoK didn’t build them at all before the 1970s and only started because of an aggressive industrialization drive. The US can re-industrialize if we can get our policy-making away from big pockets.
No, you cannot. That is like South Korea saying that they can take over as the tech capital of the world away from the United States. Complete nonsense.
That would undermine US workers and would give South Korea to much politcal leverage over the US. The military politcal leverage game goes both ways. I build your navies I own you.
@@OGUNite I am surprised that the US shipyards haven't charged the DOD $1.6B for a new Burke class ship, then outsource the contracts to South Korea for $600M and pocket $1B difference........
Simple answer, cheap labor. You can not build efficiently here in the US because of labor unions and the government willingness to write blank checks for very little in return.
An important note to make. The number of battle force ships it’s important, quite important in fact, but it does not tell the whole story. The tonnage of the US Navy is double that of China, and the number of Chinese warships that match American ones is currently only a few dozen. This doesn’t mean China can or isn’t catching up, though. Its tonnage added per year equate to an entire French Navy, so this is still an important issue to tackle.
That was the IJN's strategy in WW2. a few big heavy capital ships. But no capacity to replace them. The 6 carriers and Yamato once sunk, was not replaced.
The tonnage lead is help up by very few 100,000 tonne aircraft carriers that are looking increasingly obsolete. China already posesses hypersonic missiles that are capable of sinking a Nimitz Class carrier.
the difference is not as significant as you think. chinese naval policy is focused on regional dominance and littoral warfare, not playing global policeman. US has significantly more tonnage, yes, but it is distributed across the globe in many places simultaneously. china has plans to enlarge to 6 aircraft carriers, and currently has 3+3 LHDs. China does not need too many vessels when they have extremely potent ASM capabilities. the issue is that US naval dominance in the pacific is being challenged... US only has 1 active CSG in the region currently, and 2 other ARGs... this force cannot match that of the chinese navy
Here are some more facts they leave out. The U.S. Navy has over 3.6 million (U.S.) tons of ships in its fleet, nearly twice the size of China’s combined fleets of just over 2 million tons. While I believe we should probably repeal that 1965 protectionist law, (then buy frigates and Corvettes and destroyers from South Korea spending the money on outfitting them with better electronics / weapons and submarines from Sweden) this is a bit alarmist but all the facts should be known. For the record the US should be a little bit alarmed.
the whole world should be alarmed: the global standard currency for oil is the us dollar. why? not only because the us has one of the largest reserves--if not the largest, but because its military is the only one that is truly "global". what would happen if china closes the gap? this is scary for many reasons, and has consequences that trickle outside of just potential armed conflicts.
Sorry one more thing, we clearly should be heavily investing into unmanned submarine and drone technology. The mass of the water is an extra layer of armor, and in the saturated air space of a future war, having an ocean above you is highly valuable. Not having the humans on board means the ship can conserve space, energy, be a smaller target, but still get orders from command.
Seems like changing that outdated US law would be the most expedient and maybe cost effective way to get more USN ships from our Asian partners, who aren't happy about China's rise.
We are talking about industrial capacity to produce ships... not tonnage... what it means if we lag behind in military industrial capacity is that the Chinese can build, refit, and repair way faster than we can. At that point tonnage doesn’t matter since they can build literally more, faster, heavier.
Oh boy we got a NPC here guys........experience is not inherited.......there is no 'massive' technology advantage - the US navy has no defense against hypersonic missiles lol And tonnage does not matter once a a ship is hit by a salvo of Hypersonic missiles. The USS ford crew is short by 500 sailors.....no one wants to join your military 🤣🤣
@@adnausi "Tonnage doesnt matter" do you even know what tonnage means? Tonnage = ability to withstand damage, i.e not needing dry-dock repairs. The Chinese have smaller, weaker vessels that will be torn apart and sit in dry dock.
Change the 1965 protection law so US can buy hulls (and non-critical components) built to their specification from trusted allies. Then bring the ships to American yards and fit it out with the latest and greatest radars, sensors, and weapons. This should save costs, build up domestic industry and help with employment while at the same time cut construction time and prevent unwanted top secret tech from being copied. In the long run the US may even be able to build ships without relying on foreign yards.
Why do they never differentiate types of vessels and tonnage. Purposefully ignoring the context of littoral vs blue water, and without mentioning tonnage, you’re willfully misleading the public towards alarmist conclusions.
Well said! Well I believe that we should be a little bit alarmed the all the facts need to be put out there. For proper comparison The U.S. Navy has over 3.6 million (U.S.) tons of ships in its fleet, nearly twice the size of China’s combined fleets of just over 2 million tons.
Yea exactly! I keep hearing talk about ship count but nobody talks about tonnage. Who cares if the PRoC builds a bunch of tiny boats to patrol their coastline?
exactly! sounds like alarmism to let the public think we should dump more money into military again. However, we have 11 aircraft carriers whereas china only have 2 carriers. That's a significant difference already.
I worked for a company that had government contracts for various electronic parts. They were the only US based company that made these parts so could charge outrageous prices for subpar products. Military/Medical electronic component specs was
Hyundai's plan to build US Navy warship: Make half-built empty ship (without weapons and radars) in South Korean shipyard, bring it to US shipyard and install the armaments and the rest and deliver to the US Navy. Or build multiple large blocks of ship hull in SK, bring them across Pacific Ocean with barge to US shipyard, assemble them in US, and complete the naval warship.
This sounds like a win-win solution for both sides. As I know, Taiwan is also famous for shipyard construction, if it can set up such a similar military shipyard in Taiwan, it could boost its security and reduce the cost at the same time.
