How Arming Ukraine Exposed Cracks in the U.S. Defense Supply Chain | WSJ
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июн 2024
- The inability of U.S. defense contractors to quickly replenish weaponry such as missiles and munitions for Ukraine has raised questions about the capability of America’s defense industry and led Pentagon officials to argue that industry consolidation has gone too far.
Illustration: Adele Morgan
0:00 The U.S. defense sector is facing supply chain issues
1:34 Why can’t the U.S arm Ukrainians faster?
4:15 How American supply chains weren’t prepared for the Ukraine War
6:50 Can a merger of two large contractors aid in the production of Javelins?
News Explainers
Some days the high-speed news cycle can bring more questions than answers. WSJ’s news explainers break down the day's biggest stories into bite-size pieces to help you make sense of the news.
#Ukraine #Weapons #WSJ
![Latto - Sunday Service (feat. Megan Thee Stallion & Flo Milli) [Remix] (Official Video)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9gL0F1xIt2I/mqdefault.jpg)
The Wagner Group has become the face of the Russian assault in Ukraine.
Our documentary, Shadow Men: Inside Russia’s Secret War Company reveals how the Russian private military company hides the flow of riches and resources that ultimately connect to the Kremlin: ruclips.net/video/EMXnJMCoFYI/видео.html
It’s actually really scary stuff when you realize that we went from over 50 primary contractors down to only five. It’s very similar to what happened in the baby formula industry when there was really only one supplier left and we ran out of baby formula nationwide. Very risky stuff.
But wasnt that exactly what you voted for
If you had a cow, its milk could feed your baby too ! No need to depend on ANY industrial supplier or any baby formula !!
50% of Javlin and Stingers have failed to work fact is THE US Army admits trained US troops get around 19% hits not kills hits making Javlin near useless the M777 Artillery has been slammed by Ukraine as poor quality and breaks down daily in fact Ukraine claims ALL RUSSIAN MADE WEAPONS ARE SUPERIOR TO US MADE. The problem with Israelistan 🇺🇲 is weapons are produced to mskr money the 60% functionality allowed means weapons as long as they work 60% of the time its ACCEPTABLE the B35 Kamakhazi barely makes 54% line ready full of faults the F22 Craptor is even worse. Israelistan has not produced a working weapon in over 2 decades Zumwalt destroyers 23 billion absolutely useless. Patriot last seen attacking its own launch site. Iron Dome thrown away as completely useless and on it goes.
It is called the end of empire.
Monopolies are bad for everyone, including the monopolies. Its not about increasing wealth, its about consolidating power.
To be fair, it made sense at the time. If it wasn't for the Russians invading Ukraine, all of those Javelins would be collecting dust in an armory somewhere and you'd have politicians crying about wasteful defense spending. You really can't win the supply game 100% of the time.
So we have a war where we are not being attacked. We are learning our shortcomings and we need to work to fix that. We are increasing production on a variety of arms to supply Ukraine and replenish our stock of arms. This doesn't seem like a catastrophe. Also, How much of a stock does China have?
@@nickgardner1408 How many years do you think that will be for Russia to win, they are busy using their bodies to absorb Ukrainian bullets and they don't have an infinite supply of people.
@@jd190d Exactly. This is *exactly* what the USA needed, in terms of home defense preparedness. It's exposing all of the weaknesses in the system that have developed since the end of WW2.
Glad the war is serving its purpose then to put all those bad boys in action, and also to give a few very fortunate people the opportunity to put on some extra cash by manufacturing more of them. Everything is going great.
@@rhysioeren3203 It truly is wonderful. It's like a soft warm blanket of happytime.
Corporate Tool: "Consolidation has left our industry inflexible and lacking innovation."
Reporter: What can be done?
Corporate Tool: "We need to consolidate more."
OMG, so true.
Corporate Tool: "Consolidation has left our industry inflexible and lacking innovation." TRUE! TRUE! TRUE!
@@navamsinna8492 Ukraine was/is a backwards and corrupt almost third world country then and now. A lot of infrastructure has been destroyed and will need years and tons of money to rebuild. The Ukraine does not control Europe....
Ha.ha..
