usatoday24
The United States has been lagging behind in a field that previously dominated with iron fist. Its Marina fleet (sub) has been reduced to the same time as its budget. While China, Russia or even North Korea have been developing A new type of “war” Under the sea giving special importance to the “nuclear” theme in the UUV, Washington was still paralyzed. He Arctic case It is another perfect example. Perhaps for this reason, the approach has turned radically: Japan.
Japan as an example. Before the growing Maritime Power of China And the difficulties facing the naval industry of the United States, Congress is evaluating the possibility of Adopt the Japanese model of constant production of submarines. Unlike the American system, where the amount of built vessels varies annually according to the budget, Japan (next to South Korea) has maintained for decades a production rate of A submarine per yearan approach that has provided stability to its naval industry and cost efficiency.
The Naval Congress Specialist, Ronald O’Rourke, presented this model at a hearing of the Subcommittee for the Projection of Forces and Maritime Power of the House of Representatives, arguing that the Japanese strategy allows to maintain an constant acquisition rate Without affecting the total size of the fleet. Instead of increasing production, Japan manages the number of submarines in service through the extension of its useful life.
The success of the Japanese model. To understand the formula we must go back in time. For decades, Japan has followed this strategy for protect your maritime interestsespecially in the soybeans, Tsugu and Tsushima, key routes where Russian and Chinese ships travel. Initially, its fleet consisted of 16 operational submarines and two training, but in 2010 it extended its objective to 22 submarines without increasing productionsimply prolonging your service time from 16 to 22 years.
There is another key: the Japanese system allows Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries alternate the manufacture of submarineswhich avoids fluctuations in the workload of the shipyards and guarantees the maintenance of a highly specialized workforce. This strategy has caused the Japanese naval industry to be efficient, competitive and adaptable to changes in defense needs without generating extra costs or logistic problems.
In front of the US decline. On the other sidewalk we have Washington. While Japan maintains its stability in naval production, the United States Navy faces A worrying scenario. The construction of your ships has become increasingly expensive and slowand the data corroborates it, since the total cost of the 46 ships currently under construction was tripled in a single year, from 3.4 billion to 10.4 billion dollars.
But there is more. The aircraft carriers, which used to take 8 years to build, now They require 11 years. Here, China is advancing on the right too, As we explain. The attack submarines, whose construction took six years in the 2000s, now take nine. Even the Navy faces the shortage of personnel, both in the shipyards and in the crews, which further aggravates delays.
All challenges that make the option of adopting the Japanese approach or that of South Korea, two of the world’s largest naval builders, win traction in Washington, especially when the number of US attack submarines is on the way to decrease in the coming yearswhich could affect the balance of power in the Pacific.
Japan as a strategic complement. All this leads us to the proposal of Congress. In addition, the strengthening of the Japanese underwater fleet not only reinforces Tokyo’s defense, but also benefits the United States By having a better prepared ally in the region. O’Rourke pointed out that if Japan decided to expand its fleet to 30 submarines, it could do it maintaining its current production rate and extending the useful life of their vessels at 30 years.
The recent delivery of RAIGEI Submarineof the Taigei class, by Kawasaki Heavy Industries to the Japan Ministry of Defense, it is a sample of the efficiency of the system we are talking about. Mitsubishi did the same with him Jingei submarinereflecting a constant production scheme that contrasts with the problems of the American naval industry.
The challenge in an uncertain political context. While the Japanese model offers clear solutions, its implementation in the United States is not so simple. The main reason? The American system depends on annual budget negotiationswhat generates fluctuations in naval production and hinders long -term planning. In addition, political and economic uncertainty, including possible commercial restrictions and Threat of new tariffs On the part of the Trump administration, they could further complicate any attempt to stabilize the industry.
Thus, the things already measure that competition with China in the maritime field intensifies, the US Congress is forced to reconsider its naval construction strategy. Adopting the Japanese model could represent a viable solution to improve efficiency, reduce costs and ensure that the Navy keeps its position on the global stage. A complicated equation that would require deep structural changes In the way in which the country finances and manages its industry, a challenge that is yet to be resolved.
Image | Tom Dennison
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings