Defence`s Feeds

Polish Air Force MiG-29 Fulcrums back in the air. On Nov. 5, 2018, at 2:36PM, MiG-29UBM ’28’ of the Polish Air Force took off for a mission which marked the end the suspension of the Polish Fulcrum operations. The operations of the jets were suspended due to the crash on Jul. 6. 2018, that turned […]

On 6 November, following a meeting at working level, the four Principals of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA), the European Defence Agency (EDA), Europol and the Computer Emergency Response Team for the EU Institutions, Agencies and Bodies (CERT-EU), met at CERT-EU's premises.

The purpose of the meeting was to update each other on relevant developments, and assess the progress made under the MoU, which provides a cooperation framework aiming at leveraging synergies between the four organisations to achieve a safe and open cyberspace and to promote civ/mil synergies. 

The four partners also agreed on a roadmap prepared by the MoU working group with concrete activities and deliverables throughout 2019, which will be reflected in their respective work programmes. 

The initial focus will be on working closer in the areas of training and cyber exercises, building the cooperation capacity and the improved exchange of information on respective projects and events with a view to complementing the work of the four partners and avoiding the duplication of efforts, considering also broader EU initiatives in the cyber domain. 
 

Ken Ducatel (CERT-EU), Udo Helmbrecht (ENISA), Steven Wilson (EC3), Jorge Domecq (EDA)

 
"Following the signature of this MoU in May, I am pleased that we swiftly moved to turn this into action. Our objective is to promote civ/mil synergies in the cyber domain, considering also relevant EU initiatives, to support Member States in the development of the cyber capabilities they need, building on complementarities and avoiding duplication", said Jorge Domecq, EDA Chief Executive.

The Principals agreed that this was a major milestone in entering a new era of working together and an important first step in putting the cooperation framework into practice.
 

More information:

• Four EU Cybersecurity organisations enhance cooperation (EDA news May 2018)

Russia’s Newest Fifth Generation Fighter Dances Behind An-12 In Unique Photo-Op. Great video of Russia’s latest Sukhoi Su-57 fighters emerged early this week from what appears to be a media flight somewhere over Russia. Most of the video is shot from the back of an Antonov An-12 turboprop. As is common practice in aerial photo […]

Kunduz province faced serious security issues during and after Election Day. The turnout was far lower than expected. This was mainly due to an almost unprecedented level of Taleban violence compared to most other provinces on that day. Three districts were deprived of their rights to vote in their entirety, while six others had a patchy election as, due to the insecurity, some polling centres (PC) frequently kept opening and closing. AAN’s Obaid Ali, who observed the election in neighbouring Takhar, looks at the electoral challenges in this key province of Afghanistan’s northeast (with input from Thomas Ruttig).

Threats and Election Day violence

The parliamentary election on 20 October 2018 in Kunduz province suffered from serious security threats and acute violence. In the last two weeks prior to the elections, the Taleban leadership issued a series of four statements warning people not to take part in the election. In the first, issued on 8 October, they reiterated their April call for an election boycott. The next statement targeted specific groups of people warning them to avoid being involved in the election. On 17 October, they called on university professors, schoolteachers and others in the education sector not to support the elections process. The two following statements were even tougher; one by the preaching, guidance and recruitment commission, and one by the military commission. The first of these, issued on 18 October, called on tribal elders, religious scholars and mosque preachers to stand against the election and to prevent people from taking part. Ten, on 19 October on the eve of the elections, the military commission warned people to “do not allow your homes, guest rooms, schools, religious seminaries, clinics and workers be utilized by the organizers of this vile process.” It said the “intelligence teams of the Islamic Emirate” would be “closely monitoring all development” as a “participation in this process” would amount to “aiding the invaders.”

In Kunduz province itself, people have limited access to the internet and little awareness of the Taleban’s official statements. So, local Taleban officials delivered these statements and warnings directly to the people. In Dasht-e Archi and Qala-ye Zal districts, for example, which are areas under their control, the Taleban’s shadow district governors appeared in mosques during Friday prayers and announced the Taleban leadership’s position on the elections. In other Taleban controlled areas in Kunduz, their fighters individually talked with local elders and mosque preachers, asking them to prevent people from taking part in the elections.

