Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

Shorline Fighter Runs Aground

Not too long ago, the Littoral Combat Ship was looking like the cornerstone of the U.S. Navy's future: a 400-foot, reconfigurable ship that could chase terrorists, hunt for mines, and scout for subs in coastal waters all around the world. Best of all, the LCS was cheap -- the main ship would cost about $220 million. So the Navy could afford to buy 55 of them, making up the biggest component of the planned 313-ship fleet.

LCS_christening-5_thumb.jpgBut now, LCS is running into serious problems. So serious, the Navy has ordered Lockheed Martin to stop work on one of the two LCSs the company is building, Navy Times reports. The order, which lasts 90 days, came after estimates for the ship jumped from $220 million to between $331 million and $410 million.

The increase is related to "contractor poor performance" and increased labor costs, Navy spokesman Lt. John Gay tells the Washington Post.

For example, a key part of the propulsion system was delayed 27 weeks because of a manufacturing error, driving up costs, he said...

The order applies to the second of two vessels that Lockheed is building for the Navy. Work on the first one, which is 70 percent completed, is to continue so the Navy can launch it and evaluate the design...

While it is not uncommon for the cost of the first versions of a new line of ships to increase, Lockheed knew the requirements, Gay said. "It remained unchanged, that is why we are concerned," he said.

Lockheed acknowledged a problem with a part related to the propulsion system, saying it had been cut incorrectly by a subcontractor, but the company also blamed changes the Navy made to the way the ship was to be constructed and a shortage of the kind of steel it required...

A Navy official was unavailable last night to respond to Lockheed's claims, but earlier said steel-related cost issues already had been accounted for.

The cost of stopping and restarting the program could be about $14 million, Quigley said, adding that Lockheed is likely to attempt to recoup those costs from the Navy.

General Dynamics, which is building a pair of its own LCSs -- with a radically different, trimaran design isn't affected by the stop-work order, Navy Times notes.

But the price of GD’s first ship also is rising, although one source claimed the price for the first GD ship remains well under $300 million, and that “the estimate for the second GD ship will be around $240 million to $250 million.”

...A similar cost review will be performed on the General Dynamics ship.

The news comes about a week after the Navy reassigned its admiral in charge of ship-building, Charles Hamilton, to a new position. According to Navy Times, "sources said the reassignment was not due solely to problems with the Littoral Combat Ship."

Comments

Of course, "the reassignment was not due solely to problems with the Littoral Combat Ship", implies that it was partly due to the LCS problems. In pr-speak, they are shouting, "He screwed up a lot of things." If those were the actual words, it's pretty strong. Even off the record, politicians and bureaucrats don't like to hold anyone accountable, except to save their own skin.

Posted by: sysadmn at January 16, 2007 11:09 AM


To: b

WOW...someone actually does read the articles. :p

but seriously...your link is lame...and is it that far fetched that Playboy's journalists aren’t left...no...after all...they do live in Cali.

anyway, about the article: Question...why doesn't the military do what other contractors do...like when the state picks a contractor to build a big new bridge, after all the blue prints and renderings, they have a price set in stone, and a date set in stone...so if it costs the contractor more then they said they could do it for, it comes out of their pocket, and if it takes longer to build then expected, they get charged for every day that they over shot there target date goal?

on a side note, I've liked the GD LCS way more...so its good to see Lockheed fall on its arse.

BTW...just to add to the douches comment...I work in a body shop...which means I profit off of people crashing their cars....so in your twisted view...thats a bad thing? *rolls eyes*

Posted by: Murc at January 15, 2007 8:39 PM


Playboy has a good feature about Lockhead, how it organizes wars and profits from them. Very interesting and recommended piece:
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/features/lockheed/index.html

Posted by: b at January 15, 2007 4:20 AM


Hmmm only DOUBLE the original estimate for Lockeed. Good professional job there.

Posted by: Nixer6 at January 13, 2007 7:40 PM


» Post a Comment