Future of the Fleet

A composite photograph of the littoral combat ships USS Freedom (LCS 1), top, and USS Independence (LCS 2) provided by Naval Surface Forces, U.S. Pacific Fleet shows the two ships under way.

PANAMA CITY BEACH — The Littoral Combat Ship has been lauded by some military experts as the future of the fleet, but it also is a project that has had its share of problems.

Still, it is a ship whose time has come and the U.S. Navy is pushing hard to make sure the ships are in use over the next several years.

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) was designed to operate in dangerous shallow or near-shore waters while in enemy seas.

Imagine a combat ship that can drift close to shore, launch drone or helicopter assault teams like the one that took down Osama bin Laden and swiftly evacuate from the shoreline after the mission is done.

That is exactly what the LCS is designed to accomplish, according to the U.S. Navy.

“It is going to be a key component of the overall fleet,” said Major Gen. Timothy C. Hafinen, director Expeditionary Warfare Division for the chief of naval operations, when he was in town this spring.

But there have been some drawbacks critics have brought to the forefront.

A crack on one of the ship’s hulls caused some to speculate about the LCS design. Navy officials discarded that claim saying it was not a design flaw but rather a “welding technique flaw.”

On June 17, the Navy announced the ship was experiencing galvanic corrosion in the water jets that power the ship.

It all came to a boil for U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, who was critical of the Navy in a letter sent to Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, dated July 1, that questioned the project’s cost and value to the military.

“Instead of enacting proper oversight of this program and development of ship design, the Navy was concerned with appeasing Congress and what has been referred to in Congressional hearings as ‘industrial based stabilization,’ “ Hunter wrote. “While it is important to ensure that we have a viable industry base, we must not make hasty decisions that are not fiscally and strategically sound. Regrettably, this has led to a toxic environment where the Navy needed to contract to build more ships at a faster rate despite major technical design flaws. Furthermore, Congress was just as complicit in this failed program when it approved the dual award acquisitions strategy knowing the risks identified by the GAO.”

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) repeatedly warned both Congress and the Navy there were flaws in the overall structure of the ships.

Keeping the LCS at an affordable price would help keep the U.S. Navy’s budget in line.

With the Navy requesting approximately 55 ships in total, the estimated cost for the entire project soars to more than $30 billion and has been reported as high as $37 billion.

According to Rep. Hunter, the LCS-1 is estimated to cost $537 million and the cost for the LSC-2 is an estimated $653 million. Those numbers reportedly came from the president’s fiscal year 2012 budget.

The original cost for the ships in 2006 was in the $220 million range.

There also is a question whether the ships are not strong enough to handle a mortar fire or, in other terms, is able to “take a punch,” according to the Congressional Research Service.

Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Arlington, Va.-based Lexington Institute, said new concepts like the LCS are bound to have problems that need to be straightened out from time to time.

“It is not unusual to have some drawbacks,” Thompson said.

Thompson said the LCS concept is so different that it may take awhile to see how the LCS group fits into the Navy’s fleet. But said the LCS is designed to be quick and elusive.

“It is not designed to be a destroyer or a cruiser,” Thompson said. “The Navy doesn’t really know how they are going to use the ships in the fleet. The truth is this is a new concept and it has not been fully known how much it can be utilized.”

Part of the new concept is that the LCS will use modules, or mission packages, that can be made interchangeable. If they are being used for mine sweeping, the ship can be fitted for a mine mission module or if they are launching helicopters, a mission package will be loaded on the ship for that mission. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City has been instrumental in developing modules for the LCS.

Despite the questions, the Navy remains optimistic about the LCS.

Donna Carson-Jelley, a program manager within the LCS program, said she is confident significant progress is being made.

“We are moving and this is happening,” Carson-Jelley said. “We have had a lot of progress as far as the testing. Yes, we have had our challenges but we pushed right through them.”