Concept for Aegis-equipped LCS proposed for the likes of Saudi Arabia
Posted on 12/15/2010 9:23:59 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
Littoral Combat Ship Miracle Bids Likely To Be Accepted By Congress
20:26 GMT, December 15, 2010 Recent testimony by senior officials of the U.S. Department of the Navy before the Senate Appropriations Committee reveal the source of their new-found enthusiasm for buying both variants of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). Apparently both bidders, Lockheed Martin and Austal, came in with bids one-third lower than the price being charged for the initial set of four vessels. At $440-460 million a copy for the sea frame, the opportunity to acquire a mixed fleet of LCS is almost irresistible. Moreover, these “miracle bids” do not reflect further cost savings that could result as both builders move up the learning curve, take advantage of a multi-year procurement contract to reduce supplier costs and refine their cost estimating methodologies. The Navy’s experience with cost reduction in the Virginia-class submarine program, a collaborative effort by General Dynamics’ Electric Boat and Northrop Grumman’s Newport News shipyards, is illustrative of possible savings once production is underway.
If the new acquisition strategy is approved both bidders will be challenged to make good on their promises. This may be particularly difficult for Austal which no longer has the level of support from General Dynamic (GD) that existed when the two were partners on their construction of the first LCS. Unquestionably, Lockheed Martin will be working closely with Marinette Marine, the Wisconsin shipyards, to ensure both quality and cost controls. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that considerable risks remain in the LCS program. A recent GAO review of the LCS programs noted that the Navy believes that experience to date on the program, coupled with fixed price contracts and a sufficient budget for ship changes, mitigates this risk. This same study went on to point out that a second ship design and source provided under the dual award strategy could provide the Navy an additional hedge against risk.
In their testimony, senior Navy leaders discussed the evolution of the program and their overall level of confidence. They perceive the risks noted by the GAO as manageable. Sean Stackley, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, declared that “this program has done a complete turn-around.”
Building both variants of the LCS opens up new possibilities for further design modifications to one or both to meet specific mission requirements. Allies in the Persian Gulf have been looking seriously at the Lockheed Martin design as a potential missile defense ship. The addition of a more powerful gun and long-range missile launchers could turn the Austral/GD design into a “gunship” to support amphibious operations. The explosion of research and development in the area of unmanned systems also will create new options for both LCS designs.
---- Daniel Goure, Ph.D.
Early Warning Blog
Concept for Aegis-equipped LCS proposed for the likes of Saudi Arabia
I don’t understand these ships. Does the USN expect to fight a lot more future battles in Littoral areas? Defensively or offensively? Is the USN expecting local attacks the USCG can’t handle? Just what is the mission and why has this new need arisen? We have always focused on a blue water navy.
I do not understand them or the need either. We need planes to outfly the Chinese and we need our Infantry and Marines to be the best trained, armed, led, and supported men in the world. This Mullen really fries my rear end.
“At $440-460 million a copy for the sea frame, the opportunity to acquire a mixed fleet of LCS is almost irresistible.”
Wife comes home from shopping after spending $500.
Husband “are you crazy?”
Wife “but everything I bought was on sale, just think of how much money I saved!”
Our weapons systems have longer and longer range. Why is there a need to get in close where it's more dangerous?
Almost a half billion for these little ships? That's a deal?
Build more Arleigh Burkes.
That oil rig has no chance....No chance...
I see they’re still using black powder in the deck guns.
These ships would be better served for shore patrol like with the Coast Guard. They are excellent pirate chasers.
These seem like a return to the original idea behind destroyers. Light, maneuverable and fast. Our current crop of destroyers are the size of cruisers.
Even the LCS have 50% larger displacement than WWII Fletcher class destroyers.
If we do have to deal with Iran, we’ll have to deal with their small boats.
Thanks for the responses. Some of this makes sense to have a lighter more maneuverable vessel. The in close is a hard concept to understand though.
Can they handle the rail gun?
I think the rail gun in its current form is huge, requiring extensive power and wouldn’t fit on something like the LCS. A down-sized variant could emerge a decade or so from now though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.