Austal Counting on LCS and EPF Demand to Boost FY 2020 Earnings

By: Ben Werner

July 17, 2019 4:19 PM

Austal USA rendering of proposed EPF hospital ship. Austal USA

Australian-based Austal Limited predicts its work building U.S. Navy ships in Alabama and ferries in Australia will drive an increase in earnings this year, according to a statement released by company executives.

Austal builds the Littoral Combat Ship and expeditionary fast transport at its Mobile, Ala., shipyard, and the financial performance of this yard was cited as being a key component of the company’s overall financial performance in the coming year.

During its FY 2020, which started July 1, Austal expects earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) of at least $105 million, compared to the company’s predicted FY 2019 earnings of $92 million. The 2019 financial results are still being tabulated, with a full FY 2019 report expected to be released by the end of August, according to a media release to the public on Tuesday

Despite predictions of this coming year being more profitable than the last, long-term, the outlook for Austal’s U.S. Navy business is less clear. The two programs cited as helping boost earnings in 2020 are due to sunset soon after 2020. Austal is building EPF-11 and 12 now, and the Navy awarded Austal long-lead-time funding for EPF-13 and 14.

Currently, the Navy doesn’t have plans to purchase more EPF vessels. However, Austal is promoting the EPF as a possible small hospital ship. A concept being explored, the expeditionary medical transport, would provide ambulance-type medical services to a distributed maritime force. The Navy wants such ships to support triage and resuscitation, treatment and holding of patients until they can either return to duty or be medically evacuated, according to the request. Generally, medical staff will not perform surgeries on these vessels.

The Navy is interested in the concept proposal and included a $49 million request to pursue altering the planned EPF-14 into a hospital ship in its  FY 2020 budget unfunded priorities list.

As for LCS, Congress is clear with its desire to wind down the program after currently contracted ships are completed. Both the House and Senate versions of the FY 2020 National Defense Authorization Act include language clearly stating the LCS program is ending. Austal was awarded a contract to build LCS-32, which will likely be the second to last LCS the Navy buys before switching over to procuring a frigate.

Austal is one of four finalists expected to submit bids to build the Navy’s future frigate (FFG(X)), and based its design on its Independence-variant LCS. The Navy put out a request for proposals last month, and bidders must submit technical proposals to the Navy by Aug. 22, with pricing proposals due by Sept. 26. The Navy intends to select a winning bid in FY 2020.

When Austal’s full annual report is released, it will possibly shed more light on why U.S. investigators, including Department of Defense and NCIS agents, raided Austal’s Alabama shipyard in January in support of an Australian government investigation. Australian authorities are investigating the company’s reporting to investors about sudden cost increases associated with finishing USS Jackson (LCS-6).

uss-jackson-lcs-6-10-2011.jpg

Report to Congress on U.S. Navy Frigate FFG(X) Program

July 4, 2019 8:05 AM

The following is the June 25, 2019 Congressional Research Service report, Navy Frigate (FFG[X]) Program: Background and Issues for Congress.

From the report

The FFG(X) program is a Navy program to build a class of 20 guided-missile frigates (FFGs). The Navy wants to procure the first FFG(X) in FY2020, the next 18 at a rate of two per year in FY2021-FY2029, and the 20th in FY2030. The Navy’s proposed FY2020 budget requests $1,281.2 million for the procurement of the first FFG(X). The Navy’s FY2020 budget submission shows that subsequent ships in the class are estimated by the Navy to cost roughly $900 million each in then-year dollars.

The Navy intends to build the FFG(X) to a modified version of an existing ship design—an approach called the parent-design approach. The parent design could be a U.S. ship design or a foreign ship design. At least four industry teams are reportedly competing for the FFG(X) program. Two of the teams are reportedly proposing to build their FFG(X) designs at the two shipyards that have been building Littoral Combat Ships (LCSs) for the Navy—Austal USA of Mobile, AL, and Fincantieri/Marinette Marine (F/MM) of Marinette, WI. The other two teams are reportedly proposing to build their FFG(X) designs at General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works, of Bath, ME, and Huntington Ingalls Industries/Ingalls Shipbuilding of Pascagoula, MS.