Its not innovation. Clearly US weapons tech has made a difference for Ukraine against a lot bigger army. It’s industry conciliation the reason the problem exists now
Not just in the defense industry. Apple, google, and meta control basically the internet in the USA. General Foods, Nestle and Kimberly and Clark control our food isles in the supermarkets. Oil is basically controlled by 4 major companies….and so on. Whenever a new company comes with something new or cheaper, it’s swallowed by a bigger company to eliminate it as a competitor. Truly sad times for our economic future and well being ✋🏻
competition is needed when there is market and high demand situation which except in this case it is war. nobody wants war.
Substitutes: eat more oats for example. But harder to do with specialized hardware.
@@vitaminc2161 that's why Americunt warmongers create illegal wars
just capitalism working as intended
Is it true America's meat packing industry is completely owned and operated by the Chinese? And no
Every protracted war that has occurred after a long time of peace has shown massive supply issues. Like munition consumption during the Russo Japanese war, Artillery consumption during WW1. Its impossibly to have a cutting edge military, and retain the manufacturing capability to rapidly supply the army incase of a massive war.
In fact, the US Military Industrial Complex, was paid for and funded by our European Allies who were desperate to outpace the Germans. They agreed to pay nearly all the costs for US manufacturers to either switch their factories to making munitions, or to outright build them from scratch, as long as they could promise to deliver guns or shells.
Anyone working in the US automotive industry can also tell you, our nations industrial plants still have plans in effect to switch into army and tank production. It's unlikely we'll get to that point unless a full scale war breaks out between NATO and Russia.
Russia have yet to use it's modern weapons and doesn't look like they need too, the US and NATO are just too weak. Russia is not using their military or new weapons, they are using PMC Wagner with weapons from the 1960s-1970s ..
@ Mooseman Don't forget the nukes. If Putin has nothing to lose. He will use them at his age. This is called EGO and PRIDE.
And there are enough morons that will help him. There are also bodyguards that will give there lives for 'leaders'. I would never do that.
And everyday people are losing there life on the battlefield. Alive today. Dead tomorrow.
I predict the big boom.
If he is out of weapons... he will use them. 100% sure. Next stage beyond threatening to use them. A new point in history.
Disaster or succes. The only way for a big EGO
WW4 is the one we fight with throwing stones again.
The fact is the United States hasn't had a long time of peace. Our military industries have been cranking out weaponry non-stop for over 50 years for the various misadventures we have around the world big and small
@@ardenb2912 Mighty Russia cannot conquer a single oblast in Ukraine. Sit down.
Infantry wins battles, logistics wins wars. -Gen. Pershing
Which is precisely why Russia hasn't won yet XD
"War is a racket."
-- Gen. Smedley Butler
"war is profits"
- military industry
Nah, I think artillery wins wars
And Artillery is the God of War.
OOOPS! The first 3 launches in the intro are actually NLAWs, not Javelins! Javelins have a big black foam piece at the rear. Saab's NLAW has a similar shaped piece _at the front_ of the launcher.
Mmmmm semantics. Excellent attention to detail, fellow youtube commentsection mosh pit participant. Props
They were also showing artillery munitions while talking about Javelin production, the author hasnt a clue about arms but is talking about them.
50% of Javlin and Stingers have failed to work fact is THE US Army admits trained US troops get around 19% hits not kills hits making Javlin near useless the M777 Artillery has been slammed by Ukraine as poor quality and breaks down daily in fact Ukraine claims ALL RUSSIAN MADE WEAPONS ARE SUPERIOR TO US MADE. The problem with Israelistan 🇺🇲 is weapons are produced to mskr money the 60% functionality allowed means weapons as long as they work 60% of the time its ACCEPTABLE the B35 Kamakhazi barely makes 54% line ready full of faults the F22 Craptor is even worse. Israelistan has not produced a working weapon in over 2 decades Zumwalt destroyers 23 billion absolutely useless. Patriot last seen attacking its own launch site. Iron Dome thrown away as completely useless and on it goes.
@@yfelwulf Sorry, color me sceptical. If you can be so kind, please provide a few non-biased _credible_ sources to your claims.
@@SvPVids That would make some sense, if they talk about US supply chain limitations more generally, where munition production overall has difficulties scaling up.
I hate to oversimplify this, but Eisenhower did warn us to keep a close eye on all the effects the continually-evolving military-industrial complex could have on the efficiency of a war effort.
And shortly after that they wacked JFK for not wanting Vietnam
You mean the same speech where he said that the existence of which is necessary for any war effort and maintaining peace?
