More on the Goal...JHSV

Re: Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV), Request for Proposal Number N00024-07-R-2219

First, from the official JHSV Web Link JHSV Industry Day Website (http://peos.crane.navy.mil/pms325/jhsv.htm)
The following JHSV document links have been culled from a survey of the above web site:

http://peoships.crane.navy.mil/pms325/20070425_draft_jhsv_pspec_industry_day_release.pdf

http://peoships.crane.navy.mil/pms325/industryday_presentations/070426_jhsv_industry_day_final_overview.pdf

http://peoships.crane.navy.mil/pms325/industryday_presentations/070426%20jhsv%20industry_day_final_overview_part1.pdf

http://peoships.crane.navy.mil/pms325/industryday_presentations/07042_%20jhsv_industry_day_final_%28sdm%29.pdf

Second, from the DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2008/2009 BUDGET ESTIMATES document at:
http://www.finance.hq.navy.mil/fmb/08pres/rdten/RDTEN_ba7_book.pdf
An internal pdf keyword search can be done for JHSV. Pages 575 - 589 of the doc deal with this line item in the budget. Some quotes from this budget document:

"The Joint High Speed Vessel Program is a Navy led acquisition for a high-speed, shallow draft, commercial-based ship capable of intra-theater personnel and cargo lift for the Armed Services. The ship is not intended to be a combatant and must operate in benign or secured environments. The technologies supporting this capability were evaluated during the completed Analysis of Alternatives."

"The design parameters associated with the desired capability are:
Speed: over 35 knots
Payload: 600 short tons, 20000 sq ft
Range: 1200 nm loaded, 4500nm unloaded
Pax: 312
Single spot flight deck to support H-60
C4I suite for situational awareness and basic planning
Commercial Survivability (SOLAS and T-Ship AT/FP)
Austere Ports: access length less than 450 ft, draft less than 15 ft."

"R&D Efforts for Intratheater Connector - Addressing spiral technology development and risk mitigation efforts through development of tools and systems to monitor and forecast hull fatigue unique to lightweight hull forms. Continuing to conduct R&D in areas involving lightweight aluminum flight decks, development of advanced lightweight causeway systems, advanced fendering systems, and the safe transport of ammunition and dangerous goods aboard lightweight vessels.
FY07 - Demonstrate a Hull Monitoring System that provides real time hull stress information to the operator. Develop procedures for transportation of dangerous
goods specific to intended JHSV operations. Develop Lightweight Modular Causeway System by supporting ACTD to deliver a JHSV capable causeway that will
facilitate access and throughput in austere ports.
FY08 - Commence Deployable Airbeam Fendering System (DAFS) Integration Study required to integrate and optimize such a system for future JHSVs. Study
feasibility of Tensioned Alongside Refueling to support Navy UNREP capability on JHSV.
FY09 - Continue feasibility studies of Tensioned Alongside Refueling to support Navy UNREP capability on JHSV."

"Acquisition Strategy: Feasibility studies will be conducted to determine the best designs to meet new Joint Service requirements for intratheater connectors."

"Program Acquisition Efforts for Intratheater Connector - Conducting Industry Day to engage potential shipbuilder to comment on the JHSV Performance Spec, solicitation for proposals to JHSV Preliminary/Contract Designs, evaluation of the proposals/designs, and downselect from the proposed designs to establish a competitive range for the follow-on Detail Design & Construction Award. At the same time, we will assist the preparation of the Capability Development Document as part of requirement definition process. Milestone B preparation entails both statutory and regulatory documentation required for a Milestone decision.
FY07 - Continue efforts to support award of contract for preliminary design/contact design in mid-FY07. Resolve design issues and initiate the contract data package,
including design drawings and specifications.
FY08 - Continue preliminary design/contact design efforts leading to shipbuilding contract award in 2nd quarter FY08. Commence studies to support definition of Navy
unique requirements for JHSV #2.
FY09 - Continue studies to support definition of Navy unique requirements for JHSV #2."

The above document also includes complete budget amounts, FY timelines and diagrams. The first phase decision on this project was scheduled to be announced soon.

Third, from U.S. Army Budget information, on page 3 of the following online document:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy2006/army-peds/0603804A.pdf

"Mission Description and Budget Item Justification: This project supports advanced component development and prototype equipment for the Army's Logistics-Over-The-Shore (LOTS) missions. Among this equipment is the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV). The JHSV will operate at speeds up to four times greater than the current Logistics Support Vessels (LSVs) fleet. These capabilities will provide the Army with operational maneuver from standoff distances; by-passing of land-based chokepoints, and will reduce the logistics footprint in the Area of Responsibility. This ability to transport both troops and their equipment, and to provide an Enroute Mission Planning and Rehearsal System, does not exist today. Funds in the out years support other watercraft efforts. The evolutionary acquisition features the current lease of two commercial fast ferries, the High Speed Vessel (HSV-X1) and the Theater Support Vessel (TSV-1X) for Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) purposes."

