Pre-nuclear wartime production.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

A lot is made (as well it should be) of the industrial output of the US during the second world war. Without any real way to bomb the US, we could crank out in excess of 40000 tanks, and as many planes and enough ships to carry both (as well as goods) to various points east and west to essentially supply the world's war effort against the Axis.

However, given the short window between conventional and limited nuclear exchange of the Twilight War, would there even be time to ramp up production of anything? I know during the cold war many types of production lines were open, but when it comes to some assets, there'd just be no chance due to complexity. I mean, in WWII if we lost a sub, or subs, or destroyers, and so forth, another was a mere month away. However, during the conventional part of the Twilight War was there even any consideration given to building replacements for weapon systems as the war went on? I recall reading Sir John Hackett's books and how NATO was on pins and needles because the US strategic bomber force (B52s and B1s) had been attritted so badly that a conventional strike planned to break the back of the 3rd Shock Army in Central Europe was seriously questioned.

I would think in the 18 or so months where we, to quote Isoroku Yamamoto, we "ran like a wild beast" across Europe we wouldn't have enough time to ramp up production before the first nukes flew to the west.

Thoughts?

[Raellus]

I'm curious about this as well. And something else to consider...

Building an M4 Sherman and building an M1 Abrams are not the same thing. Due to its mutitude of advanced components, especially its armor and optics, an Abrams takes longer to manufacture from start to finish. How much longer, I'd love to know. This is doubly true of aircraft and ships.

So, how many advanced weapon systems could the U.S. crank out in the eventuallity of a full-scale conventional war? I think it's safe to say that the numbers would be significantly lower than the output during WWII but, again, how much lower?

I know that over the past couple of decades, and maybe even prior, that the U.S. has closed a large number of major shipyards because it couldn't complete with lower cost producers like South Korea. I can't see the U.S. cranking out a carrier a week like they did with the Essex class in the later years of WWII. Could the U.S. even keep up with combat losses during the last decade of the Cold War?

How about now? To bring this to the present day, I'm really worried about how the U.S. would able to keep up with its rivals (read Russia and China) in the event of a conventional WWIII. An F-22 is a fearsome beast, but they cost a ton and take a while to build. I fear that the U.S. has lost the production advantage that we had during the last World War.

[Olefin]

I can give you some insight into this - when I was at BAE we took Bradley production from 40 per month to 160 per month in the course of a six month period - but remember these were all either reworks or upgrades to existing vehicles

same with M88A2- line went from 1 per month to 16 per month in a six month period

we built 8 brand new M88A2's for the Iraqi Army where we ordered castings and other material - and the lead times were over 6 months for the material

and MRAP's were built on a crash basis during the war - but many of them had a lot of quality issues because we didnt have time to properly get the kinks out during the build process

so the real questions for war production would be:

1) Are you talking modifications and upgrades to existing hulls (turn an M1 into an M1A1, a Persian Gulf Bradley into a more modern Bradley, an M88A1 into an M88A2) or are you talking about new production?

New production means armor plate and castings - and there are only so many producers of armored plate and heavy castings in this country. Even on a war footing around the clock you could only ramp up production so far.

2) If its mods how much extra equipment is there to be able to send to the factories for the upgrades? At one point we had nearly 800 Bradleys and 90 M88A1 hulls sitting in our storage areas at York waiting for the upgrade or refit process - but in an all out war can you afford to have that much equipment sitting to be upgraded at a factory?

3) How much repair work will be done at the factories? Is there shipping to bring the stuff back? We were repairing Bradley's with battle damage at York when I was there - would any equipment be sent back or would it stay overseas

And even if you can make the vehicles - can you keep them armed? One thing that they ran into during both Gulf Wars was the shortage of artillery shells - it doesnt help if you have 500 new M1A1 tanks but dont have enough shells to arm more than 200 of them at a time. Lots of replacement tanks available but your real strength multiplier is just the 200 tanks you can arm at any one time.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Thanks for the info Olefin. I'm not entirely sure what "modern" war production would entail - would they be shipping back wrecked vehicles (that one has a dead turret, that one has a compromised hull e.g., deformed fuel cell) to rebuild? If so, there's your "40 a month" figure. But from raw iron up? How long would it take to build a basic model M1 "from scratch"? A month? More? And how many could go at the same time?

