Breaking News from the front page of Military.com:
A senior Navy official said Thursday one of General Dynamics Corp. next-generation combat ships has been canceled after efforts to control costs failed.
After more than a month of extensive talks, neither the Navy nor Falls Church, Va.-based General Dynamics could agree on a restructured contract that contained cost overruns in a way that was acceptable to both parties.
“They were above the numbers we were willing to accept,” Navy Adm. Charles Goddard, told reporters at a Pentagon briefing.
This is the second ship that the Navy has canceled on the so-called Littoral Combat Ship program. In April, the Navy terminated Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin Corp.‘s second ship after costs on the first ship soared to at least $350 million from an initial price of $270 million.
The Navy declined to specify how much costs on the General Dynamics ship has exceeded initial estimates, but said the cost difference is comparable to Lockheed’s.
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
Is it just me or has the restructuring of the military Industrial complex into a few large companies just made them that much more brazen?
It seems like they do not care about loosing the ship, they know that with their Congressmen firmly in place the Navy and coast Guard will be back to be screwed some more.
I’m not sure if it’s a case of MIC greed and corruption or the Navy’s inability to agree on the ship’s capabilities and mission. Once one of these “catch-all” ships hits the drawing board, the capabilities and missions mount, making it a much more expensive proposition once the ship goes to production. Oh, and let’s not forget Congress’s meddling. Do you think the Blue-Gold team development program was solely a Pentagon idea? Jobs=votes baby!
This is truly sad. On the bright side, this will enable us to get a good look at the two different LCS hull forms and decide which is best before ordering more. I have the feeling that the trimaran hull will turn out to be a big winner due to superior interior volume and deck size but only time will tell. We need these ships; really really need them. Changing one FFG frigates to LCS ships will save 150 manpower berths at sea, plus associated support manpower and support costs on shore. Multiply by fifty and you get to, say, move a CVBG to a blue/gold crew system for free with the savings.
For $100 Million (less than a third of the LCS), the Navy could field a modern AMPHIBIOUS, rigid AIR SHIP.
(NO BLIMPS! NO ZEPPELINS!)
such a craft would/can: fly at 200mph, with unlimited “unrefueled” range, carry 300 Marines and equipment, land on the surface of the sea, or ANYWHERE inland. Carry both offensive and defensive missile systems. Employ a huge radar array.
Such FLYING craft would be hugely advantageous as littoral combat/supply/surveillance/interdiction “ships”
I told you so. The globalists are jerking us all around. This is nothing but the neuturing of our armed forces.Listen,this being wartime,our “patriotic” military industries should be bending over backwards making sure our armed forces had the best equipment to win the war. General Dynamics & Lockheed Martin would be bending over backwards,along with their workers,to insure that the LCS would be ready for combat. This is all one big joke,doubt it not.Don’t curse the industry(although they are complicit),don’t curse the military(although they also are complicit),curse the globalist internationalists who are purposely destroying our military to make us weak & interdependent on the UN One World Government. When you read the LCS,future destroyer,future aircraft carrier,F-35 fighter jet,Future Combat System,etc.,THIS IS WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON!!!!!
Roy, what in the holy hell are you talking about? How did globalist conspirators cause a disagreement in price?
The simplest answer on all these cost overruns is this. The military (be it Army, Navy, or Air Force) wants equipment that can do everything under the sun. This super-equipment is incredibly expensive, because a lot of it has to be built from the ground up. Each system is built with a dozen different immature technologies that cost lots of money to develop (if they are even possible at all). We also only buy a few of them, so all that development cost ends up being spent on a small production run. If you want to drop costs, then settle for stuff that doesn’t break any new ground. And buy in bulk. Simple as that.
I dont see a problem.
the navy has one Lockheed made LCS.
and GD’s LCS is nearing completion.
They are going to pick ONE as the winner….why would you need 2 ships of each one to decide which is better….
one of each is fine.
I am hopeing that General Dynamics wins…its a better ship overall, and hopefully both sides can agree on a good price…and General Dynamics better try hard to stay on the targeted price.
I have an amazing idea:
How about we:
1. Get the Navy an in-house design capabhility to check the shipbuilders?
2. Agree that once we place an order, the quantity ordered will not decrease? (To prevent the Acquisition Death Spiral)
3. Try designing with mature technologies for the first time in eons?
4. End the cost-plus contract. It’s been 30 years, inflation is not what it was, the shipbuilders can take a fixed-price contract.
