A Navy ship competition?

NPP Pressroom

Prairie Pundit

04/04/2010

As the Navy prepares to choose one version of the littoral combat ship as the basis for future orders, all sides say the service needs to go for the best deal. They just don't agree on what that means. In the winner-take-all face-off between Mobile-based Austal USA and a team led by Lockheed Martin Corp., the Navy's main focus is sticker price, leaders have indicated. "It's crucial to us to get the cost of these ships down so that we can buy the numbers that we need," Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said at a Senate hearing last month. But members of the Alabama congressional delegation have been pushing for a more expansive approach that considers not just purchase price but "capability," and "life-cycle" costs, such as fuel. At a separate hearing, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Mobile, recently went so far as to suggest that the Navy should change its bid package to better reflect that tack, even if it meant buying a ship with a slightly higher up-front price tag. So far, however, Mabus and other officials have showed no sign of budging. One outside analyst said the Navy has no choice but to put price first. "The shipbuilding budget is overextended," said Christopher Hellman, research director for the National Priorities Project, a nonpartisan organization that tracks federal spending issues. ... The competing designs are starkly different. Austal is offering a three-hulled trimaran; its selection would mark the first time that the Navy has opted for an all-aluminum surface warship. Lockheed, whose version has so far been built by Marinette Marine Corp. near Green Bay, Wis., has opted for a traditional steel monohull. ... While Lemmo downplayed the contrast between the two designs, noting the Navy has said that both meet its requirements, Lockheed's public sales pitch appears to play off its model's more conventional appearance. ... Last month, the trade publication Defense Daily reported that a Navy document shows Austal's ship is more fuel efficient, particularly at high speeds. Lemmo, however, said that more recent data shows the Lockheed ship is better at more commonly used lower speeds than the Navy document shows. ... Here is a photo of the Austal trimaran. The article does not discuss the vulnerability of the two craft to damage from conventional weapons. It is possible that speed is suppose to make the larger ship less vulnerable, but I think a hit on an aluminum hull would easily penetrate. I do think for the mission of the ship speed should be an important factor.