Navy Opts for Speed, Innovation in LCS Design Winners

Variety in Lockheed, General Dynamics Proposals May Provide Future Tradeoffs

By DAVID W. MUNNS
Assistant Editor

The Navy underscored its sense of urgency and determination to foster new technologies with the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program by awarding two final system design contracts with options for detail design and construction to Lockheed Martin’s Maritime Systems & Sensors Division and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, while rejecting a bid by Raytheon.

The two winning contractors will design and build up to two ships each in this phase of the program.

Lockheed offered a more traditional approach with a semi-planing monohull design, emphasizing low-cost construction and proven ship architecture. General Dynamics’ design featured a larger ship size and included more innovative technologies, such as composite materials and a transformational trimaran hull design.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Vern Clark expressed the need for expediency in the execution of the LCS program noting, “LCS will deliver capabilities to enable our Navy to dominate in this critical littoral region.” He emphasized that the ships will be a vital component of naval strike groups, adding, “We need this ship today.”

John J. Young, Jr., assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition, said, “The acquisition team is successfully changing how we buy ships — completing the source selection on schedule and developing affordable designs that can adapt to changing technology.”

Rear Adm. Charles S. Hamilton II, program executive officer for naval ships, declined to comment on why Raytheon’s bid was turned down, but did say “technical, management and cost factors” facilitated the Navy’s decision. He noted that Raytheon had “a very interesting design, but did not measure as well against some of [the other] criteria” as did the General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin teams.

A Washington, D.C.-based naval analyst said the decision gives the Navy maximum opportunity for tradeoffs between the two winners because of the variance between the designs, pointing to the speed and lift of Lockheed’s design as a more traditional approach, whereas General Dynamics offered a more transformational design by using composite materials and more leading edge technologies.

General Dynamics was awarded approximately $78.8 million while Lockheed Martin’s contract award was $46.5 million. The variance in award amounts was attributed to Lockheed’s aggressive low-cost proposal, which was achieved by investing large amounts of money in its program to ensure its final design is ready so production can begin in January 2005.

The analyst suggested that General Dynamics and Raytheon both used transformational approaches to their proposed build; however General Dynamics was able to provide a greater comfort level for production than the Raytheon team.

The Navy awarded $10 million LCS preliminary design contracts on July 17, 2003, to General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The final design phase of the program continues through Jan. 18, 2005, when the Navy plans to exercise the program’s first construction option. The service plans to award a second construction option on Dec. 31, 2005.

Over the long term, the LCS program could produce as many as 56 hulls, under the Navy’s notional force structure plan, or as few as 37 hulls, should the fleet force structure remain below 300 ships. LCS could be worth almost $4 billion through fiscal year 2009, with a scheduled procurement of nine hulls.

The LCS designs will be based on new hull forms with new propulsion systems and drafts of 20 feet or less. The key characteristics of the new ships will be economical loiter speeds, sustained high transit speeds, sprint capability of 40-50 knots and low sensor signature. LCS will have basic systems including guns, missiles and countermeasures for self defense; integrated navigation and command-and-control systems; and a small core crew to man the vessel.

The distinguishing characteristics of the LCS hulls will be their mission modules. The Navy plans three types of modules, or packages of equipment, which could be loaded and unloaded depending on the type of mission the LCS ships undertake. One type of mission module will contain improved detection, surveillance and defensive equipment for antisubmarine warfare. Another will include systems for defeating surface threats, such as small boats. A third type of module will contain equipment to accelerate mine warfare missions.

Competitors Look to Challenges Ahead With Eye on Next Phase of Program

By HUNTER C. KEETER
Associate Editor

With the smoke clearing from the first round of competition in the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program, executives from the competing companies, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, said their goals for the future are challenging but achievable.

The Navy plans to contract detailed design and construction of the first LCS hull at the beginning of fiscal year 2005, and the second at the beginning of fiscal 2006. “Flight 0” is the Navy’s term for the first generation of these new surface combatants. In fiscal 2005, the Navy plans to request proposals for a “Flight 1” LCS concept design, representing the second generation in development and an opportunity for new competition. A detailed design and construction of a Flight 1 LCS hull is scheduled for fiscal 2008, with delivery of the third ship in the class by fiscal 2010.

