Editor in Chief Bill | 31 Mar 2023 3:25 a.m. PST |
Ukraine could use more of the devastating artillery rockets, but Lockheed says tooling, labor, and supply-chain problems prevent big leaps in production. Defense One: link |
20thmaine | 31 Mar 2023 3:43 a.m. PST |
From the LM web site – they are looking at a 20-40% increase in production rate at best. GMLRS Quick advancements in technology have increased the speed of defense. When every second counts, our customers must make decisions faster. They need versatile, flexible options in their arsenal for security and deterrence. Having the capability to strike from farther distances has become more crucial than ever before — that's where GMLRS comes in.GMLRS is the primary round for the combat-proven MLRS family of launchers (HIMARS and M270). In October and November of 2022, the U.S. Army awarded multiple contract options worth $520.8 USD million for GMLRS in order to replenish DoD inventory to Ukraine. (*FY23 production award $476 USDM and advance procurement.) This followed a $918 USD million FY22 production award last March to produce GMLRS. We are currently tooled to a 10,000 per year production capacity, and we've produced more than 60,000 rounds. Lockheed Martin is conducting analysis to potentially take that up to 12,000-14,000 rockets a year. |
Inch High Guy | 31 Mar 2023 6:51 a.m. PST |
Not buying it. They're running one shift on the production line now – 40 hours per week. There are 168 hours in a week, maybe add more shifts? That would be a start. I hate to think there is not a contingency plan to ramp up production in case of war, but maybe I'm putting too much faith in our leadership. |
20thmaine | 31 Mar 2023 7:54 a.m. PST |
And where do the trained staff come from to undertake all the extra shifts? And what would LM do with them all once they've hired and trained two or three times the current workforce to run the line round the clock? In a year or two the USA war stock will be replenished and they'll have to lay them all off again. Hiring, training and then severance pay doesn't come for free. Why would LM (or anyone else for that matter) want to do that? Extending the shift by 20-40% would be just about manageable with limited hires and copious overtime for a year or two. |
Dagwood | 31 Mar 2023 11:29 a.m. PST |
If the Government want it badly enough, they will pay all the costs … |
20thmaine | 31 Mar 2023 11:53 a.m. PST |
I guess that's what LM are waiting to hear. It still won't be quick/easy to get three shifts of workers in place when you only have one. It's not just handle turning or burger flipping after all. And whilst some of your production staff are training the new people you're going to see the delivery rate drop fora while. It's do-able – but not easy and not cheap. And needs the whole of the supply chain to triple their production as well. |
35thOVI | 31 Mar 2023 1:23 p.m. PST |
"If the Government want it badly enough, they will pay all the costs …" Remember that's we "taxpayers" who would pay that. The "government" does not have one dam# red cent of its own. Even though they claim it is their money. It is always ours. 😉 |
Druzhina | 31 Mar 2023 1:36 p.m. PST |
"machine tools, skilled labor, and parts" Labour is only one of the needs, it is no use having 3 shifts in an assembly plants if there are not the parts to assemble. "Certain components for GMLRS rockets are also needed for other missiles; she noted that there are only two rocket-motor manufacturers in the United States. She also said that one GMLRS subcontractor also makes components for another in-demand missile—the anti-tank Javelin—and increasing production for one would mean taking workers away from the other." Some parts manufacturers would need to greatly increase their production if they are to provide to triple GMLRS production plus demand for increases in other weapons production. They are going to have their own problems doing this as will their suppliers. Druzhina Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers
|
Editor in Chief Bill | 31 Mar 2023 1:57 p.m. PST |
It still won't be quick/easy to get three shifts of workers in place when you only have one. Hire Ukrainian refugees? |
Inch High Guy | 31 Mar 2023 2:14 p.m. PST |
I'm just glad we didn't face this issue during the Second World War! Who knows how that might have turned out if we couldn't increase production while putting 16 Million in uniform! |
20thmaine | 31 Mar 2023 2:27 p.m. PST |
WWII was a bit different though – it was a full-time war-time economy. And people stopped doing civilian jobs and could do full-time equivalents to support the war effort. And it was understood that it would be needed for years and on a massive scale. But I don't think LM are running a metal bashing plant – they are effectively turning out precision electronics. In WWII you just built factories and trained people because you knew it had to be done and the job would last years. This isn't the same. Double production for 12 months? Expensive. Sure, you can, but expensive. |
Legion 4 | 31 Mar 2023 3:17 p.m. PST |
Hire Ukrainian refugees? Or any of the millions of illegal aliens that crossed the Southern Border here for jobs. |
McKinstry | 31 Mar 2023 3:18 p.m. PST |
I'm just glad we didn't face this issue during the Second World War! We did. There was a constant push/pull on production and right up until late 1944 there were never enough landing craft from LST's on down. The production of DE's could only ramp up when Admiral King made choices around fewer larger ships. Rubber was rationed and artillery ammunition was a constant worry on the production side in particular certain fuses. Manufacturing of civilian side items virtually ceased and still production took years to fully ramp up. Even something as seemingly ubiquitous as steel was continually subject to decisions around who got what. Tanks v battleships etc. |