腐女

Political preferences clash with warship building realities as Trump pushes costly Ford class carrier revamp: experts_我的网站

一 |     

    The USS Gerald R. Ford departs from Souda Naval Base near Chania on the island of Crete, Greece, on February 26, 2026. Photo: VCGUS President Donald Trump's reported push to reshape the US Navy's next-generation aircraft carriers - from moving the island to abandoning electromagnetic catapults in favor of steam-powered systems - could impose heavy engineering, financial and schedule costs, Chinese military affairs experts said, warning of a widening gap between political preferences and the realities of building some of the world's most complex warships.
The Washington Post reported on Saturday that the US Navy is considering a major redesign of its new Ford-class aircraft carriers to better match Trump's preferred aesthetic, with the president favoring ships that more closely resemble US carriers from the World War II era. One option under study would move the carrier's island farther forward, toward the middle of the ship.
US officials cited by the report warned that such a change could require billions of dollars in redesign costs and cause substantial delays. 
The potential island redesign comes only days after Trump ordered another far-reaching change to the Ford-class program. On Thursday, he signed a national security memorandum directing the Pentagon and Navy to develop a plan within 60 days to replace the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) with steam catapults and the Ford-class carriers' Advanced Weapons Elevators with hydraulic systems, beginning with the future USS Doris Miller, or CVN-81, USNI News reported. 
Trump has repeatedly criticized EMALS as "too complex" and "not as effective as steam catapults," according to Reuters. 
But the order would reverse a technology path the US Navy has pursued for more than a decade. When the Navy selected EMALS in 2009, it said the system would lower overall lifecycle costs, require less maintenance than steam catapults and place less physical stress on carrier-based aircraft, per Reuters.
As of March 2026, the USS Gerald R. Ford had conducted 36,863 EMALS launches, according to Pentagon documents cited by Reuters. 
General Atomics, the manufacturer of EMALS, has warned against changing course on the Doris Miller, saying nearly 50 percent of production related to the system has already been completed and that a switch now would create significant cost, schedule and integration risks, according to Reuters. 
Zhang Junshe, a Chinese military affairs expert, told the Global Times on Sunday that the Ford-class carrier's aft-positioned island is not merely an aesthetic choice, but is closely tied to flight-deck efficiency and landing safety. "Moving the island farther aft creates more space around the catapults for aircraft parking and handling, helping shorten launch preparation time, while also reducing airflow disturbance during aircraft recovery," he said. 
Relocating the island forward would not be a simple cosmetic adjustment, but a major redesign affecting weight distribution, buoyancy, flight-deck layout and aerodynamics, with significant implications for both cost and schedule, Zhang noted.
Song Zhongping, another Chinese military affairs expert, told the Global Times that Trump's demand is one thing, but turning it into an actual warship design is another.
"The first four Ford-class carriers have either entered service or are already in different stages of construction, leaving very little room for fundamental changes to their overall designs," Song said. Even the fifth and sixth ships - the future USS William J. Clinton, CVN-82, and USS George W. Bush, CVN-83 - would face considerable cost and engineering consequences if the Navy attempts to overturn their established technological architecture, he said.
The US Navy officially announced the names of CVN-82 and CVN-83 in January 2025, per the US Navy official website. 
"There is an obvious gap between US President's political will and the engineering realities of aircraft-carrier construction," Song said.
Such proposed changes come as Ford-class construction timelines have already grown considerably compared with those of the preceding Nimitz class. The US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said in April that Nimitz-class carriers typically took seven to eight years to build, while Ford-class ships are currently taking roughly 10 to 11 years. In a separate assessment released this month, the CBO estimated that future Ford-class carriers under the Navy's 2027 shipbuilding plan could cost about $22 billion apiece. 
"Electromagnetic launch represents an advanced direction in aircraft-carrier catapult technology and has far greater development potential than traditional steam catapults," Song said. "If the US gives up electromagnetic catapults and returns to steam catapults, that would be a technological regression and a step backward."
Echoing Song, Zhang said electromagnetic catapults offer more precise control of launch energy and broader compatibility with different types of carrier-based aircraft, while requiring less shipboard space than steam systems with their extensive high-pressure piping.
"Replacing EMALS with steam catapults on a Ford-class carrier already designed around electromagnetic launch would not only represent a technological step backward, but could also turn an attempt to reduce risk into a new source of engineering and system-integration risk," Zhang said.
。