We already lack factories and trained engineers. Now we offshore this causing even more factories to close down? More of that and we won't be able to make a single ship anymore. Especially during war. We'll have to hope others make our military for us
A few corrections: China has 3 liquid-powered carriers, not coal. The PLAN isn't interested in patrolling shipping lanes, unlike the US Navy, hence the need for nuclear carriers. The PLAN has also shied away from building a large fleet of carriers, given their vulnerability and large number of assets they consume - escort ships, subs and aircraft. Though, it's observed they see owning a nuclear-carrier as a way of showcasing themselves as a superpower. China has already made the US carrier groups inert by developing vast arsenals of missiles that can keep US carriers out of aircraft range of the Chinese coast. Leaving them exposed to the growing threat of China's submarines.
Today's navy scale only proves that US had larger construction ability/ship-industry than China in 1990s. But today's construction ablility predicts the NAVY scale in the 20 years.
@@HexaSquirrel haha that’s what we make fun of the thick black smoke from chimney during sea test😬thanks for clarifying though US and China navy won’t have a fight in the future, just deterring each other. China wants US to get out of our doorway, and US want China just stay in our backyard. If us two strongest powers clash together, that might be the end of the world. Luckily we both have enough patience and wisdom to handle any situation.
The solution was mentioned early on in the video… building commercial ships and military ships at the same time. And ofc… volume. Laying down 5-8 of the same ship side by side. And subsides… the US gave them out for commercial shipping into the early 80s. And then stopped.
China claims they have a larger navy that the US, but in reality, none of their vessels are blue water capable, and the reason that number is so high is that they include anything that floats. So, to say that the Chinese have a larger Navy is disingenuous.
Korean yards can also do MRO work for existing USN ships for starters and then if they do a good job and do it cheaply the US can invite them to take over an old yard or set up a new one in the US like what the Italians have done. Such a move will mean everything is built in the USA. The US will have total oversight on construction, be able to create more jobs while better competing with China in warship numbers. The Koreans will be happy because they will have a steady stream of work from Uncle Sam.
Pretending like the US is somehow behind China in terms of naval strength is the greatest marketing campaign of our generation. What an incredible way to increase the budget.
Thank you. I saw this headline and thought I'd wandered into bizzarro world. The last simulations of conflict between US and China I'm aware of has the US winning any naval engagement. In worst case scenarios, we lose one Carrier. No way China matches US naval power.
@@WestOfEarth i dont know what simulations you speak of but all the ones I have read online tells of the US defeat. The US is really far from its turf and it doesn't have much bases to hold its navy ships.... unless the US wants to bring Japan and the Philippines into war which I doubt those two countries would be oblige to do so.
@@WestOfEarth The last simulations are of the CSIS in which you look at the sponsors which are from American defense contractors. OF COURSE THEY WANTED AMERICA TO WIN so they can advertise and sell their weapons. If you look at U.S GOVERNMENT naval simulations of a war between America and China, America loses nearly all of them. Who says about China just matching US naval power, on the other hand, the largest missile program on this planet is from China. China literally has enough industrial might to fight a war with just missiles. Literally.
Our trained shipyard worker wages are 3 to 5 times at least more than south Korean, not even talking about the money wasted for lobbying government and for the greedy shipyard executives. Why? We printed too much money and now everyone needs high wages to combat the increased living cost here in the US, it's a death spiral. Just for those reasons alone we will not build any ships of the same quality if not costing many folds more.
The last thing you will see in the US army manufacturing is progress and efficiency in construction. The biggest example is US incompetence in supplying Ukraine. The lobbying makes things as slow as the congress
U.S. supply to Ukraine is the main reason they're still an independent country at this stage. I would agree that there were avoidable delays, but those were of a political nature (see House republicans blocking aid for over 6 months).
But a US Arleigh Berk destroyer is MUCH more capable than the Chinese counterpart with not only more reliable systems and better training, but better damage control and safety, better weapon systems, better radar systems, better communications... It is easily worth spending 3-4x as much.
That's not necessarily true. Their newer ships all have ASEA radar like Arleigh Berk. It's debatable the effectiveness but if we're being honest, none of us know the true capability of each radar and how they work in wars. When was the last time US fought a modern navy with similar equipment? People always talk big game but never have facts to back it up. A lot of things are speculation like your ballpark 3-4x as much comment out of no where. I can name a few facts that are logical. 1) Chinese carrier operation is definitely new. It takes a lot of training/practice to be successful. Even US navy often had accidents landing. So it's fair to assume Chinese training needs more work. 2) Their systems are all new for their crews, so even if we assume radar tech is same level we can assume their operational efficiency isn't as strong. So your comment about better damage control is probably a fair one.
Nope. Absolutely not. The most capable destroyer in the world at this moment in time by U.S and European naval analysts is the Chinese type 055 Renhai class destroyer. It is a destroyer that has the firepower of a cruiser and literally DWARFS the Arleigh Burke in terms of size(tonnage) and firepower. It is also the ONLY destroyer in the world capable of launching HYPERSONIC missiles at targets. The Renhai class destroyer is the most LETHAL surface based NON CARRIER combatant.
@@Tau_Long_Ranged_Fire_Support that’s if you go by missile count. It’s hard to say what is the best in real world. Even the Chinese are mass building smaller type 54 frigates. In real world battle which has never happened before (modern navies), is when we will see the performance of all the radar, missile, training, put into test. Until then it’s all in theory for everybody. War games and training are as close to reality as we get for now
Not just shipyard. the trained engineers and workers, all the steel, parts and subsystem, i.e. whole shipbuilding industry & infrastructure. Impossible or too expensive and time consuming to revive.
@@youcantataI always hear how it’s “impossible” to re industrialize. What a looser attitude. China started with nothing but dirt! Nonsense that US cannot have industry and factories and shipyards.
A valid concern in some cramped places like Russia is finding out in the Black sea. But in a fight in the pacific these ships are never going within 200 miles of the Chinese coast and so cheap drone swarms are not going to reach them. These higher end ships are the only ones that could protect themselves and our carriers against longer ranged threats like submarines, anti ship ballistic missiles, air launched cruise missiles etc.