And from the 2007 Army Modernization Plan (AMP), on page 57 of this online document:
http://www.army.mil/institution/leaders/modplan/2007/AMP07%20Annex%20D.pdf

"JOINT HIGH-SPEED VESSEL (JHSV)
The JHSV is an intra-theater platform that
provides advanced capabilities for the operational
maneuver of combat-ready units and sustainment
to smaller theater ports or sheltered shoreline areas
within a JOA. The JHSV program is based upon
a high-speed (40+ knots), shallow-draft , sealift
platform that will maximize current commercial
high-speed ferry technology. The JHSV provides
the capability to conduct operational maneuver and
repositioning of intact unit sets while conducting
en route mission planning and rehearsal. This intra
theater vessel provides the combatant commander
with increased throughput, survivability, and
responsiveness, and improved closure rates. It
provides an alternative to intra-theater airlift
within many theaters and allows the Joint force
commander to rapidly insert combat forces into
austere ports. JHSV would provide theater force
projection and sustainment lift to deploying units
arriving by strategic lift (air, sea) to a theater. The
vessels would be utilized to move Army Prepositioned
Stocks (APS) located on land or afl oat. JHSV
supports traditional JLOTS and future seabasing
operations within an anti-access/access denial
environment. This transformation enabler
helps deployment goals as well as achieve full
distribution-based logistics.
Program Status. The Army and the Navy have
combined requirements and merged the Army’s
Theater Support Vessel (TSV) and the Navy’s
High-Speed Intra-Theater Surface Connector
programs. Although the Army initially determined
a requirement for 24 vessels and a critical
requirement for 12 vessels, a Joint requirements
and solution set has not yet been determined. To
ensure Joint interoperability, minimize redundant
capabilities and gain economies of scale, the
Army and Navy have signed a memorandum of
agreement assigning the acquisition lead for the
JHSV program to the Navy. Each department will
source its Service-unique developmental costs
and will separately fund vessels to meet their own
requirements. The Navy and Army are jointly
sourcing RDTE 50/50. Cost for the fi rst vessel
is $210 million, and follow on vessels will cost
$170 million (in FY08 dollars). The price does not
include additional add-ons (C41, AT/FP, mounted
command) of $10-20 million. The Army and Navy
have initially programmed funding for a total of
eight vessels (3 Navy, 5 Army) in FY07-11 FYDP.
The lead vessel award is planned for FY08, and
delivery is planned for FY10-11, followed by
postdelivery tests in FY11-12. Follow-on vessels are
planned for FY09-11 (vessels 2-4), FY10-12 (vessels
5-6), and FY11-13 (vessels 7-8)."

Next, check out these pictures/diagrams and a recent article from Incat at http://www.incat.com.au/:
On page http://www.incat.com.au/defence_fs.html, there are some very interesting pictures/diagrams at the following links:
HMAS Jervis Bay
Joint Venture HSV-X1
TSV-1X Spearhead
HSV 2 Swift
Military Design Concepts

Pictures:
http://www.incat.com.au/news/download.cgi?articleID=63674&category=63452&subheading=NONE
http://www.incat.com.au/display2.cgi?file=63208_1598muscgga.jpg&title=General%20Arrangement&type=ap
http://www.incat.com.au/display2.cgi?file=63371_39030115-n-5319a-00.jpg&title=TSV-1X%20Spearhead&type=ap
http://www.incat.com.au/display2.cgi?file=63367_63cpv231livdhr.jpg&title=TSV-1X%20GA&type=ap
http://www.incat.com.au/news/media.cgi?task=SHOWCATEGORY&category=63452 http://www.incat.com.au/news/media.cgi?task=SHOWCATEGORY&category=63441 http://www.incat.com.au/news/media.cgi?news_task=DETAIL&articleID=64259&sectionID=63068