We’ll see what happens. I think somebody in the LCS design office needs to get schooled–they never should have allowed these flight zero craft to get so burdened under constantly changing requirements. We could have used a bare-bones model of both vessels–there are plenty of low-risk areas where a good patrol craft or lightly armed logistical support vessel could be useful.
I suspect this program was deliberately sunk under a hailstorm of of different requirements. Only civilian leadership could have stopped this, but the civilian leadership wanted this LCS thing killed deader than a dodo.
It will be interesting to see if the civilian leadership rushes to make a decision on the LCS before another administration has a chance to weigh in on the subject. I suspect the worst.
Why cant the Navy hold a company to its contract, is there a clause built in. Everything these days is going over cost. Why cant the military sign contracts that set a price, and why don’t they stick to it. When ever I do a job that runs over what I bid, I have to eat the cost, why doesn’t the DOD contractor have to? O well maybe its just me.
Defense contractors that go over budget? Who knew?
FWIW, the LCS is not all that sophisticated/immature technology based. It doesn’t go faster than any ship ever built on a semi-fuel efficient basis (although it approaches the higher end of that capacity; the F-22, in contrast, does set new records). It doesn’t require stealth technology. It doesn’t run on nuclear power. It doesn’t have to go underwater. It doesn’t have to be air independent or have unlimited range. It isn’t supposed to be cruise missile proof. It doesn’t have AEGIS or cruise missile control and launching capacity. The modular cargo concept is as old as the container ship. It doesn’t have newly invented offensive or defensive weapons (like the rail gun originally contemplated for Zumwalt DDG-1000 or the ground bases version of Phalanx used in Iraq or the various laser guns being proposed for air use and in the CG(X)). Every naval ship built for the past 30 years, at least, has had a helipad. And, the really aggressive hull and automation technologies were pre-tested in Sea Fighter.
I can even see a cost plus contract being reasonable on Flight 0. Shit happens in a new design, no matter how mature the technologies may seem. But, the frightening part is that the plan is to build a lot of these. We need to negotiate a fixed price contract for the remaining LCS units purchased (two test ships didn’t make sense anyway), with only a producer price index type rider to cover fluctuating material and labor costs, and we need to hold them to it.
Maybe we can get supernegotiator Bill Richardson to drop out of the Presidential race, stop trying to get peace with North Korea and Sudan, and start trying to stop General Dynamics and Lockheed from screwing over the Department of Defense.
22lr,
Because nobody would sign a contract like that. You can’t ask someone to build something when said technology does not currently exist and expect them to do it for a set cost. This isn’t like building a new garage, or putting up a fence. It’s like hiring someone to make you a flying car. The design requirements could change in the middle of construction of the prototype. Only an idiot would agree to be bound by a contract where the terms and conditions change and agree to do so for a set price.
Well, there’s something else here…the Navy has a piss-poor concept for how to use this thing. A ship to do anti-piracy, show the flag and theatre lift is very, very different from a vessel expected to survive a conflict in, say, a certain Asian strait.
So, while folks from one camp were pulling one way, the others were busy draping an extra battery of rolling airframe missiles on the vessel.
It’s never a good situation when the operational concepts are deliberately undefined. And that’s what Winter should have been doing from the get-go. He didn’t. He just killed it.
And gave the LPD-17 program–a program exhibiting far more inexcusable affronts to the nation’s pocketbook–a mere talking to. A stern one. But that’s it.
Something about his behavior doesn’t sit well with me.
They’re trying to make the LCS do too much. Specialization may be for insects, but we can’t do everything either. Focus on the missions that are not cost-effective or hard to do with a small quantity of larger vessels, and farm that out to these smaller craft. It seems like the LCS was designed to simply be a scaled down version of what’s already in inventory; and that’s not the point of the exercise…
Good Evening Folks,
All great comments and true as far as
I can tell. But it looks like the same ol, same ol way of doing business.
GD is doing what defense contractors have done since the American Revolution in this country, then it was sawdust in dried meat they sold to the Army and Navy. Rise the prices on the bid, and cut quality and jack up the price for what they should have provided in the first place.
For the Navy, who doesn’t want the LCS in the first place has mdiscoverd a Democratic Congress who doesn’t blink and eye at $billion ships, hey there is a war on.