During Election Day and the day after, the Taleban invested much energy in order to disrupt the polls. According to Rasul Omar, head of the Independent Election Commission (IEC) for Kunduz, the Taleban fired mortars at polling centres (PC) in most parts of the province. In several PCs, he said, IEC workers fled to safe places because of the shelling. He told AAN “70 per cent of the total of [89] polling centres were under serious attacks by the Taleban.” He added, “Even inside the city we had serious security issues.” He said Taleban fired mortars against 20 of the 35 PCs that operated inside the city. Abdulbaqi Nuristani, the police chief for Kunduz province, told AAN that frequent mortar fire lasted from the early morning of the Election Day until late into the night.

Zabihullah Majedi, a parliamentary candidate in the province, is also the head of the Journalists Association there. He said more than 100 mortar rounds hit PCs in Kunduz city alone. He said the Taleban inflicted serious casualties on IEC workers and voters. According to him, 15 people were killed and 110 others were wounded in the city because of the shelling. Local journalists in Kunduz confirmed this range of election-related casualties. Rahmatullah Hamnawa, a journalist in Kunduz, told AAN he had recorded more than 120 casualties in Kunduz city. He added that this included police, IEC workers and civilians.

Kunduz was possibly the province most affected by Election Day violence issued by the Taleban. (1) In neighbouring Baghlan, 62 casualties were reported by local government officials, while in Kabul there were 79 election-related casualties reported.

Mursal Setayesh, a civil society activist in Kunduz, told AAN that, due to the Taleban’s mortar shelling, most women feared going out to cast their votes. She said that, apart from the insecurity, the IEC works also had technical difficulties that reduced the number of people who could vote and added “In many PCs voter registration lists were missing and people had to search different PCs to find their names in order to cast votes.” Therefore, she said many female voters left the PCs without casting votes. Speaking to AAN, Karima Sediqi, a female member of the provincial council in Kunduz, said female voters’ participation in this parliamentary election in Kunduz was lower than that in 2010. She added that insecurity was the major factor that reduced the female turnout in Kunduz city. Both Sediqi and Setayesh said the same was the case in the districts where men did not allow their female family members to go out to vote for security reasons.

The Taleban also mined roads. On 23 October 2018, when the author returned from Takhar and travelled through Kunduz, he noticed that parts of the main Takhar-Kunduz highway had been destroyed by explosive devices planted at the roadside during the election days. There were also burned out military vehicles and destroyed police checkpoints visible on that highway.

The Taleban’s ability to inflict a high level of Election Day violence has resulted from a badly deteriorating security situation in the province over recent years. Currently, the Taleban control three districts of Kunduz. In three more districts, the government presence is limited to the district centres and a few villages around the district governor’s compounds. In the remaining three, the government and the Taleban each hold almost half of the districts (read AAN’s previous analysis about security in Kunduz here and here).

Elections in Kunduz city

The parliamentary election in Kunduz city was held in a chaotic environment. There were fears immediately before Election Day that the Taleban might overrun the provincial centre for another time (read media report here). Most of the 35 PCs in the city were targeted by Taleban mortar and rocket fire.

According to journalist Hamnawa, many parliamentary candidates provided transportation for voters to get to PCs. He told AAN that the parliamentary candidates, together with their agents, frequently visited PCs to mobilise people to take part in the election. Speaking to AAN’s Farhad Nuri, a shopkeeper in Kunduz city, said most of the shops in the city ran out of mobile credit cards. “Candidates and their agents bought up all mobile credit cards to call people and to encourage them to vote.” Nevertheless, Hamnawa said, most people preferred to stay away from voting due to the threats and the violence on Election Day.

