?????? ?????????
FULL STEAM
AHEAD? As the U.S. defense industrial base continues to shrink with drastically reduced spending, some sectors of manufacturing, specifically submarine production, are more vulnerable than others. By Joshua T. Cohen, NP&FP Editor
T
he submarine industrial base is perhaps the most illustrative example; losing even a few domestic manufacturing capabilities can result in foreign suppliers controlling the flow of critical materials. A dangerous dependence on foreign suppliers has been growing, to the point a threat to national security is evident, if one knows where to look. On average, a modern nuclear attack submarine consists of over one million unique individual components, specifically designed for naval undersea use in extreme climactic conditions. Very few, in most instances zero commercial applications exist for these products, rendering sole-source suppliers totally dependent on the U.S. Navy, through its prime contractors.
construction continuity and cost controls difficult to maintain.
Engineering Conundrum Morphing Supplier Base The largest concentration of submarine suppliers in the U.S. is located in Connecticut, a state economy impacted by fluctuations brought on by sequestration cost cutting. Citing lack of business, for several years, a number of lower tier submarine suppliers have left the industry. Engineering and design staffs have also shrunk or disappeared. According to the Submarine Industrial Base Coalition, at least 18,000 companies supply these parts and components. Reversal of a decision to cut submarine construction to a single Virginia class attack submarine in the 2014 budget, and normalization of submarine production funding, have helped ease the big picture.
Supplier Spotlight Electric Boat is busy working on orders for ten new Virginia class submarines. Scheduled for construction and delivery over the next five years, to accomplish this task, Electric Boat is seeking 600 new hires. Once absorbed into the shipbuilder’s table of organization, these employees will need training and skills development, neither quick propositions in the field of nuclear submarine construction. At the same time Electric Boat is under enormous pressure to produce on time, at, or under budget. Gaps are appearing in the submarine industrial base supply chain. And more can be expected as years of unstable funding take their toll on small, lower-tier suppliers unable to diversify away from submarine construction. A weakened supply base, combined with a new, inexperienced workforce at Electric Boat could well render
20 | Naval Power & Force Projection | Q12015
Compounding future submarine industrial base supply dilemmas, lower-tier component design and engineering capability is not deep. In many cases, only single sources are available domestically for the astronomical amount of parts and services needed to build a modern nuclear- powered submarine. A story bound to be repeated, the effects of years of unstable budgets are now taking their toll in what may be a long line of unexpected supply chain disruptions. The Navy has already lost its sole source of domestically produced copper nickel tubing, specifically used in nuclear subs. Ansonia Copper and Brass Company, founded in 1845, was the only producer of copper and nickel tubing of the size and composition required for use in U.S. submarine and warship construction. Faced with an unstable submarine construction environment and lack of orders in 2013, the company sought venture capital funding in a move to diversify into the oil and gas industry.
Looking Ahead Anticipating a return of Navy orders that never materialized, the VC firm terminated its support, forcing Ansonia to permanently close operations. Without Ansonia, Barto said the Navy has three sources for its copper nickel tubing. A firm in Germany and companies in South Korea and Mexico, due to free trade agreements, are the only options available for components comprising what is arguably one of the most important assets to U.S. national security.
tacticaldefensemedia.com