Return of the Prodigal Drydock: Guam and the Navy’s Western Pacific Repair Gap
The MOC
Figure 1: Drydock ex-Machinist
By
Dr. Steven Wills
September 17, 2026
The former U.S. Navy large floating drydock once named Machinist has had an unusual journey since its construction in Germany in 1980: service at Subic Bay, later commercial work in Guam, severe storm damage in 2011, and a decade-long repair and modernization period at PaxOcean Shipyard in Zhoushan, China. Now known informally as “Big Blue,” the dock is positioned to return to Guam at a moment when the Navy’s Western Pacific repair capacity remains dangerously thin. Restoring a fully functioning shipyard and drydock on Guam should therefore be a high priority for U.S. civilian and naval leaders seeking to improve fleet readiness west of Pearl Harbor.
The Prodigal Drydock
The large floating drydock formerly known as Machinist is still relatively young by floating-dock standards, having been built for the Navy in West Germany in 1980. It served at the Subic Bay Ship Repair Facility for more than a decade before the 1992 closure of Subic Bay led to its move to Pearl Harbor. The dock remained in service there until 1997, when Base Realignment and Closure decisions led to its decommissioning. Ex-Machinist was then sold to the civilian Guam shipyard and served there from 1998 through 2011. Towed to Singapore-owned PaxOcean in 2016, the dock completed a significant overhaul that increased its capacity from 30,000-ton vessels to 35,000-ton ships, along with other modernization work supervised by U.S. personnel. U.S. shipyards have purchased or used floating drydocks built in China before, and given the relatively simple design of these platforms, intelligence collection and compromise appear unlikely. In any case, ex-Machinist would need a thorough inspection before returning to active service in Guam. Unlike other docks the Navy might purchase, ex-Machinist has a long record of U.S. Navy certifications that can help document and assess the upgrades made at PaxOcean. The dock could support a range of vessels, including LHA-class amphibious assault ships, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and Virginia-class submarines.
Bringing Back a Guam Ship Repair Facility
Although Guam, like other U.S. ship repair facilities in the Pacific, lies within range of extensive Chinese air and missile threats, day-to-day operations across the spectrum of naval activity require more forward repair capacity than the Navy currently has available. Some progress has been made in expanding access to facilities in Japan and South Korea, but dedicated U.S. ship repair capacity remains concentrated in Japan and in a Ship Repair Facility detachment in Singapore. A large gap still separates those forward locations from Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and, farther east, the West Coast of the United States. Ships that cannot be serviced in Yokosuka or Sasebo often face long transits to reach more capable repair locations. Reestablishing a Ship Repair Facility in Guam would help close that gap and strengthen maintenance and repair operations in the Western Pacific.
Since the former Navy Ship Repair Facility in Guam was closed, the number of ships homeported on the island has grown. Submarine Squadron Fifteen now includes five nuclear attack submarines based there, supported by the submarine tenders USS Frank Cable and USS Emory S. Land. Guam supports dozens of Military Sealift Command vessels that transit the Western Pacific in support of the Navy and the wider Joint Force. The island also hosts an expanded U.S. Coast Guard squadron of six fast response cutters and three buoy tenders that currently must go the Hawaii for drydock maintenance. A revitalized Ship Repair Facility on Guam would therefore have a substantial and continuing workload.
An Affordable Choice for Repair Return to Guam
From the closure of the Navy Ship Repair Facility in 1997 until 2012, the civilian Guam shipyard company leased the Navy facility and employed about 450 workers in ship repair. From 2013 to 2018, Cabras Marine, a tug and barge company, operated the facility to support its own vessels. According to local sources, the Navy has not yet decided how it will use the Ship Repair Facility. That delay is reducing the service’s own repair capacity in the Western Pacific. Sending ships to Singapore or Hawaii for major repairs imposes high costs in lost time, fuel, and operational availability.
Guam Industrial Services, which operates the Guam Shipyard business, remains the most economical option for restarting a major contractor-operated ship repair facility on the island. The company has a record of successful Navy work and retains the modernized ex-Machinist drydock, which is ready to return from Asia and support Guam-based Navy submarines and Military Sealift Command vessels. Some estimates suggest it could cost upward of $160 million to make Guam Shipyard a fully functioning depot-level maintenance site, but the company has already invested $45 million in upgrades to ex-Machinist, the essential asset around which the yard would be organized. Even without a floating dock for the past decade, Guam Shipyard has continued to build experience through work on Military Sealift Command vessels in the region.
Returning the prodigal floating drydock ex-Machinist to Guam would provide a major increase in U.S. Navy and Military Sealift Command maintenance and repair capacity in the Western Pacific. Located on U.S. soil and supported by U.S. citizen workers, a revitalized depot-level maintenance facility in Guam would give the fleet greater repair flexibility while also strengthening shipyard employment on the island. The U.S. Pacific Fleet should therefore inspect and recertify ex-Machinist before its return and approve its reinstallation as the centerpiece of a revived depot-level repair capability in America’s westernmost territory.