二 |     欧盟寄予厚望的《工业加速器法案》（Industrial Accelerator Act，简称IAA）正面临内部分裂的严峻考验。

三 | 随着今年秋季立法谈判进入关键阶段，欧盟两大经济体——法国和德国，围绕这部标志性产业政策应当具有多强的保护主义色彩，展开了激烈交锋。    “政客新闻网”欧洲版（POLITICO ）当地时间8月25日爆料，据三名欧盟外交官透露，法国主张强化“欧洲制造”保障，认为这是抵御所谓“中国补贴”竞争的必要手段；德国则忧心忡忡，担心过度保护主义会招致贸易伙伴报复，伤害自身高度依赖出口的经济。    这是欧盟委员会主席冯德莱恩第二任期的核心产业政策，目标是通过加速工业项目审批、降低行政负担，并引入低碳公共采购配额和“欧洲制造”规则，刺激清洁制造需求，同时将欧盟制造业占经济比重从目前约14%提升至2035年的20%。    提案设计者、欧盟工业事务专员塞茹尔内将其称为“学说的转变”，明确指向保护欧洲企业免受来自中国等国家所谓“更廉价且获得大量补贴”的进口冲击。        欧盟3月4日正式公布《工业加速器法案》，声称“如果我们100%的电池最终都产自中国，我们如何向民众解释脱碳是一个机遇？”欧盟    法德对垒，钢铁问题成焦点    据报道，法国主张严格的“仅限欧盟”口径，要求公共资金直接支持本土生产和就业；德国则青睐折中路线，主张向“可信伙伴”开放市场。尽管美国自身也在推行保护主义贸易政策并已表示反对，法国将这部立法视为建立更强“欧洲制造”保护的契机，以保护国内制造商免受来自中国等地的竞争。

四 |     而出口导向型的德国则担心，保护主义措施可能招致贸易伙伴的报复，从而重创其本来就已承压的经济。德国工商大会的调查显示，高达四分之三的德国跨境经营企业认为法案将对其产生明显影响，55%预计行政负担增加，42%预计生产成本上升，36%担心贸易伙伴采取报复措施。    在具体行业条款上，钢铁问题成为争论的焦点之一。根据欧盟委员会的原始提案，公共采购项目中使用的钢材中25%须为“低碳”钢材，但并未要求必须在欧盟生产。

五 | 这一“冷落”激怒了欧洲钢铁协会（Eurofer）。Eurofer警告，如果没有强有力的欧盟原产地要求，公共采购很可能通过进口产品来满足，从而打击欧洲钢铁制造商进行脱碳投资的积极性。    Eurofer呼吁，法案应明确要求低碳钢必须在欧盟27国境内完成“熔化和浇注”，才有资格参与政府采购与各项补助计划。

六 | 而按照现行草案的认定方式，来自近80个国家的产品仅需在摩洛哥、土耳其、塞尔维亚等地进行最低限度的加工，就可能被认证为“欧盟制造”。    这一立场正在获得支持。

七 | 在欧盟理事会分发的一份妥协草案中，成员国提议修改法案，要求“所用钢材总量中至少25%应为低碳且为欧盟原产地”。    据知情人士称，委员会刻意弱化“欧盟原产地”要求，部分是为了避免激怒美国特朗普政府和印度等钢材出口国。        8月14日，德国杜伊斯堡，可以看到莱茵河部分裸露的河床，背景中是蒂森克虏伯钢铁厂。政客    多国领导人打电话：以为你们想做朋友    德国的顾虑并非毫无根据。欧盟盟友和贸易伙伴也已对提案中一些保护主义色彩较浓的元素表示不安。    据“政客”援引一位议会内部人士透露，已有多国总理直接致电欧盟官员，抱怨“嘿，我以为你们想做朋友”（Hey, I thought you wanted to be friends），或嘲讽“你们不是正跟美中两国较劲吗”（I thought you were having a hard time with the U.S. and China）。言外之意，你们一边诉说着“不公平”，一边自己也跟美国一样搞贸易保护主义。    法德之争也只是冰山一角。爱尔兰、荷兰、瑞典、芬兰、爱沙尼亚、捷克等国家已明确站到反对阵营。爱尔兰作为欧盟新任轮值主席国，强调促进开放和基于规则的贸易，与法案的保护主义底色构成直接冲突。爱沙尼亚等6国甚至联名批判法案的保护主义条款将“严重削弱欧洲制造业的全球竞争力”。    产业界的反弹同样猛烈。欧洲汽车制造商协会警告，法案中有关整车组装与零部件本土化的硬性要求只会抬高欧洲本土制造成本。大众、斯特兰蒂斯、雷诺三大车企联手发声，要求放宽“欧洲制造”的认定方式。

