Just a Context Thing: U.S. not alone in issues with naval shipbuilding

MarineLink reports "Late & Overweight: Germany's New Frigates Found Wanting":

2016 Bundeswehr / Carsten Vennemann)

Germany's much-delayed new frigates, built by ThyssenKrupp and Luerssen for at least 650 million euros ($710 million) apiece, are overweight and float with a persistent list to starboard, according to a confidential report seen by Reuters.

The ships, designed to need a crew of only 120, less than half their predecessors, are a crucial element in Germany's plans to beef up its military to face an increasingly uncertain European security landscape and a more assertive Russia.

Designed to remain at sea for far longer than the German armed forces' existing fleet, the new F125 frigates need extensive servicing only once every two years, compared to once every nine months for their predecessors.

The 1.3 degree starboard list and excess weight, which emerged during testing in September, means the ship is now close to the limit of its design parameters and will raise the class's lifetime maintenance costs by around 20 million euros, according to a confidential annex to a regular German defence ministry report.

A defence ministry spokeswoman declined to comment on the confidential report, but said "in general terms" that the development of the four ships, the first of which was to have been delivered in 2014, remained on track.

Buidling ship on time and on budget is hard. Except, perhaps for the U.S. submarine force, which until recently has been exceptional but apparently is facing growing pains as set out by Chris Cavas in here:

Problems seem to stem from two primary factors: the move in 2011 to double the submarine construction rate from one to two per year has strained shipyards and the industrial base that supplies parts for the subs; and the Navy has successively reduced contractual building times as shipbuilders grew more experienced with building the submarines, cutting back on earlier, highly-trumpeted opportunities to beat deadlines.

About Time - President Wants More U.S. Ice Breakers for Arctic

Source - Note the Arctic Ocean in the upper right

Silly headline in the NYTimes, "Obama to Call for More Icebreakers in Arctic as U.S. Seeks Foothold. "

Golly, I always though the Great State of Alaska (that's a map of it above) was our foothold in the Arctic since it has 1000 miles of coastline on the Arctic Ocean, but perhaps the fact that Alaska has been a state bordering the Arctic since 3 January 1959 (that's 56 years!) somehow eluded the NYT headline writer. In any event, from the article:

President Obama on Tuesday proposed speeding the acquisition and building of new Coast Guard icebreakers that can operate year round in the nation’s polar regions, part of an effort to close the gap between the United States and other nations, especially Russia, in a global competition to gain a foothold in the rapidly changing Arctic.

"Proposed?" Given his penchant for executive orders and as the Commander-in-Chief, one would think he would just order them built or bought as soon as possible.

You might note that I've been discussing the need for new U.S. ice breakers since 2008. See also last year's Arctic Waters: U.S. Policy and the Sea Services in which I embedded:

U.S. National Arctic Strategy

Other Arctic Strategies are also set out at the link.

At least the President is proposing to do something. That's a step forward.