No. We use our Naval ships for power projection and Naval time interception. Those drones have a very limited range and flight time. 30 minutes and possibly 1 to 5 miles only depending on the wind and return flight back. Naval vessels in comparison can be out at sea for 6 months at a time and can have nearly an unlimited range. You can't do that with current drone technology. You can leave drones out as mines or for surveillance but it doesn't compare to a Naval warship. The ships are used to enforce international trade laws and to protect assets from piracy. If you removed warships, then your own trade vessels can be subject to piracy.
One thing US should do is to undo the privatization of ship yards. Those 13 ship yards used to be government ship yards during the cold war. Make the government owned again, remove profit motive. Start going back to building ships like US used to do in the 80s. Sure, the wages are not competive with Asian countries, but that's not the main reason US ship cost more to build, it's the ever increasing need to be more profitable year over year after privatization.
Given how easily angered American tax payers are. The military will have a hard time justifying increasing costs given how many Americans want more funds directed elsewhere like healthcare and education
Imagine US Navy had the technological advantage like able to sink 3 to 4 Chinese warships before loosing 1, but in the long term one thing you need to remember that China's shipbuilding capacity is 231 times larger than the US. China always playing the long game while the US always busy seeking for voters for the next term in every 4 years.
The ratio you put up here is mere speculation that came out of arrogance. And that won't win the war. China will bury the USA in a direct full scale war and that's a fact well known around the world.
Sorry, the U.S. Navy has long had no technical advantage. The answer can be obtained by comparing the radar and missile data of both sides. Now the United States is eating the stock advantage at the end of the Cold War. This advantage can be sustained until 2030 at most.😅
From the humble beginning's of rebuilding toyota water pumps to when south korea needed engines for a start up car company when asked do you build engines saying yes we do preceding into a building showing them a engine the size of a house they got the contract ! Being a republic like the U.S Hyundai Heavy Industries Chung -shu-yun A National treasure built the company into what is considered by many to be the best in the world you can easily see why it garners heavy U.S. Interest !.
Just like Trump tariffs will only move manufacturing into countries like Vietnam/India/Mexico, not back to America. US expensive yet under productive workforce will force US to move more navy contracts to Korea or Japan.
4:30 Is the idea is what when a US ship is damaged in the SCS during a conflict in China, they’ll sail it up to Korea to get it repaired. How does that make any sense? You’re moving a damaged ship from within Chinese missile range to a facility that’s even closer to Chinese missiles 😅
Thats not the only problem the U.S faces. Whats the point of building more war ships if there is not enough new sailors recruited to operate them. Navy will have to increase recruitment. Make college more expensive.
This is also reason why we need to defend global democracies (I know S. Korea was a dictatorship at first but it had the seeds of the transition to democracy), because if we didn't defend them back in the 50's then we wouldn't have their help now. Same goes for Ukraine, if we don't help defend Ukraine now then we won't have them as allies in the future.
The world's largest shipyard is China Shipbuilding Corporation. Placing the construction of important assets on the front lines of war like in South Korea is a huge mistake. Very susceptible to fatal blows.
It's that when anything computer science or AI would pay easily over $100000, and with many sources of revenue generating platforms these days such as UA-cam, manufacturing in general seems it fell out of favor. It's almost impossible for US ship building to be as competitive as one in China. Let our allies build the ship for now so we can stay in the lead in the future
What China calls ships the rest of the world calls sloops. They are padding their numbers with them. If you want real numbers, look at displaced tonnage. Completely different ball game.
US Shipyards: Demand highest price and salary first. But repeated delays, and resulted failed warships. Asian Shipyards: Accept lower price and salary. But produced faster than scheduled, and good warships.
Nope. That's why America loses wars. In a war between two near peer or equal peer adversaries, it ALWAYS ends in a slug fest. It always does. From World War 1 - World War 2 to Ukraine. How can you say quality is better when America literally uses the QUANTITY military strategy that helped them win World War 2, - the same strategy that America talks bad about today? What do you think the arsenal of democracy EVEN IS? What do you think the SHERMAN TANK EVEN IS? It's QUANTITY, NOT QUALITY that wins wars between near peer / equal peer adversaries. There is NO discussion here. Which is exactly why Ukraine at the moment is losing looking at Pro-Ukrainian war maps. They are running low on manpower and has little to no manufacturing capacity to speak of. You guys always said about sending Ukraine MORE ARMS. Um....what do you think "MORE" arms mean? It means QUANTITY, because Ukraine DOES NOT have enough arms. And more arms require what? More FACTORIES and INDUSTRIAL POWER. It is what it is.
Corporate America wanted globalization for increased profits and no pesky unions in China. Now we cannot defend ourselves in a war with China. Thanks Corporate America! 😂😂😂😂
I am surprised that the US shipyards building Arleigh Burke flight 3 ships haven't outsource the contracts to Korea for $600M and then pocket $1B difference........
The 1965 law referenced in the video is what’s lining the defense Contracotr CEOs’ pockets. The entire video was about how the Navy is trying to reverse the high prices and long lead times of military vessels.
Those shipyards are also in range of short and medium range Chinese missiles . Building in Asia sounds great on paper but you never position your sensitive industry within quick striking range of your future enemy. This analysis lacks any sense staretegic sense .
I am surprised that the US shipyards building Arleigh Burke flight 3 ships haven't outsource the contracts to Korea and then pocket $1B difference........
China CSSC Holdings and China Shipbuilding Industry Corp (CSIC) on Thursday detailed a plan to merge through a share swap to create the world's largest shipbuilder😮😮😮
What was the purpose of this video? Target China? Humiliating the American shipyards? Makes US shipbuilders mad? Praise Korea? Raise a concern that the US defense industry has to rely on Korea? A prelude to imposing a tariff on Korea-built ships? I got lost by watching it.
How survivable is that S. Korean destroyer tho. It bugs me how low the survivability on US warships has become. You can't have it both ways, either they're low survivability in high volume or high survivability in lower volume. Smaller fleet that can't take hits cuz they trust the defensive missile screens and ciws to handle incoming threats.
