Thursday, April 3, 2025

Just Make a Decision

Naval News website reports that Japan is interested in co-producing SM-6 Standard missiles. 
 
Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani has announced that Tokyo proposed joint production of the Standard Missile 6 (SM-6) ship-to-air missile during his meeting with U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on March 30.[1]

Japan has previously agreed, to some nebulous extent, to co-produce AMRAAM and PAC-3 missiles although no action appears to have come of that, yet.
 
… the U.S. and Japan in Tokyo in July 2024, both governments had already agreed to “pursue mutually beneficial co-production opportunities to expand production capacity of AMRAAM and Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (PAC-3 MSE).
 
Nakatani’s [Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani] proposal this time will not only include joint production of AMRAAM and PAC-3 MSE missiles, which have been under consideration since the previous Joe Biden administration, but also include the long-range ship-to-air missile SM-6 … [1]

What is the US reaction/response?
 
… the U.S. side responded, by saying “We would like to continue to discuss the joint production of missiles that are mutually beneficial for both Japan and the United States, including the SM-6, as well as AMRAAM, and PAC3 that we have discussed so far, even at an administrative level. We understand the importance, so we would like to deepen the discussion at the administrative level in the future.”[1]

Good grief.  What a bunch of wishy washy nonsense.  Make a decision, already.  Endless studies and discussions benefit no one.  This is what’s wrong with modern government.  They’re incapable of acting, instead defaulting to never ending commissions, studies, reports, and discussions.  A major reason China is outproducing us their ability to make a rapid decision and then get about implementing it.  We, in the meantime, continue to study the issues to death.
 
I don’t have all the details on this particular issue but it certainly seems like a win-win proposition.  As the Ukraine war has demonstrated, we lack the weapon production capacity to meet our needs.  If Japan can help fill that need, where’s the downside?
 
Do it or don’t do it but make a damn decision!
 
 
 
_________________________________
 
[1]Naval News website, “Japan proposes co-production of SM-6 missiles to the U.S.”, Kosuke Takahashi, 3-Apr-2025,
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2025/04/japan-proposes-co-production-of-sm-6-missiles-to-the-u-s/

15 comments:

  1. I wonder if the defense establishment is reluctant to have Japan produce those missiles faster and cheaper than they can?

    Might be a little bit embarrassing.

    Lutefisk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Running out of weapons in a war would also be a little bit embarrassing!

      Delete
    2. MHI has been building 30 Pac-3 a year for years,
      they could build 60 a year, but Boeing can't provide enough seekers. (Japan Times July 2024)

      Delete
  2. A major issue is technological transfer. Despite an ally, Pentagon doesn't want Japan to learn too much, which leads to "new" missiles made in Japan apart from US.

    China doesn't rush to make decision. Take example of J-20, first equipped its air force in 2018 (2011, first prototype fly) but productions were slow initially, not because capacity but they were not sure everything were right. Only after a couple years, they ramped up production. China's key strength is its industry base thus once it makes decision, things happen very fast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "China doesn't rush to make decision."

      They don't seem to rush into foolish decisions but they most certainly do make quick decisions. For example, they moved quickly to develop their aircraft carrier capability.

      Delete
    2. "A major issue is technological transfer."

      I don't think that's much of an issue. China knows all are technological secrets so who cares if Japan does, also? I don't think we have much in the way of actual secrets, anyway. Japanese technology is pretty advanced and they've got all the actual technology in their hands if they wanted to reverse engineer something.

      Debating technology transfer issues is a like closing the barn door after the horses are out.

      Delete
    3. "For example, they moved quickly to develop their aircraft carrier capability."

      Fun fact: the PLAN's carrier roadmap, first announced in 1987, called for their carrier and indigenous naval fighter development to be completed in 1995, with a hull in the water shortly after. They've slipped that aggressive schedule by some 2 decades with their own homegrown carriers, and are still some ways off from realising their indigenous carrier fighters, but it's still a remarkable achievement starting from zero.

      Delete
    4. " Japanese technology is pretty advanced and they've got all the actual technology "

      You know how to make A doesn't mean you must know how to make B. US spent lots of efforts to develop these missiles while Japan didn't. In the case of China, they did parallel development (might have different tech paths) and got their weapons. You can see their HQ-19 is not the same as THAAD or SM-6.

      Delete
  3. Yesterday's tariff announcement will put a slowdown on just about all decisions involving international trade to or from the US. Everyone will want to see what other governments do and re-do their figures on the likely volume and profitability of trade when they know that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trade and tariffs are a good example of the US making a quick decision. Trump has wasted no time implementing tariffs. Admittedly, he had years in between his first and second terms to consider the issue but he acted very fast once he began his second term.

      Quick decisions have been a hallmark of this administration, so far. You can agree or disagree with the decisions but they've come fast and furious. The US government hasn't seen this speed of decision making in ... forever and it's partly why the establishment politicians are so upset.

      I'd like to see a similar application of speedy decisions applied to the military. So far, that hasn't happened to any great extent.

      No, we're not going to get into political/policy discussions.

      Delete
    2. 2019-2020 COVID would be the last time gummint moved fast,and that was feds and state local.
      Inside the military, Big Safari is good at going from requirement to boom fast.

      Delete
  4. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-navy/
    "Why US shipbuilding is the worst and more money won't save it Someone should tell Trump the real reason the fleet is so small "
    CNO, I believe you concur with what is in this article !
    One thing stands out is that congress has been throwing money at the Navy and we keep getting 1 sub / year for example ! Also the article mentions simplicity of design and lower workforce numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Said to be new footage of US Navy ships under attack in the Red Sea. What do you all think? Do they have to keep the carrier and LHA lit up at night for their aircraft ops?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH3-PPgZa4Y

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Come on, now. There was little or nothing real in that video. I don't know what it was (video game?) but it wasn't US ships. One of the ships had what looked like a pre-WWII cage mast, for goodness sake!

      Don't offer a link to an obviously fake video. You're better than that.

      Delete
  6. Wow, this is from someone that was from the inside and knows what's the reality of BMD and "testing"! Pretty much confirms everything that has been argued here by CNO and many of us!!!

    https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2025/04/05/the_illusion_of_bmd_testing_in_ships_1102182.html

    ReplyDelete

Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.