For aircraft, I'd imagine it'd be just as long if not longer given the much tighter tolerances. And, lastly, capital ships ... well, anything you didn't already have started would practically go un-built before the nukes started to fly.

[Raellus]

Thanks for the inside scoop, Olefin. I hadn't factored in rebuilds. That complicates things. I was focussed on new production to both replace total scratch combat losses and to equip new units. I don't know for sure, but I'm under the impression that if would have been very difficult, if not impossible, to keep up with demand, even if WWIII had occured at the height of the Cold War.

Olefin, do you happen to know how many Bradley assembly lines were operating at the height of production?

Any idea about how long it would take to set up a new production line? Once again, I think it would take a lot longer in the 1980s and beyond than it would have in the 1940s. There were a lot fewer automobile and heavy machinery plants in the U.S.A. starting in the 1970s and there are very few (comparatively) here today.

I think I remember another thread that discussed this issue a while back. IIRC, there might have even been a list of plants building M1s or major components. I'll see if I can find it and maybe merge it with this one.

[Olefin]

I would say given the length of the war that capital ships would be whatever would be in the pipeline for anything large

You might get some new freighters, patrol boats, landing craft, etc.. - but I dont see anything destroyer or submarine or larger from scratch unless all the parts, etc.. were already ordered and it was in the build pipeline priot to the war start - especially with all the electronics you would need and lack of American steel production versus WWII

however you could get faster production of what is already in the pipeline due to wartime need and increased around the clock production

for instance I think there is a real chance that the Harry S. Truman - which in our timeline wasnt commissioned until July 25 1998 - might have been ready in time to be commissioned before the Thanksgiving Massacre - given the start of the Russian Chinese war you could see getting her ready being given higher priority and especially with the start of hostilities in 1996 with the Soviets

With the losses in the Atlantic she would have been built around the clock and probably commissioned no later than August to September of 1997 - i.e. in time to get some kind of air group and join the war before the strike on Norfolk

On the other hand you could bring older ships back into action faster - for instance it took two years to get the Iowa class battleships back into commission and improved with all their upgrades in the mid 80s' - but if all they had needed was to put them back into commission as is with no upgrades they might have been ready in as little as 18 months - and this wasnt working around the clock in a war situation

[Olefin]

The Bradley production lines would have just transitioned from San Jose CA to York PA and we had two production lines - one for mods and one for refits

The final assembly, integration and test is conducted at the BAE Systems facility in York, PA. Unlike RESET programs, designed to replace all defective or worn parts and restore/service a vehicle back to pre-combat condition, remanufacture is a complete rebuild designed to return it to full “zero miles” condition, and install upgrades

the other lines were for making M88's and M109's - and also keep in mind that the M8 AGS would have been in production too given a wartime order

all of this would have been at York

There was another facility at Fayette in Uniontown as well for disassembly and structural modifications of Bradley's that were then sent to BAE Systems in York. This started in 1993 and raises an interesting addition to the Allegheny Uprising module.

When they wrote the module the facility wasnt there - so if you want to make an interesting addition you can have that facility there in Uniontown - there would be an assortment of partially torn down or older Bradleys and M109's there that would barely be driveable waiting to be worked on - in pretty sad shape but a few might have been operable. Could make for yet another reason that they want you to go to that area - to get parts off the vehicles or possibly capture some operable ones that are in the hands of the militias in the area

[JHart]

US production would already be ramped up, assuming that production was increased to help the Chinese. Munitions such as small arms ammo, AT weapons, possibly arty ammo should be easy to produce. Trucks of all types could be shipped to China. Aircraft and tanks would take longer to build and ship and production of both may proceed in the assumption that if the Chinese hold on they will get tanks and planes, and if they don't, then the US and NATO may need them.

