COLUMN | Politics versus reality: factors impeding America's shipbuilding revival [Aft Lines]

Those that write the statement of requirements (SOR) for these newbuilds always have the immortal words “proven hull form.” What this simply means is they want a hull or a design that has been built and proven. This is compounded by an SOR requiring an overly complex design (because we can), which leads to outsourced design capabilities (beyond the yard’s ability), and concurrent design-build processes.

In other words, the US Navy creates high-level requirements for complex, multi-role ships, and it outsources the design of these ships to third-party contractors, which is beyond their ability to deliver in terms of cost and time.

However, as noted, this strategy will backfire. As design work is completed, changes to ships under construction are often required, resulting in costly and time-consuming rework and significant delays.

The finished design – if eventually completed – is then a hodge podge of corrections and mitigation to fit a budget and deadline that was not meant to be. So, when the vessels are eventually delivered, they are flawed right out of the box before they even begin operations.

So, a "proven design" really means, "the same mess again, please," and zero progress in new and current methods and/or findings from research. The design is just a rehash of an “old” design that is outdated and unsuitable for the multi-role capacity it was even originally designed to satisfy.

Ergo, since there is very little, if any, room for evolution, or modified or new thinking in terms of design, in the SORs that are issued, the status quo continues.