BAE Systems announces partners for Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle design

On the same subject

• 

  September 28, 2018 | International, Naval

  Navy Awards Ingalls 6 Destroyers, Bath Iron Works 4 in Multiyear Deal; Ingalls to Build Both 2018 Ships

  By: Megan Eckstein The Navy awarded six of its next Arleigh Burke-class destroyers to Ingalls Shipbuilding and four to General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, in a combined $9-billion purchase right at the end of the fiscal year. The two companies had been competing for work in a five-year multiyear procurement (MYP) deal that would cover at least 10 Flight III destroyers. The contracts span Fiscals Years 2018 – which ends on Sunday – through 2022. “These contract awards are further evidence of the Navy's continued delivery of lethal capacity to the nation with a sense of urgency while ensuring best value for the taxpayer,” Navy acquisition chief James Geurts said in a Navy news release. “The Navy saved $700 million for these 10 ships by using multiyear procurement contracts rather than a single year contracting approach. We also have options for an additional five DDG 51s to enable us to continue to accelerate delivery of the outstanding DDG 51 Flight III capabilities to our Naval force. We executed this competition on a quick timeline that reflects the urgency in which the Navy and our industry partners are operating to ensure we meet the demands of the National Defense Strategy.” Ingalls Industries' contract is worth $5.1 billion and covers two ships in FY 2018 and one a year in FY 2019 through 2022. It also includes options for additional ships, which may be subject to a future competition with BIW. Bath Iron Works' contract is valued at $3.9 billion and covers one ship a year in 2019 through 2022 – and none in the short-term in 2018. According to the Navy statement, “each shipbuilder's contract contains options for additional ships in FY18/19/20/21/22, providing the Navy and/or Congress flexibility to increase DDG 51 build rates above the 10 MYP ships in the Navy's FY 2018 budget request, if appropriated.” Lawmakers in the House and Senate armed services committees have pushed for faster acquisition of the destroyers, and in the FY 2018 National Defense Authorization Act they authorized the Navy to enter into a multiyear procurement contract with the two builders for as many as 15 destroyers – three a year, compared to the previous shipbuilding rate of two a year. The lawmakers on the appropriations committees only provided money to buy two ships in 2018, but they did fund three DDGs in the 2019 spending bill, which the Senate passed last week and the House passed this week. It is unclear if that third ship in FY 2019 would have to be competitively awarded or if the Navy would be allowed to select a shipyard based on schedule, performance or other factors – the contract announcement notes the options “may” be subject to a competitive process. Program officials had been mum during the competition on their acquisition strategy and how to handle options for additional ships. All the ships covered under this pair of contracts is for the Flight III configuration, which is built around the powerful AN/SPY-6(v) Air and Missile Defense Radar. “This procurement will efficiently provide Integrated Air and Missile Defense capability for our future fleet while strengthening our critical shipbuilding and defense industrial base,” DDG-51 program manager Capt. Casey Moton said in the news release. “The Navy is proud to be working alongside the dedicated shipbuilders at BIW and Ingalls to continue to deliver these warships to the fleet.” Moton told USNI News in a December 2017 interview that the contracts would be structured in such a way that additional ships – beyond the previous two-a-year rate – could be added easily if the Navy deemed it a priority in its spending request or if lawmakers wanted to add in more funding. With this contract award, the two shipyards – who, for a time after the production line had restarted remained neck-and-neck on contract awards and deliveries – will further diverge. Ingalls Shipbuilding was awarded a contract in June 2017 to begin work on its first Flight III ship, DDG-125. Two months later, Bath Iron Works was awarded a contract that would have the yard build DDG-126 with a Flight III configuration but DDG-127 in the older Flight IIA design, like the rest of the ships in the previous multiyear procurement contract. Though Navy and congressional officials would not comment while the competition was occurring, Bath Iron Works had been challenged to balance the Arleigh Burke-class program and the DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer program. Keeping DDG-127 – which Congress incrementally funded in FY 2016 and 2016 – at the Flight IIA design would help ease the yard into Flight III production. The yard will not be building any new destroyers in FY 2018, according to the contract announcement, whereas Ingalls will take on two Flight III ships. https://news.usni.org/2018/09/27/navy-awards-ingalls-6-destroyers-bath-iron-works-4-in-multiyear-deal-ingalls-to-build-both-fy-2018-ships

• 

  January 2, 2020 | International, Naval

  The US military ran the largest stress test of its sealift fleet in years. It’s in big trouble.

