By Emelie Rutherford
A Navy official rejected claims yesterday that the service is not properly considering the total-ownership costs of two competing Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) designs.
Under Secretary of the Navy Robert Work acknowledged to a naval gathering in Arlington, Va. that there is “a lot of talk” now about the two ships’ costs in relation to fuel efficiency.
Next Monday is the deadline for Lockheed Martin [LMT] and General Dynamics [GD], which have each delivered early LCSs to the Navy, to submit their competing proposals to build the next 10 littoral ships. The chosen design also will be used for subsequent LCSs.
Supporters of the General Dynamics-Austal USA aluminum Independence-class LCS charge the Navy is not properly weighing lower fuel-consumption costs their ship can have compared to the Lockheed Martin-Marinette Marine steel Freedom-class vessel. Service officials maintain the General Dynamics ship’s greater fuel efficiency is only exhibited on the infrequent occasions when the littoral vessels operate at the highest speeds.
Alabama lawmakers, whose state is home to Austal USA, want the ship’s request for proposals (RFP) amended to include an evaluation factor that considers energy-consumption costs. Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) failed to compel the Navy to delay the due date.
“The assertion is one ship is clearly better than the other in terms of fuel efficiency, so that ought to be the entire indicator in total-ownership cost,” Work said yesterday at the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual conference.
“We looked very, very hard at this,” he added. “What we said is, ‘What is the speed regime that this ship is going to operate at?’ And when you look at a speed regime in which the ships operate, they’re extremely competitive in fuel efficiency…especially in the ranges where this ship will generally operate.”
Work said the LCS was “designed from the beginning for low total-ownership cost.” He pointed to the littoral vessels’ open architecture and small 40-person core crews, noting sailors make up most of ships’ lifecycle costs.
“That is why we say over and over we like either of these two ships; either of these two ships will meet the Navy’s needs,” he said. The service would keep both LCS variants in production if it could afford to, he added.
“Affordability is everything,” he said. “The cost of purchasing and procuring the ship becomes key. Because if you cannot afford to buy 55 of these ships, we will not get to…the numbers of ships that we need in the Navy.”
“So total-ownership cost is important,” he added in his address to naval engineers, “but it’s also important to understand the entire aspect of how total-ownership cost impacts on (the) life of (the) ship. And engineers will help us understand that.”
In general, Work said, the Navy needs to improve its systems-engineering capabilities, with a focus on total-ownership cost.