Money is the name of the game and as long as Congress is spending the Navy will help out, after all they don’t want to become like the Air Force.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Brian,
Its like having a religious belief.If you are Christian,you have a world view that includes living a life that will ultimately allow you to make it to heaven. You have a whole bunch of delusional leaders,in politics,in private business,in religion,& yes,even in the military(because only men & women in this mind set are allowed to advance in rank to becoming admirals & generals).Like Christian leaders would act in a way that benefits Christianity,these delusional globalist politicians,admirals & generals,private business & industry leaders,& even religious leaders work to advance the goal of one world government.If that means playing around with the building new military equipment & “lying” about cost overruns,then they can ultimately influence the degrading of a single nation(the U.S.) to benefit the building up of the U.N. as the only legitimate government in & of the world.
Come on,we are supposed to be at war.Our way of life is threatened.Do you seriously believe that the military & the military industry would pick now to argue & haggle over money if they really believed that our country was in trouble? They are playing all of us for FOOLS!!! They are passing money around(read fraud,corruption,& bribes) & then saying,”oh no,cost overruns.We need to pay yet more….or kill the project entirely.” Maybe they’ll throw us crumbs like the F-22 &/or the Osprey,but they have no serious intention of modernizing our weaponry(by the way,congress is playing around with our missile defense shield & SecDef Gates is saying that he’ll “delay” the activation of the missile defense shield “until further notice”).Open your eyes,its so obvious.If the navy was trying to build a modern row boat,they’d find a way to price that out of range & then cancel it while promising that they will find a way to get a better row boat in service……some day.Where are the cutting edge UAVs,UGVs,& unmanned surface craft? I watch the bald headed guy on Future Weapons(on Military Channel) talking about them,where are they?
@Crusty Old Chief
“The Navy will need an arrogant asshole … to come along again …”
I know plenty in the O-corps! ;)
It’s not the military-industrial complex.
It’s the mentality that we SHOULD be able to write a specification that is perfect the first time out of the box. Even if it takes ten years to write that specification. Or even twenty years.
It’s the mentality that we don’t need to prototype.
And the reason is that bureaucrats are great at writing. But bureaucrats are lousy at actually building hardware.
So, we evaluate programs based on promises and intentions. But we evaluate hardware based on performance.
Intentions versus results. Different standards.
It’s easy to criticize actual hardware. But it’s difficult to criticize the intentions in specifications. So, the bureaucrats major in writing specs with good intentions. That way they can avoid being criticized for actual results.
The answer is more prototyping for a lump sum.
That’s what happened with the F-16 and the F-17.
They were lump sum competitions. [By the way, the A-10 Warthog was also the result of a hardware competition.]
The F-16 won the fighter competition and the F-17 evolved into the F-18.
Think of all the great pieces of hardware that were built by experts … not written up for decades over and over….
I spent some time a few decades ago welding hull butts on LA & Trident class boats at Gen Dyn EB in Groton. A large part of the cost overruns are the constant on-the-fly changes. The vessels are in a continuing tweak and refit mode throughout the building process.
You can’t bid that aspect, you just have to bill for it. It gets worse with a brand new design. Unitl you have built a few it’s just an experiment. I worked on hull#688, the Los Angeles, which was a much different boat than the last few to roll off the ways. Two quick major changes were the fair weather planes, and the addition of vertical launch tubes.
You have to watch them closely to prevent them taking advantage of the system, but TANSTAAFL.
I know the CG is working on our Deepwater project which includes the National Security Cutter, a ship not very different that the LCS. I am flabbergasted why in this age of “One National Fleet”, why dont we collaborate on this and have a CG variant and Navy Variant of the same Hull design?
We have gone through some nasty contractor issues ourselves with the NSC. Sounds like our Navy brothers are going through drama as well.
Chief B … You hit the nail squarely on the head!
BTW: Seems to me you’d be a good candidate to take the job to push the Navy & contractors in the right direction.
In my humble opinion, the contractors grossly underbid the contract to they win it and hope they can squeeze the extra bucks needed to complete the contract. If I were controlling the dollars I would allow the underbidding to take place.
I’m pretty sure that their bid of $270 mill was going to be a guaranteed win. The problem is that our bidding processes for contracts requires us to take the LOWEST BIDDER.
Congress needs to wake up and read the fine print on these contracts as the LOWEST BIDDER isn’t always the RIGHT bidder for the job.
It is horrible to consider our Nation’s defense is protected by the LOWEST bidders. No wonder we have issues with the equipment not working as specified.
So Chief … take the bull by the horns and ride it as I believe you’ll do a GREAT JOB!