As an aside, I wonder if nations near China would provide material aide, especially if the US agrees to replace what ever is given. Japan could easily ship trucks and munitions, and Taiwan may side with the mainland and help. I thought they did in canon by i don't recall at the moment.

[RN7]

American heavy industry such as automobiles, steel making and shipbuilding has declined since the 1970's as foreign competition has eroded its competiveness and American industry has also refocused on newer technologies. American aerospace production is probably an exception to the rule if it is considered a heavy industry. It has consistently remained large and America's manufacturing capacity remains greater than any other countries. However building a B-2 or an F-22 is a bit more complicated than building a P-51 Mustang or a B-17, but America could still build them quicker than anyone else.

American commercial shipbuilding has practically disappeared, but America's naval shipbuilding infrastructure is probably the most extensive in the world. America can still build a nuclear powered aircraft carrier or a submarine quicker than any other country. However unless it builds new shipyards it won't be churning out many new destroyers, amphibs and freighters at a much higher rate than it does at the moment.

American auto and steel making and many other heavier industries have remained under capacity despite some investment in the auto industry from Asia. It can produce more and with huge government contracts and orders being dangled in front of it and exports to allies as WW3 breaks out, American manufacturing could massively expand and there would be no foreign competition for these orders or transplanting factories to China either. What factory capacity doesn't exist could be very easily added to by building new factories. Building new factories to produce jeeps, trucks, guns, bullets, uniforms and artillery shells would not be challenging for America and it could produce them in huge numbers over an 18 month period.

Building tanks and armoured vehicles might be more of a problem. At the moment (and in the 1990's) there are only a limited number of factories that produce them. Regarding tanks there have only been three American tank factories since the late 1950's.

Chrysler Delaware Defence Plant in Newark produced the first M60's. Newark stopped making M60 tanks in 1960 as production switched to Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant. Chrysler retained operational control of the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant until it sold its defence division to General Dynamics in 1982 who stopped production of the M60 in 1987. General Dynamics built the M1 at Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant until 1996 when General Dynamics consolidated all of its tank production to Lima, Ohio. The United States hasn't made an all new tank from scratch since 1996.

Olefin would probably know if it would take a lot more time to build a new tank than recondition a tank, but General Dynamics reconditioning of the M1 is very intensive so maybe not so much.

M1 tank reconditioning at Lima averages half a tank per day (15 tanks a month). General Dynamics can easily ramp that up to two and a half tanks a day (75 tanks a month). In wartime that figure could conceivably rise to over a 100 tanks a month. If we say that reconditioning takes the same amount of time as producing a new tank, then the addition of the still existent Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant production to Lima's figure could probably produce about 200 Abrams class tanks a month (2,400 a year) with 1996 infrastructure. Would building a couple more tank factories be all that difficult?

[Olefin]

Again the issue comes down to availability of armor plate for the tanks. Producing light vehicles, trucks, Hummers, even military vehicles with lighter armor like Bradley, M8 AGS and M109 would be easier because they dont require the heavy armor plate that vehicles like the M88, the M60 and the M1 require. While you could build new factories the question is would there be enough time to get them up and running from say the beginning of the Russian invasion of China to before TDM?

That could also explain why the military took over the export production of the Stingray tank for its own use - its lighter armor would be easier to make and thus could make up for a shortfall in heavy tank production caused by a shortage of armor plate to make or repair tanks like the M1 and the M60.

[RN7]

How far does the military-industrial complex really reach?

Its ironic but the state controlled arms industry of the Soviet Union and China is actually more transparent than in the West. The Soviet's built a tank factory to build tanks, and they built a refrigerator factory to build refrigerators. In the West private enterprise plays a much bigger role in industry and its harder to discern the true arms manufacturing capacity.

In America for example a corporation builds a factory to make trucks, or steel plate or widgets. But how many were originally designed with the capacity to be able to switch over to military production relatively easy. Given the extent of America's military-industrial complex I would be very surprised if such factories don't exist.

