During hearings on the budget held Thursday on Capitol Hill, top Defense Department officials revealed a stark difference of opinion over the direction of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program, which was slashed from 52 to 40 ships in the fiscal year 2017 budget request.
Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told House appropriators Thursday afternoon that the decision to move to 40 ships—which was dictated to the service through a December memo written by Carter—was driven by longterm national security considerations.
But in a House Armed Services Committee seapower and projection force subcommittee hearing that afternoon, the Navy’s top acquisition official Sean Stackley painted a very different picture.
“This budget cycle, the decision was made [to cut the program],” he said. “It comes down to reductions in the budget. Reductions in the budget drove trades in terms of capability in the near term, and long term. The decision was made not based on a force structure assessment.”
The latest force structure assessment, which lays out the size and shape of the Navy, was published in 2014 and stated a 52-vessel small surface combatant requirement, which would be made up of 40 LCS and 12 of the “fast frigate” variant of the ship. That requirement has not changed, Stackley said.
“The Navy’s analysis is captured by the force structure analysis, which still requires 52 small surface combatants,” he said. “The decision to go from 52 to 40 becomes a budget-driven decision and accepts risk.”
Carter’s memo also directed the Navy to downselect to a single LCS builder in fiscal year 2019 and move to a slower 1-1-1-1-2 shipbuilding profile. That could put a portion of the industrial base at risk, Stackley said. Because of the reduction to the overall program of record, there is not enough work to sustain the two shipbuilders: Fincantieri Marinette Marine, which is partnered with prime contractor Lockheed Martin [LMT], and Austal.
“What will break [the industrial base] will be the decision to downselect. That will drive, likely, one of the shipyards out of business,” he said. The lack of competition and slower profile could also drive up the price of ships, and lead to less innovation overall.
In the House Appropriations defense subcommittee hearing, Carter characterized the reduced buy differently.
“The Littoral Combat Ship is a successful program. It is an excellent ship,” he said. “The Navy’s warfighting analysis concluded 40 of them were enough. And, yes we did want to apply resources elsewhere to the lethality of our ships. That’s critically important, that we not only have enough ships…but that they’re the very best.”
Carter also defended the scope of the FY ’17 shipbuilding budget request, which includes funds for Virginia-class submarines, destroyers and other ships as well as two LCS.
Written testimony—submitted by Stackley, Vice Adm. Joseph P. Mulloy, deputy chief of naval operations for integration of capabilities and resources (N8) and Marine Lt. Gen. Robert S. Walsh, deputy commandant for capability development and integration—stated that a downselect is scheduled for FY 2019 but could occur as early as FY 2018 based on the proposed frigate design and the modified block buy cost.
In the meantime, the Navy will assess the potential consequences to the industrial base and the cost of the program, as well as identifying “appropriate actions to mitigate these impacts to the extent practical,” it said.
The service has not finalized its revised LCS acquisition strategy, but Stackley said he hopes to compete the last 10 ships at the same time, which would hopefully help to keep costs down because shipbuilders could not raise the ship price in following years when they are the sole-source for the vessel.