Impact on turnout

Provincial security officials confirmed that insecurity had caused serious challenges for people wishing to cast their votes. However, Police chief Nuristani told AAN that the Taleban had failed to disrupt the election. He said the security forces “managed to protect the PCs” and – counter-factually, given successful Taleban attacks on two PCs in Imam Saheb – that they “repelled the Taleban’s attacks.” Candidate Majedi added, “Despite of serious risks men and women came out to cast their votes.” Many locals, nevertheless, told AAN that most of the PCs across the province faced serious security challenges to their operation.

Also, the turnout figures from the districts, as suggested above, speak another language compared with the officially given figures and the security officials’ optimistic statements. The Taleban threats before and their attacks on Election Day meant voter turnout figures were much lower than expected – only between 32,000 to 35,000 people voted across the province, according to the Provincial Independent Election Commission (PIEC). (In the 2010 parliamentary election, some 115,000 votes in Kunduz were considered valid by the IEC.) (2) The official 2018 turnout figures represent between 18.8 and 20.6 per cent of the 169,802 registered voters, of whom men were 108,832, women 60,843 and Kuchis 127 (see IEC data for registered voters in Kunduz here), and only seven per cent of the estimated population in voting age. (The number of registered voters was only about 34 per cent of the voting age population; the total population of the province is 1,091,116, according to Afghanistan’s Central Statistic Office, see p25 here).

Of the official 32-35,000 voters, only 8,750 participated in the districts (plus possibly some few in Khanabad and Aqtash districts, but where the district governors refused to give figures). This is around one quarter of the provincial total, meaning that three quarters of the turnout came from Kunduz city.

Technical and organisational problems leading to more disenfranchisement

Apart from the insecurity and violence, technical issues and shortcomings of the provincial IEC workers were the other factors that negatively affected the turnout. Several local journalists in Kunduz told AAN that, in most of the PCs, voter registration lists were not available. This forced people to visit other polling centres in order for them to find their names and be able to vote. The use of the biometric voter verification devices and the lack of experience of the staff in handling them was another factor that meant casting a vote took a long time and resulted in long queues. Waiting for a long time in an insecure situation, and with frequent shelling, made many voters return home without casting their votes.

However, it has remained unclear how many ballot boxes and votes would be invalidated. Muhammad Sediq Samim, the head of the Kunduz Election Complaints Commission (ECC), told AAN that they had already suggested a recount of votes in some PCs in insecure areas. According to him, 239 complaints have been registered for reasons including: “manipulations, fraud, and IEC workers’ were campaigning for some specific candidates.” Samim also said that, in some PCs, there was some ballot box stuffing inside the city and in some districts, but he refused to give the exact locations. Observer organisations also have not been ready to share their findings with AAN thus far.

The ECC call for recounting might result in votes being invalidated in some Kunduz PCs. This would reduce the turnout figures that PIEC announced even further.

Election in Kunduz’s districts

Rasul Omar of the provincial IEC told AAN that voters in three districts, Qala-ye Zal, Gulbad and Gultepa, were not able to cast their votes. In Gulbad and Gultepa, there had been no voter registration at all due to insecurity (see here).

Further, Omar said 18 out of the total 54 PCs in the remaining six districts were closed and six other PCs, in Khanabad and Imam Saheb districts, only operated for half a day because of the Taleban’s intense attacks. This meant that 36 PCs – only two thirds of the total – opened in the districts, and some for only a part of the time. (In 2010, 8.4 per cent of all planned polling stations in Kunduz were reported closed on election day by the IEC, see AAN report here; no figures about polling centres available.)

The election did not take place in three out of a total of nine districts of Kunduz due to insecurity: Qala-ye Zal, Gulbad and Gultepa. AAN interviewed the governors of the six districts where elections were held to obtain an overview of the turnout (district population figures from the Central Statistics Office, p25 here and IEC voter registration figures here). The figures below, according to district governors, are the officially numbers taken from the PCs where the result sheets were published after counting. The final breakdown of the turnout will be released by IEC. AAN tried to corroborate these figures, but the independent election observer organisations declined to share their figures. None has officially published their reports as yet; and only the Transparent Election Foundation of Afghanistan (TEFA) held a press conference on 28 October.