It wasn't about the efficiency of a war effort, dude. It's much bigger than that
I find it interesting that they always quote defense budgets of nations, but rarely take into account the difference of costs per nation. Example US vs China where costs of inputs (materials, wages, etc) are very different. I would like to see this done with these factors taken into account to give a true analysis.
Good point.
Might I suggest Perun. In a few of his videos he's covered SIPRI & Purchasing power parity. Here's one he did focusing on China;
ruclips.net/video/mH5TlcMo_m4/видео.html
if details are shown, probably details will also show the huge amount of skimming off by . ...
Not to mention that actually some parts of Chinese and Russian military expenditure are classified or disguised
@@watershed8685 Russian expenditures were stolen, wouldn't be surprised if much of China's are as well. Some of the US too I wouldn't doubt, but I think the accountants for those big weapons manufacturers would quite possibly assassinate anyone who tries to steal from their contracts. Well perhaps not real assassination but career killer and such.
It can be argued the US would've used far fewer Javelins in the first place. Ukraine has burned through a lot of Javelins because their infantry have had to use it extensively against tanks and IFVs because they were initially dominated in the field. A massive war machine like the US fighting Russia or China (let's assume it's "only" a conventional war for this scenario) would've used its air force, carrier aircraft if they're within range, attack helicopters, ground-attack missiles, then its rocket artillery, field artillery, tanks, IFVs, and so on even before its infantry got to use their Javelins against any remaining enemy armor.
They did mention projections and simulations on a conflict in the taiwan straight, so sure there would be a greater diversity of weapons systems to draw from, but the more sophisticated air and naval systems are likely the ones to run out first.
@@kimberleemodel7182 Although how they can run out of munitions in a week when they probably can't get them near Taiwan by then has me puzzled. Also *strait for the nautical kind. .
Jawelin here is just used as an example of a modern weapon that can't be produced fast enough, to expose supply chain issues. Same problems are applied to other weapon systems USA produces.
Ok, this was a good video overall, but I gotta be a stickler about it. They keep talking about Javs but they put up images and videos of both Javelin missile launchers and NLAW launchers. They are VERY MUCH not the same, even as they are rather similar.
Haha thank you!!!! It was bugging me all vid lol
The point of the article was the typewritten copy, not the pictures.
Nobody cares. You can scuttle back to Reddit and touch yourself while thinking about weapons there.
These WSJ videos on military matters are generally under researched and full of assumptions
THEY ARE REPORTERS!
Mass production is key to victory in any war, with probability of minor conflicts increasing in near future small arms production will be a key part of settling issues.
information is key to victory in any war. if you win a war, before there is a war, this is the real victory!
The problem in cases like this is production is based on orders (demand) in states where defense is private. Countries like china and russia can increase production more quickly because the industries are state owned
Great. Right now we are planning to issue new infantry weapons firing the 6.8 cartridge. So how will we interface with NATO having forced the 5.56 on them. One foot on the dock and one foot in the canoe.
@@walex5462 You've forgotten about the Defense Production Act that allows the US Govt to nationalize production during times of emergency. It was just used as recently as 2020 to compel manufacturers to ramp up production of ventilators and masks during the pandemic
@@chrisd9700 The problem is that 277 sig fury (6.8) cartridge is a completely novel design. I think ammo producers will have to overhaul their production lines to make it. Plus no one else in NATO uses it. We'll probably be sticking with the m4 for a good while longer.
Anyone who's been in business the last 20 years sees exactly why we're having supply chain issues. While DoD requirements differ obviously unregulated consumer manufacturing has almost completely gone overseas in the past 25 years. We've seen US manufacturing in past conflicts make incredible changes turning things 180 degrees like switching car production to tanks and typewriter factories to rifles for example. There's a small fraction of production capability that we once had for low tech weaponry, let alone anything high tech. I also thought it unwise that US govt in previous administrators went after firearm manufacturers- the same ones that produced the arsenal that won WWI and WWII. When we need them, it's of the upmost importance, but as we've seen when we don't they can be discarded quite easily.
Firearms are just a minor tool, they've never really won wars. Cannons,bombs, nukes, missiles, jet, helicopter and intelligence collection are more efficient at damaging the enemies.
@@spicychad55 Gee, I wonder what that intelligence, artillery, and those vehicles are meant to support...
Yup... And who did we give all that manufacturing power too? China... Our biggest threat. So in the event of a war the USA has basically no way of ramping up production rapidly, meanwhile China will be able to do what the USA did in WW2 on a 100x bigger scale.