21st November, 2007
Navy shows off high-speed catamaran at Academy
Published November 16, 2007, Capital Online News
"The HSV-2 Swift hugs the Naval Academy quay like an aluminum-clad bastion, looking more like a fortress than the high-speed, cutting-edge Naval vessel it truly is.
The $21 million, 320-foot-long, wave-piercing catamaran, which can be reconfigured to carry cargo, troops and even a full surgical ward, is at the forefront of military technology and the visit to Annapolis this weekend is its first trip to America after docking in ports as far-flung as Jamaica, Lebanon and Indonesia.
"This is one of the coolest things the Navy has going right now," said Lt. j.g. Rob Gill, the Swift's operations officer.
The ship is in town for the weekend to give midshipmen and the public a peek at one of the military's most high-tech toys. The cargo hold, which can take on more than a dozen M1A1 Abrams tanks, will be filled this weekend with examples of the Navy's various surface-warfare divisions, including the SEALs and their equipment, riverine squadrons with their patrol boats and Navy Expeditionary Combat Command, as well as the Seabees.
"When you think 'surface warfare,' people think tradition," said Executive Officer Lt. Cmdr. Erik Patton. "You've got a ship, it's got a couple of guns, maybe a flight deck."
The crew of the Swift also will be showing off the ship to curious visitors.
The Swift, built in 2003 by the Australians to precise specifications and on lease until July 2008, can do more than 40 knots over the water - nearly 60 mph - while carrying 600 tons of cargo.
"It's a giant jet ski," Lt. Gill said with a grin. "... You get more airsick on this than seasick."
But the behemoth has a draft of only 10 feet, which is less than half of a comparably sized frigate.
Lt. Cmdr. Patton estimates that the Swift, because of its shallow draft, has access to 500 more ports across the world.
"It's always forward-deployed because of its unique capabilities," he said.
The Swift boasts two crews of 47, which rotate through the ship every four months, allowing it to be constantly deployed. During the last two years the ship has provided relief to the disaster-stricken New Orleans as well as to Indonesia, and became the first American vessel to dock in Lebanon in more than two decades.
When it pulls out of Annapolis, the Swift is bound for the western coast of Africa where it will drill with allied nations before steaming into the Mediterranean. Afterward, the Swift will travel to New Zealand where it will be returned to the Australians when the lease expires in July. The Swift is the Navy's third high speed catamaran as it continues development of the Joint High Speed Vessel with the Marine Corps and the Army, which is expected to be deployed by 2012." Credits: Andrew Childers Staff Writer (Naval Academy)

Next, check out these pictures and newsletters from Austal. At least read the most recent Austal News and Austal Defence Newsletters. Very interesting pictures:
http://www.austal.com/go/news-and-images/photo-galleries?OTHERID=7E3CF2E9%2D65BF%2DEBC1%2D23DB24B25DC39A97

Austal Newsletters
The Austal Group News provides an insight into the activities, current and forthcoming projects of the Austal Group. Please click on the links below to download copies of the Newsletter.
Austal News - Issue 1 2007
Austal Defence News
Austal Defence News - May 2007
Austal Defence News - October 2006
Austal Defence News - December 2005
Austal Defence News - July 2005

An interesting quote from http://www.austal.com/:
"Following September 11, 2001 the Air Force often had only two C-17s positioned in the region at any given time and these aircraft were tasked to support the entire U.S. Military Establishment in Korea, Japan and throughout the Western Pacific (WestPac). Given limited airlift support of one or two sorties per day it was previously taking up to two weeks just to move the battalion anywhere off the island of Okinawa. By contrast, the same deployment could be carried out by “WestPac Express” in 24-30 hours. Describing the immediate time and cost benefits of “WestPac Express” first deployment in 2001, CW05 Roger G. Rose, Surface Embarkation Officer, II MEF G-4, Strategic Mobility Office, commented, “Instead of a two week process to deploy by air lift WestPac Express moved the unit’s 843 Marines, 63 vehicles and 27 containers of baggage and cargo in 30 hours. Instead of a price-tag of over $500,000 for one-way transportation requiring at least sixteen, C-17 airlifts, WestPac Express did the round trip lift for $130,000.”

Still, expensive by private sector commercial standards, but apparently cheap by military standards.

