[HN Gopher] U.S. seeks to revive idled shipyards with help of Ja...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       U.S. seeks to revive idled shipyards with help of Japan, South
       Korea
        
       Author : mikhael
       Score  : 71 points
       Date   : 2024-03-03 18:32 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (asia.nikkei.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (asia.nikkei.com)
        
       | JacobDotVI wrote:
       | Are there any startups working on disrupting US Shipbuilding?
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | There should be. This is going to be a huge need.
         | 
         | Autonomous ships will probably also be a big thing.
        
           | Waterluvian wrote:
           | Like trains, autonomous ships fundamentally doesn't seem to
           | make any sense. What's the upside? Having a crew of 19
           | instead of 22?
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | Container ships already have tiny crews relative to the
             | amount of goods they transport. The systems are already
             | highly automated and you need some level of crew anyway for
             | unexpected events, maintenance, etc. The idea that
             | "automation" is this magical thing when the labor component
             | is already pretty small is just silly.
        
             | cesarb wrote:
             | > Like trains, autonomous ships fundamentally doesn't seem
             | to make any sense.
             | 
             | Autonomous trains already exist, see https://en.wikipedia.o
             | rg/wiki/List_of_driverless_train_syste... for a long list
             | of places where it's been implemented. The related article
             | at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_train_operation#
             | Adva... has a list with six advantages of autonomous
             | trains. Many of these advantages would probably also apply
             | to autonomous ships (and other kinds of vehicles).
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | In spite of the intro, those seem to pretty much be all
               | people-mover/metro systems. They're not long distance
               | transport in potentially unpredictable conditions.
        
             | pfisch wrote:
             | cheap suicide drone ships full of explosives...
        
               | Waterluvian wrote:
               | Okay if we're talking boats, not ships, a ton of things
               | change.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | Fully autonomous ships are pointless. But automation
             | improvements across the US fleet while retaining
             | reliability are a significant factor behind America's
             | dominance of the seas.
        
           | oneplane wrote:
           | Already a thing (mostly remote controlled drone ships). But
           | you'll always need mitigating controls for unexpected or low
           | frequency events, and it's not always feasible to fly in a
           | crew at which point the crew needs to be on board. This
           | effectively is the same as the crew that's already there
           | right now, so it doesn't actually impact all that much.
           | 
           | The biggest benefit of remote, drone or automated piloting is
           | the way you could make better use of a person's time, and
           | maybe save a tiny amount of wages, but it's mostly the
           | resulting functionality/features/business processes that is
           | the benefit, not the headcount cost.
        
         | CHB0403085482 wrote:
         | The problem is a skilled labor force for shipbuilding ie. too
         | few of them.
        
           | toomuchtodo wrote:
           | Also union skilled workers who aren't going to tolerate "hire
           | fast, fire fast, fail fast."
        
             | astrange wrote:
             | Workers are unionized in a lot of overseas industries that
             | are more productive than the US. Don't know about Korea but
             | they are in Japan and certainly in Europe. Part of it is
             | have better union structures than we do; sectoral
             | bargaining means any employers and unions spend less time
             | fighting each other.
             | 
             | A big problem for US shipbuilding is the Jones Act, which
             | is so protectionist it's easier for the industry to flee
             | the country entirely than deal with it. It's really harmful
             | to our overseas areas like Hawaii and PR too.
        
               | toomuchtodo wrote:
               | My point was that you will not solve this with a startup,
               | because of how a startup must operate due to its inherent
               | nature. You must operate this as a long term, sustainable
               | operation (perhaps a public private partnership), like
               | you would build a nuclear reactor over years or a decade.
               | To not do this is to ignore the muscle memory needed to
               | retain the core component: teams of skilled labor with
               | options.
               | 
               | Boeing is learning this the hard way currently, for
               | example, and is in talks to buy the subcontractor (Spirit
               | AeroSystems) it spun out:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39571819
        
             | lmm wrote:
             | They'll tolerate it if appropriately compensated, e.g. if
             | you structured the venture as a workers' cooperative where
             | they share the upside as well as the downside.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | Unions in the United States are entrenched with a
               | particular government-backed structure that puts the
               | high-ups far from the working guys... they're not all
               | necessarily leftist or willing to accept models other
               | than management-and-bargaining.
        
       | baggy_trough wrote:
       | The US is too weighed down by legal and regulatory barnacles for
       | this to have a chance.
        
         | deycallmeajay wrote:
         | Which regulations?
        