In other words, the boomers that sold our factories overseas so they could make slightly more profit at the expense of their countrymen are traitors and should be treated as such.
@@spicychad55 Point taken but that was just one example on small arms.
The US actually has quite a good ammunition (including artillery) manufacturing capability. It can scale up reasonably well and has fairly modern manufacturing methods. What the US (and every other country) struggle with are the high tech weapons and other systems that rely on the global supply chain for components.
I say it's a good thing. Being able to test and refine your supply chain in peacetime is still better than spotting the cracks after declaring a wartime economy.
In my opinion it’s a good thing that we’re seeing this stuff now. Imagine if we got into a sudden conflict and our industry was this unprepared.
There is conflict coming fast because we are telling China hit them now how stupid is the media
It's a repeat of Lend-Lease preparing the US for WWII
Are those regulators who approved the merger now working for the companies with nice salaries?
YES! AND CHINA TOO.
but its not easy, lots of legal guidelines and governmental oversight .... they will earn that wage
Would it have been "fiscally responsible," to produce at this scale before the war? We barely have workers for most businesses, nevermind supply chains. Stopping good people from coming here to get an education, and WORK is a national security issue. I never hear the WSJ worrying about that.
Thats one of the big downsides of the anti-immigration movement, it severely impacts the long term economic growth and production of the US economy
Wsj is owned by rupert Murdoch so not a surprise
A hundred years ago, the US had factories which could switch from consumer goods to militry goods in a matter of months. That isn't the case before. In part because there aren't that many domestic factories and in part because military goods are far more complex than they were 100yrs ago.
@@chrisd9700 and without automation who's gonna work in mcdonalds
@@kimberleemodel7182 and a hundred years ago there was unregulated immigration to the US. Not to sound to Machiavellian but frankly immigrants have always done hard and underpaid jobs in the history of the US and the idea they’re stealing anything is just plain stupid, i don’t think any American to annoyed missing out on the opportunity to clean hotels or do yard work for under minimum wage
So, all us military logisticians knew 'just in time' logistics had no redundancy or robustness. First major war and it comes tumbling down. To give the US and Europe credit, they were not expecting to fight or support a prolonged conventional war. But it shows that local industry is critical to any country's national security.
Just in time delivery is a problem in all sectors.
I've thought the same thing about the consolidation of America's defense contractors. Though not a "military expert", I am an accountant with considerable supply chain experience. And "just in time" supply chain manufacturing is not necessarily a good thing for defense contractors like it is in the auto industry.
Given the recent new car shortages I'm not sure if it's good for the auto industry either.
@@TheMsdos25 It isn't. Ironically, the originator of the 'just in time' paradigm changed back into stockpiling parts during Covid, and did much better than their competitors.
That consolidation started around when Bush Senior was in Office.
I remember that. They were commiserating the fact consolidation was the tall order, and a lot of M&A deals took place then.
Martin Marietta became Lockheed Martin or something like that.
By the time Reagan was in office, 9 out of 10 well paying Engineering jobs came from Defense. No security clearance, no job. I was then a Green Card Holder, and going through College. The glossy hiring book for companies doing DoD contracting work might've been 200 pages thick.
Come to think of, all of the money made then wouldn't be worth . I remember interviewing for a job for a manufacturer of shrapnel projectiles in Concord MA, and the shop foreman was describing what the product did. I put some effort in keeping a straight face, but something might've surface the foreman could read on me.
I am at peace not getting those well paying jobs. | sleep like a baby.
We definitely don’t spend enough on DoD contracts😅
One day it's too much defence industry now it's not enough
u have to understand that war is won by military industrial complex asks the russians, they are struggling to find the components and key semicounductors and many more. in war time u can convert civil industry to make war stuff but for that u need the industrial scale and it would be still inferior to defence industrial complex. Russians have heavy artilerry sitting in russian not at border both logistics and maintaninace is absolute key. USA is still very storng in these departments when it comes to protect usa or its nato allies but same cant be said when for other countries
One thing WSJ fails to take into account is that the U.S didn’t need to produce a lot of equipment that Ukraine needs, because conventional conflicts in the Middle East were over quickly.
So troops didn’t really need things like Javelins or Artillery, because they wouldn’t be useful against the types of enemies they were fighting. Combined with American logistics and maintenance being relatively good, few troops were losing equipment.
