LegiStorm Blog
Caught Our Eye
Weekly Updates
LegiStorm Blog
SOCIAL MEDIA
Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program: Background and Issues for Congress - CRS Report
| Release Date: | Revised April 5, 2013 |
| Report Number: | RL33741 |
| Source Agency: | Congressional Research Service |
| Pages: | 79 |
 
|
|
|
Older Revisions:
Summary: Revised March 14, 2013 Revised Aug. 10, 2012 Revised June 13, 2012 Revised April 6, 2012 Revised May 12, 2011 Revised April 29, 2011 Revised March 18, 2011 Revised Jan. 20, 2011 Revised Jan. 11, 2011 Revised Dec. 22, 2010 Revised Dec. 16, 2010 Revised Dec. 9, 2010 Revised Nov. 29, 2010 Revised Oct. 14, 2010 Revised Sept. 27, 2010 Revised Sept. 8, 2010 Revised Aug. 25, 2010 Revised June 21, 2010 Revised June 10, 2010 Revised April 8, 2010 Revised Feb. 18, 2010 Revised Dec. 22, 2009 Revised Oct. 22, 2009 Revised Sept. 30, 2009 Revised May 5, 2009 Revised Nov. 17, 2008 Revised Oct. 1, 2008 Revised May 23, 2008 Revised April 7, 2008 Revised June 11, 2007 Revised Dec. 11, 2006 Nov. 30, 2006 The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a relatively inexpensive Navy surface combatant equipped with modular plug-and-fight mission packages for countering mines, small boats, and dieselelectric submarines, particularly in littoral (i.e., near-shore) waters. Navy plans call for fielding a total force of 52 LCSs. Twelve LCSs were funded from FY2005 through FY2012. Another four (LCSs 13 through 16) were funded in FY2013, although funding for those four ships has been reduced by the March 1, 2013, sequester on FY2013 funding. The Navy s proposed FY2014 budget is expected to request funding for the procurement of four more (LCSs 17 through 20). Two very different LCS designs are being built. One was developed by an industry team led by Lockheed; the other was developed by an industry team that was led by General Dynamics. The Lockheed design is built at the Marinette Marine shipyard at Marinette, WI; the General Dynamics design is built at the Austal USA shipyard at Mobile, AL. LCSs 1, 3, 5, and so on are Marinette Marine-built ships; LCSs 2, 4, 6, and so on are Austal-built ships. The 20 LCSs procured or scheduled for procurement in FY2010-FY2015 (LCSs 5 through 24) are being procured under a pair of 10-ship, fixed-price incentive (FPI) block buy contracts that the Navy awarded to Lockheed and Austal USA on December 29, 2010. The LCS program has become controversial due to cost growth, design and construction issues with the leads ships built to each design, concerns over the ships ability to withstand battle damage, and concerns over whether the ships are sufficiently armed and will be able to perform their stated missions effectively. Some observers, citing one or more of these issues, have proposed truncating the LCS program to either 24 ships (i.e., stopping procurement after procuring all the ships covered under the two block buy contracts) or to some other number well short of 52. Other observers have proposed down selecting to a single LCS design (i.e., continuing production of only one of the two designs) after the 24th ship. In response to criticisms of the LCS program, the Navy has acknowledged certain problems and stated that it was taking action to correct them, disputed other arguments made against the program, and maintained its support for continuing the program. Reported comments from some Navy officials suggest that the Navy might be open to changing the design of one or both LCS variants after the 24th ship or perhaps down selecting to a single LCS design after the 24th ship. Issues for Congress concerning the LCS program include the following: the impact on the LCS program of the March 1, 2013, sequester on FY2013 funding; whether to truncate the LCS program to 24 ships or some other number well short of 52; whether to down select to a single LCS design after the 24th ship; technical risk in the LCS program; and what defense-acquisition policy lessons, if any, the LCS program may offer to policymakers. |
|