On May 28, 2019, it was reported that a fifth industry team that had been interested in the FFG(X) program had informed the Navy on May 23, 2019, that it had decided to not submit a bid for the program. This fifth industry team, like one of the other four, reportedly had proposed building its FFG(X) design at F/MM.

On June 20, 2019, the Navy released its Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Detail Design and Construction (DD&C) contract for up to 10 ships in FFG(X) program (the lead ship plus nine option ships). Responses to the RFP are due by August 22, 2019. The Navy plans to award the contract in July 2020.

The FFG(X) program presents several potential oversight issues for Congress, including the following:

  • whether to approve, reject, or modify the Navy’s FY2020 funding request for the program;

  • whether the Navy has appropriately defined the cost, capabilities, and growth margin of the FFG(X);

  • the Navy’s intent to use a parent-design approach for the FFG(X) program rather than develop an entirely new (i.e., clean-sheet) design for the ship;

  • cost, schedule, and technical risk in the FFG(X) program;

  • whether any additional LCSs should be procured in FY2020 as a hedge against potential delays in the FFG(X) program;

  • the potential industrial-base impacts of the FFG(X) for shipyards and supplier firms;

  • whether to build FFG(X)s at a single shipyard, as the Navy’s baseline plan calls for, or at two or three shipyards; and

  • the potential impact on required numbers of FFG(X)s of a possible change in the Navy’s surface force architecture.

frigateFridtjof.jpg

Navy Completed Hellfire Tests on Littoral Combat Ship, Will Likely Deploy Later This Year

By: Megan Eckstein

July 3, 2019 2:52 PM • Updated: July 3, 2019 5:09 PM

The Freedom-class littoral combat ship USS Detroit (LCS-7) fires an AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missile during a live-fire missile exercise. US Navy photo.

This post has been updated with additional imagery.

The Navy has finished the structural testing needed to confirm that the Hellfire anti-surface missile can safely operate on the Littoral Combat Ship, and the missile will go out on a ship deployment later this year, USNI News understands.

The service had previously wrapped up structural testing for the Freedom-variant ships that are homeported in Mayport, Fla., a source told USNI News. Testing on the Independence-variant hulls wrapped up about two weeks ago with a successful engagement. The AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missile makes up the surface-to-surface missile module, which supplements the rest of the LCS’s surface warfare mission package.

As such, Independence-variant USS Montgomery (LCS-8), which deployed from San Diego in late May, does not have the SSMM piece of the mission package but is equipped with the over-the-horizon Naval Strike Missile, USNI News understands.

Montgomery was scheduled to pick up the NSM during a port visit to Hawaii in June. However, the NSM launchers were not clearly visible in photos released by the U.S. Embassy when the LCS made a port call to Davao City, the Philippines, on June 29, 2019. Prior to Montgomery’s deployment, USS Coronado (LCS-4) experimented with anti-ship missile canisters mounted on the ship’s bow behind the deck gun.

The source added that USS Detroit (LCS-7), which is undergoing maintenance now, is still on track to deploy to U.S. 4th Fleet later this year and would likely bring the SSMM with it. Detroit’s deployment would be the first from Mayport in the LCS program’s history. Montgomery’s recent deployment is the first for the entire LCS class since the class went through an overhaul in its organization and deployment model.

The LCS mission packages themselves have also undergone many changes. The Navy originally planned separate increments for the surface warfare, mine countermeasures and anti-submarine warfare mission packages, with each increment adding specific capabilities. As the technology development timelines changed, though, the service moved to a model where technologies would be fielded as they were ready, rather than trying to time the fielding of new gear to specific increments. The SSMM is a later addition to the surface warfare mission package, meant to add more offensive punch to the small combatant.

Lt. Cmdr. Sean Riordan, the spokesman for the Navy’s Logistics Group Western Pacific and Task Force 73, was limited in what he could say about the Montgomery deployment and the capabilities the ship brought along with it.

“The LCS platform provides a wide-range of capabilities – it is a fast, agile and networked surface combatant, optimized for operating in the littorals. Mission packages allow for a tailored capability to meet specific mission needs. For reasons of operational security, we are not disclosing any additional details of USS Montgomery’s capability,” he told USNI News.

He also cited operational security in not disclosing details of the ship’s expected deployment length or how often the blue and gold crews would swap out – the first time the blue/gold crewing model is being used since the program reorganization.

Asked how the LCS will contribute to operations in U.S. 7th Fleet – the LCS’s shallow draft means it can get into more than 1,000 shallow water ports in South and Southeast Asia, whereas destroyers are limited to about a dozen – Riordan told USNI News, “there is no better signal of our desire to maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific than U.S. naval operations in the region. Like previous deployments of littoral combat ships, Montgomery will conduct operations, exercises and port visits throughout the region as well as work alongside allied and partner navies to provide maritime security and stability, key pillars of a free and open Indo-Pacific. Its unique capabilities allow it to work with a broad range of regional navies and visit ports larger ships cannot access.”

USS Montgomery arrives at Davao City, the Philippines on June 29, 2019. US Embassy Photo

USS Montgomery arrives at Davao City, the Philippines on June 29, 2019. US Embassy Photo

Littoral Combat Ship Deploys for First Time in 19 Months; USS Montgomery Left Unannounced in Early June

By: Megan Eckstein

July 1, 2019 12:26 PM • Updated: July 1, 2019 10:41 PM

The littoral combat ship USS Montgomery (LCS-8) departs Naval Base San Diego to conduct routine operations and training in the Pacific Ocean. US Navy photo.

This post has been updated to include a comment from a Navy official regarding the timeline of the USS Montgomery deployment.

There is a Littoral Combat Ship operating forward on deployment for the first time in 19 months, with USS Montgomery (LCS-8) arriving in the Philippines over the weekend on its maiden deployment.

The Navy did not announce the departure of Montgomery from its San Diego, Calif., homeport, but the service on Saturday released a news release and several photos of the LCS during its first port call of the deployment, in Davao City on the island of Mindanao.

“In this era of Great Power Competition, the U.S. Pacific Fleet does not announce the deployment of every ship in the Pacific,” a Navy official told USNI News after this story was first published. “USS Montgomery departed its homeport of San Diego in late May, as part of a deployment to the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations.”

According to commercial ship tracking data, Montgomery made a port call in Hawaii and left on June 10 to continue its trip towards 7th Fleet.

According to the Navy news release, Montgomery will host local military and civic leaders during the port visit.

“Our navies, just like our nations, have a long history of cooperation and partnership based on mutual trust, respect and decades of friendship,” Rear Adm. Joey Tynch, commander of Logistics Group Western Pacific, said in the news release.
“Every port visit and exercise we complete together continues to strengthen maritime security and regional stability.”

The Independence-variant LCS went through the first-ever LCS Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training (SWATT) event in April as part of its pre-deployment workups. During that five-day at-sea event, Montgomery’s crew practiced surface warfare operations – including live-fire shots with the crew-served weapon, 30mm gun and SeaRAM missile defense system – as well as limited anti-air warfare operations.

The ship also practiced some missions on its own and some falling under the tactical control of a warfare commander on another ship, simulating how the LCS might be used solo or as part of a larger task group on its deployment.

USS Coronado (LCS-4) was the last LCS to deploy overseas, from June 2016 to December 2017. Since that deployment, though, the LCS community has gone through a major reorganization that involves moving from a system of three crews supporting two ship hulls to a blue/gold crewing model similar to that used in the submarine community; the creation of a test division that includes the first four LCSs, which will now focus on mission package testing and other work at home and will not deploy overseas; the standup of Littoral Combat Ship Squadron 1 (LCSRON-1) in San Diego that includes all the Austal-built Independence-variant ships; and the standup of LCSRON-2 in Mayport, Fla., for the Lockheed Martin-built Freedom-variant hulls.

The Navy had not planned to have such a long gap between LCS deployments, but in part due to trying to implement the new organizational structure and in part due to LCS hull maintenance availabilities, USNI News first reported in April 2018 that there would be no LCS deployments that calendar year.

Independence variant littoral combat ship USS Montgomery (LCS 8) launches a RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) during a missile exercise on April 23, 2019. Montgomery is underway in the Eastern Pacific conducting routine training. US Navy photo.

Independence variant littoral combat ship USS Montgomery (LCS 8) launches a RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) during a missile exercise on April 23, 2019. Montgomery is underway in the Eastern Pacific conducting routine training. US Navy photo.

LCS Billings Commander Removed After Hitting Merchant Ship in Montreal

By: Sam LaGrone

June 29, 2019 9:56 AM

Screen capture of a video showing Billings strike a moored cargo ship.

The commander of a Littoral Combat Ship that hit a moored ship in the St Lawrence River in Canada has been removed from command, USNI News has learned.

Cmdr. Michael Johnson was removed from command of the yet-to-be commissioned Billings (LCS-15) on Friday, a Surface Force Atlantic spokeswoman told USNI News on Saturday morning.

“Capt. Shawn Johnston, commander, Littoral Combat Ship Squadron Two (LCSRON 2), relieved PCU Billings(LCS 15) Blue Crew’s commanding officer, Cmdr. Michael Johnson, June 28, due to loss of confidence in his ability to command,” Lt. Cmdr. Courtney Hillson told USNI News.
“The relief follows the recent allision in Montreal, Canada, which occurred on June 21.”

Former Billings commander Cmdr. Nate Rowan, now commander of the blue crew on USS Wichita (LCS-13), assumed command of the ship.

Billings was leaving its berth in Montreal, under the assistance of tugs, when the LCS struck the moored bulk carrier Rosaire Desgagnes. 

Video from the scene shows that Billings was stemming a strong current, and the direction of her exhaust stream suggests that the wind would have tended to set her towards shore,” read a report in The Maritime Executive.

Billings is currently pier-side in Montreal as an investigation and damage assessment is ongoing.

Billings sustained minor damage above the waterline. While the ship is able to safely transit to its homeport, Naval Station Mayport, Fla., the ship will temporarily remain in port in Montreal to conduct a full damage assessment. No injuries were reported from either vessel. An investigation into the incident is ongoing,” a Navy spokesperson told USNI News earlier this week.

The Navy has released few other details on the incident. The video doesn’t show any lines from the tug attached to the ship and its unclear if a local pilot was in control of the ship when the allision Rosaire Desgagnes with occurred.

Last year, LCS USS Little Rock (LCS-9) was stranded for four months in Montreal after being trapped by an iced-over St. Lawrence after departing its commissioning ceremony in Buffalo, N.Y.

170825-N-IJ355-001.jpg

Littoral Combat Ship Billings Still in Montreal After Hitting a Moored Ship

By: Sam LaGrone

June 26, 2019 6:14 PM

Screen capture of a video showing Billings strike a moored cargo ship.

Littoral Combat Ship Billings (LCS-15) is pier-side in Montreal undergoing repairs after making contact with a merchant ship on Friday, Navy officials told USNI News on Wednesday.

The Freedom-class LCS, delivered to the Navy in February, was leaving its slip when it allided with the bulk carrier Rosaire Desgagnes, according to a video of the incident reviewed by USNI News.

The LCS was under the assistance of two tugs when the starboard side of the warship made contact with the port side of the carrier that was moored at the pier, the Navy said in a Wednesday statement.

Video from the scene shows that Billings was stemming a strong current, and the direction of her exhaust stream suggests that the wind would have tended to set her towards shore,” read a report in The Maritime Executive.

Other press reports said the incident occurred after Billings had cut lines with the two tugs.

“While getting underway from Montreal, Canada, the Freedom-variant littoral combat ship, [Billings] allided with a moored commercial vessel at Berth 30, June 21, at approximately 2 p.m.,” Lt. Cmdr. Courtney Hillson told USNI News. “Billings sustained minor damage above the waterline. While the ship is able to safely transit to its homeport, Naval Station Mayport, Fla., the ship will temporarily remain in port in Montreal to conduct a full damage assessment. No injuries were reported from either vessel. An investigation into the incident is ongoing.”

Surface Division 21, under LCS Squadron (LCSRON) 2 based in Mayport, will oversee the investigation into the allision, Hillson said.

This is the second time recently an LCS has had to wait unexpectedly in Montreal. In 2018, USS Little Rock(LCS-9) was stranded for four months in Montreal waiting for St. Lawrence River to thaw after departing its commissioning ceremony in Buffalo, N.Y.

170825-N-IJ355-001.jpg

Navy Refining How Data Analytics Could Predict Ship Maintenance Needs

By: Ben Werner

June 24, 2019 12:39 PM • Updated: June 25, 2019 2:58 PM

Hull Maintenance Technician 1st Class Patrick Zembol, from Romeo, Mich., welds a stanchion in the weld shop aboard the Navy’s forward-deployed aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76). US Navy Photo

The post was updated to include correct terminology.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Extending the lifespans of existing ships using data-driven maintenance efforts is the best strategy for achieving a 355- ship navy, said the Naval Sea Systems Command chief engineer.

The key to maintaining ships and enabling the Navy to extend their lifespans is data analytics, Rear Adm. Lorin Selby, the chief engineer and deputy commander of ship design, integration and naval engineering at NAVSEA, said Thursday at the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual Technology, Systems & Ship symposium.

“I have ships with a number of sensors on them, measuring things like reduction gears, shafting components, turbines, generators, water jets, air conditioning plants, high packs, a number of components, and we’re actually pulling data off those ships, in data acquisition systems,” Selby said.

At the Naval Surface Warfare Center Philadelphia Division, Selby’s team is analyzing data gleaned from smaller ship component operations to determine how often such components need servicing, oil changes, filter changes, other maintenance actions and replacement. The process is called condition-based maintenance plus (CBM+), and Selby wants CBM to drive improvements in maintaining ships.

“That’s one of the things we’re doing to get after utilizing the technology we have today to operate the ships we have today more efficiently and more effectively,” Selby said.

The Navy has dabbled with CBM for years. A 2008 Department of Defense Conditions Based Maintenance Plus guidebook mentions NAVSEA efforts. However, two years ago at the ASNE TSS symposium, NAVSEA Commander Vice Adm. Tom Moore told USNI News that the Navy’s use of CBM had perhaps gone too far and was disrupting the shipyards’ ability to plan for large maintenance jobs properly.

During previous attempts at incorporating CBM, there was a thought that, if major efforts like refurbishing tanks were only done when needed, rather than on a predetermined timetable, the Navy could avoid spending time and money on work ahead of need. However, that also meant that shipyards wouldn’t have a clear work package before a ship showed up at the pier, adding uncertainty and, ultimately, more time and cost into the maintenance availability.

This time around, Selby sees condition-based maintenance as a way to address smaller maintenance items in such a way that data analysis points a ship crew to components that are experiencing minor performance issues or otherwise showing signs they are about to fail before the failure actually occurs.

This summer, a pilot program using enterprise remote monitoring will occur on an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, he said. Data collected will be sent for analysis, and operators will learn how to use the data to understand how their systems are performing and if maintenance or repairs are needed.

Selby wants to have a system of apps the Navy can use to collect data from ship components, analyze the data, share it with operators and schedule work. He wants to hold a competition for app developers to create apps the Navy will test for use in the fleet.

Describing his vision, Selby said, “the systems that will be monitoring, say the turbine; it will tell the operators when a work procedure has to be performed and it will also then tap into the work package side of the house and generate a work package that gets sent to the ship, to the work center, to do the work. And if there’s a part involved, it will be able to pull a part from the supply system.”

Testing is occurring now, but Selby concedes there are some obstacles the Navy has to overcome before large-scale deployment. The Navy is struggling with how to transmit data securely, something Selby discussed during an earlier session at the symposium. The data also has to be secured.

“The performance of any given asset is something we want to hold close. So I think what you have to do is you have to architect this from kind of the get-go with that kind of security mindset in mind,” Selby said. “You can harvest that data and you could potentially discover vulnerabilities, so you have to protect that. That’s part of my project: as I do this, we’re bringing that security aspect into the program.”

Extending the lifespan of the Navy’s current fleet is essential if the Navy is going to grow to 355-ships, Moore said during his keynote address after Selby spoke Thursday. The Navy, military planners at the Pentagon, the White House and lawmakers are all anxious to reach 355 ships as soon as possible because Moore said current forces are stretched too thin.

“We in the Navy, we don’t have enough forces to go everywhere we need to go, and we have a pretty fragile mix of ships, so that when we miss an availability coming out on time, or we don’t build something to the schedule they’re supposed to build to, there are real-world consequences to that,” Moore said.

The true determining factor of whether a ship’s lifespan can be extended, Moore said, is the platform’s flexibility. The Arleigh Burke-class is the Navy’s workhorse today because, during the past 30 years, the Navy has successfully updated its operating systems. Moving forward, Moore said extending the life of the ships in this class means back-fitting many of the older Flight I and Flight II with a scaled-back version of the AN/SPY-6(V) Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) to keep these ships relevant to current and future mission needs.

“If you’re willing to do the maintenance on the ships, from a hull and mechanical perspective, you absolutely can keep them longer,” Moore said. “The issue is really not can you keep them 50 years; the issue is can they maintain combat relevance. If they can maintain combat relevance, we know we can keep them longer.”

Shipbuilding Industry Struggles to Recruit And Retain Workforce

By: Otto Kreisher

June 21, 2019 3:14 PM

William Mahan, a Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility worker from Puyallup, Washington, grinds a bulkhead on Aug. 04, 2017. US Navy Photo

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The shipbuilding and repair industry is facing increasing challenges from an aging workforce, lack of stability in the contract workload and a problem convincing young Americans that shipyard work is essential and well-paying, industry officials said.

The search for new shipyard workers must overcome the constant pressure for high school graduates to go to college, as well as the lack of experience in today’s youth in the kinds of skills the industry needs, a panel of shipyard officials and engineers told the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual Technology, Systems & Ship symposium on Thursday.

Todd Hooks, general manager of BAE Systems Ship Repair yard in Jacksonville, Fla., said the average age of his workers is 55 and that his skilled managers are retiring. Workflow fluctuations at the yard only aggravate his hiring and retention. In recent years, Hooks had 2,200 workers coming through the gates, then months later was down to 1,500 workers, and then staffing needs would go back up as demand from the Navy fluctuated.

“We can’t have that. … We need a stable workforce,” Hooks said. The challenge of getting and keeping trained workers will only get harder as future ships and their combat systems grow more advanced and therefore need different skills to maintain and modernize them, he added.

The policy of many high schools not welcoming industry recruiters hampers their ability to attract new workers, he said. High schools, he added, are more interested in getting every student into college, although less than one-third attend, Hooks said. The industry has the problem of getting the message out that the shipyards provide good-paying jobs. Then, when they get new workers, the industry has trouble keeping them because many do not come back after they are laid off during a drop in workload, he said.

William Crow, president of the Virginia Ship Repair Association, said the Norfolk-based institute is attacking the need for skilled workers with the support of its 286 member companies and financial support from the state of Virginia and the federal government. Illustrating the importance of the industry, Crow said there were 43,000 employees in the Norfolk shipyards, contributing $6.4 billion to the state’s economy and earning an average of $81,531 a year.

“The problem is lack of stability of the workload,” he said.

Extreme workload cycles at the yards don’t help with recruiting and retaining, said Crow, a retired surface warfare officer. He didn’t want “to throw rocks at the Navy,” but he noted the swings in Navy funding for repair and upgrades run counter to the Navy’s goal of expanding the fleet. Crow said he learned early in his career the Navy can’t build its way into a 355-ship fleet but must maintain the ships it has.

The association offers “a very wide range of training” in the classroom and online. In 2017, it trained 1,075 workers. With a grant from Newport News Shipbuilding, the area’s biggest employer, the association recently added a Marine Trade Training Program that is providing low-level skills that allow students to get entry-level jobs in the yards, he said.

Retired Vice Adm. David Architzel, chairman of the Maritime Industrial Base Ecosystem Institute, said his group formed to take a more in-depth look at the problem of getting workers into the shipyards and is evaluating the kind of workers needed in the future.

The industry needs more support nationally, similar to what is offered by Virginia and the Norfolk area, the panel members agreed. They want to see increased efforts to spread the message that ship repair is an essential and well-paying career.

5189611.jpg

Navy Issues Final RFP for FFG(X) Next-Generation Frigate

By: Megan Eckstein

June 20, 2019 6:37 PM • Updated: June 20, 2019 7:25 PM

FFG(X) contenders

The Navy released the final request for proposals for its next guided-missile frigate (FFG(X)) today, outlining the program that will get the U.S. Navy into the business of operating high-end small combatants. 

The service is counting on the new frigate to help the fleet operate in a distributed manner in a contested maritime environment. To that end, the final solicitation for bids for the FFG(X) program highlights a particular interest in what industry can offer in range; margins for weight, cooling, electrical and arrangeable deck area, to allow the ship to bring in new technologies as they develop; acoustic signature management; undersea surveillance; and over-the-horizon capabilities.

After previous iterations of the frigate were ditched as the Navy’s view of what capability it wanted evolved, the current FFG(X) effort sought to bring in industry early to ensure that requirements were in line with what technologies were currently feasible at the right price point. Those ongoing discussions led the Navy to settle on a ship that would have at least 32 vertical launching system (VLS) cells, an Aegis-based combat system, the Cooperative Engagement Capability datalink so the frigate could share targeting data with other ships and aircraft, and advanced anti-submarine warfare and electronic warfare systems.

The service announced earlier this year the frigate would include as government-furnished equipment:

  • A fixed-face Raytheon Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) that will serve as the primary air search radar.

  • At least 32 Mark 41 Vertical Launch System cells that could field Standard Missile 2 Block IIICs or RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSM) and a planned vertically launched anti-submarine warfare weapon.

  • COMBATSS-21 Combat Management System based on the Aegis Combat System.

  • Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) datalink that would allow the frigate to share targeting information with other ships and aircraft.

  • Space, weight and cooling for 8 to 16 Over-the-Horizon Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles

  • An aviation detachment that includes an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter and an MQ-8C Firescout Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.

  • AN/SQQ-89(V)15 Surface Ship Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Combat System

  • AN/SQS-62 Variable Depth Sonar.

  • SLQ-32(V)6 Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2 electronic warfare suite with allowances to include SEWIP Block 3 Lite in the future.

  • Space, weight and cooling reservation for a 150-kilowatt laser.

Further highlighting the focus on allowing the ships to be upgraded as technology evolves, the solicitation asks that bids include a “description of the flexibility in the design to accommodate efficient warfare systems upgrades by explaining equipment removal and upgrade paths with an emphasis on avoiding hull cuts or the need for dry docking,” as well as provisions for upgrading hull-mounted and towed undersea warfare sensors.

Five industry teams have been involved in early design maturation efforts, which both helped industry refine their plans to be more in line with what the Navy wanted, and allowed the Navy to refine its idea of how much this new class might cost.

Earlier this year, USNI News reported that costs were coming down as a result of the design maturation contracts.

“$950 (million) was the threshold; $800 million is the objective,” frigate program manager with Program Executive Office Unmanned and Small Combatants Regan Campbell said in January at the Surface Navy Association symposium.
“We started closer to the $950; we are trending to very close to the $800 now. We have taken some very significant costs out,” she said of the second through 10th ship of the class. The Navy intends to buy at least 20 frigates, though the first contract will only cover the first 10. After the first contract, the Navy could continue with the same builder or re-compete the program to potentially bring in a second builder, if it wanted to accelerate frigate production to keep in line with its drive to reach a 355-ship fleet and leadership acknowledgement that it will need more small combatants and fewer high-end destroyers going forward.

After the release of today’s final RFP, interested bidders will have until Aug. 22 to submit their technical proposals to the Navy and until Sept. 26 to submit their pricing proposal. A winner will be selected in Fiscal Year 2020 to build the frigate.