Tom Vecchiolla, Raytheon’s integrated defense systems director of naval systems, said his firm would continue to look for opportunities to contribute to the program, though it was unsuccessful in its bid for a Flight 0 contract.

“We are very interested in participating again [in the Flight 1 competition] in order to provide the Navy and the taxpayers the opportunity to get the best system at the best value,” Vecchiolla told Sea Power.

He set aside the notion that the Navy’s decision against Raytheon’s Flight 0 design was an implicit criticism of the firm’s past performance. The Navy provided all three firms a detailed debriefing on the positives and negatives of their proposals.

“We did not see shortfalls as contributing toward the down-select decision for LCS,” Vecchiolla said.

Technologies from its Flight 0 bid that Raytheon hopes to apply elsewhere include its systems integration approach into what the Navy has called the “total ship computing environment.” This environment comprises the hardware and software that manages ships’ functions. Raytheon is contracted to develop computing suites for several ship programs, based on the firm’s Ship Self-Defense System. Vecchiolla said he would combine those efforts with the total ship computing environment in development for LCS, the DD(X), the LPD-17 and other new ship classes.

Raytheon views the Navy’s DD(X) program — a new multimission surface combatant program running parallel to the LCS effort — as one of the “crown jewels” of its naval systems programs directorate.

“The Navy is using the DD(X) technology engine as a key aspect of the LCS program and leveraging that across the family of ships and systems,” Vecchiolla said. “We see our role in that effort continuing.”

For the Lockheed Martin team, which won a $46 million first-round contract for a steel, semi-planing monohull design, the challenge ahead is to sustain the effort that has brought success

in the Flight 0 competition, ensuring the ability to produce a ship to the promised schedule and budget specifications.

Fred Moosally, president of Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics & Surveillance Systems, said another near-term focus would be to convince doubters on Capitol Hill that LCS is the right horse on which to bet.

“We will work very hard to allay the concerns of the people in Congress with the maturity of the program,” he said. “We can convince Congress that we have a very mature design that is ready to be built today and there is no reason for a delay in the program.”

Carol Hulgus, vice president of programs at Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors, said while there remained the “temptation” to look forward to the Flight 1 competition, or to international sales opportunities, her firm would concentrate on the task at hand.

“This team is going to stay very focused on delivering on the promise that we made to the Navy. They will get their [Flight 0] ship on time and at the price that we contracted for,” she said.

Executives with General Dynamics Bath Iron Works declined to comment on the challenges ahead in developing LCS or to what use they will put the lion’s share of the Flight 0 detailed design contract funding. The company won almost $79 million for its aluminum and steel trimaran concept.

General Dynamics spokesman Kendell Pease told Sea Power Bath Iron Works was going to “design the ship and build it,” but offered no further comment. nhe Navy awarded $10 million LCS preliminary design contracts on July 17, 2003, to General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The final design phase of the program continues through Jan. 18, 2005, when the Navy plans to exercise the program’s first construction option. The service plans to award a second construction option on Dec. 31, 2005.

Over the long term, the LCS program could produce as many as 56 hulls, under the Navy’s notional force structure plan, or as few as 37 hulls, should the fleet force structure remain below 300 ships. LCS could be worth almost $4 billion through fiscal year 2009, with a scheduled procurement of nine hulls.

The LCS designs will be based on new hull forms with new propulsion systems and drafts of 20 feet or less. The key characteristics of the new ships will be economical loiter speeds, sustained high transit speeds, sprint capability of 40-50 knots and low sensor signature. LCS will have basic systems including guns, missiles and countermeasures for self defense; integrated navigation and command-and-control systems; and a small core crew to man the vessel.

The distinguishing characteristics of the LCS hulls will be their mission modules. The Navy plans three types of modules, or packages of equipment, which could be loaded and unloaded depending on the type of mission the LCS ships undertake. One type of mission module will contain improved detection, surveillance and defensive equipment for antisubmarine warfare. Another will include systems for defeating surface threats, such as small boats. A third type of module will contain equipment to accelerate mine warfare missions.

that’s right so they did!

Ja i have been trying to think what problems they have on the RN sweepers but cant remember.. I do remember that the materials on the ship were actually had better properties after they were in service for a few years. (curing characteristics of the matrix they used.)