Go to Mobile, Alabama and count them
'
Posted on 12/23/2010 10:43:05 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
WA company to build US navy warships
By David Weber
Updated Thu Dec 23, 2010
United States president Barack Obama has signed off on a deal for a West Australian company to build 10 warships for the US navy.
Austal will construct the warships at its yard in Alabama in a contract worth more than $4 billion.
The Perth-based company has designed a 127-metre multi-purpose vessel called the Littoral Combat ship.
Austal chief operating officer Andrew Bellamy says the aluminium trimaran has been developed for action close to shore where larger ships cannot operate effectively.
"Effectively it was invented in Western Australia by guys in our design and R&D groups and that technology, to have that adopted by the US navy, is the biggest tick in the box that you could ever get and something that we're really proud of," he said.
He says the trimaran can be equipped for multiple applications.
"It's got a very large hangar space and in that hangar space there's a place where you put mission modules," he said.
"You basically install a module specific for the task that the ship is undertaking at the time, which could be mine sweeping, humanitarian relief, anti-submarine warfare.
"It's a customisable product that allows the navy basically to be able to do two or three jobs with one ship instead of two or three specialist ships."
The original order for 20 warships was split and Lockheed Martin will build the other ten.
The deal needed US government approval and a bill, which was passed by the Senate, was then signed by Mr Obama.
The ships will have to be built in the US but the order is a massive boost for Austal, which has faced some challenges.
Earlier this year, the company closed its yard in Tasmania but Mr Bellamy says the company is now forging ahead.
"We've had a pretty reasonable run in a tough environment," he said.
"Right now our Australian business is facing up to difficult times with a very strong Australian dollar, which obviously impacts our competitiveness in international markets."
The contract is expected to be officially offered to Austal next week.
First, there's:
This translates into how many American jobs???????????
When the article clearly states that "the ships will have to be built in the U.S." and that 50% of the jobs will be in the Austral yard in Alabama with the other 50% going to Lockheed Martin.
Then, there's:
Exactly my point [referring to the equally stupid question of your fellow non-reader: "So, they couldnt find an American company to do this?"] American ingenuity just got a slap in the face by the self-proclaimed jobs-creator.
For that to be your point, you would have had to stupidly assume that Austral would be building them in Australia.
In fact, as the article quite clearly stated, this has nothing to do with American ingenuity, it was Australian ingenuity.
It's their design and idea, and they're justifiably proud that we have adopted their design. Nobody got slapped by anyone, not even by the Narcissist-in-Chief. Americans get the jobs and a great ally participates in building something we need that they developed.
Then, upon finally realizing that the ships will be built in the U.S., there's the final idiocy:
By union labor.......
Which is, of course, entirely and predictably wrong. Austral, USA is not unionized.
Got any more gems to burp up?
Hey - ru still awake?
Have a beautiful Christmas this year!
Looks like close to 50% of the people on this thread didn’t read the article.
Anyone else feel we are not the same country we were a couple years ago?
—
Not in the same country I lived in 35 years ago... back when people, who had fled the Iron Curtain at the risk of their lives to live and work in a free country, began to feel they had never left...
Will be built in Mobile, Alabama and provide several thousand jobs for this area. Hopefully will also push up the salaries of all shipyard employees in this area is I’m lucky.
is=if
Go to Mobile, Alabama and count them
'
“Looks like close to 50% of the people on this thread didn’t read the article.”
Never let the facts get in the way of a bad argument.
I understand it’s common, but the 50% number is unusually high. I’m getting ready to post a thread that will make the non-readers go ballistic, if they can bring themselves to click on it.
The decision was made a couple of years ago. This goes back to the Bush Administration. They gave the contract for the USS Independence to Austal in 2005.
Hey, please ping me on that !
Nicely done !
Wow, how many people replying had no clue this has been in the works for years? That we already have one of these roaming the seas (USS Freedom), with more on the way? This is a competing design to the Lockheed built USS Independence, the DoD is buying both designs. People need to stop setting their hair on fire over every perceived slight, in seemingly every thread.
I seem to remember a French Exocet missile used by the Argentinean navey during the Falkland war burnt a British aluminum interior/superstructure warship down to the gunwales...
. Video here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1maCM4K8EI&NR=1&feature=fvwp
This is a common myth - HMS Sheffield had a steel superstructure, not an aluminium one.
HMS Ardent and HMS Antelope did have aluminium superstructures but their sinkings had nothing to do with that.
Aluminium is certainly something to worry about in terms of fire - HMS Amazon suffered a significant fire that was exacerbated by the use of aluminium in 1977, and the USS Belknap was severely damaged in 1975 - but that can be handled if you plan for it, and sometimes the advantages of aluminium do justify the difficulties it can cause.
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.