Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

bd popeye said:

This whole program may be in jeporday of being cancelled. It's a dang shame. But above all a real embarrasment for the USN...

I never did like the two hull idea. The USN should have started with one and stuck with it....

We will have to wait and see what happens...

Click to expand...

Norfolk said:

I've really wondered about the whole LCS program since the Lockheed contract ran into such problems that the Navy cancelled that one.

I have to admit, I found the catamaran hull intiguing for all the (paper) capability is gave such a small ship (boat, really), especially two helos; I mean you don't even have that on many destroyers or even cruisers. But I was concerned about the short operational range of LCS, never mind the obvious implications of serious battle damge for a catamaran hull.

Still, I'd like to see LCS succeed, but it's not looking good now. Besides, LCS should be called what is really is, a corvette, and not an acronym.

Click to expand...

FuManChu said:

Hey, at least your government actually takes military spending seriously. Ours just sees it as something that can be cut to fund bone-idle sods who do nothing for the country.

I tell you what, let's reverse positions. We can have 12 Type-45s, CVF and new frigates - you can have your surface fleet slashed in half, with no DDX, no new carriers, etc. How do you feel? That's how we feel right now.

Click to expand...

Unit88 said:

by your government, do you mean the United Kingdom parliment???

Click to expand...

Nov. 1 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Navy said today it is
canceling General Dynamics Corp.'s contract to build a second
ship in a new class of warships.
Negotiations over the Navy's demand that General Dynamics
assume more risk for cost overruns broke down, Navy Secretary
Donald Winter said.
``While this is a difficult decision, we recognize that
active oversight and strict cost controls in the early years are
necessary to insuring we can deliver these ships to the fleet
over the long term,'' Winter said in a statement issued at the
U.S. Defense Department.
General Dynamics, the Navy's second-largest shipbuilder, and
Lockheed Martin Corp., the world's biggest defense company by
sales, are building competing versions of the new ship, called
the Littoral Combat Ship. Costs for developing the vessel have
increased as much as 70 percent, Navy officials have said.
Each was under contract to build two prototypes. Each has
its first ship under construction, and both are experiencing
significant cost overruns.
The Navy canceled Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed's
contract for a second ship in April after costs rose almost 50
percent on its first craft and Lockheed refused to accept a fixed
price incentive contract for the second.

`In Excess'

General Dynamics offered a fixed-price-incentive contract
that would have assumed more responsibility for overruns, but the
price it offered ``was above the number we were willing to
accept,'' Rear Admiral Charles Goddard, told reporters at the
Pentagon. ``Their offer was in excess'' by a ``significant''
amount, he said.
``We hope and expect General Dynamics and its team members
will compete'' to build other ships in what's planned to be a 55-
vessel fleet, said Goddard, who oversees surface-ship programs.
Jim DeMartini, spokesman for General Dynamics, said the
company's offer ``reflected realistic cost estimates.''
``We are disappointed that the Navy has decided to reject
the proposal,'' but ``remain focused on completing'' the first
ship and ``delivering the most-capable, most-affordable ship we
can,'' he said in an e-mailed statement.
General Dynamics received the contract for the first ship in
October 2005 and the contract for the second in December 2006.
Its craft is 417 feet (127 meters) long and features three
parallel hulls. The design, called a trimaran hull, makes the
vessel more stable, allowing for helicopter takeoffs and landings
in rough waters.
The design is based on one from Australia-based Austal Ltd.
General Dynamics is supervising construction of the first ship at
an Austal shipyard in Mobile, Alabama.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

i don't think anyone is too surprised by this news, but it's out now.

I wonder what plan they are going to replace this with.

Click to expand...

bd popeye said:

How knows? This is really going to set this program way back. The USN is now saddled with ships that will have no sisters. And what kind of tech support will the USN get on these "White Elephants"???..

The USN will probaly have to neogiate with another shipbuilder. But who?? Not many warship builders in the US. The USN needs to act immediatley now to resolve this problem.

Question..Will the USN go overseas to get these much needed ships built? can anyone say BAE???

Click to expand...

bd popeye said:

Who knows? This is really going to set this program way back. The USN is now saddled with ships that will have no sisters.

Click to expand...