           | explaininjs wrote:
           | Environmental ones, perhaps?
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=335yX5kj7is
        
             | speedylight wrote:
             | Environmental laws are necessary to make sure we're not
             | poisoning ourselves or the planet.
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | Environmental, labour, safety and energy are the usual 4
           | horsemen that I have seen. Just listing a random point from
           | my collection of squeaky-wheel arguments on the topic:
           | 
           | * I frankly don't know how to make it a persuasive message,
           | but my experience in English speaking countries is that it is
           | generally illegal to make mistakes or skimp on quality. That
           | means it is impossible for industries to learn how to do new
           | things. Look at the treatment of Boeing after 2 airplane
           | crashes for example and ask what that would mean for a new
           | company attempting to learn how to operate in the space. With
           | no room to fail, it is a challenge for new companies to
           | succeed. There were even calls to nationalise them which is
           | ... not likely but also not comforting as an investor. It is
           | darn risky to put money into manufacturing spaces with
           | attitudes like that, it is safer to go with cat picture
           | delivery platforms.
           | 
           | * The US has particulate air pollution that is half of South
           | Korea's and a quarter of China. It is a pretty reasonable
           | guess that air pollution would be mostly industrial
           | production that the US would shut down for environmental
           | concerns.
           | 
           | * US labour laws are an impediment. That new fab plant that
           | TSMC was trying to build in the US seemed to be falling over
           | because it was illegal to use skilled, experienced labour.
           | 
           | * The US is seeing declines in per-capita energy availability
           | and flat actual production. That is almost certainly a policy
           | choice linked to anti-fossil-fuel ideologies, Asia has been
           | seeing seeing crazy growth. It is hard to do energy-intensive
           | activities like manufacturing in an environment where
           | securing energy is a battle.
           | 
           | There have been something like 50 years of anti-industrial
           | policy in the west. A lot of the capital was built in
           | China/Asia. It should be a literal embarrassment that we're
           | being outdone at capitalism by nominal communists and
           | legitimate authoritarians.
        
           | astrange wrote:
           | Outdated protectionism like the Jones Act.
           | 
           | https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/jones-
           | act-...
        
             | anonymous-panda wrote:
             | For all the faults of the Jones Act, I don't think that
             | explains the challenges of US ship building. If anything,
             | it keeps US ship building efforts alive when foreign ships
             | would have killed it.
        
         | fyrn_ wrote:
         | Considering the existing precedence with Italy and Australia
         | (both of which build us navy ships), I doubt it
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | Australia's manufacturing capacity is rather unimpressive and
           | the Adelaide military fabrication is a serious effort but at
           | least partially a jobs program. We are not the place to look
           | if you want to try to challenge China's manufacturing
           | prowess.
        
       | amou234 wrote:
       | In a separate but combined effort, Europe is seeking to revive
       | its artillery shell industry. the production capacity for
       | artillery shells in Europe went up 40% since start of war, and
       | wants to reach 1.4 million round by end of 2024. However, EU can
       | only supply half of promised shells to Ukraine by March. Right
       | now EU is having gunpowder shortages. The gunpowder is made from
       | specific cotton which mostly comes from China. "Would you know
       | it, deliveries of this cotton from China stopped as if by chance
       | a few months ago," Breton added [1].
       | 
       | Luckily, recently Czech Republic helped to find hundred and
       | thousands of shells for Ukraine recently [2]. Otherwise, because
       | of the republican stalling in congress, Ukraine was only firing
       | 4000 to 7000 artillery shells per day, while Russia was launching
       | 20,000 shells daily [3]. Also very coincidental, Russia has
       | started using 122-mm artillery shells that have similarities to
       | Chinese-made shells [4].
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/03/02/world/politics/...
       | 
       | [2] https://news.yahoo.com/czech-republic-found-hundreds-
       | thousan...
       | 
       | [3] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-nato-
       | artillery...
       | 
       | [4] https://mil.in.ua/en/news/russia-has-started-using-122-mm-
       | ar....
        
         | sbierwagen wrote:
         | Fun historical fact, at the height of WW1, Germany was
         | producing 12 million shells a _month._ Just in the preliminary
         | bombardment at the Battle of the Somme the British fired 1.5
         | million shells. And now we 're scrambling just to achieve one
         | percent of the production we had a century ago.
         | 
         | All that industrial base is long gone, of course. Contrary to
         | complaints about war profiteering, artillery shell production
         | is not a terribly attractive business. The equipment can't
         | easily be repurposed, it's not terribly sophisticated so the
         | technological barriers to entry are low, you have one single
         | customer, and the faster and better you provide your product
         | the quicker the war ends and you go out of business. It's like
         | combining the low margins and drudgery of running a factory
         | that stamps out spoons, but with the added risk the spoons
         | might obliterate the plant if a single worker makes a mistake.
        
           | amou234 wrote:
           | I wonder if it's fair to call the hodgepodge of localized
           | conflicts WW3 now? It's clear one alliance - Ukraine, Europe,
           | US, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Australia,
           | Canada, Israel (recently aligned with Ukraine) - is fighting
           | another alliance - Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Hamas,
           | Houthi. With countries supplying technology, money, military
           | stockpiles, and in some ways, foot on the ground. With India
           | trying to play both sides, via purchasing Russian oil, but
           | involved in Aukus.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-03-03 23:00 UTC)