Yes, the US has had air supremacy in every war since the 1950's. It's not really surprising that the US isn't prepared for a long term WW2 style war when an airstrike can do the same thing far safer.
And also a war between the US against a nuclear power would make these conventional weapons a moot point. This news video seems like an ad to increase our military budget again.
@@npc2480 i think you are on to something! Let's see who funded states media for the past few years... Oh sh-
@@npc2480 problem is that US in proxy war vs nuclear power (russia) and cant provide enough conventional weapons
@@shulovic well who asked the US to get into a proxy war with Russia? The problem the US has is its own doing.
I honestly learned about Javelin ATGM from Call of Duty 4 during the mission "The Bog", ah yesss great times and top 3 best Call of Duty
I mean we arent relying on javelins to take out tanks, just the ability to if necessary. Every next war will entirely rely on air superiority and SEAD missions
The fewer manufacturers equals higher prices. When you have no other choices you pay what ever price they give you.
Capitalism at its finest
@@firasajoury7813 It's actually Corporatism at its finest
@@Ningen18 Semantics at its finest.
@@supermega10453 not semantics, corporatism.
I thought the point of a defense department was to maintain a force that can take on any adversary?
Quality reporting
It is very much the opposite
This is eye opening!
Great insight 👍
* why the "Analysing in background" banner at little over half way through the video?
wsj frames this as a lagging supply chain story, rather than a story about ramping up supply chains for the protracted proxy wars with china to come
Hail president Kamala!
It's comming
Even then, what not mentioned is chinas or russias ability to draw upon N. Korea vast stockpiles. Given how the nation is starved, it wouldn't be too far fetched or too far from reality to trade food for arms. China has vast warehouses of old Soviet era weapon systems and their munitions. They might be old but if it can still kill you then its still effective.
Another thing thats not mentioned is Chinas ability to massively ramp up military production. There are factories all across the country that can produce items quickly and cheaply, which if you're fighting a drawn out war is a major plus.
if US can't even mass produce weapon like javelin, then how US can mass produce missile, cruise missile, and ship againts china?
@@user-gc1hg9sp9k Its due to the destructive capability of each weapon system. If each cruise missile, anti-ship missile, torpedo can sink a ship then the US is already winning as the US has a greater stockpile of said munitions than there are ships crewed by the USN and PLAN combined but the same can be said for China's anti ship weapon systems. However and this is a big however, the US can't even field half of its commissioned ships as of now. Usually half of them are doing refits, dry docks, training or repairs which puts them out of action. Yes they can go all hands on deck and get the ships back out to sea but while they are waiting, they can be hit by ICBMs, antiship missiles, torpedoes, etc.
I think the main problem is consolidation and monopolies
I like how the javelina and the warthog are both tank destroyers
Excellent stuff.
This is really all very good news. It’s so much better to get this fixed now then during wartime for us.
Its not good news because we've already totally emptied our stocks of Javelins and Stingers which Taiwan needed yesterday. Their orders are backlogged to the late 2020s when we might be in a war by 2027.
The more complex a weapon system is the harder it is to raise production because to build new and complex production lines and then train up new operators takes both time and money
It’s not even that. It’s the fact that proprietary tech and manufacturing practices are closely guarded. There’s little provisions for other industries that are theoretically capable of manufacturing those subsystems to be contracted out.
Well that's moderately terrifying.
Informative, though an editing mistake appears at 4:39: 'Analyzing in background'
Anyone surprised by WSJ showing NLAW launches while talking about the Javelin?
Perhaps defense contracts should always include building redundant machinery, tools, and other equipment for production lines AND warehousing components, hardware, and all materials necessary for the type of quick a sudden large war might require in case the U.S. suddenly needs more (?).
We can't stockpile talented workers who know how to make a Javelin. Only so many people can be asked to come back out of retirement. Training good workers to make complex weapons can take a while. 4:12 is one example of the work environment.
Perhaps the military can have reserve jobs just for manufacturing. I wouldn't mind re-enlisting for that if there was no height/weight requirements.
In past wars, other industries were retooled to make weapons and ammo. We saw this recently with many small companies "retooling" to make masks and hand sanitizer to fight covid. The problem is that we have sent most of our industry to other countries and continents, because we wanted to have a "service economy", so there aren't really any factories to retool.
Great video!
Good report, interesting to remember the old work place and program
Every supplier of weapons must have their assembly lines and trainer stuff preserved until the particular weapon remains in service of an army in order to ensure steady supply when army stocks begin to shrink.
