Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

States Try to Share Ship-Building Business
Fox News ^ | May 11, 2005 | Unknown

Posted on 05/10/2005 11:52:43 PM PDT by CrawDaddyCA

WASHINGTON — The powerful DDX Destroyer is nicknamed the "stealth" warship for its design that has several flat surfaces above the water to make it more difficult for the enemy to detect. The Navy wants to buy one DDX per year, paying about $3 billion per ship, but the place where the ships will be built is a point of disagreement between the Pentagon and Capitol Hill.

The Pentagon wants the two shipyards that build the Navy's destroyers to compete, meaning only one would get the whole DDX contract.

The two sites are Ingalls Shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., run by Northrop Grumman and Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine, run by General Dynamics.

Defense analysts say the Pentagon has calculated that it's too costly to have both sites building the DDX, especially considering that only one warship will be built each year. Plus, they argue, the Navy has pared down its other surface ship construction to one shipyard.

"One shipyard to build aircraft carriers, one shipyard to build amphibious assault, one shipyard to build amphibious attack, and so I think the theory is there is very low production rate of only one ship a year, [and] it makes sense to narrow it down to just one shipyard," said John Pike, director of Globalsecurity.org.

But closing one of the shipyards means a financial hit to one of the states and constituents out of work. That drew the attention of some lawmakers who have nixed, for now, the Pentagon's idea of one yard to build the DDX.

Republican senators from Maine and Mississippi want one shipyard to build a DDX one year and the other shipyard to build the warship the next year.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; US: Maine; US: Mississippi
KEYWORDS: bathironworks; ddx; generaldynamics; maine; mississippi; norfolk; northropgrumman; pascagoula; shipbuilding; usnavy
"One shipyard to build aircraft carriers, one shipyard to build amphibious assault, one shipyard to build amphibious attack, and so I think the theory is there is very low production rate of only one ship a year, [and] it makes sense to narrow it down to just one shipyard," said John Pike, director of Globalsecurity.org.

This guy is smoking crack, the one shipyard proposal will bite us in the ass in the upcoming war with China.

1 posted on 05/10/2005 11:52:44 PM PDT by CrawDaddyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CrawDaddyCA

Since it takes more than a year to build one, why not start one in one yard this year, and the next in another yard next year and spread the money and the expertise around?


2 posted on 05/11/2005 12:02:32 AM PDT by konaice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: konaice
You're making way too much sense...stop that at once!!
3 posted on 05/11/2005 12:11:47 AM PDT by CrawDaddyCA (There is no such thing as a fair fight. Thou shall win at all costs!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CrawDaddyCA
Ingalls Shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss

Trent Lott (R-Miss) may want to reconsider his statement on the Tony Snow show on May 10th.

From: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1400272/posts

Lott also stated that he won't accept criticism from Republicans for working with Democratic senators because "they're the same ones who threw me overboard. I'm free. I don't have to work with them anymore."

4 posted on 05/11/2005 12:12:57 AM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJL
I'm free. I don't have to work with them anymore."

He called negotiating away all that we held dear to be working with us. I can still see him grovelling to the Black Caucus trying to save his job. Even they gave him the Nero thumbs down. Now he is mad at the Republicans.

5 posted on 05/11/2005 12:54:12 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not everything that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CrawDaddyCA

Aren't the DDX's the ships that will be retrofitted with the railguns the Navy is developing?


6 posted on 05/11/2005 1:32:02 AM PDT by Crazieman (If Con is the opposite of Pro, what is the opposite of Progress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crazieman

The 90 + mile range rail guns? I think so, but not sure. Will look into it further...


7 posted on 05/11/2005 2:22:42 AM PDT by CrawDaddyCA (There is no such thing as a fair fight. Thou shall win at all costs!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CrawDaddyCA

The DDX is a waste of money. We would be better off building more DDG-51s and let the contractors design them for reduced crews, than the X. Plus, that keeps both yards going.

The DDX will turn out to be way over cost and delivered late. It will be a disaster for the Navy and keep Congressional Committees happy for years, investigating it.


8 posted on 05/11/2005 3:48:24 AM PDT by KeyWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyWest

How do you know all of this information?


9 posted on 05/11/2005 4:59:27 AM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: em2vn

Was in the Navy and worked in new construction during my career.


10 posted on 05/11/2005 6:34:34 AM PDT by KeyWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson