Lawmaker urges Navy to allow competition for littoral ship
The program has more than doubled in costs since its inception and has been delayed 18 months.
House Armed Services Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee Chairman Gene Taylor, D-Miss., on Tuesday called on the Navy to open up competition for the troubled Littoral Combat Ship to bring down the program's cost.
"It appears to me the solution is simple," Taylor said during a hearing. "Bring true competition into this program, not the pseudo-competition we currently have between the two poor performers but true competition based on price, schedule and quality."
General Dynamics Inc. and Lockheed Martin Corp. are slated to build two versions of the LCS, a ship that Navy officials had hoped would cost just $220 million.
But the program has more than doubled in costs since its inception and has been delayed 18 months.
"What makes you think you owe these two shipyards anything?" said Taylor, suggesting that other shipyards get a chance to build the shallow-water vessel. He added that he sees the need for the LCS, but questions whether it is affordable.
But the Navy appears committed to keeping the two lead contractors in the program, with the possibility of dropping one firm at some point. Opening up competition for the program could add $60 million to the price of each ship and delay production by another 18 months, said Rear Adm. William Landay, the service's program executive officer for ships. So far, Lockheed Martin has completed construction on the first LCS, while General Dynamics is about 85 percent finished building the second ship.
In 2007, the Navy canceled contracts with both defense firms to build the third and fourth ships after their costs rose to more than $500 million a piece. During the hearing, service officials said they remain committed to building all 55 planned LCSs and are working on fixed-price contracts with the two companies for the additional ships. Landay would not disclose how much the next ships would cost, but he said "learning-curve benefits should be evident" when the contractors build the next ships.
Meanwhile, Navy officials stressed that the service, whose last-minute design changes helped drive up the ship's price, is committed to current designs. Officials acknowledged that changes to the hull design after the initial contracts were awarded were the primary reasons behind the cost increases.