Guy’s if we are going to be an empire we need
gun boats we need 50 of these but they can
I still believe that there is corruption involved & we are all being played for fools.Please,somebody show me when,after projects like the Crusader Howitzer,the Comanche,& I’m sure other weapons systems that were cancelled after billions of dollars was poured down the drain on them,our government demanded a refund of the money payed to the private industries building them.At the very worse,its a global conspiracy,at the very least,it is blatant corruption & fraud on the part of the military,the politicians,& the private industry sector.Lets go with corruption & fraud at the least.This whole LCS thing is corrupt,just like the F-35 &other “proposed” weapon systems.I’m sure we can all agree on this point.This is all full of bribery,corruption,& fraud. The admirals,generals,politicians,& CEOs are getting rich from bribes & graft,& our soldiers,sailors,airmen,& marines are dying from faulty &/or inappropriate for the task equipment.
And I do not operate from the naive opinion that all men(& women) are good or basically good.I operate from the priciple that all men(& women) are crooks.When you have that viewpoint,you won’t be so trusting of the politicians,generals & admirals,& private businessmen in charge.Trust but verify? I don’t trust,but I’ll still verify.
@SFC_JIM- most development type contracts dont go to the lowest bider, but to the bid with the “Best Value”.
Some folks here, and at large, decry cost plus devlopment contracts andwant fixed price contracts, be carful what you wish for. Industry will be less likely to take the risk if there is little reward. Over time industry bids will be higher and higher to mitigate the risk of losing money on fixed price contracts. I belive that fixed price sontracs led to some problems for the Brits in the 90′s.
If we only have one Littoral Combat Ship & we canceled with the 2 companies the building of the other 3 ships,then who is going to build the Block 1 LCS’? I’m very sure that the workers at the ship building docks are NOT intentionally screwing up the building of these & other ships being built.They are just as patriotic as the next person & they don’t want to screw the sailors over.So who is at fault & to be blamed for all of this? I believe that I already named the prime suspects,& by the way,the completed LCS looks nothing at all like the artistic impressions & drawings of the “sci fi” stealth ship being advertised.
The old saying “Bath Built is Best Built” still applies today. I have worked on their competitors ships and have seen alot of stuff that wouldn’t pass inspection in Bath. I am employed by Bath, union, and we have made great strides in reigning in costs. For the first time since the Perry class FFG’s a ship has been delivered below bid price in Bath.
As far as the LCS being built in Alabama by Austal USA and BIW, they are working from a commercial design plan which has very few dimensions. The saying is, Put that pipe run wherever it fits. Later on it has to be ripped out because it’s in the way of something. Things like that raise costs big time. The Navy made a mistake accepting the plans as is.
Uh, wouldn’t it be simpler to just frag this “Buy American” nonsense–basically a form of corporate welfare–and BUY SHIPS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES.
Russia, for instance. And the Ukraine. We could probably get a nice price and a sweet bidding war. These guys really hate each other.
Just a simple corvette with guided missile capability, a decent gun, as much protection as can be afforded without compromising other qualities. Good speed. An ASW chopper.
This is what the Navy needs. Forget all the nonsense rhetoric. Fact is, the US Navy has precisely two ships which can loiter near land and survive–Iowa and Wisconsin. And both are headed for museum status.
People forget that the BBs really turned out to be quite useful, just not for what they were intended to be used–ship-to-ship combat. They’re land-attack platforms with missile capability and superb fleet defense capabilities. Oh, and they have armor.
Seems to me that every time a lightly armored ship has closed within firing range of a hostile country’s land-based and short-range sea-based assets since 1967, it’s been hosed.
(See the Six-Day War, Falklands War, USS Stark for details).
Lightly armored ships have NO WAY TO PROTECT THEMSELVES IN LITTORAL WATERS.
Period.
And bugger stealth ships while you’re at it.
What a stupid concept.
You want power projection from the Navy? Stealth. Use submarines. Send in the 4 Ohio SSGN conversions & the USS Jimmy Carter–talk about irony, there.
Pack them with SEALs. And, uh, make some cheaper missiles so that massive payload the converted Ohios carry can become an affordable power projection package.
‘Nuff said.
-G
During WWII,the Japanese had submarines operating as aircraft carriers.I mean,I think they only carried one plane each,& they were like modified sea planes,but it is an idea worth pursuing especially with UCAVs.I also thought that the LCS was supposed to be a type of Corvette ship? France & Germany are making great advances in small diesel submarines,why are we still concentrating on large nuclear submarines(the Virginia is not small)?