Also building a new tank factory may not be that difficult. The blueprint would already exist to build a factory with the right dimensions, equipment, machine tools, and for what type of materials and parts would be needed from suppliers. In fact the suppliers would also have their own blueprints for what they need. America wouldn't have a new tank factory on the scale of Lima or Detroit up and running in two months, but in a year?

[raketenjagdpanzer]

re: soviet production...there's an old joke that goes like this:

Soviet woman wants to do something really nice for her husband and she notes that her neighbor finally got approved to buy a new mattress. So over tea she complains and says "I have waited for five years for a new mattress, and I work at the mattress factory! My husband has a poor back and I want to get him a nice new spring mattress."

Her friend says "Well, do what everyone else does, take a little part here, and a little part there, nothing that anyone will notice, and then in a month or two when you get all the parts, assemble your mattress at home!"

She sighs and says "I've tried and tried but every time I bring home all the parts and assemble them I just wind up with an AK47."

[unkated]

I think that on average, it would take 6 months to ramp up production to double it's normal production rate for aircraft and ground vehicles. It's not just a question of simply running more shifts - the components (and the components for the components) need to ramp up their production, too.

Ship production you can more or less forget about; while you might get construction started, you won't get a completed, outfitted frigate that starts after 1995 by the end of 1998.

For example, M1s need body sections, engines, track, drive wheels, cannon, etc. These components, constructed elsewhere, need to have their production ramped up - contracts agreed to, materials (steel, castings, chips, boards, seats, etc) supplied. And this is just to improve one production line; setting up another factory will be a year or so.

Recall for WW2, the US spent most of 1940/41/42 building or converting the additional factories & ship yards it would need before the massive production started. Today's more complex factories would take longer to set up. Again, starting in mid-1996, new production lines for large items (armored vehicles) would hardly have started production before TDM, 1998.

(Dumb) ammo production might be better than doubled in that time frame, because there are fewer supporting requirements. Ammo sent to China (I thought we had talked about that as limited) would be ramped up production, and probably not added production lines. Smart bombs and missiles have the same issues with getting production for components to ramp up before their completed item can ramp up.

As for rebuilds in a major war - I could see more effort (turret, engine, drive train replacement) being made to repair in theatre, as sending tanks home for rebuild would be a long trip, as well as taking a chance on surviving the trip home.

[rcaf_777]

If the west if already making items for China as they are first to fight the Russians, would you not see some plants alreay at full production and certians parts of the US industrial base may be already ramping up to meet demands.

[Apache6]

I think your underestimating the ability of the US to ramp up tank and ship production. "In order to maintain the industrial base," Congress has for a long time directed the Services (Army and Navy) to build ships and vehicles in U.S. plants and MUCH slower then necessary. The intent is to make it possible to keep the production lines open.

It results in slower production, and higher costs, but is intended to give the nation the ability to 'ramp up' for a major war.

A lesson learned from Desert Storm is that we (US Military) consumed precision guided munitions at a very high rate. In real world, this led to increased capacity to surge production (executed by the Goverment by writing it into contracts for producers), which was exercised/demonstrated in Bosnia Operations. During T2000K the increased production capability might just be starting to come on line around TDM.

Could led to an interesting adventure, when a PC group is tasked to go to the Lockheed Martin Plant in St Louis (and/or a rail siding just about anywhere) and recover and escort X number of semi trucks carrying Y number of Tomahawk Missiles or TOW missiles which were produced before TDM but unable to be shipped as they were 'lost' in post TDM confusion. They are vitally needed to help drive the Mexicans out of Texas.

I once GM'd a game where the PCs learned about and worked to recover a lot of prewar ordnance which was sitting 'dockside' in ISO containers when Breman was nuked. The area was heavily contaminated and the only one who knew where the munitions was a Army Logistics SgtMaj, blind due to nuclear flash, who was the operations chief at the logistics hub at the Port.