China has advantage as they can focus their whole navy in one theater where as US navy is too stretch as they have multiple places to protect can only bring limited amount of ships to china
Doesn't a navy mostly exist for posturing? In the event of a conflict, most of these ships will be easy targets for modern weaponry, first and foremost. Taiwan as an island is exposed to naval attacks, but only to a degree. Land based defense system, long range planes and missiles can be precise and efficient at a more rational cost of deployment in terms of people and funds.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." -Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th President of the United States & 5 Star General
Is the US Navy a jobs program or a defense program? If the latter, at minimum buy their ships until the US bureaucratic processes are solved to build our own at a competitive cost.
catch up to china's navy? am I seeing this right? I though china's catching up to the US all throughout my life? when did we start playing the catch up game on china?
They aren't comparing apples to apples though. Clearly China is catching up on carrier side, both from ship and training perspective. If they just want to talk firepower they should compare systems, such as number of vertical launchers and number of missiles available and production capability of all of those things.
If we look at statistics, the USA is always miles ahead of any country including China. I find these comparison videos trying to vie China and the USA very sill tbh. China has to feed 4 times the population of the USA with no allies. USA however is already an advanced economy in every department. Look at its overseas territories, military might, and several bases all over the world. Can China match it? I don't think so, even with all the ways China is trying to catch up.
there is a risk of outsourcing in korea since it is well documented that tech secrets in korea are often leaked to china, but there is little risk in Japan since unlike korea, Japan is very well known for being very wary of China and as such have lots of anti-espionage laws.
We are the most armed country in the world, and we need more weapons to protect ourselves because there are always threats against us. Arms dealers: Make America great again.
At the world’s largest shipyard, U.S. courts an ally to face up to China: on.wsj.com/4eeERfk
Slava 🇹🇼 Heroyam TAIWANese 🦾
This sounds good on paper but the asian efficiencies aren't a secret. They have the trained workforces and we don't. It's true across the construction space. High speed rail, chip faabs, etc. We offshored all the manufacturing and are now multiple generations removed from having enough institutional knowledge in our workforce. It will similarly take many years (and a lot of money) to build this capacity back up.
It is not just about the workforce. I believe the US has enough skilled labor to match the Chinese and Koreans, but the main issue is the industrial ecosystem. There are a lot components that go into shipbuilding, and it wouldn't do you much good if your skilled labor still has to import chips and other important components all the way from Taiwan, and other Asian countries.
This workforce is also really cheap because all the salaries as well as the cost of living in the country are much lower than even the cheapest US states not to speak of the East and West Coasts where the shipyards are located. Moreover, Koreans, like Japanese and Taiwanese, live in an overtime culture (until 2018 they worked 52-h weeks instead of 40-h).
There is no way the US can copy that, hence no way American shipbuilders are competitive in commercial shipbuilding, therefore not much improvement is possible in military shipbuilding as well (those are coupled)
It's not fixable might as well just burn the money, modern "Stock - Buy back" America is incapable of conducting long term industrial projects any attempt inevitably devolves into an MBA infused gift of contractors , outsourcing, downsizing etc.... see Boeing and Intel. The trend started in the 80's.
Experienced workers are rapidly approaching retirement. Apprenticeships would be a better choice than yet more BA or IT graduates.
@@corvusglaive5769 The US does make chips --- low end chips, admittedly. However, many functions do not require high end chips.
The US should and could be building those ships domestically. RoK didn’t build them at all before the 1970s and only started because of an aggressive industrialization drive. The US can re-industrialize if we can get our policy-making away from big pockets.
You dont have the manpower for it
No, you cannot. That is like South Korea saying that they can take over as the tech capital of the world away from the United States. Complete nonsense.
🎯
@@jaja3359Robots
@@dxelson Maybe in the future yeah but that wont solve the current problems
Hyundai... Hanhwa... Mitsubishi... Sumimoto... all great potential partners for the navy.
Why would they help you to take away their business?
All Owned by FOREIGN Countries 😮
@@jkselama9715 They don't have a business with the US navy anyway. So they can at least charge for consulting.
Foreign companies getting deep into military secrets??
NOT Hyundai.
Remember Baltimore Bridge collapse?
hyundai engine stop working. they are not reliable .
Here’s a novel idea: change the law 🙄
That would undermine US workers and would give South Korea to much politcal leverage over the US. The military politcal leverage game goes both ways. I build your navies I own you.
@@OGUNite I am surprised that the US shipyards haven't charged the DOD $1.6B for a new Burke class ship, then outsource the contracts to South Korea for $600M and pocket $1B difference........
@@thejeffinvadenot sure they can do that
Don't forget that DoD spending is also partley pork barrel spending.
Zut alors!! humans can do that?
How dumb could you be closing all those shipyards? 😂😂
reagan
Union labour cost.
Ask Congress who's controlled by mostly Republicans and Isolationists
You say that as if those shipyards were capable of producing functioning ships....
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Simple answer, cheap labor. You can not build efficiently here in the US because of labor unions and the government willingness to write blank checks for very little in return.
The USA seems to be waking from its complacent slumber.
An important note to make. The number of battle force ships it’s important, quite important in fact, but it does not tell the whole story. The tonnage of the US Navy is double that of China, and the number of Chinese warships that match American ones is currently only a few dozen.
This doesn’t mean China can or isn’t catching up, though. Its tonnage added per year equate to an entire French Navy, so this is still an important issue to tackle.
That was the IJN's strategy in WW2. a few big heavy capital ships. But no capacity to replace them. The 6 carriers and Yamato once sunk, was not replaced.
The tonnage lead is help up by very few 100,000 tonne aircraft carriers that are looking increasingly obsolete. China already posesses hypersonic missiles that are capable of sinking a Nimitz Class carrier.
the difference is not as significant as you think. chinese naval policy is focused on regional dominance and littoral warfare, not playing global policeman. US has significantly more tonnage, yes, but it is distributed across the globe in many places simultaneously. china has plans to enlarge to 6 aircraft carriers, and currently has 3+3 LHDs. China does not need too many vessels when they have extremely potent ASM capabilities. the issue is that US naval dominance in the pacific is being challenged... US only has 1 active CSG in the region currently, and 2 other ARGs... this force cannot match that of the chinese navy
Here are some more facts they leave out. The U.S. Navy has over 3.6 million (U.S.) tons of ships in its fleet, nearly twice the size of China’s combined fleets of just over 2 million tons.