Dasht-e Archi district

In Dasht-e Archi, a heavily contested district, the government presence is limited to the district governor’s compound and a few nearby villages. Therefore, the voters were either local government officials or those who live in the government-controlled areas.

Afghanistan’s Central Statistic Office (CSO) estimated the total population of Dasht-e Archi at 92,576 people. During the voter registration between May and June 2018, the IEC registered 9,277 people as voters; ten per cent of the population. The turnout, however, was far lower. According to Nasruddin Sahdi, the district governor, Taleban threats and a lack of sufficient training of the IEC workers to use biometric devices negatively affected the turnout. Speaking to AAN he said, Taleban targeted four PCs that operated in the district by shooting rockets and machine guns at them. Therefore, he said the turnout in the district was as low as 400 voters – this is only 4.3 per cent of the registered voters and less than one per cent of the voting age population. (3)

Chahrdara district

In Chahrdara, another contested district, to the west of Kunduz city, the government only controls a small part of the district centre. Therefore, the IEC had opened only one PC in the government-control area and this had remained closed until 11:00 am.

Turnout remained very low. According to district governor Zalmai Faruqi, the Taleban blocked most of the roads leading to district centre to prevent people from reaching the PC. He told AAN that the Taleban also fired mortars and rockets targeting the district centre. According to Faruqi, the number of voters was 450 people, ie 12.5 per cent of the registered voters and around one percent of the population in voting age. The total population of the district, according to CSO, is 80,196 people. The IEC had registered 3,598 voters, 4.4 per cent of the total population.

Aliabad district

In Aliabad, the government presence is larger compared to Dasht-e Archi and Chahrdara and they control almost half of the district. The CSO estimates its total population at 51,455 people. According to IEC data, 7,815 people were registered as voters. This is less than two thirds of the voting age population.

District governor Emamuddin Quraishi told AAN that the turnout was between 2,700 and 2,800 voters, ie 34.5 to 35.8 per cent of the registered voters and slightly over 20 per cent of the total voting age population. Quraishi said “Taleban fired mortar rounds and rockets against the PCs during the Election Day; most voters did not take a risk to get out and to cast their votes.” There were eight PCs in Aliabad, and six of them were open.

Imam Saheb district

Imam Saheb, another contested district in northern Kunduz, also faced serious security threats. The Afghan government controls almost half of it. The remaining half is either control by the Taleban or else is heavily contested by them. The CSO estimates its total population at 220,256 people. The IEC recorded a high number of registered voters, 41,147 people.

According to district governor Mu’in Saedi, the Taleban carried out attacks against PCs in several parts of the district. He told AAN that the Taleban overran two PCs, Ab Forushan primary school and Abdulrahman Turk primary school, and took away election materials, including biometric devices. A further three PCs, out of a total of 19, remained close because of insecurity. Saedi said the turnout was low, with between 4,000 and 5,000 voters. That would be between 9.9 and 12.1 per cent of the total registered voters (between 3.6 and 4.4 per cent of the total voting age population).

Khanabad district

Khan Abad is another example where the government’s presence is larger than the Taleban’s, but where there was a low turnout. The CSO estimated the population at 150,544 people, of which the IEC registered 22,840 people as voters (less than one third of the voting age population). During and after the Election Day the Taleban launched rockets and shot with machine guns at the district centre to disrupt the security. As a result, one PC remained close and two others, out of a total 14 PCs, operated for some hours only in the morning of the Election Day.

District governor Hayatullah Ameri told AAN that insecurity was the major factor that prevented many voters from casting their votes. He refused to share information on the number of voters. However, he said the turnout was “very low.”

Aqtash district

Aqtash is a newly established district largely controlled by the Taleban. The CSO gives a total population estimate of 26,629 people. The IEC registered 4,781 people as voters. According to district governor Zabihullah Aimaq, there were two PCs in the district and both operated on Election Day. Aimaq said there were “good elections” in his district. He refused to give further details about the turnout and security during the Election Day. Haji Fazel, a local from Aqtash, told AAN that, because of Taleban large presence in the district, most people did not take part in the election. He added that the two PCs were both located in government-control area.

Qala-ye Zal district

Qala-ye Zal had 2,583 voters registered by the IEC, but no election took place because of general insecurity and Taleban attacks against the district centre. As a result, all three PCs that were supposed to operate in the district (all in its centre) reportedly remained closed.

Gulbad and Gultepa districts

Both Gulbad and Gultepaare newly established districts that are entirely under Taleban control. Therefore, neither voter registration, nor parliamentary election, took place.

Large voter disenfranchisement in rural and urban areas

Kunduz’ low turnout and its high degree of resulting voter disenfranchisement was caused mainly by the Taleban’s aggressive stance towards the election and high-level of actual violence on Election Day. These problems were exacerbated by the same technical and organisational problems reported from elsewhere in the country. However, the Taleban threats and violence failed to entirely stop Kunduzis from taking part in the election.

The combination of security and organisational problems strongly impacted not only Kunduz’s rural, but also its urban, population. The urban-rural divide observed by AAN in other provinces also manifested itself in Kunduz, as a large majority of voters came from the provincial and some district centres.

The question remains as to whether a larger number of people will take part in the presidential election scheduled for April 2019, if the security situation does not significantly improve.

 

(1) In the 6 November 2018 UNAMA civilian protection special report “2018 Election Violence” that was released while this text was under work, Kunduz province is not mentioned. According to this National Democratic Institute report, already the 2010 parliamentary elections were “plagued by election day violence.” It quotes candidates saying voter turnout was “extremely low”, particularly in Chahrdara and Dasht-e Archi.

(2) Read AAN impressions from the presidential elections in 2014 here and here.

(3) According to the World Bank, nearly two thirds of Afghanistan’s population is below 25 years of age. This gives a countrywide voting age population of around 50 per cent. We use this percentage here roughly, in order to show orders of magnitude, rather than the exact figures.

 

Amazing color scheme for this IX(B) Sqn “Tonka” at RAF Marham. With the arrival of the first F-35B Lightning 5th generation aircraft, the Royal Air Force prepares to retire one of its most important and famous types: the Tornado GR4. The last aircraft will be retired from active service next year. In order to celebrate […]

Another “ordinary day” of Cold War over the Black Sea. A U.S. EP-3E Aries aircraft flying in international airspace over the Black Sea was intercepted by a Russian SU-27 on Nov. 5, 2018. According to the U.S. Navy 6th Fleet, “this interaction was determined to be unsafe due to the SU-27 conducting a high speed […]

Americas

The US Special Operations Command is ordering additional helicopters from Boeing. The awarded contract modification is priced at $42.8 million and provides for four new build MH-47G Chinooks. The MH-47G is a new version of the helicopter platform that first flew in 1962 and has been configured to perform long-range day and night missions, in inclement weather at low levels. The Chinooks feature enhanced digital avionics and flight control systems, as well as a sturdier monolithic airframe increasing survivability. According to the DoD press release, SOCOM needs those additional rotorcraft to satisfy an urgent need for heavy assault helicopters. Work will be performed at Boeing’s factory in Ridley Park.

The Canadian government is entering the next stage of its fighter procurement program. In a draft bid package posted on October 26 procurement officials name five companies that could make the run in the upcoming tender. Canada needs to replace its ageing fleet of fighter aircraft with 88 new ones at a cost of $12 billion. Lockheed Martin’s F-35, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale, Saab’s Gripen and the Boeing Super Hornet will likely be considered and the companies are expected to give their feedback by the end of this year. Ottawa plans to receive initial proposals from bidders between summer and winter 2019. A contract is anticipated to be awarded during the winter months of 2021-2022. Canada wants initial aircraft to be delivered in 2025, with IOC achieved by 2026. The Royal Canadian Air Force wants all aircraft delivered by 2031 or 2032, at which time the CF-18 fleet will be retired.

Raytheon is marking another milestone in its Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) program. During a recently held test one of the USMC’s F-35Bs made a successful digital air connection with the USS Wasp. SSDS uses software and commercial off-the-shelf electronics to turn incoming data from several systems into a single picture of prioritized threats. The system then recommends an engagement sequence for the ship’s crew, or (in automatic mode) fire some combination of jamming transmissions, chaff or decoys, and/or weapons against the oncoming threat. “Information is key for any Commander – and shared information from multiple sources and vantage points extends our battlespace and our advantage over enemy threats,” said U.S. Navy Captain Danny Busch, Program Executive Office – SSDS. “Now with the ability to link our sensors and weapons, from sea and air, SSDS is providing a level of interoperability and defensive capability never before available to the Expeditionary fleet.”

Boeing’s new KC-46 tanker receives more certifications as it successfully completes aerial refueling of two additional aircraft types. During recently held tests the KC-46 completed receiver certification testing for the B-52 bomber and the F/A-18 fighter jet, with the F-15 to follow next year. A Boeing spokesperson says that the certification test are in preparation for the start of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation work next year. KC-46A is a militarised version of the 767-2C. Modification include aerial refueling equipment, an air refueling operator’s station that includes panoramic 3-dimensional displays, and threat detection/ countermeasures systems. Boeing recently missed the delivery schedule for its first aircraft which was expected to take place on October 27. The KC-46 acquisition program sees for the delivery of 179 tankers at a cost of $44.3 billion, with the first aircraft expected to be delivered between April and June 2016.

Middle East & Africa

Boeing is being tapped to continue maintenance support for the Royal Saudi Air Force’s fleet of F-15 fighter aircraft. The company is being awarded with a $14.6 million contract that sees for the sustainment of the Aircraft Maintenance Debrief System (AMDS). The F-15 is an all-weather, extremely maneuverable, tactical fighter designed to achieve aerial superiority in combat situations. The contract allows Boeing to provide trained personnel to use and maintain AMDS equipment at six locations throughout Saudi Arabia. The company’s staff also train RSAF members on how to operate and maintain the equipment. Work will be performed at multiple locations in Saudi Arabia and is expected to run through November 4, 2023.

The Turkish government is contracting a team of three Turkish companies to build the country’s first indigenous long-range air and anti-missile system. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan unveiled the National Long Range Regional Air Missile Defense System (SIPER) project on Wednesday. “This system is crucial for Turkey’s defense and they (the partners) are taking a new step with this project that will upgrade Turkey in the league of defense systems,” Erdo?an was quoted by Defense News’s Burak Ege Bekdil. The SIPER system will be produced by the Turkish state-run military electronics manufacturer Aselsan, state-controlled missile producer Roketsan, and Tübitak Sage, a state research institute. For the next 18 months the companies will conduct a definition study to prepare a a development and production contract for the future system. SIPER is expected to be completed by 2021.

Europe

Germany will be able to integrate Lockheed’s Patriot PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) missile into its next-generation TLVS missile defense system. TLVS is a highly mobile ground based air and missile defense system for protection against the current and future threat spectrum in the lower tier. TLVS is developed by an MBDA and Lockheed Martin joint venture. Build upon the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), TLVS is easily transportable, tactically mobile and uses the hit-to-kill PAC-3 MSE missile to defeat tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles and aircraft, providing full 360-degree engagement. Since its final decision in 2015 the German government was unable to move forward on its new air-defense system because Lockheed needed US governmental approval to integrate the Patriot missile into the TLVS. A spokesman at the German defense ministry said, “There is new momentum. Both sides are clearly committed to successful completion of the TLVS program.” The new air-defense system was expected to cost about $4.56 billion, however current estimates suggest a cost overrun by several billion. Germany wishes to sign a contract for TLVS in 2019 and field the system in 2025.