[Olefin]

Our GM when we did Last Submarine made a lot of the adventure about recovering torpedoes and other equipment and electronics to repair the SSN (which was already in government hands but had a non-functional weapons system and thus couldnt be used for war patrols or the mission overseas until it was repaired)

Actually thats one thing that the Challenge Magazine article on getting to the M1 tank plant in Ohio completely glossed over - sure there wasnt a bunch of tanks sitting there waiting to be grabbed by the players - but an intact tank plant would be a gold mine of spare parts,engines, armor plate, etc.. - especially since MilGov is probably sitting on as many as 100-200 M1 tanks that need repairs and they are back in operation if not more - 20 crated engines and transmissions, new barrels and a couple of truckloads of spare parts would be worth far more than one or two operational M1's

[rcaf_777]

The supply of tanks and surplus parts in the US might be a reason why the US agree to give up their tanks and AFV on departing from europe, minus key part of course.

I mean in CIV or MIL Gov has acess to some stockpiles, why not start making newish stuff.

This would also explain why the germans were keen to have them, as their means of production is gone.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by rcaf_777

The supply of tanks and surplus parts in the US might be a reason why the US agree to give up their tanks and AFV on departing from europe, minus key part of course. I mean in CIV or MIL Gov has acess to some stockpiles, why not start making newish stuff.

This would also explain why the germans were keen to have them, as their means of production is gone.

I dunno about Germany completely losing its tank production capability. Before the war the assembly lines for the Leopard 1 and 2 tanks was in Munich, Kiel and Kassel at various stages. Munich was a nuclear target, but I don't think Kassel and Kiel were.

[Olefin]

I think the US gave up as much equipment as they did primarily because outside of the Russian forces in Alaska and Texas there wasnt much need for heavy armor at home. The Mexican forces didnt have much left and what they had was basically mostly light armor

Now if they had known they were about to face a home grown enemy they may have changed their minds about that

Some of it as we discussed must have got sent to CENTCOM (thus explaining the larger tank numbers in the US units there after Omega and the reinforcements arrived from Europe as seen in the RDF Sourcebook) but they left the vast majority of it in the hands of the Germans - basically as compensation for taking what was left of the German and possibly the Danish merchant marine with them and for the oil necessary to get them all home.

[Olefin]

By the way one thing to keep in mind too is that the US Army Depots at places like Red River and Anniston would have been very busy trying to get as many older stored tanks as possible back into trim to be used by either our allies (M48's for the Turks for instance) or to be used as replacements or even to add some armor to the light divisions that were being formed - i.e. I would rather have a battalion of old M48 tanks to give me some armor than none at all.

And there were a significant amount of older tanks in the US that could have been used long before they had to start raiding museums to get armor

[chico20854]

Attached is a summary from a 1987 Congressional Budget Office report of what weapon production rates were at the time...

It too will go on my new website!

[Olefin]

M-2 Bradley 540 792

Keep in mind that we had higher production rates than that if you are looking at either reset or remanufacture of Bradleys when I was at BAE in York during the 2008-2014 time period - those rates are probably new builds

(for about a year and a half during that time period between the reset and remanufacturing lines we were processing over 125 a month at the height of the effort)

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I still wanna see my M70A2 Puller in the unofficial official non-canon canon weapons timeline

[mpipes]

And those rates Chico quotes are not the MAXIMUM production rate.

Was not Anniston able to produce M-1s as well as refurbish them? I know for my game, I had two intact M-1 production lines in Anniston as well as two production lines and a refurbishment/repair line at Lima. I used the V2.2 timeline with production beginning to ramp up to wartime after the invasion of Belarus.

[Webstral]

Some of this discussion is covered in some detail elsewhere in this collection of threads. I think there's room for flexibility in the numbers by the time we get to Jan 97. By that time, the war will have been on for almost 18 months. Which US production lines are functioning at what capacity will be based on what was happening in July 1995 but will be subject to whatever decisions one imagines the DoD and Congress making after that. We would sell some items in massive quantities. We would sell others in limited quantities. China would not be the only market, necessarily. If other US customers get swept up in an arms race, sales of M1 could go up. One would have to settle definitively on a set of political developments in late 1995 and early 1996 to have a basis for imagining how production of the various arms in question would be affected.