And an interesting quote from Incat http://www.incat.com.au/:
"In 1998, as part of the US Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation Technologies High-Speed Sealift Program, and in cooperation with the US Transportation Command and Maritime Administration, NAVSEA undertook development work and sponsored the evaluation of an Incat 91 metre vessel.
In 1999, the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) chartered the HMAS Jervis Bay, an Incat 86 metre vessel, for use during the East Timor crisis. The vessel seized the attention of the worldwide military, enabling them to witness the potential of HSC to perform various military roles.
In 2001, and in response to the overwhelming interest from US forces in high-speed craft, Incat formed a strategic alliance with an American Shipyard to market and build our innovative craft designs for the US military and commercial markets. Incat USA’s alliance with Bollinger Shipyard Inc of Louisiana, who have extensive experience with supplying patrol craft to the Military and Coast Guard, has combined the strengths of two world class shipbuilders.
Later in 2001, joint forces from the US Military awarded to Bollinger / Incat USA the contract for a High Speed Craft to be used as an evaluation platform for various trials and demonstrations for the different forces involved. The 96 metre Wave Piercing Catamaran HSV-X1 Joint Venture became the benchmark for future Fast Sealift acquisitions, thanks to her high operational speed, long-range deployment capabilities, combined with a high deadweight capacity. Joint Venture has excelled during her deployment in the Persian Gulf in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Just hours after Operation Iraqi Freedom began, Joint Venture sped into the shallow Persian Gulf waters near the southern Iraqi port of Umm Qasr, acting as an afloat forward staging base for Marine Fleet Anti-Terrorism Security Teams and Navy SEAL commandos.
On 14 November 2002, the US Army took acceptance of its first Theater Support Vessel TSV-1X Spearhead. The craft is part of the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrator (ACTD) program, a joint effort by the acquisition and operational (war fighter) communities within the Department of Defence (DoD). Typically ACTD’s begin by identifying significant military needs and then matching them with current commercial technology or other programs ready to focus on military application.
A Third Craft
Military Sealift Command, Washington, D.C., has contracted HSV 2 Swift from Bollinger/Incat USA, LLC, Lockport, Louisiana for the US Navy. Delivered in August 2003, the High Speed Vessel, Incat Hull 061, will serve operationally as an interim Mine Warfare Command and Support Ship (MCS), and support transformational mine warfare modular mission payload initiatives. In support of Navy experimentation, the HSV will be used to explore concepts, capabilities and military utility associated with the advanced hull and propulsion technology integrated with advanced communications..."

And an interesting quote from http://www.bollinger-incatusa.com/:
"As a result, in 2001, joint forces from the US Military awarded to Bollinger/Incat USA the contract for a 96-meter High Speed Craft, HSV-X1 Joint Venture, to be used as an evaluation platform for various trials and demonstrations for the different forces involved. The runaway success of Joint Venture has led to more contracts. The 98-meter USAV TSV-1X Spearhead was delivered to the US Army in November 2002 while another craft HSV 2 Swift for the US Navy, was delivered in August 2003."

GlobalSecurity.org has some really good summary information, pictures, and charts on JHSV, so I am including some links and quotes from that here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/jhsv.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/hsv-specs.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/hsv-1-unit.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/hsv-gallery.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/images/tlv101_bigB.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/hsc.htm
From http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/hsv-mod.htm:
"High Speed Vessel (HSV) / Theater Support Vessel (TSV) - The commercial sector has already developed and demonstrated a number of relevant technologies and capabilities; specifically, high-speed ships (45+ kts), long range at endurance speeds (30 kts, >4000 nm), good sea keeping ability (30 kts in 4.5-5 meter seas), shallow draft (12-14 ft) and ease of rapid modular adaptability to multiple missions. A singular baseline configuration, depicted here, with a dedicated crew of 20, remotely injected with a tailorable and versatile C4I capability could allow rapid mission reconfiguration (within hours) and the embarkation of roll on / roll off mission specific equipment or modules, with specific staffs and personnel tailored to meet a wide variety of military tasks."
From http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy2006/army-peds/0603804A.pdf#xml=http://www.globalsecurity.org/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/webinator/search/pdfhi.txt?query=jhsv+and+hsv-x1&pr=default&prox=page&rorder=500&rprox=500&rdfreq=500&rwfreq=500&rlead=500&rdepth=0&sufs=0&order=r&cq=&id=4748faf613:
"The JHSV will operate at speeds up to four times greater than the current Logistics Support Vessels (LSVs) fleet. These capabilities will provide the Army with operational maneuver from standoff distances; by-passing of land-based chokepoints, and will reduce the logistics footprint in the Area of Responsibility. This ability to transport both troops and their equipment, and to provide an Enroute Mission Planning and Rehearsal System, does not exist today. Funds in the out years support other watercraft efforts. The evolutionary acquisition features the current lease of two commercial fast ferries, the High Speed Vessel (HSV-X1) and the Theater Support Vessel (TSV-1X) for Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) purposes."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/webinator/search?pr=default&prox=page&rorder=500&rprox=500&rdfreq=500&rwfreq=500&rlead=500&sufs=0&order=r&rdepth=0&query=jhsv+and+hsv-x1


Re: Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV), Request for Proposal Number N00024-07-R-2219

"In December 2004, the Departments of the Army and Navy agreed to merge the HSV, HSC and TSV efforts into the JHSV program administered by the Navy’s Program Executive Officer for Ships (PEO Ships)."

"Department of the Navy The Request for Proposal will be issued on or about February 5, 2007. High Speed Vessel (JHSV), pending Request for Proposal Number N00024-07-R-2219."

"Navy Planning Second JHSV Industry Day, Nearing RFP Release. Apr 12, 2007."

