Doris Miller moved to 2034.My tally for US carrier count. Very vibes based
(maybe in 10-15 years we will achieve AGI and scarcity no longer an issue and unlimited carriers)
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Fair, but we have the Trump Thread to shitpost in... New people or even decently old but uninformed(like me) come here and it really isnt ideal.
Picture of Enterprise btw, Jan 2026
"every accusation is an admission" time
Remember after Operation SpiderWeb the Americans were clamoring that Chinese cargo ships shouldn't dock?
To go with these shipbuilding related posts, I found this interesting report from Boston Consulting group. Specifically, this image below:
The above statistics are very interesting and not what I would have expected. The US doesn't have drydock disadvantage (in terms of drydocks) against Korea or Japan, nor does it have a labour force or revenue disadvantage. Yet it has virtually has no commercial shipbuilding and its Naval output is struggling to expand.
To go with these shipbuilding related posts, I found this interesting report from Boston Consulting group. Specifically, this image below:
The above statistics are very interesting and not what I would have expected. The US doesn't have drydock disadvantage (in terms of drydocks) against Korea or Japan, nor does it have a labour force or revenue disadvantage. Yet it has virtually has no commercial shipbuilding and its Naval output is struggling to expand.
It throws together a bunch of stuff that is largely irrelevant to the shipbuilding capability, though. Like, what does it matter how many km of deep water coastlines do you have for the matter of shipbuilding capabilities?. Also it, like the deep water ports is a "duh!" moment because that should be obvious considering the US have more coastlines than Korea and China and while still less than Japan, they are limited by the smaller size of the islands in general.
Also it doesn't make it clear what are the criterias they are using to count the drydocks viable for this kind of shipbuilding capabilities while also doing the usual cope "we can now because we totally did it in WW2 and the Cold War" completely ignoring the fact that most of the work was done in state owned yards that no longer exist. Also no mention on improving the benefits of dockyard workers which one of the main issues affecting them, because working in McDonalds pays more and has more benefits than working at a shipyard and has less risk.
Last edited:
lcloo
Major
IMO these are largely ambiguous figures.To go with these shipbuilding related posts, I found this interesting report from Boston Consulting group. Specifically, this image below:
The above statistics are very interesting and not what I would have expected. The US doesn't have drydock disadvantage (in terms of drydocks) against Korea or Japan, nor does it have a labour force or revenue disadvantage. Yet it has virtually has no commercial shipbuilding and its Naval output is struggling to expand.
1. Revenue - US ship building revenues would likely be from expensive aircraft carriers, nuclear power submarines etc while figures for Japan China and Korea are likely publicly available figures for commercial ships. Meaning less ships and small tonnages built in USA compare to others despite the cost per ship, example more than US$12 billion for only one 100,000 tons aircraft carrier, there is huge disparity between revenue earned and number/tonnages of ships built.
2. Workforce - what kind of skill levels and how much robotics are employed instead of human workers?
3. Dry docks - sizes, different capabilities and areas must be clearly stated.
4. Deepwater ports - more relevant to import/export than ship building capabilities.
5. Deepwater coastlines - irrelevant.
6. Industrial waterfront - SIze could be useful but shipbuilding infrastructure on the property is more relevant.