While I believe we should probably repeal that 1965 protectionist law, (then buy frigates and Corvettes and destroyers from South Korea spending the money on outfitting them with better electronics / weapons and submarines from Sweden) this is a bit alarmist but all the facts should be known. For the record the US should be a little bit alarmed.
the whole world should be alarmed: the global standard currency for oil is the us dollar. why? not only because the us has one of the largest reserves--if not the largest, but because its military is the only one that is truly "global". what would happen if china closes the gap? this is scary for many reasons, and has consequences that trickle outside of just potential armed conflicts.
Slava TSMC 🇹🇼
We should be alarmed, but we need to understand that the range of US, Japanese, and UK ships is far superior than China's
Besides losing many of our shipyards, we have lost virtually our entire machine tool industry.
Sorry one more thing, we clearly should be heavily investing into unmanned submarine and drone technology. The mass of the water is an extra layer of armor, and in the saturated air space of a future war, having an ocean above you is highly valuable. Not having the humans on board means the ship can conserve space, energy, be a smaller target, but still get orders from command.
Seems like changing that outdated US law would be the most expedient and maybe cost effective way to get more USN ships from our Asian partners, who aren't happy about China's rise.
We already lack factories and trained people. Now offshore it so even more factories can close down?
@rickson50 yeah then just wait until china outpaced the combat ship production rate..... We will lose war in tht case
I was able to briefly see the Hyundai Shipyards in 2017, would be nice to go back and see how they are doing now. Great place with great workers.
Make SOJU 🍶 Great Again
And who cheered on that de-industrialization ?
Why, it was the WSJ!!!
😀😀😀😀😀😀😀😀
“Catch up”?
The US Navy has well over twice the tonnage, decades more experience, massive tech advantages…
That was a hopeless piece for WSJ
We are talking about industrial capacity to produce ships... not tonnage... what it means if we lag behind in military industrial capacity is that the Chinese can build, refit, and repair way faster than we can. At that point tonnage doesn’t matter since they can build literally more, faster, heavier.
Oh boy we got a NPC here guys........experience is not inherited.......there is no 'massive' technology advantage - the US navy has no defense against hypersonic missiles lol And tonnage does not matter once a a ship is hit by a salvo of Hypersonic missiles. The USS ford crew is short by 500 sailors.....no one wants to join your military 🤣🤣
@@adnausi "Tonnage doesnt matter" do you even know what tonnage means? Tonnage = ability to withstand damage, i.e not needing dry-dock repairs. The Chinese have smaller, weaker vessels that will be torn apart and sit in dry dock.
@@amunra5330 Winnie the Pooh called he says you have the day off to change your diaper
@@scparker6893 tonnage is the sizes of the ships specifically.
Change the 1965 protection law so US can buy hulls (and non-critical components) built to their specification from trusted allies. Then bring the ships to American yards and fit it out with the latest and greatest radars, sensors, and weapons. This should save costs, build up domestic industry and help with employment while at the same time cut construction time and prevent unwanted top secret tech from being copied. In the long run the US may even be able to build ships without relying on foreign yards.
Why do they never differentiate types of vessels and tonnage. Purposefully ignoring the context of littoral vs blue water, and without mentioning tonnage, you’re willfully misleading the public towards alarmist conclusions.
Well said! Well I believe that we should be a little bit alarmed the all the facts need to be put out there. For proper comparison The U.S. Navy has over 3.6 million (U.S.) tons of ships in its fleet, nearly twice the size of China’s combined fleets of just over 2 million tons.
The entire Chinese Navy is primarily active around the seas next to China. Unlike the US Navy which is spread thin globally.
Yea exactly! I keep hearing talk about ship count but nobody talks about tonnage. Who cares if the PRoC builds a bunch of tiny boats to patrol their coastline?
exactly! sounds like alarmism to let the public think we should dump more money into military again. However, we have 11 aircraft carriers whereas china only have 2 carriers. That's a significant difference already.
This should be the top comment.
Military companies look to build military strength in other countries. US military companies look to line their pockets.
I worked for a company that had government contracts for various electronic parts. They were the only US based company that made these parts so could charge outrageous prices for subpar products. Military/Medical electronic component specs was
Remember when Romney was running for president and was literally laughed at for bringing this up?
As long as they keep wanting welders with 3 years of experience minimum but keep paying entry level wages, they won't solve their personal problems.
Hyundai's plan to build US Navy warship: Make half-built empty ship (without weapons and radars) in South Korean shipyard, bring it to US shipyard and install the armaments and the rest and deliver to the US Navy. Or build multiple large blocks of ship hull in SK, bring them across Pacific Ocean with barge to US shipyard, assemble them in US, and complete the naval warship.
This sounds like a win-win solution for both sides. As I know, Taiwan is also famous for shipyard construction, if it can set up such a similar military shipyard in Taiwan, it could boost its security and reduce the cost at the same time.
We already lack factories and trained engineers. Now we offshore this causing even more factories to close down? More of that and we won't be able to make a single ship anymore. Especially during war. We'll have to hope others make our military for us
Taiwan can't build big ships. Have not for years.
China has a larger Navy than US does? Well that’s new.
US has 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carrier fleet, while China has only 3 coal-burning ac.
A few corrections:
China has 3 liquid-powered carriers, not coal. The PLAN isn't interested in patrolling shipping lanes, unlike the US Navy, hence the need for nuclear carriers.
The PLAN has also shied away from building a large fleet of carriers, given their vulnerability and large number of assets they consume - escort ships, subs and aircraft. Though, it's observed they see owning a nuclear-carrier as a way of showcasing themselves as a superpower.