That's all very easy to say until you see the bill for keeping specialized production lines open and skilled workers on the job. Consolidation happened in the first place because the US public didn't want to pay that price through MIC subsidies.
There is a lot to consider here. I understand Warren's position but a heightened base of specific manufacture increases security risk. But a heightened base of manufacture also increases opportunity for innovation. These are opposed. I wonder if in designing advanced weaponry the ability to quickly increase production is considered at all and if making manufacture scalable shouldn't be part of the criteria. Maybe it's that simple.
Monopolies are on the rise in every major sector today. I'm thankful for Warren's voice, but she's been pointing out the dangers this trend clearly for years now, how do we get other politicians to care?
@@Andrew-is3ld So has Klobuchar. The questions I have just concerns the defense industry. I don't know if it should be treated separately from other industries but doing so would not be without precedent. For me, your point about other industries is certainly valid though. I have not idea, except to vote in other politicians; of how to get politicians to face thorny unsexy issues that can't be captured in a highly charged sound bite.
What are you analysing in the background at 4:37?
I like how they totally evaded the word "MONOPOLY"
Better now than later when they are directly involved in a war.
the large explosive warhead and accurate targeting system is what makes this very potent .... hand fired
That subliminal flash at 4:38 says “Analyzing in background.”
Suppliers not only have a citizen's duty to resist radical exaggerations of the need to arm both the government and potentially other governments but a moral duty to act as a brake on drastic expansions of various components of military industrial production as it relates to unjustifiable expansion of the military capacity of the state in spite of real-world conditions. The state should not be underwritten by the strength of military industrial production and to account the industry should not become accomplice to radical schemes by various governments or entities within them from time to time to attempt to stimulate affairs or even the economy with military industrial production. That would be irascible and fundamentally irresponsible.
I'd rather learn this now than latter. Good time to address it now.
Someone forgot to remove that 4:38
Regardless of cracks in the system, you have to admit post 9/11, the forever wars are the gift that keeps on giving if you're the defence industry.
Yup
Get on it Congress! Solve this!
4:38 so do you guys Screen record the video an upload it besides actually rendering and exporting to save time?
It's good that we are aware of this issue. Now let's get to fix it!
Another issue the video did not bring up is that unlike regular business that can sell good to any counties or business as long as it is allowed, we don't want that to happen for milliary supply company. I mean jut think if Russia or China or Iran is able to buy the f35 or some high tech weapons from US military company. It will be very bad.
I think that's one of the reason why military contact is very expensive not only to cover for R&D but also have an exclusive Claus that you can't sell to certainly companies or counties but to keep your company a float and keep making these military equipment we will pay you more.
Break up the monopolies.
dear god yes please...
Oligopolist markets compete on everything except price. Scary when the military has to rely on a handfull of suppliers.
If you're also wondering what that was at 4:38, it says "Analyzing in background". Wonder what that is.
It would be interesting if the US govt banned further mergers or purchases of smaller companies. Instead, larger companies could invest up to 49% in smaller companies. This would either see more investment in smaller manufacturers (and thereby support innovation) or the larger companies would spend the money on R&D to try and compete with the innovation of smaller companies.
Alternate title for this video: how we can feed more money to the war machine
What's the "analyzing in background" flashing on screen at 4:38 ?
Well, at least we're learning from it now instead of later. Let's see if anyone does something about it.
This is what is sometimes called "a cheap lesson". The benefit to the US is that we aren't in a direct hot war with a near peer adversary. We now have some time to fix the problem.
I agree
And other countries to lean on to lighten the load in the meantime. As a vet, I'm fascinated & appreciative of how many nations have come together in an emergency, it's really something unique and incredible to see. So much for thinking the west couldn't pull it off as a group mission, we've done very well considering there was no plan in place for such an event.
A war with a near peer will be nuclear which will make these conventional weapons meaningless.
What the video doesn't mention or cover is that it's likely every country around the world is facing similar issues. The United States was not unique in its C-19 supply issue struggles, nor are we the only country facing economic woes currently. The only question is how quickly we can adapt and overcome. Given the potential financial incentives... I'd say we'll be alright ;)
Many countries, but not all. China is a country in which they have the industrial base to grow at a very rapid rate. They have the facilities for raw materials, fabrication, and production. Chips would seem to be the one area that they may struggle, but this could change.
