Very interesting exchange in the replies. A war in the western Pacific would require some very serious sustainment and replenishment ship numbers. And the ability to replace such shipping with some rapidity is vital. Efforts to rely on shipbuilding capacity "under the guns" of the most likely foe in such a war would seem to be a non-starter. To assert, as Mr. Grabow does, "It is not apparent that there is sufficient sustained demand for naval auxiliary ships and commercial ships to support three US shipyards" is an argument that would virtually insure that the US would lack sufficient combat supply and resupply shipping from the start of any combat operations. Anticipating such demand is one of many reasons there now is a much needed push to build up US shipbuilding capacity. "Just in time" thinking does not work well in real world strategic and tactical sealift given the time it takes to build ships. Logistics may not be the pointy end, but it allows the pointy end to do its job.