China has already made the US carrier groups inert by developing vast arsenals of missiles that can keep US carriers out of aircraft range of the Chinese coast. Leaving them exposed to the growing threat of China's submarines.
Today's navy scale only proves that US had larger construction ability/ship-industry than China in 1990s. But today's construction ablility predicts the NAVY scale in the 20 years.
@@HexaSquirrel haha that’s what we make fun of the thick black smoke from chimney during sea test😬thanks for clarifying though
US and China navy won’t have a fight in the future, just deterring each other. China wants US to get out of our doorway, and US want China just stay in our backyard.
If us two strongest powers clash together, that might be the end of the world. Luckily we both have enough patience and wisdom to handle any situation.
@@kleinesbiest1264that's only from the liaoning, a Soviet era design. Just like the admiral kuznetsov. The newer carriers didn't produce black smoke.
Haha only 11? China will built maybe 4 times amount of that in near future.
The solution was mentioned early on in the video… building commercial ships and military ships at the same time.
And ofc… volume. Laying down 5-8 of the same ship side by side.
And subsides… the US gave them out for commercial shipping into the early 80s. And then stopped.
Impressive efforts to level the naval playing field, America! 🚢
These lessons revived must be learned quickly
China claims they have a larger navy that the US, but in reality, none of their vessels are blue water capable, and the reason that number is so high is that they include anything that floats. So, to say that the Chinese have a larger Navy is disingenuous.
the Type 055 DDG is larger and more capaple than the Arleigh Burke DDG and Ticonderoga CG. I assure you, they are completely blue water capable.
Korean yards can also do MRO work for existing USN ships for starters and then if they do a good job and do it cheaply the US can invite them to take over an old yard or set up a new one in the US like what the Italians have done. Such a move will mean everything is built in the USA. The US will have total oversight on construction, be able to create more jobs while better competing with China in warship numbers. The Koreans will be happy because they will have a steady stream of work from Uncle Sam.
Great infornation
Pretending like the US is somehow behind China in terms of naval strength is the greatest marketing campaign of our generation. What an incredible way to increase the budget.
Thank you. I saw this headline and thought I'd wandered into bizzarro world. The last simulations of conflict between US and China I'm aware of has the US winning any naval engagement. In worst case scenarios, we lose one Carrier. No way China matches US naval power.
It's going up regardless with the war in ukraine
@@WestOfEarth i dont know what simulations you speak of but all the ones I have read online tells of the US defeat. The US is really far from its turf and it doesn't have much bases to hold its navy ships.... unless the US wants to bring Japan and the Philippines into war which I doubt those two countries would be oblige to do so.
@@hehe-mq2bk How about we not listen to "What if's"
@@WestOfEarth The last simulations are of the CSIS in which you look at the sponsors which are from American defense contractors. OF COURSE THEY WANTED AMERICA TO WIN so they can advertise and sell their weapons. If you look at U.S GOVERNMENT naval simulations of a war between America and China, America loses nearly all of them.
Who says about China just matching US naval power, on the other hand, the largest missile program on this planet is from China. China literally has enough industrial might to fight a war with just missiles. Literally.
The US should be making its own ships.
Our trained shipyard worker wages are 3 to 5 times at least more than south Korean, not even talking about the money wasted for lobbying government and for the greedy shipyard executives. Why? We printed too much money and now everyone needs high wages to combat the increased living cost here in the US, it's a death spiral. Just for those reasons alone we will not build any ships of the same quality if not costing many folds more.
We need to pass the "Mitt Romney was right and we're really sorry for mocking him" Defense Appropriations Bill ASAP
The last thing you will see in the US army manufacturing is progress and efficiency in construction. The biggest example is US incompetence in supplying Ukraine. The lobbying makes things as slow as the congress
The US is not incompetent in supplying Ukraine lol. Where did you get that from?
U.S. supply to Ukraine is the main reason they're still an independent country at this stage. I would agree that there were avoidable delays, but those were of a political nature (see House republicans blocking aid for over 6 months).
Having repairs in Asia is the only good thing here. No successful model abroad can be replicated in the US.
But a US Arleigh Berk destroyer is MUCH more capable than the Chinese counterpart with not only more reliable systems and better training, but better damage control and safety, better weapon systems, better radar systems, better communications... It is easily worth spending 3-4x as much.
That's not necessarily true. Their newer ships all have ASEA radar like Arleigh Berk. It's debatable the effectiveness but if we're being honest, none of us know the true capability of each radar and how they work in wars.
When was the last time US fought a modern navy with similar equipment?
People always talk big game but never have facts to back it up. A lot of things are speculation like your ballpark 3-4x as much comment out of no where.
I can name a few facts that are logical. 1) Chinese carrier operation is definitely new. It takes a lot of training/practice to be successful. Even US navy often had accidents landing. So it's fair to assume Chinese training needs more work. 2) Their systems are all new for their crews, so even if we assume radar tech is same level we can assume their operational efficiency isn't as strong. So your comment about better damage control is probably a fair one.
Damage control? I guess rust control is not part of it.
Nope. Absolutely not. The most capable destroyer in the world at this moment in time by U.S and European naval analysts is the Chinese type 055 Renhai class destroyer. It is a destroyer that has the firepower of a cruiser and literally DWARFS the Arleigh Burke in terms of size(tonnage) and firepower. It is also the ONLY destroyer in the world capable of launching HYPERSONIC missiles at targets.
The Renhai class destroyer is the most LETHAL surface based NON CARRIER combatant.
@@Tau_Long_Ranged_Fire_Support that’s if you go by missile count.
It’s hard to say what is the best in real world. Even the Chinese are mass building smaller type 54 frigates. In real world battle which has never happened before (modern navies), is when we will see the performance of all the radar, missile, training, put into test.
Until then it’s all in theory for everybody. War games and training are as close to reality as we get for now
Holy Ship💀
Yeah instead of building shipyards let’s outsource the remaining! great idea WSJ! love it.