It is good that these issues are coming to light. The way that we had been doing business has to change. Key industries must not be allowed to be outsourced.
except russia they make 3 million sheels a year now paimping to 5 million ..western nations combined do not reach 5 million so no you're not doing alright . russia has been stockpiling since 8 years they haven't even run out and now their factories run 24 hours a day 7 days a week .the west cannot match that .
@@navamsinna8492 lol
How’s the weather in Russia
Won’t be in time to stop Ukraine from falling and being at the mercy of Russia though. Perhaps this will lead the US into a period of isolationism to build itself up. Instead of getting involved in wars it loses
People ask....what should I invest in? Aerospace might be a good idea, lol.
That was pretty alarming
lets hope china doesn't see this video...
Why not take advantage of industrial capacity of friendly countries of US like South Korea, Japan and Germany. They will be happily obliged to supply components for Javelin or other high-tech munitions. They are already producing similar weapon systems and have industrial skill and infrastructure to supply. Having extra qualified supplier will encourage more competition and more extra production capacity on demand or emergency. South Korean arms industry have good capacity, quality and price for many legacy and modern weapons.
Did you not listen, conventional war is a war of industrial base. US is already trying to destroy china industrial base, to keep it as a manufacturer of tchotchkes. Why would they shore up their client nations.
Japan? Have you forgotten the attack on Pearl Harbor?
@@whitemailprivilege2830 are you a time traveler from 1940s? Japan is one of America’s most important military allies.
The Military Industrial Complex is 5 companies, wow.
Good.
In France we got the same pattern of consolidation and we lost many companies and supply chains. Lot of people say it is no problèm because the US can be the backup. Well the US has the same issue.
I’m so surprised that the Wall Street Journal telling the truth now even though it’s too late to tell to the public. 😂😂😂😂
4:36 That blip says "Analyzing In Background"... You're welcome
For a "healthy" free market economy, it needs competition!
We need to decide whether the defense industry is for the American people, or for shareholders of the defense industry
with their big noses
Russian tanks face German tanks in combat once again. Germany is renowned for its high quality manufacturing, yet has extreme difficulty comprehending a simple concept-assuming that it is even able to learn at all-and is making the same mistake all over again.
Superior equipment, first class training, unparalleled discipline. What could possibly go wrong? This time?
Perhaps, one of us ought to let them know.
This is a problem throughout the U.S. economy. Monopolies both vertical and horizontal stifle innovation and competition but is good for profits.
All the years of mergers and out sourcing has been crazy, nice to see no pay wall with is video.
The javelin, the best!! MANPAT
Not even close, it's old tech now
@@francisyockey8225 good enough to pop soviet designs
@Francis Yockey it was the first to be fire and forget technology dude. Paved the way for everyone else to follow and copy, like the chinese HJ-12, the NLAW. Before MANPAT were just shooting a rocket grenade to enemies with your aim.
These guys have n.ever worked a day in DOD contracting and production. I designed the first Javelin launch motor tooling in the early 1990s, developed MK1000 bomb production, M1 Abrams gun ammo, etc. The problem isn't "competition" or pricing. They're correct in that certain types of munitions like Javelin are very expensive and equipment wasn't designed for a protracted WWII style war. On the other hand, tank munitions were high capability The overall problem is having trained personnel, using available munitions with launchers and delivered in a timely manner. It's a very complicated logistics problem. The U.S. has more than enough capability to deliver JDAM, but the delivery vehicle will be in short supply without appropriate delivery of the launch vehicle.
I remember long time back someone who commented on a RUclips clip that she worked at a javelin plant, and that she wasn't paid all that great. Is there an underpayment problem at these facilities?
@@MantisShrimp80 Perceived underpaying differ person from person. I would take a youtube comment for a grain of salt
@@MeowyBrigade His comment has " The overall problem is having trained personnel" while I cannot depend on one comment as you said for sure, while I am not experienced working in the defense industry having a shortage of skilled employees in an established company is generally a sign of management undervaluing skilled labor.
Just in time is an optimization for cheap and efficient by sacrificing resiliency.
that's dangerous.
That’s why this is a good opportunity to really tune up the military supply chain, use up some equipment that has been stored for a while and test how well the current weapons work in a real combat situation.
Much of our mothballed equipment went to NATO so that has put some pressure on demand as well.
We don't have any problem with testing given how much we've sent to Ukraine. The issue is our stockpiles are bare. According to the CSIS report this video references, it could take a decade to replace some systems. That's an issue given what could happen to Taiwan in 2027. The supply chain doesn't just need tuning, it needs a total overhaul.