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF APRIL 19, 2007 FBO #1970 SPECIAL NOTICE 99 -- Modification to Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) Industry Day Notification - Current Information Notice Date 4/17/2007
Solicitation Number DON-SNOTE-070417-001
Description
This notice is a modification to the notice posted on 16 April 2007. All information contained herein is the same as that which was previously posted. Preliminary information on the Industry Day is now available on the JHSV website referenced in this notice. PEO Ships will conduct an Industry Day on 26 April 2007 in Quantico, Virginia to disseminate information regarding the acquisition of the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV), pending Request for Proposal Number N00024-07-R-2219. All information regarding specifics on time, place, location, directions, etc. for the Industry Day will be made available at the JHSV website address listed below. This notice is not a request for proposal. No information on a potential RFP release date is available at this time. The JHSV is a 35 knot, shallow draft ship designed to support the intra-theater movement of Personnel, Supplies, and Equipment (PSE). The JHSV will be designed and built to American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) High Speed Naval Craft (HSNC) Guidelines with specific Military features for helicopters and secure exterior communications. A general overview of the program, acquisition strategy, and performance specification for the JHSV will be presented. The draft performance specification and statement of work will be available for download prior to 26 April 07 at the PEO Ships JHSV web site. Industry comments on the draft documents are encouraged and are requested to be submitted by 8 May 2007. Additional information regarding the JHSV Industry Day, to include directions, agenda and registration, will be available at the PEO Ships JHSV website. Tentative Agenda Admin and Intro Program Overview & Update Requirements Overview JHSV Performance Spec Overview and Updates C4I concept NAVAIR certification concept ABS HSNC overview Wrap-up/Concluding Remarks Again, all information pertaining to specifics of the Industry Day will be found on the JHSV website listed in this notice. Web Link JHSV Industry Day Website (http://peos.crane.navy.mil/pms325/jhsv.htm)

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/04/mil-070430-arnews01.htm
Services Chart Course for New Vessel
Apr 30, 2007 BY Steve Harding, Soldiers Magazine
"WASHINGTON (Army News Service, April 30, 2007) -- Representatives of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and the shipbuilding industry met last week to discuss the current status of the Joint High Speed Vessel, a new type of fast logistic-support ship that will ultimately be acquired by all three services.
Held at Quantico Marine Corps Base outside Washington, the meeting allowed the service representatives to update prospective contractors on the vessel's design requirements, said Capt. Patricia M. Sudol, the Navy's program manager for support ships, boats and craft, and the officer in charge of the Navy-led joint acquisition program.
The JHSV's specifications and capabilities are based on lessons the services learned from operating four leased, commercial high-speed vessels over the past five years. While the Army operated one ship, Joint Venture, in conjunction with the Navy, the theater support vessel Spearhead was under sole Army control until its recent return to commercial service. Both ships saw extensive Army use in operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, as well as supporting other Army operations in the Pacific, Atlantic and Mediterranean. Two leased vessels remain in service, Swift with the Navy and Westpac Express with the Marine Corps....
Capt. Sudol and her staff are currently waiting for the Department of Defense to approve their acquisition strategy for the JHSV, she said, and very shortly after that approval is granted her office will release a "request for proposals." The RFP will outline all of the JHSV's mandatory specifications and capabilities, and each design submission will be measured against those criteria. A single firm will ultimately be selected to produce all eight JHSVs. Current plans call for the first ship to enter service -- with the Army -- in fiscal year 2008."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-167388355.html
Launching the JHSV (Joint High Speed Vessel)
From: Soldiers Magazine Date: 8/1/2007 Author: Harding, Steve
"While the Army has long operated watercraft ranging from small landing craft to large logistics-support vessels, a new joint acquisition program looks set to give the service the largest, fastest and most capable ship it has ever known.
Known as the Joint High Speed Vessel, the craft will be acquired by the Navy for itself, the Army and the Marine Corps. While a final design has not yet been selected, representatives from the three services have established a range of requirements that prospective builders must meet, said Capt. Patricia M. Sudol, the Navy's program manager for support ships, boats and craft, and the officer in charge of the Navy-led joint acquisition program.
The JHSV's specifications and capabilities are based on lessons the services learned from operating four leased, commercial high-speed vessels over the past five years. While the Army operated one ship, Joint Venture, in conjunction with the Navy, the theater support vessel Spearhead was under sole Army control until its recent return to commercial service. Both ships saw extensive Army use in operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, as well as supporting other Army operations in the Pacific, Atlantic and Mediterranean. Two leased vessels remain in service, Swift with the Navy and Westpac Express with the Marine Corps.
While all of the four leased vessels have been catamarans, Capt. Sudol said that any hull form will be considered for the JHSV. 'When the Navy procures ships, it uses performance-based specifications in a full and open competition, so we're not dictating the hull shape or even the material from which the hull is constructed,' she said. That means that the companies submitting designs for the JHSV could offer single or multiple-hulled designs made of steel, aluminum or even composite materials..."