八 | 德国化学工业协会主席则批评法案为“保护主义实验”，指出欧洲在未来技术领域依赖第三国的资本和专业知识，但法案却对外国投资设置了强制合资、技术转让和股权上限等新障碍。    中方亦是高度关注，已在6月世贸组织服务贸易理事会会议上就《工业加速器法案》提出严重关切。中方指出，法案对外国投资欧盟境内的电池、电动汽车、光伏及关键原材料等四大新兴战略行业设置了不合理的限制性要求，包括强制技术转让、股比限制（外资持股不超过49%）、本地含量、本地员工占比不低于50%等诸多限制性条款。

九 | 这些做法“构成了严重的投资壁垒和制度性歧视”，与世贸组织规则严重不符。

十 |     中国商务部在向欧委会提交的评论意见中，建议欧方删除法案中对外国投资者的歧视性要求、本地含量要求、强制转让知识产权和技术要求、公共采购限制政策等内容。中国汽车工业协会也发表声明，对法案表示“严重关切、强烈不满和坚决反对”。    走钢丝    面对重重阻力，爱尔兰轮值主席国7月底提交了一份妥协草案，提议放弃欧盟委员会此前宽泛的“欧洲制造”概念，并赋予委员会在成本过高、供应不足或威胁竞争力时放宽配额的酌情权，重新建立一套基于国际贸易协定和特定产品市场准入的全新体系。新方案还首次引入了“伙伴原产地”分类标准。    欧洲议会内部同样存在张力：中间偏右的欧洲人民党（议会最大党团）、中间派的复兴欧洲以及中间偏左的社会党与民主党之间，正在形成一个更倾向于支持产业的联盟。他们共同主张，欧洲需要采取更具进取心的产业战略，以与中国和美国展开竞争。而绿党则警告此举可能稀释气候目标。

十一 |     尽管冯德莱恩希望法案能在今年年底前获得通过，但目前立法推进节奏已明显延后，欧洲理事会版本仍存在实质性修正需求，加上欧洲议会预计要到9月才能确定立场，法案年内通过的可能性正在降低。

十二 |     这场辩论的本质，是欧盟在“应对中国竞争”的旗号下，试图平衡产业保护与开放贸易的两难。法国希望借机筑起更高的壁垒，德国则害怕壁垒反过来伤及自身。原本设想的“联手抗中”，如今却演变成法德先内斗的局面。        在欧盟关键议题上，法德少不了要内讧AFP    正如比利时布鲁盖尔研究所（Bruegel）在其政策简报《欧盟拟议〈工业加速器法案〉的缺陷及如何修复》中举例指出，根据欧盟委员会自身评估，将中国太阳能电池排除在市场之外，不仅使欧洲政府支付的太阳能板价格翻倍，还将在更广范围内损害欧洲的工业竞争力。

十三 |     说到底，欧洲的产业雄心正卡在一个老问题上：既要对外筑墙，又要对内拆篱，可最该打通的关节却始终无人敢动。

十四 |     8月24日，西班牙对外银行研究部（BBVA Research）毫不客气地戳中了要害：欧盟通过《工业加速器法案》重启工业政策，方向本身没有错——以针对性干预应对美中竞争、减少关键依赖，这本就不是简单的重商主义保护。

十五 | 但问题在于，法案一边喊着简化审批，一边又添上新规则，陷入了典型的“监管悖论”，非但没能根治欧洲过度监管的积弊，反而暴露了更深层的短板：缺乏推进单一资本市场、统一能源体系等真正一体化改革的魄力。    报告最后的提醒，值得每一个欧洲决策者细读：如果只满足于产业规则的修修补补，却迟迟不愿在欧盟层面共享更多主权、提升共同行动能力，那么欧洲最终很可能既挡不住外部竞争的风浪，也守不住自家工业的底盘。产业政策终究只是一张处方，敢不敢真正动手术，才是决定生死的那个问题。

十六 |         “散装欧盟”，该如何和中美竞争？欧盟返回，查看更多。

Current article:http://sddif.chongtunkuaitaogacuiliamanzu.cfd/list_pn4/o6x1stx.html

Published on:16:07:40