[Olefin]

One thing to keep in mind as to ramp ups of production - things like castings, tank guns, engines, transmissions have long lead times - in some cases up to a year

So even assuming that the US ramped up tank and AFV production with the start of the Russian Chinese war it would take nearly a year to get all those lines up to capacity for new production.

Now reman and reset are different - those could be expanded more quickly in some cases - but you dont just suddenly get another 1000 tank engines

its the same with ship production - you can accelerate new ships already in the pipeline that at the least have been laid down and all major parts in hand but unless you were in series production and ordered long lead items years before you cant suddenly rush out a dozen new DD's or submarines from scratch

[jester]

I would think rather than building new items from scratch which has been covered by many. And the big issue is not the items, but the parts to put these items together.

I would also like to add,

SKILLED PERSONNEL to do this. Simply put, brain drain. We lost a lot of people at the end of the Cold War who either retired or went on to other industries. So, rounding them up and getting their skillset back would take time. Or training new people would also take time.

REFURBISHING EQUIPMENT IN STORAGE:

This is easier than rebuilding from scratch, but would still require new parts and components. And it would also require skilled personnel.

Otherwise, aircraft that have been properly mothballed can be brought online in a month IF the right people are available.

Smaller ships again if properly mothballed could be brought online in about that amount of time. Six months to a year for capital ships.

For other vehicles, about 30 days turnaround from disassembly to rebuild provided spares and talent are available. In some cases the time can be much less. Basicaly the less complicated the vehicle the quicker the turnaround.

A reading of a production facility, they once the line is up and producing could rebuild and put out about 200 Humvees a month. That is of course multiple lines producting round the clock which during War time would be assumed.

Another assumption, if we were at war time production all shifts would be at max capacity unlike now where the bulk of the workforce is during he day shift and the swing and graveyard are a fraction of day shift.

I do wonder if any of us are considering full staffed round the clock production 24-7 at the same rate. Unlike in our life times, swing and graveyard shifts tend to be much less than day shift.

The big problem I see has already been mentioned. Much like being in a fast paced advance. Out running your supplies. So that your lines are all shut down due to a lack of parts.

Next. Personnel as I mentioned. Skilled personnel to do the work, or training them. Even being on an assembly line will take six months to get up to speed.

And personnel to man this gear. I would imagine there would be a draft or recall of troops within their IR obligation.

But, where would we get enough people who knew how to operate these systems on active duty? A lot of guys from the Cold War era would have 3 issues.

1.) Our skills have perished.
2.) Technology has advanced that a lot of it is alien to us.
3.) Time has attacked us and lowered our Con, Agility and Stature.

[unkated]

Originally Posted by jester

SKILLED PERSONNEL to do this. Simply put, brain drain. We lost a lot of people at the end of the Cold War who either retired or went on to other industries. So, rounding them up and getting their skillset back would take time. Or training new people would also take time.

This depends a lot on which timeline. The v1.0 timeline does not include a halt to the Cold War, or a build down. This is an issue for V2 or v2.2 or 2013.

(And if you think NATO's build down was severe 1987-1996, to me the WP build down in the same period is..... more extensive.)


Uncle Ted

[pmulcahy11b]

As far as small arms, most firms, even small ones, already producing small arms would receive "build for us or else" orders from the US government. It may even mean that troops receive a hodgepodge of calibers and arms by the TDM.

I once played in a game where the players were given double starting funds, but the new draftees were told they would receive little from their new units other than food, heavy weapons, and transportation.

[jester]

Well, the hodge podge of weapons is easy. That happens normaly as it is.

Specific contracts are given for the lower receiver and that's it. Another company does the upper, another the barrel and then the other parts are contracted usualy other system, like say the sights to someone else who may use subcontractors for the actual parts and simply assemble them.

This I can see being done with a lot of equipment, from mess kits to packs to smaller vehicles.

I would also think that every model of pickup truck, SUV and ATV and jeep of the year of the TDW would be taken and painted camo, OD or white with black lettering "Gov Vehicle" and of course whatever number of next years models who made it to the show room.