Not just shipyard. the trained engineers and workers, all the steel, parts and subsystem, i.e. whole shipbuilding industry & infrastructure. Impossible or too expensive and time consuming to revive.
@@youcantataI always hear how it’s “impossible” to re industrialize. What a looser attitude. China started with nothing but dirt! Nonsense that US cannot have industry and factories and shipyards.
The Constellation program is already in trouble because of bloated bureaucracy and corruption.
this is just a picture of how the US is terrible at spending money. the amount of money wasted on inefficient processes is insane.
Don’t inexpensive drones make it a little silly to have giant fighting boats?
21st Jeune École
A valid concern in some cramped places like Russia is finding out in the Black sea. But in a fight in the pacific these ships are never going within 200 miles of the Chinese coast and so cheap drone swarms are not going to reach them. These higher end ships are the only ones that could protect themselves and our carriers against longer ranged threats like submarines, anti ship ballistic missiles, air launched cruise missiles etc.
You need both.
So far, those inexpensive drones have not scored a single hit on our ships in the Red Sea.
No. We use our Naval ships for power projection and Naval time interception. Those drones have a very limited range and flight time. 30 minutes and possibly 1 to 5 miles only depending on the wind and return flight back.
Naval vessels in comparison can be out at sea for 6 months at a time and can have nearly an unlimited range. You can't do that with current drone technology. You can leave drones out as mines or for surveillance but it doesn't compare to a Naval warship.
The ships are used to enforce international trade laws and to protect assets from piracy. If you removed warships, then your own trade vessels can be subject to piracy.
While the US owns 11 carriers and China only got 3, this video literally says “Catch up to China’s Navy” lol.
One thing US should do is to undo the privatization of ship yards. Those 13 ship yards used to be government ship yards during the cold war. Make the government owned again, remove profit motive. Start going back to building ships like US used to do in the 80s. Sure, the wages are not competive with Asian countries, but that's not the main reason US ship cost more to build, it's the ever increasing need to be more profitable year over year after privatization.
Given how easily angered American tax payers are. The military will have a hard time justifying increasing costs given how many Americans want more funds directed elsewhere like healthcare and education
Imagine US Navy had the technological advantage like able to sink 3 to 4 Chinese warships before loosing 1, but in the long term one thing you need to remember that China's shipbuilding capacity is 231 times larger than the US.
China always playing the long game while the US always busy seeking for voters for the next term in every 4 years.
The ratio you put up here is mere speculation that came out of arrogance.
And that won't win the war.
China will bury the USA in a direct full scale war and that's a fact well known around the world.
Sorry, the U.S. Navy has long had no technical advantage. The answer can be obtained by comparing the radar and missile data of both sides. Now the United States is eating the stock advantage at the end of the Cold War. This advantage can be sustained until 2030 at most.😅
From the humble beginning's of rebuilding toyota water pumps to when south korea needed engines for a start up car company when asked do you build engines saying yes we do preceding into a building showing them a engine the size of a house they got the contract ! Being a republic like the U.S Hyundai Heavy Industries Chung -shu-yun A National treasure built the company into what is considered by many to be the best in the world you can easily see why it garners heavy U.S. Interest !.
Just like Trump tariffs will only move manufacturing into countries like Vietnam/India/Mexico, not back to America. US expensive yet under productive workforce will force US to move more navy contracts to Korea or Japan.
I don't think relying on other country to build our warship is good for national security, not to mention that it is just sad.
4:30
Is the idea is what when a US ship is damaged in the SCS during a conflict in China, they’ll sail it up to Korea to get it repaired.
How does that make any sense? You’re moving a damaged ship from within Chinese missile range to a facility that’s even closer to Chinese missiles 😅
well not to mention Russian and North Korean missiles too....
The USA's battle in the China sea is lost before it has begun. The more time passes by the more pronounced that reality becomes
Thats not the only problem the U.S faces. Whats the point of building more war ships if there is not enough new sailors recruited to operate them. Navy will have to increase recruitment. Make college more expensive.
Korea doesn't have to deal with unions and an incompetent congress.
Korea has unions and they have a much more orderly congress and executive
This is also reason why we need to defend global democracies (I know S. Korea was a dictatorship at first but it had the seeds of the transition to democracy), because if we didn't defend them back in the 50's then we wouldn't have their help now. Same goes for Ukraine, if we don't help defend Ukraine now then we won't have them as allies in the future.
The world's largest shipyard is China Shipbuilding Corporation. Placing the construction of important assets on the front lines of war like in South Korea is a huge mistake. Very susceptible to fatal blows.
Philippines should start building it's own Navy. Instead buying from other countries. The threat of china in WPS is aggressive.
We don’t have the industry for it.
Most of our economy is directed towards education followed by public works.
It's that when anything computer science or AI would pay easily over $100000, and with many sources of revenue generating platforms these days such as UA-cam, manufacturing in general seems it fell out of favor. It's almost impossible for US ship building to be as competitive as one in China. Let our allies build the ship for now so we can stay in the lead in the future
What China calls ships the rest of the world calls sloops. They are padding their numbers with them. If you want real numbers, look at displaced tonnage. Completely different ball game.
How is letting our ally country(still a foreign country) build our frigate, not our national security, but importing civilian cars from China?
US Shipyards: Demand highest price and salary first. But repeated delays, and resulted failed warships.
Asian Shipyards: Accept lower price and salary. But produced faster than scheduled, and good warships.
I have seen japanese Sumitomo install scaffolding on a main mast in under 2 hours. Yet seen it take almost a week on the same ship in the US.
What do you mean “catch up”? USN is still #1 on earth
Made in China ships. Quality (US Ships) over Quantity (CN)
Wrong !
Nope. That's why America loses wars. In a war between two near peer or equal peer adversaries, it ALWAYS ends in a slug fest. It always does. From World War 1 - World War 2 to Ukraine.