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF OCTOBER 06, 2007
FBO #2140 SOLICITATION NOTICE 19
-- ITAR Notice for Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) Program
Notice Date 5/3/2007 Solicitation Number N0002407R2219
Archive Date 1/1/2008
Description
This is an information notice pertaining to the pending Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) requirement. This is not a solicitation or Request for Proposal (RFP). The formal release date has not been identified as of the release of this notice. Contained herein is a notice to potential offerors on the processes involving ITAR. This is a re-posting of information originally synopsized on 10 April 2007. The RFP number will be N00024-07-R-2219. NOTICE TO POTENTIAL OFFERORS OF INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARM REGULATION (ITAR) REQUIREMENT. All potential offerors that have interest in utilizing foreign resources for the purposes of responding to the pending Request For Proposal are hereby notified that information contained within the RFP, to include all attachments, amendments, or any other information that is posted with the RFP is subject to the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR). Defense-related information of any kind may not be exported without the explicit permission via export license from the United States State Department. Therefore, applicable potential offerors must apply for the export license through the State Department. For the purposes of the JHSV RFP initial proposal preparation only, potential offerors that seek to utilize foreign resources in the manner specified in 22 CFR 125.4(c) may request an exemption to the immediate licensing requirement. This exemption would only be for the purposes of obtaining quotes to respond to the initial solicitation phase of the JHSV RFP. The exemption request must be made through the Naval Sea Systems Command Contracting Officer. The exemption request is not processed by the Naval Seas Systems Command (NAVSEA), and has no control over the timing, or granting of such an exemption. NAVSEA will only forward the request, along with pertinent documentation to the Navy International Programs Office (Navy IPO). The Navy IPO is the sole party with the authority to provide a written exemption to the licensing requirement of the State Department. Offerors are also required to initiate the licensing process with the State Department before the Navy IPO will take action....

Regarding the "X-Hull" Ship:
Dec 20, 2007
Agency: Department of the Navy
Office: Naval Sea Systems Command
Location: NAVSEA HQ
Posted: Dec 20, 2007
Type: Synopsis Title:A--CG(X) Hull Form Study RFP/SOL: N0002408R2305
Posted: Dec 20, 2007
Type: Synopsis Title:A--CG(X) Hull Form Study RFP/SOL: N0002408R2306

Here is an interesting industry blog thread on LCS/JHSV/Coast Guard X-Hull subject matter:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6785

September 13th, 2007
Galrahn
Defense Professional / Analyst
Location: Upstate NY
The US Navy LCS May Have Died Today
It looks like the LCS died today. The US Senate finalized its defense bill for 2008 and the results appear ultimately fatal to the LCS. Things could still change, but considering the House Bill has even less money for the LCS in FY08, it is unlikely the combined bill will add more money.The results? LCS-4 was canceled LCS-5 appears funded for FY08 LCS-6 appears unfunded for FY08 LCS-7 appears unfunded for FY08 I have a hard time believing the LCS will survive this long term, despite the rosy smiles the US Navy may give for a few months. An analysis of alternatives is due out in November, and so far the only thing it is reported to recommend is the 25,000 ton CBGN version of the CG(X). However, I expect to see an alternative to the LCS, in some form. Questions. What effect would the cancellation have on Austal? How much of their business is weighted on the success of the US Navy LCS program?Finally, does anyone know if Kockums has any partnerships with any US shipbuilders that could mass produce the Visby? That last is just wishful thinking, but you never know.

September 14th, 2007
Galrahn
Defense Professional / Analyst
Location: Upstate NY
Quote: Originally Posted by barra
Doesn't look dead, 55 ships is a substantial order in anyones language.
55 ships was the number of LCS's included in the 313-ship plan the Navy released in 2005-2006 time frame. That plan hasn't exactly been executed well, and there is a lot of speculation it won't make it past the next year. With no alternative to the LCS it may yet survive, but alternatives have a way of popping up quickly, the LCS was originally such an alternative that popped up quickly in FY02. In FY08 two will have already been built and delivered, so it doesn't take much time to change course.

