Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Based on 1996, if you are reading the USGS page. They have not updated the wording on this page since then. That's why they link PDF with the updated information instead.
High grade gallium is produced from refining low grade. China produces both, with more than 80% of the world's low grade supply coming from China. The main drivers for these consumption are lighting, TVs, LED screens, smartphones, wifi routers, and network base stations.
In China you can buy GaN RF amps commercially. This is useful for prototyping devices.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
You are correct however the PDF is more detailed and states only 39% of US imports are from China prior to 2018. And we do not know the trends post. Farther more there is also Gallium salvage now emerging.
Resource mining can change as time progresses remember in 1996 the US was the globes largest LNG importer now its almost an exporter.
Of course all of this is far off topic for a thread dedicated to Littoral combat ships not economics.
Resource mining can change as time progresses remember in 1996 the US was the globes largest LNG importer now its almost an exporter.
Of course all of this is far off topic for a thread dedicated to Littoral combat ships not economics.
You are not going to expect Gallium shortages in the US and there is no trade threat in this but if less Gallium are imported to the US, the prices will rise. Actually my point is showing that China's GaAs and GaN industries are helping to power China with a new generation of radars, and these may already started to be equipped. If they are selling GaN SSPAs in the open market, that means universities and institutions are buying them for prototyping, and students are making their own home made radar modules and arrays to pass their course. There is going to be an intensifying of students taking engineering courses in China.
To give LCS a GaN touch, they will be the first USN ships to have GaN radar starting with the next block of Freedom class ships from LCS 17, in the form of the Cassidian TRS-4D radar from Germany, also used on the F125 frigates.
Brumby
Major
Semi conductor business is capex intensive and value is driven through economies of scale. Over time the business model is structured in the form of a value chain collectively known as the “Global Supply Value Chain”. As such your argument that China being a major producer of the raw material is entirely irrelevant because each sector in the chain is maximising value within its own operating environment. The final end product whether in the form of device or chip is subject to market demand and supply pricing mechanism. In other words, end product pricing in China has no direct relationship to its being a major supply of raw materials. Competitive advantage in cost is derived from cost structure and economies of scale.
While China might be a big consumer of semiconductor, its contribution in the value chain is significantly under represented. This is one of the main driver behind China 2025.
According to two different sources :
A picture of the Global Supply Value Chain.
The advantage in generating value within the chain and by default cost competitiveness rest with the US and others as represented by their dominance in several key sectors in the value chain
China is solely represented by HilSilicon in the above ranking.
Competitiveness through innovation in the semiconductor business is via R & D and there is no Chinese company in the top ranking.
In summary your argument about economies of scale and dominance by China are not reflected by actual facts on the ground.
Jura The idiot
General
funny this thread has recently become a place for US x China bickering, actually it's ironic considering the USN LCSs are trash that benefits the interest groups which churn them out, and the USN LCSs are trash that cripples the USN surface forces
Friday at 6:14 AM
Friday at 6:14 AM
Brumby
Major
Based on the above data there is a 3.65 X factor between the two.
If I take the Diplomat article on the Type 054A labor cost it works out to about $23.4/hour.
A destroyer requires approximately 4.2 million labor hours.
If I apply the base of $23.4/hr X 2.65 (differential) against 4.2 million hours, relative cost increment is approximately $260 million. Please explain to me how do you account for the Billions in difference.
I can give you two plausible explanation rather than labor costs being the key driver.
Firstly, adopting commercial standards vs military specs accounts for doubling of cost as evident by cost differential between Europe and the US. However survivability is an issue that generally is ignore until you have a collision problem. I would claim that Chinese standards are closer to the European approach than the US in terms of survivability
Secondly, the main driver in cost trend in naval ship is in the ever improvement in capabilities driven by systems and weapons. A Type 052D is not a Burke in capability and that is reflected in the building cost between the two. You get what you pay for.
Brumby
Major
US Navy eyes additional combat power for the Littoral Combat Ships
Note the content about a 8 cell or single cell bolt on consideration in the works. Having seen the USN slow walk approach to the LCS program, I have my doubts until I actually see a program of record. I am doing a "Jura" on this.
Note the content about a 8 cell or single cell bolt on consideration in the works. Having seen the USN slow walk approach to the LCS program, I have my doubts until I actually see a program of record. I am doing a "Jura" on this.
Jura The idiot
General
16 minutes ago
it's a success for The People's Liberation Army Navy
and in a separate post I'll tell you whose success the LCS Project is:
it's a success for The People's Liberation Army Navy