The Omaha World Herald February 20, 2012

Warship needs to outflank critics

By Joseph Morton

WASHINGTON — The Navy's new littoral combat ships are designed to be speedy little jacks-of-all-trades, uniquely adapted to future warfare at sea, but Sen. John McCain considers them poster children for everything that's wrong with Pentagon procurement programs.

During a Senate floor speech in December, the Arizona Republican described the ships as "another example of a fundamentally flawed acquisition process."

The Navy announced last week that two of the ships scheduled to be finished in 2016 will be named in honor of the cities Omaha and Sioux City. The littoral combat ships were conceived as a faster, more capable replacement for the Navy's traditional frigates.

The nimble vessels are designed to take on plug-in weapons packages so they can quickly be converted for fighting other surface ships, hunting submarines or trawling for underwater mines.

Their high-tech automation allows them to operate with fewer sailors. But perhaps above all, they were intended to be cheap by military standards — about $188 million a pop, by initial estimates.

That meant the Navy would be able to buy lots of them, giving it greater flexibility to respond to a range of threats than it would have with just a few lumbering giants.

But the program ran into trouble, and the costs mounted to more than $700 million for one of the ships.

McCain, a decorated Navy veteran, has criticized the ships as part of a broader critique of how the Pentagon purchases its weapons. He raised concerns about the ships' performance last year and cited reports of "aggressive galvanic corrosion" on the USS Independence.

"What the Navy originally said it wanted and what could be delivered on budget and on schedule have proven to be irreconcilable," McCain said in a statement.

"As a result, the LCS program acquisition strategy has changed several times, with the Navy canceling contracts with both sets of competing contractor teams. Whether the Navy has gotten past those fundamental issues afflicting the program remains to be seen."

The Navy now puts the average cost of the ships — including equipment and margin for some growth — at about $440 million per ship.

Still, the Navy has defended the program as an important weapon in its arsenal of the future, and at least one defense expert said it appears to be on track.

John Pike of globalsecurity.org said that nearly all weapons systems stumble at some point in the early stages of development and that the LCS program has been no different.

"It went through a really rough patch initially," Pike said. "But I think that's a thing of the past."

He said the iconic B-52 is now thought of as solid as "the Rock of Gibraltar," but early on it struggled with engine troubles and leaky fuel tanks.

Part of the problem with the LCS, Pike said, was that the Navy overpromised on how cheap the ships would be.

He also downplayed the significance of corrosion problems.

"Every weapons system has issues, and corrosion is just a fact of life at sea," Pike said.

The LCS is based on some good ideas, such as the plug-in weapons systems, Pike said. Ships today last much longer than in the past, and who knows what the needs of the Navy will be in 2050?

If the new ships prove to be as fast as advertised, they will be able to outrun just about anything in the water, he said. Still, it's simply too early to say for certain whether the ships represent a good investment, he said.

Naming two of them after Omaha and Sioux City is part of a long-standing tradition of gracing ships with the names of cities. The earliest steel ships were named after Atlanta, Boston and Chicago more than a century ago.

The naming tradition is a way for the military to establish bonds with the people who are ultimately asked to sacrifice their blood and treasure.

Once upon a time submarines were named after fish and other denizens of the deep, he noted.

"Then somebody pointed out 'Fish don't vote,' and they started, then, naming them after cities," Pike said.