September 14th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
The LCS is NOT dead, merely delayed!
I don't think all this doom and gloom is warranted. Regardless of the Navy's inept attempt to contract for new technology ships, the need still exists for a large corvette-sized ship to complement the larger DDs & DDX etc. There is also a dire need for a large production run of ships of this size. The Perry FFGs are wearing out. I think the bill reported out of conference will set the course, and it will be for the Navy to buy one LCS hull design in moderate quantities at a reasonable price. Austal will not be hurt by this. They continue to deliver HSVs regularly. Both from Australia and US shipyards. IF they are not selected as final LCS builder, they will just turn to commercial shipbuilding in the US as they will then have the production facilities to build larger vessels. I have to check to see if Austal Austraila has expanded again. NGSS has not built a successful composite hull yet and if Kockums was smart they would get a new US partner! NGSS may offer a design to USCG for FRC-A, BUT I highly doubt Adm Allen will buy from them. Besides the USCG is well on its way to buying the FRC-B (non-composite) design. A more interesting dialogue to watch is IF the USN & USCG can merge their rqmts for LCS and OPC into one hull. Now that would be a very interesting shipbuilding arrangement indeed!

September 14th, 2007
Galrahn
Defense Professional / Analyst
Quote: Originally Posted by leesea
A more interesting dialogue to watch is IF the USN & USCG can merge their rqmts for LCS and OPC into one hull. Now that would be a very interesting shipbuilding arrangement indeed!
There is evidence this is very possible, insidedefense ran a story about this the other day.

September 15th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
Yes that is the most recent article I've seen about merging USN&USCG ship programs, but it is still a lot of talk. I think the USCG is wary of NAVSEA ship acqusitions since the last icebreaker did not go so well. And having been involved in about a dozen NAVSEA ship procuements I would warn any "customer" to be very suspect! Especially when it comes to new tecnology ships. For instance, the current JHSV is a way over-spec RFP and too expensive per hull project IMHO! P.S. I worked on WestPac Express charter first time around.

September 17th, 2007
B.Smitty
Defense Professional / Analyst
How much are we looking at for the JHSV? And what would be a reasonable price?

September 17th, 2007
radiosilence
Location: us
Quote: Originally Posted by B.Smitty
How much are we looking at for the JHSV? And what would be a reasonable price?
The price as of now is around 100 mil. I believe one of the two prototypes is being used by special forces.

September 17th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
LCS vs. JHSV what for?
The total programmatic cost for the first (Army) JHSV is $220 million !!! The cost for the HSV WestPac Express used as a transport only for US Marines was about $45 mil in then year dollars. A better comparison might be to the newer Austal trimarans? But in the end why does the USN need a small trans-oceanic transport of limited lift capablity for inter-theater sealift missions? Somebody in senior USN management ought to answer that one pls?!! Don't get me wrong I am a true believer in HSVs as tactical sealift platforms for maneuver warfare. BUT the JHSV as currently spec'd is NOT that~ and the LCS while bigger and longer range does NOT have sealift as a function. Can you tell I am sealift proponent?

September 17th, 2007
B.Smitty
Defense Professional / Analyst
What the heck did they do to it to make it cost so much? What would you prefer to see for a tactical sealift platform?

September 19th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
JHSV specs vs. LCS
In typical Navy (& Army) fashion, the NAVSEA project office added bells and whistles to the JHSV specs. To be precise, they took an LSV type ship and overlaid a set of HSV rqmts. To make matters worse they picked HSV specs at the high end of the spectrum (see below comment). Nine pages just to list the standards - does that give you an idea? But most importantly NAVSEA (with the Army's input as it is a joint project now) requires a small ship which can self-deploy at high speeds trans-oceanic. That drives up the size. And they required a ship with a flight deck and large elevator which can discharge alongside. That certainly makes it much more specialized. Based on my experience with WPE, I think that the Navy, not Army, should buy and exsting design ROPAX i.e. roll-on/roll-off and passenger HSV. There are literaly a dozen possibilities. The ship's range, cargo lift, and accomodation should be perform inside theater i.e. tactical sealift for maneuver ops. WPE by way of reference carries about 900 troops and 300 tons of tactical vehicles/helos. HSVs a little larger are available now.

September 22nd, 2007
radiosilence
Quote:
cost growth ranging from 50 percent to 75 percent on the company's lead ship
No wonder the LCS program might be in trouble.

September 22nd, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
LCS contract changes
Since the Congress has "unfunded" the second version of each LCS, the existing contract type had to change. Since each company is only building one, fixed price seems to make sense? IF you assume that both GD and LM have got costs under control - which may be a leap of faith?Or this may just be necessary for NAVSEA to do a termination for convience with GD as opposed to the terminaton for default with LM?

October 20th, 2007
F-15 Eagle
Man that sucks! The Navy says it needs 313 ships for the 21st Century and this is a major setback for the Navy. The fleet has declined from 600 ships in the 1980's to just 276 today. The fleet can't drop anymore and if anything it must increase. A U.S. senator (I can't remember his name) says they should have 350 ships to maintain their Navel dominance.

