The Navy in mid-March awarded funds to Lockheed Martin and Austal USA, prime contractors for the two shipbuilding initiatives that comprise the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program, to “assess engineering and production challenges and evaluate the cost and schedule risks from affordability efforts to reduce LCS acquisition and lifecycle costs.”
The Navy plans to build 55 of the ships, which, by taking on and offloading various mission packages, are intended to be capable of multiple missions in complex, dangerous coastal environments where larger surface combatants cannot operate.
Lockheed Martin, teamed with Marinette Marine, is building the Freedom class of conventional monohulled ships displacing 3,200 tons. Austal USA and General Dynamics are building the trimaran-hulled, 2,800-ton Independence class.
The March awards ($33.6 million for Lockheed Martin and $19.7 million to Austal USA) could be seen as having been in anticipation of a rush of criticism that came in April—criticism of LCS shipbuilding and development of LCS mission packages for surface, antisubmarine, and countermine warfare. The packages consist of mission modules (weapon, sensor, and vehicle systems, and support equipment) plus crews and support aircraft.
The criticism included a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, followed by a letter from Danielle Brian, executive director of the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. Brian’s letter charged that the Navy has not fully reported performance problems, leaks, and design shortfalls on board the Freedom (LCS-1) to the Pentagon’s Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, and called for termination of the Freedom-class program.
The Navy responded quickly, pointing out that the deficiencies cited already have been reported and addressed, adding that the first ship of a new class often experiences problems. The Navy noted that “LCS-1 has traveled more than 65,000 nautical miles since [she] was delivered to the Navy in September 2008 and continues to meet our expectations.”
Still, the House Armed Services Committee inserted language in its markup of the Fiscal Year 2013 Defense Authorization Bill, calling on the Navy to report, within 30 days of passage of the bill, how it is addressing LCS deficiencies. On 27 April, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and ranking member John McCain (R-AZ) asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to evaluate both the shipbuilding and mission-package programs.
A month earlier, the Navy had exercised contract options for Austal that fund construction of the Gabrielle Giffords (LCS-10) and Omaha (LCS-12), the third and fourth ships of a ten-ship contract awarded in December 2010, when it also awarded a nearly identical contract to the Lockheed team. Austal’s second ship, the Coronado (LCS-4) is set for delivery this year. Austal also has started work on the Jackson (LCS-6) and is under contract for the Montgomery (LCS-8).
Marinette Marine is scheduled to deliver the Fort Worth (LCS-3) this year and is building the Milwaukee (LCS-5) and Detroit (LCS-7), to be delivered in August 2014 and April 2015 respectively. Also in March, the Navy awarded Lockheed Martin $715 million for construction of the Little Rock (LCS-9) and Sioux City (LCS-11).
In their letter to the GAO, Levin and McCain wrote that “as the mission module program is approaching a Milestone B [engineering and manufacturing development] decision, it has demonstrated instability. Specifically, the configuration and design of some of the modules are still to be determined in testing.” They noted the Navy also has announced plans to build an irregular-warfare package.
In late 2010 the Navy awarded Northrop Grumman a $29 million contract to act as systems integrator for the antisubmarine, countermine, and surface-warfare mission packages.
Navy and industry officials have pointed out that the development of the mission packages and integration with the seaframes are considerable challenges. In all three packages, systems selected initially have been replaced by others. The mine-warfare package now includes the MH-60S helicopter, a remote multimission undersea vehicle, an airborne-laser mine-detection system, AQS-20A minehunting sonar, and other elements.
The surface package consists of the Army’s Griffin surface-to-surface missile, a Bushmaster 30-mm gun, the MH-60R helo, and a vertical-takeoff unmanned aerial vehicle (VTUAV), with Increment 1 to be complete in FY 13. The Navy canceled an Increment 1 antisubmarine-warfare package, stating that Increment 2, for delivery in FY 16, will consist of advanced capabilities (still in development) probably including the VTUAV and MH-60R fitted with an airborne low-frequency dipping sonar.