Of the five companies that participated in the design maturation phase, four are expected to submit bids to the RFP. Austal USA, who builds the Independence-variant Littoral Combat Ship; Fincantieri Marine, which builds the Italian FREMM multipurpose frigate; General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, who will partner with Spanish F100-builder Navantia; and Ingalls Shipbuilding, who has declined to discuss its design, all worked with the Navy to take their existing parent designs and mature them to become in line with the Navy’s vision for its guided-missile frigate. Lockheed Martin, which builds the Freedom-variant LCS, was part of that effort as well but announced it would not continue on with the frigate competition.

Despite the earlier design work that the Navy funded, the frigate competition is open to any bidder who has a parent design to base the frigate offering on.

Proposed Government Furnished Equipment for FFG(X)

Proposed Government Furnished Equipment for FFG(X)

Navy: Next Large Surface Combatant Will Look A Lot Like Zumwalt

By: Ben Werner

June 19, 2019 10:32 AM • Updated: June 21, 2019 3:13 PM

Destroyer Zumwalt (DDG-1000) transits the Atlantic Ocean during acceptance trials with the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey (INSURV). US Navy Photo

This post has been updated with a clarification comment from ASNE’s Richard White.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Navy’s next large surface combatant will probably look more like the futuristic Zumwalt class of guided-missile destroyers than fleet’s current workhorse class of Arleigh Burke destroyers, the program executive officer said.

Navy and industry designers are talking about increased payloads, increased computing and increased design flexibility when considering the possible capabilities of the fleet’s next large surface combatant, Rear Adm. William Galinis, the Navy’s program executive officer for ships, said during the American Society of Naval Engineers’ annual Technology, Systems & Ship symposium on Tuesday. Designers also have to consider that the Navy now plans to operate in an increasingly contested environment, which means taking into account how adversaries will see the new ship class on radars.

“The signature aspect of it, what does that do to the shaping of deckhouse hull form. I will tell you, not to predispose anything, but I think in the end, you know, it’s probably going to look a lot more like a DDG-1000 than a DDG-51 if I had to say so,” Galinis said. “But there’s still a lot of work to kind of go do in that area.”

Galinis was speaking during the opening keynote address at the 2019 TSS conference. Rear Adm. Lorin Selby, the Navy’s chief engineer and deputy commander for ship design at Naval Sea Systems Command, joined Galinis during the keynote.

The Navy had planned to buy the first of its new class of large surface combatant in 2023, but Galinis said the Navy has since pushed back the start date. USNI News first reported the Navy now is looking at awarding a contract in Fiscal Year 2025. The current Arleigh Burke-class multi-year contract expires in 2022.

By pushing back the production timeline, Galinis said the Navy can refine its requirements now and incorporate feedback from industry and current programs to help improve the ship design and control costs.

As an example, Galinis said the Navy continues learning from the DDG-1000 program. The Navy is applying a lot of acquisition and production lessons learned from the Zumwalt class experience to the Columbia-class submarine program, Galinis said.

“When you start thinking about large surface combatant, that’s going to be a key element of that acquisition strategy,” Galinis said.

At the same time, the current emphasis on developing new ships is increasing the demand for ship design expertise, Selby said. He wants to establish a constant design workflow so the Navy doesn’t lose talent during the years between ship major designs.

“There’s a lot of design work across the enterprise,” Selby said. “We really have to work hard to build that talent base back up.”

When introducing Galinis and Selby, retired Navy Capt. Richard White, the TSS 2019 committee chair, said Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer had requested that conference attendees not ask questions about aircraft carriers.

During his keynote address highlighting recent advances naval ship design, Galinis merely said, “the one new design over the last couple of years is obviously the Ford-class carrier, but we’re not going to talk a lot about that over the next couple of days.”

During the second day of TSS 2019, White provided clarification to his previous comments regarding the discussion of aircraft carriers. When planning this year’s conference, the decision was made to focus on surface ships. There was no direction from the Navy regarding asking about aircraft carriers.
“I did not receive any direction from the Secretary of the Navy,” White said.

171026-N-TU910-135.jpg