"this is the javaline" they say while showing footage the the British/Swedish NLAW 😆
Well… If they have issues keeping up production of the Javelin, they might as well have issues keeping up producing of video clips of the Javelin.
4:38 The editors forgot this part for 1 frame or so
Good to expose it, now they can work on fixing it.
So government turned the defense industry into a monopoly? And you can't just ramp up production? Read that between the lines.. What that means is they only want a few friends making all the money and we're not allowing any competition to cut in on that, even if the nation's safety is at stake... Gotcha... Put another contract out or offer $1 more a unit and watch how fast production ramps up.
Edit: Guess I should have finished the video first before I watched it LOL But yeah, corporations, that's the reason for most of our problems and why they spend so much on media to convince us government is the problem. Government isn't that powerful, the multibillionaire's who pay off these slime ball politicians are what's powerful. Gas too expensive? Blame government while oil companies are making record profits! Malnourished infant due to a formula shortage? Blame government for it while a few companies that control supply make record profits off it's scarcity.. While certain area codes never knew the problem existed..
What if I told you those same corporations are the most responsible this war even started in the first place?
"But, Russians are the ones who invaded" is simply NPC tier reasoning.
@@shonemumy I would tell you that you wasted my time and yours stating the obvious. Thanks...
@@ec6052 Oh, look someone with an actual working brain. Rare thing among these comments. Cheers, man.
@shonemumy Well that makes one of us 😂
@@ec6052 Starting to think the same.
But for example when Texas Instuments sold off their defense industry to Raytheon the facilities & manpower remained intact. So not sure the loss of scale translates - seems more of a supply chain/covid issue
Covid lol
@@biggestcomplainer yeah should have covid response by idiot politicians
@@ameliam7898 Were you referring to TI's former defense contracts for semiconductors and microelectronics? I thought it was sold to Raytheon and Qorvo.
"Supply chain issue" is just another way of saying "reliant on China"
"THISSSSS" 0:02
Efficient and lean manufacturing is not built for surge support. We have spent decades cutting back on “waste” that we no longer have capacity to process huge amounts of munitions.
This is extremely alarming. Is anyone actually constructively DOING something about this or is everyone still standing around clutching their pearls and wringing their hands?
Welcome to America - everyone who can make money on it is already working to fix it. This is not only common sense, but one example is illustrated at 6:35.
The cold war idea of stockpiling weapons and munitions is 30 years in the past.
@@ewoksalot Doesn't sound to me like they're putting the pedal to the metal to get it done anytime in the near future. Projected delivery dates for ammo, as an example have been talked about in numerous other videos are being mentioned in double-digit months and even not until some time in 2024, depending on the kind of ammo being talked about. This in inexcusable and unacceptable.
I agree, we should be ramping up the day Ukraine was invaded
At time code 4:38 you have an error message in the video: "Analyzing In Background" that runs across the screen. It's for a brief second. Now we know you use Adobe Premiere lol.
war is costly. cant keep up with demand is even greater costly.
I used to think WSJ was a pretty unbiased news source, but more and more it feels like they are shilling for various corporations. The US spends an ever increasing amount on our military each year, but this paints the picture that the military industrial complex needs even more money to keep us ‘safe’.
They never said they needed to spend more money, just that the current supply chain is not sufficient. If you don't want to increase spending you could just conserve weapons more effectively, but that would require policy changes.
People are thinking that, oh, the US can't keep up with the demand of ammunition and military vehicles anymore. People don't know that the US is not at war, it's economy was not set to full-scale war productions, and it's not even in 25% of war productions. It's peace time, people, except the russia-ukraine war. It's not like ww2 where the US is in a full-scale war. That's when America came out from sleeping and built and produced the most military weapons and vehicles in history.
Yeah it went from a small time military to arguably the strongest in WW2.
People are hilariously ignorant to how strong the US economy is sometimes.
Yeah people overreact. US economy just wasnt calibrated for a war like the one in Ukraine. If the US really wanted to they could pump out ammunition at a pace that drowned Ukraine in ammo lol.
@@glichjthebicycle384
With what? The U.S is now too divided to even agreed on one policy that last more than 1 election.
Some excergerations don't even make sense. The javelins were mostly inoperable, with dead batteries et Al.
Anybody else catch the “analyzing in background” flash at 4:38