  By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. military in September ordered the largest stress test of its wartime sealift fleet in the command's history, with 33 out of 61 government-owned ships being activated simultaneously. The results were bad, according to a new report. In an unclassified U.S. Transportation Command report posted to its website, the so-called turbo activation revealed that less than half of the sealift fleet would be fully prepared to get underway for a major sealift operation in a crisis. “The relatively low ... Qualitative Mission Success Rate indicates the Organic Surge Fleet is challenged to be immediately available for a large-scale inter-theater force deployment without delays/impacts to force closure due to degraded readiness,” the report read. The Dec. 16 report confirms what senior military and transportation officials have been saying for years now: that the sealift fleet is in urgent need of recapitalization if it is to be relied upon to support a large-scale operation overseas. In a crisis, nearly 90 percent of all Army and Marine Corps equipment would be carried by ship. The Navy is on the hook to pay for recapitalization, but it has so far failed to land on a strategy to do so. Overall, 40.7 percent of the 61 ships operated by Military Sealift Command and the Maritime Administration were fully ready to support a major sealift operation. Sal Mercogliano, a merchant marine and current professor at Campbell University who closely follows these issues, said the major equipment casualties are the driving factor that is dragging down readiness. “You had 22 out of the 61 ships in either C-5 or C-4 condition,” Mercogliano said. “C-5 means that you can't even leave the dock; C-4 means you can leave the dock but you are not in any condition to sail any real distance. In my ballpark, that's non-mission capable. So right off the bat you lose 22 of the 61 ships. Then of the 33 that they activated, nine of them had issues. Three of them were C-4 level. “So when you add together the ones that had issues with the ones that couldn't be activated, they're saying you can only really count on about 40 percent of the fleet to active when they are aiming for 85 percent.” Ultimately, the degraded status of the sealift fleet means that combatant commanders won't be able to count on its capacity for logistics support, Mercogliano said. “If you are Indo-Pacific Command, or you are Central Command, and you are counting on a certain amount of square footage available to you, that's going to have huge ramifications,” he added. In recent testimony, INDOPACOM Commander Adm. Phil Davidson said as much, saying his operational plans depend on logistics support. “Clearly recapitalization of our sealift system is going to be critically important, as it's aging out and really has propulsion plants that [are] expiring in capability and our ability to maintain them,” Davidson said. “It's [a] risk to our troops and all of our people that are forward in the region if there is any delay in our ability to deliver the logistics in accordance with the [operation] plans.” Manning concerns In a November interview prior to the compilation of the final report, Maritime Administrator retired Rear Adm. Mark Buzby told Defense News that the test validated the data they had on ship readiness and the Maritime Administration's ability to crew the vessels, which he has long maintained is enough for initial activation but would suffer during a prolonged effort. “I think given the scale of the test, as we've been saying, we are OK for doing initial manning for our ships when they are activated,” Buzby said. “Something that we couldn't test in this fairly short-term activation was the follow-on aspect. “We believe we have plenty of manning to man up the ships initially, get them past the sea buoy and get them on the mission. But the problem is going to manifest itself four to six months down the line when some of them want to rotate. Who is going to be standing on the pier ready to take their place? That's where we have a problem. You just couldn't show that in this activation.” One of the primary issues has been, as Davidson intimated, that many of the plants in the Ready Reserve Force are steam-operated plants, which are all but nonexistent in the commercial world, so it is increasingly difficult to find qualified engineers. Finding steam engineers went well for the turbo activation, Buzby said, but it proved difficult and will only become more so as fewer opportunities to retain updated certifications become available. In a 2018 interview with Defense News, Buzby described a shortage of personnel that would affect the sealift fleet's ability to operate for an extended period of time. The Maritime Administration, part of the Department of Transportation, estimates it has 11,768 qualified mariners with unlimited credentials available to crew the Ready Reserve Force, a number that just exceeds the needed total of 11,678 to operate both the reserve and commercial fleets at the same time. But that comes with a catch: This service is entirely voluntary. “Maritime Workforce Working Group estimates that there are sufficient mariners working in the industry to activate the surge fleet if the entire pool of qualified United States citizen mariners identified by MWWG are available and willing to sail when required,” the report read. “This assumption is of paramount importance given the voluntary nature of mariner service.” Furthermore, that number is just what it would take to activate the ships and temporarily operate them. If the nation needed to sustain a large-scale effort, it would soon begin to falter. “We are about 1,800 mariners short for any kind of long-term sustainment effort,” Buzby said. “We believe we have enough today to activate all the ships we would need to activate. ... But anything less than an all-of-nation effort ... where everyone who went out to sea, stayed at sea, we start to run short of people as we rotate.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/12/31/the-us-military-ran-the-largest-stress-test-of-its-sealift-fleet-in-years-its-in-big-trouble/

• 

  October 1, 2024 | International, Naval

  Naval Group signs contract to deliver four Barracuda Family expeditionary submarines to the Netherlands Ministry of Defense

  September 30, 2024 - Today, Gijs Tuinman, Dutch State Secretary for Defence, and Pierre Eric Pommellet, CEO of Naval Group, signed the Delivery Agreement for the Replacement Netherlands Submarine Capability...