Why Didn't the U.S. Navy Share the America-Class Amphibious Ship Design with Japan and South Korea?

The decision not to share the America-class amphibious ship design with Japan and South Korea, unlike the collaboration with the Arleigh-Burke-class destroyer, is multifaceted and reflects several strategic, operational, technical, and resource considerations.

Strategic Considerations

The U.S. Navy may have strategic reasons for limiting the sharing of certain advanced technologies and designs. The America-class ships are integral to U.S. amphibious operations and capabilities, and the U.S. might prefer to retain exclusive control over specific operational aspects of these vessels. This ensures that these advanced technologies remain under U.S. surveillance and control.

Different Operational Needs

Japan and South Korea have distinct operational requirements and threats that may not align perfectly with the America-class design. The U.S. may encourage these nations to develop their own designs that are better suited to their specific strategic contexts rather than adopting a design that may not fully meet their needs. This tailored approach ensures that the amphibious carriers are optimized for local conditions and military scenarios.

Technical Complexity

The America-class amphibious assault ships incorporate advanced technologies and systems that may be more complex or sensitive than those used in the Arleigh-Burke-class destroyers. Sharing such designs can involve significant challenges in terms of technology transfer, maintenance, and operational integration. The U.S. must ensure that any shared technologies are thoroughly vetted and can be integrated seamlessly into U.S. and allied military systems.

Existing Collaborations

The U.S. has engaged in various levels of defense cooperation with Japan and South Korea, but this collaboration often focuses on specific systems or platforms rather than entire ship designs. For example, Japan is developing its own class of helicopter carriers, and South Korea has been working on its own amphibious assault ship, the Dokdo-class. This approach allows for a more flexible and adaptable regional defense strategy.

Cost and Resources

Developing and building a new class of ships is a significant investment in time and resources. The U.S. may prioritize its own shipbuilding capabilities and resources, especially given the complexities involved in the design and construction of advanced amphibious platforms. Sharing design blueprints can be challenging and may not always result in cost-effective solutions, given the specialized nature of these vessels.

In summary, while Japan and South Korea are indeed looking to develop their own amphibious carriers to operate the F-35 stealth fighter, the decision not to share the America-class design likely stems from a combination of strategic, operational, technical, and resource considerations. This approach enables the U.S. to maintain control over advanced technologies, tailor designs to specific operational needs, address technical challenges, and manage costs more effectively.

Keywords: amphibious ship design, F-35 stealth fighter, Naval Collaboration