October 20th, 2007
tphuang
Quote:
Man that sucks! The Navy says it needs 313 ships...
...economically speaking, it's really not feasible considering the slow pace of the US economic growth these days + the cost of shipbuilding in America. Let's face it, people talk about the PLAN growth, but there is no way you can grow like that unless you can build a 054A for $200 mil or a Type 22 for $25 mill. The cost of building LCS, DDX and CVN-78 just continues to escalate. I know this would never happen, but if they really want to stay on schedule, get the South Korean shipyards to build the ships for them. Visit my Chinese military blog at http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ext.php?ref=http://china-pla.blogspot.com/

October 24th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
You know I have seen several very good & imaginative warship designs come out of SKorean and Japanese shipyards recently. But I have not seen any advance marine vessels from them? Aussies and Europeans seem to be ahead of the power curve in that area.The problem always comes when NAVSEA tries to translate new technology into their own contract spec gibberish! I have reviewed the JHSV spec and it a jumble of junk rqmts!One has to wonder why not?:Use the LCS-Isreali design approach for next LCS design, and put all the module transport/tactical sealift functions into a revised JHSV?

October 29th, 2007
Lawman
The obvious solution might be to put the Israeli LCS kit onto the more successful Austal / GD trimaran design, and have Austal produce it ASAP. I would hope to avoid having GD's hands on the project, which would otherwise pretty much guarantee cost blowouts! These ships shouldn't cost much over $500m in full rate production, so a rate of six ships per year shouldn't be too unreasonable, with an annual cost of c.$3bn. This would mean that eight years production would allow 48 ships to be produced, allowing all the OHPs to be retired. It would also allow the Arleigh Burkes to be shifted over to other duties that are more suited to its capabilities. It the US really needs a 300+ ship Navy, then much as in the '80s, some shortcuts need to be taken...

October 29th, 2007
leesea
Location: Florida
Sorry Lawman it is not that easy. First off the mission systems for an Israeli LCS are still under consideration, secondly those type systems are pretty much hull specific. Goto LM-LCS website and read up on the weapons adds they are considering. They are not packages like the mission modules. More importantly Israel has a weapons systems industry which can bring engineering and hardware to the table. Something LM needs badly! While I like the Austal trimaran for some LCS missions, I think the fast monnohull is better for others. In either case it has been a steep learning curve for both Navy and LCS contractors.As to force sizing, the Navy has reclama the LCS cuts. I strongly believe the Navy needs on copy of each hull design to learn what their attributes are. The Navy badly needs low end corvettes/frigates and more mid-sized Burkes. But I don't know if that is what they are going to get? You can send your ideas about total force to your local congressional type just as CNOs have been doing for years with about the same results. Them folks on the hill are only interested in their "backyard shipyards"!!!

November 1st, 2007
Galrahn
Defense Professional / Analyst
Location: Upstate NY
LCS-4 was cancelled today. Of the three ordered by the Navy in the current FY08 budget bill soon to pass, the best they can get is one, and the Senate voted for none. If the Navy gets one, they said they would compete the bid between GD and LM. Interesting stuff.
Visit Galrahn's homepage!

November 2nd, 2007
gf0012-aust
Location: Australia
Quote: Originally Posted by Galrahn
Questions. What effect would the cancellation have on Austal? How much of their business is weighted on the success of the US Navy LCS program?
I'm not surprised at how this has turned out. Dept of Commerce wrote a briefing paper in 2004 that went to Navy and State which outlined the problems with shipbuilding and budgets for programs. This was given a bit more kick when the team involved with helping out with HMS Astute did a supplementary report on UK problems. So it should have been a pretty clear warning to the Primes that an attitude adjustment was going to be needed. As for Austal, they've turned around the US enitity they bought by some 300% based on commercial sales and opportunities, so although LCS would have been a carrot, I don't see it impacting on their actual forecasts. Considering that they've taken the US operation out of the Red and substantially into the Black, I guess they'll continue on steady as she goes...

November 2nd, 2007
tphuang
Quote: Originally Posted by gf0012-aust
I also can't see Visby making the cut anyway. Certainly the initial reports I'm aware of weren't excessive in their enthusiasm.
I guess it's because the Visby are too small? Does USN really need littoral ships the size of a frigate? Visit my Chinese military blog at http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ext.php?ref=http://china-pla.blogspot.com/

I have not found the RFP for the JHSV online, yet. I also have not done an exhaustive search yet for the X-hull and U.S. Coast Guard connection with JHSV. It seems like the JHSV project fell behind schedule the later half of 2007, although I have not determined that for certain. If the project is on schedule, then the first ship contract should be awarded in the next few months. Presumably it will be either an Incat or an Austal inspired design. It seems to me the Incat designs and proven ships and technology are better, but that the Austal/USA political connections are stronger. So far, political connections have been pretty effective on this whole matter.

Aloha, Brad