Why is buy American nonsense
Russian stuff isn’t as high quality as American. We be stuck with second class ships.
Someone hit the nail on the head earlier-getting equipment from overseas is just an exchange of money. Building it ourselves leads to lobbyists, unions, lots of procurement officers running around…
We should ground ourselves in reality and concede that not everything we use MUST be made in America. The M3 “Carl Gustav” recoiless and the SAW (aka Minimi) come to mind. If something is available “off the shelf” in another country that can be adapted to our needs at a cost below what it’d take to build ourselves (while maintaining acceptable quality), why not?
Re: Buy it overseas…
Morning Boys,
My estated DT colleagues who are here pushing to buy our ships from overseas shipbuilders, I respectfully suggest they take a long walk off the fantail.
In any endeavor a leader or manager must keep the desired endstate in mind and never allow parsimony, convenience, or sloth to turn him away from the stated goals.
In this instance, buying our smaller ships form foreign companies would have a cascading affect on Americans:
There are precious few active shipyards in the US as it stands, sending the LCS contract overseas would likely shutter another yard or convert it to something very difference from shipbuilding.
What’s more, buying overseas means that tax dollars which would have been reinvested in the US would lost to foreign powers.
Lastly, what Sailor worth his salt would want to serve in a ship built by the Russians? “Kilo Mike Alpha, over. How copy?”
Taking this line a bit further, we should consider what over reliance on foreign, fair-weather friends would mean to us when the inevitable tides politics and hubris turn. Think the Russians or anyone else would NOT play games with us?
And, in what strategic position would this expediency leave us in the future? An emasculated America dependent on foreign powers for her weapons and war machines? An America who will have lost her organic capability to defend herself with anything more powerful than diplomats and lawyers?
My God, its like the UN came up with this idea!
Better we deal with our OWN assholes, criminals, nincompoops, and idiots. GD, LockMart, Boeing, and the rest of the rogues gallery are guilty of many sins, BUT when properly led, managed, cajoled, threatened, bullied (and otherwise well-lawyered) they do turn our a better product than anyone else on the planet.
Taking the lead from FDRs apocryphal assessment of Samoza: They’re all sons of bitches, but their OUR sons of bitches.
Cheers,
Chief B.
P.S.: I think that we ought to get Bill Belichick drafted as the next SecDef. He clearly knows how to assemble a winning team, how to keep them motivated, and destroy the enemy. Plus he seems to be unafraid of snuggling up to Satan and all the Powers of Darkness to get ‘er done. :)
Yes, Crusty old Chief, and you can bet he’d be knee deep in aerial and satellite surveillance. No more faulty pre-war intelligence reports! Woo-hoo!
I just saw on Fox News about an “earmarked” patrol boat that was forced on the navy,who didn’t want it,& now its going to NOAA to be a “research” patrol boat.You know,if somehow we ever got boats on the Caspian Sea to counter Iran,maybe Patrol boats would be the way to go.They would be easier to move overland,especially since there is no guarantee that Turkey would allow us to move our naval ships into the Black Sea.Maybe somebody should spell out & explain the concept of operating “boats(versus ships)” from Georgia &/or Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea to counter Iran(& it will be the closest we ever get to Tehran).
It took a lot of work,but I found the Guardian Marine International Fast Patrol Craft that was shoved down the navy’s throat & then passed on to NOAA. I understand the Navy’s hesitance to take this thing,but….wouldn’t it be just what we needed to patrol the Caspian Sea from Georgia or Azerbaijan? We could monitor Iran using this craft. We could also maneuver it through the rivers of Romania,Bulgaria,Moldova,&/or The Ukraine & completely bypass Turkey.Looks like you’d have to move it across land at least to the Kura River & hope that Azerbaijan has no problems with the U.S. operating craft from Azerbaijan on the Caspian Sea to monitor Iran. Just have to watch out for Kilo Diesel Subs in the Caspian Sea.
As far as uying overseas goes, I’m in NZ and the issue comes up every time a major military contract pops up, remember the government recieves tax back from the wages of the staff building them, tax on company profits, capital gains tax on the assets the company installs to build the ships…
To Buy a $100 mil domestic equivalent ship from overseas for what it costs the govt in what they DON’T get back in tax would it have to be no more than $60 mil…