How can you say quality is better when America literally uses the QUANTITY military strategy that helped them win World War 2, - the same strategy that America talks bad about today? What do you think the arsenal of democracy EVEN IS? What do you think the SHERMAN TANK EVEN IS? It's QUANTITY, NOT QUALITY that wins wars between near peer / equal peer adversaries. There is NO discussion here.
Which is exactly why Ukraine at the moment is losing looking at Pro-Ukrainian war maps. They are running low on manpower and has little to no manufacturing capacity to speak of. You guys always said about sending Ukraine MORE ARMS. Um....what do you think "MORE" arms mean? It means QUANTITY, because Ukraine DOES NOT have enough arms. And more arms require what? More FACTORIES and INDUSTRIAL POWER. It is what it is.
we won WW2 on the idea of quantity over quantity, especially in terms of ships.
Since the end of the Cold War, Congress is always never give little appropriate fundings for ship building and maintenance.
Regan nailed it
China far ahead of this race, nothing surprise. With unlimited resources what can we expect.
just shows you how our divisive politics are distracting us from these real issues
China has a lot of ships, but their ships are small and run on imported oil. They have very limited range and pose limited threat to anyone.
Corporate America wanted globalization for increased profits and no pesky unions in China. Now we cannot defend ourselves in a war with China. Thanks Corporate America! 😂😂😂😂
The chinese are laughing so loud I can't sleep.
Outsourcing military shipbuilding now? Is America really a "Superpower"?
and here we go entering another arms race!
You mean how the Navy is helping the shipyard's CEO catch up with other billionaires.
They made billions when they outsourced our jobs now they are going to make billions more in gov handouts to bring the jobs back
I am surprised that the US shipyards building Arleigh Burke flight 3 ships haven't outsource the contracts to Korea for $600M and then pocket $1B difference........
Cause they legally can't?@@thejeffinvade
The 1965 law referenced in the video is what’s lining the defense Contracotr CEOs’ pockets. The entire video was about how the Navy is trying to reverse the high prices and long lead times of military vessels.
@@benedict6897 Because the military industrial complex has enough power to pass new legitimation in their favor.
Those shipyards are also in range of short and medium range Chinese missiles . Building in Asia sounds great on paper but you never position your sensitive industry within quick striking range of your future enemy. This analysis lacks any sense staretegic sense .
Surprised there was no mention of the Jones Act which contributed to the decline of US ship building.
I am surprised that the US shipyards building Arleigh Burke flight 3 ships haven't outsource the contracts to Korea and then pocket $1B difference........
all i can see from this is us navy is calling for more money.
Wait wait, catch up? But I thought the US Navy was the best in the world!
Look at 1949 China's Navy. How did they "catch up".
Is that supposed to mean something?
China CSSC Holdings and China Shipbuilding Industry Corp (CSIC) on Thursday detailed a plan to merge through a share swap to create the world's largest shipbuilder😮😮😮
Never thought I’d see the day when our advantage was at stake.
What was the purpose of this video? Target China? Humiliating the American shipyards? Makes US shipbuilders mad? Praise Korea? Raise a concern that the US defense industry has to rely on Korea? A prelude to imposing a tariff on Korea-built ships? I got lost by watching it.
fear mongering
why are we moving towards another world war. pathetic. small egos
How survivable is that S. Korean destroyer tho. It bugs me how low the survivability on US warships has become. You can't have it both ways, either they're low survivability in high volume or high survivability in lower volume. Smaller fleet that can't take hits cuz they trust the defensive missile screens and ciws to handle incoming threats.
China has advantage as they can focus their whole navy in one theater where as US navy is too stretch as they have multiple places to protect can only bring limited amount of ships to china
I dunno man... after seeing the Ukraine war
Steel Grade is Important!
Design to Implementation do have the Modular Integration for the Final Assembly.
Doesn't a navy mostly exist for posturing? In the event of a conflict, most of these ships will be easy targets for modern weaponry, first and foremost.
Taiwan as an island is exposed to naval attacks, but only to a degree. Land based defense system, long range planes and missiles can be precise and efficient at a more rational cost of deployment in terms of people and funds.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."
-Dwight D. Eisenhower, 34th President of the United States & 5 Star General
Start using tube and fitting scaffolding. 👍
I bet they won’t use these naval ships! Ultimately sailing the sea aimlessly
Is the US Navy a jobs program or a defense program? If the latter, at minimum buy their ships until the US bureaucratic processes are solved to build our own at a competitive cost.
You think Korean will not hold back and 100% support us and annoy china?
catch up to china's navy? am I seeing this right?
I though china's catching up to the US all throughout my life? when did we start playing the catch up game on china?
If you watched the video you would have seen that the tip over year was 2015.
They aren't comparing apples to apples though. Clearly China is catching up on carrier side, both from ship and training perspective.
If they just want to talk firepower they should compare systems, such as number of vertical launchers and number of missiles available and production capability of all of those things.
If you measure by water displacement the US navy is much larger. Also nuclear carriers a generation ahead of China
If we look at statistics, the USA is always miles ahead of any country including China. I find these comparison videos trying to vie China and the USA very sill tbh. China has to feed 4 times the population of the USA with no allies. USA however is already an advanced economy in every department. Look at its overseas territories, military might, and several bases all over the world. Can China match it? I don't think so, even with all the ways China is trying to catch up.
Turn off the TV, bro. It's fried your brain
So basically saying U.S is not on the top any more
Outsoucing to South Korea and Japan is also risky.
there is a risk of outsourcing in korea since it is well documented that tech secrets in korea are often leaked to china, but there is little risk in Japan since unlike korea, Japan is very well known for being very wary of China and as such have lots of anti-espionage laws.
The fundamental issue is why USA want to be the only superpower in this world and can’t tolerate the other superpower at the same time 😂😅
We are the most armed country in the world, and we need more weapons to protect ourselves because there are always threats against us. Arms dealers: Make America great again.
That explanations and reasons presented by The Wall Street journal channel are incorrect concerning ships.