GAO's Most Recent Report on JHSV and LCS

Some nuggets from the most recent GAO report on JHSV:

From: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10388sp.pdf

The JHSV is a joint Army and Navy program to acquire a high-speed, shallow-draft vessel for rapid intratheater transport of combat-ready units. The ship will be capable of operating without reliance on shore based infrastructure. The program awarded a detail design and construction contract with options for nine additional ships to Austal USA in November 2008, and DOD authorized construction of the first ship in December 2009...

Design and Production Maturity

In December 2009, DOD authorized the shipbuilder to start JHSV lead ship construction with 65 percent of the ship’s 3D product model complete. According to program officials, the product modeling is complete for some of the JHSV’s most complex modules, including the machinery, water jet, and generator rooms. The decision to authorize construction is not consistent with GAO recommended shipbuilding best practices, which call for achieving a complete and stable 3D product model before construction begins. The program office believes that the completion of the model prior to construction start is less critical for its program because the JHSV is not as complex as other Navy ships, such as the DDG 1000 or the T-AKE. The Navy also demonstrated JHSV design maturity by tracking the number of critical drawings approved by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). As of December 2009, ABS has approved 99 percent, or 319 out of 321, of JHSV’s critical design drawings used to build the 3D product model. Program officials estimate that 70 percent of the JHSV design is the same as the commercial Hawaii Superferry produced by the JHSV shipbuilder. However, the differences, which include the firefighting system, hotel services, aviation accessibility, and the addition of a limited self-defense capability, affect a large area of the JHSV...

In order to achieve the necessary production rate, the shipbuilder built a modular manufacturing facility, which marks a change in production strategy for the yard. Prior to using this facility to build the JHSV, the shipbuilder built components of the Littoral Combat Ship in the facility. In addition, it built a pilot JHSV module in the facility prior to lead-ship construction start. While modular manufacturing decreases the number of workers needed, the contractor experienced hiring issues and program officials anticipate that the shipyard will be challenged to hire a sufficient number of workers with critical skills as its workload increases...

And the LCS nuggets:

The Navy’s LCS is designed to perform mine countermeasures, antisubmarine warfare, and
surface warfare missions. It consists of the ship itself, or seaframe, and the mission package it
deploys. The Navy plans to construct the first four seaframes in two unique designs, then select one design for the remainder of the class. The first seaframe (LCS 1) was delivered in September 2008 with the second seaframe (LCS 2) following in December 2009. We assessed both seaframes. See pages 97-98 for an assessment of LCS mission packages...

...The Navy identified watercraft launch and recovery as a major risk for both designs...

...Challenges for LCS 2 include completing required endurance testing of the main propulsion diesel engines and addressing pitting and corrosion in the waterjets...

Technology Maturity

Seventeen of 19 critical technologies for both LCS designs are mature. For LCS 2, the trimaran hull and aluminum structure are nearing maturity. The Navy identified watercraft launch and recovery—essential to complete the LCS antisubmarine warfare and mine countermeasures missions—as a major risk to both seaframe designs. Watercraft launch and recovery systems have not been fully demonstrated for either seaframe...For LCS 2, factory testing of the twin boom extensible crane revealed performance and reliability concerns that were not fully addressed prior to installation. In addition, program officials report the LCS 2 main propulsion diesel engines have not completed a required endurance test, in part due to corrosion in each engine’s intake valves. As an interim solution, the Navy has installed new intake valves, which enabled the ship to complete acceptance trials. LCS 2 has also experienced pitting and corrosion in its waterjet tunnels. The Navy has temporarily fixed the issue and plans to make weld repairs to pitted areas during a future dry dock availability.

...At fabrication start for each ship, approximately 69 percent (LCS 3) and 57 percent (LCS 4) of basic and functional drawings were complete. Starting construction before drawings are complete could result in costly out-of-sequence work and rework to incorporate new design attributes...

...For LCS 3, the contractor has incorporated a design change to extend the transom by four meters to improve stability...

...Navy officials report that the earned value management systems (EVMS) in each of the LCS shipyards do not yet meet Defense Contract Management Agency requirements. Under the terms of the LCS 3 and LCS 4 contracts, the shipyards must achieve EVMS certification within 28 months from the date of the award. Until those requirements are met, cost and schedule data reported by the prime contractors cannot be considered fully reliable.

...The Navy stated that LCS 1 now meets the damage stability requirement with the addition of external tanks on the rear of the ship...

...To address corrosion of the waterjet tunnels, the Navy stated that electrical isolation of propulsion shafts from the waterjets is being incorporated and a plan is in place to renew the corroded metal in the waterjet intake tunnels.

There you have it.