Dr. Steve Willsis the Navalist at The Center for Maritime Strategy.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.
Center for Maritime Strategy
By Dr. Steven Wills
The former U.S. Navy large floating drydock once named Machinist has had an unusual journey since its construction in Germany in 1980: service at Subic Bay, later commercial work in Guam, severe storm damage in 2011, and a decade-long repair and modernization period at PaxOcean Shipyard in Zhoushan, China. Now known informally as “Big Blue,” the dock is positioned to return to Guam at a moment when the Navy’s Western Pacific repair capacity remains dangerously thin. Restoring a fully functioning shipyard and drydock on Guam should therefore be a high priority for U.S. civilian and naval leaders seeking to improve fleet readiness west of Pearl Harbor.
The Prodigal Drydock
The large floating drydock formerly known as Machinist is still relatively young by floating-dock standards, having been built for the Navy in West Germany in 1980. It served at the Subic Bay Ship Repair Facility for more than a decade before the 1992 closure of Subic Bay led to its move to Pearl Harbor. The dock remained in service there until 1997, when Base Realignment and Closure decisions led to its decommissioning. Ex-Machinist was then sold to the civilian Guam shipyard and served there from 1998 through 2011. Towed to Singapore-owned PaxOcean in 2016, the dock completed a significant overhaul that increased its capacity from 30,000-ton vessels to 35,000-ton ships, along with other modernization work supervised by U.S. personnel. U.S. shipyards have purchased or used floating drydocks built in China before, and given the relatively simple design of these platforms, intelligence collection and compromise appear unlikely. In any case, ex-Machinist would need a thorough inspection before returning to active service in Guam. Unlike other docks the Navy might purchase, ex-Machinist has a long record of U.S. Navy certifications that can help document and assess the upgrades made at PaxOcean. The dock could support a range of vessels, including LHA-class amphibious assault ships, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and Virginia-class submarines.
Bringing Back a Guam Ship Repair Facility
Although Guam, like other U.S. ship repair facilities in the Pacific, lies within range of extensive Chinese air and missile threats, day-to-day operations across the spectrum of naval activity require more forward repair capacity than the Navy currently has available. Some progress has been made in expanding access to facilities in Japan and South Korea, but dedicated U.S. ship repair capacity remains concentrated in Japan and in a Ship Repair Facility detachment in Singapore. A large gap still separates those forward locations from Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and, farther east, the West Coast of the United States. Ships that cannot be serviced in Yokosuka or Sasebo often face long transits to reach more capable repair locations. Reestablishing a Ship Repair Facility in Guam would help close that gap and strengthen maintenance and repair operations in the Western Pacific.
Since the former Navy Ship Repair Facility in Guam was closed, the number of ships homeported on the island has grown. Submarine Squadron Fifteen now includes five nuclear attack submarines based there, supported by the submarine tenders USS Frank Cable and USS Emory S. Land. Guam supports dozens of Military Sealift Command vessels that transit the Western Pacific in support of the Navy and the wider Joint Force. The island also hosts an expanded U.S. Coast Guard squadron of six fast response cutters and three buoy tenders that currently must go the Hawaii for drydock maintenance. A revitalized Ship Repair Facility on Guam would therefore have a substantial and continuing workload.
An Affordable Choice for Repair Return to Guam
From the closure of the Navy Ship Repair Facility in 1997 until 2012, the civilian Guam shipyard company leased the Navy facility and employed about 450 workers in ship repair. From 2013 to 2018, Cabras Marine, a tug and barge company, operated the facility to support its own vessels. According to local sources, the Navy has not yet decided how it will use the Ship Repair Facility. That delay is reducing the service’s own repair capacity in the Western Pacific. Sending ships to Singapore or Hawaii for major repairs imposes high costs in lost time, fuel, and operational availability.
Guam Industrial Services, which operates the Guam Shipyard business, remains the most economical option for restarting a major contractor-operated ship repair facility on the island. The company has a record of successful Navy work and retains the modernized ex-Machinist drydock, which is ready to return from Asia and support Guam-based Navy submarines and Military Sealift Command vessels. Some estimates suggest it could cost upward of $160 million to make Guam Shipyard a fully functioning depot-level maintenance site, but the company has already invested $45 million in upgrades to ex-Machinist, the essential asset around which the yard would be organized. Even without a floating dock for the past decade, Guam Shipyard has continued to build experience through work on Military Sealift Command vessels in the region.
Returning the prodigal floating drydock ex-Machinist to Guam would provide a major increase in U.S. Navy and Military Sealift Command maintenance and repair capacity in the Western Pacific. Located on U.S. soil and supported by U.S. citizen workers, a revitalized depot-level maintenance facility in Guam would give the fleet greater repair flexibility while also strengthening shipyard employment on the island. The U.S. Pacific Fleet should therefore inspect and recertify ex-Machinist before its return and approve its reinstallation as the centerpiece of a revived depot-level repair capability in America’s westernmost territory.
Dr. Steve Wills is the Navalist at The Center for Maritime Strategy.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.