Asia-Pacific

India recently conducted a user trial night-time test of its Agni-I ballistic missile. The Agni-I is a short-range ballistic missile that was first launched in 2002. The Agni-I is a single-stage missile developed to fill the gap between 250 km range of Prithvi-II and 2,500 km range of Agni-II. Weighing 12 tonnes, the 15-metre-long Agni-I, is designed to carry a payload of more than one ton, including a nuclear warhead. Its strike range can be extended by reducing the payload. The missile has a specialised navigation system which ensures it reaches the target with a high degree of accuracy and precision. During the user trial a randomly selected unit launches a test missile to prove the system’s overall performance and crew readiness. The trajectory of the trial was tracked by a battery of sophisticated radars, telemetry observation stations, electro-optic instruments and naval ships from its launch till the missile hit the target area with accuracy, the Indian military said. In recent months the decade long conflict Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan started to resurface.

Today’s Video

Watch: $2 Billion US Stealth Plane in Action Over US States: Northrop B-2 Spirit

A drone with a significant resemblance to the Northrop Grumman X-47B has been unveiled at China’s biggest airshow. A new drone model with stealth features has been unveiled at China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) booth at the China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition and Airshow China, in Zhuhai. Initially hidden under a tarp, […]

A Russian Navy Tu-142 Bear-F long-range maritime patrol reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare aircraft made a “surprise visit” to the USS Mount Whitney, off the Norwegian coast. Sailors aboard the Blue Ridge-class command ship of the U.S. Navy USS Mount Whitney had gathered for a group photo on deck, when a Tupolev TU-142, RF-34063 / 56 […]

An unusual incident occurred to an F-16I Sufa at Ramon air base. An Israeli Air Force F-16I Sufa belonging to the 119 Squadron, also known as “The Bat” Squadron, was damaged at Ramon air base, Israel, on Oct. 31. According to the reports, the aircraft was taxiing after landing when the pilot lost braking action: […]

The people of Kandahar cast their vote on 27 October 2018, a week later than the rest of the country. Although no figures have been released, turnout appears to have been good in Kandahar city and Spin Boldak, as was expected, and patchy to nonexistent in most other districts. The IEC had stressed that the bad experience of the first two days of the election would not be repeated in Kandahar. Still, the vote was marred by late starts and technical problems, which the IEC is trying to underplay. AAN’s Ali Mohammad Sabawoon takes a closer look (with input from Martine van Bijlert).

Security, voting and turnout

The people of Kandahar went to cast their vote on 27 October 2018, a week later than the rest of the country. (1) The day before the election, Abdul Badi Sayad, the Head of the IEC announced they intended to open 172 polling centres across the province with a total of 1112 polling stations. Sayad said possibly “some 12 polling centres may remain closed because of security reasons.” He also said there would be no vote in Maruf and Nesh due to insecurity, since there had been no registration in those districts. (2)

On election day security was tight. Security officials had announced a transport ban, starting the day before the election at 2:00 pm. Movement by vehicle in Kandahar city was forbidden, unless permission had been granted. (Every candidate was given permission for the use of two vehicles; observers and reporters were also allowed to move in the city to visit polling centres and cover the election). Abdul Hanan Munib, the acting governor of Kandahar, told the media in the morning that the government would provide voters the facilities of mili buses (government local buses) in the city. He also said that the health department of Kandahar had prepared ambulances in case something happened or civilians faced health problems. AAN asked three voters if they had seen any buses in action. Two of them said they had indeed seen some buses moving in the city but that they had not been enough to tackle the problems of voters in term of transportation.

The turnout in Kandahar city and Spin Boldak district – the home area of assassinated General Razeq –, according to observers, appeared to be good, with women coming out to vote as well. Kandahar city and Spin Boldak were also where, by far, the most voters had registered (see this AAN dispatch for details). Turnout was less in the nearby districts and negligible in the more remote and insecure districts.

According to Ataullah Wisa, a civil society activist, there had been no voting at all in Reg and Shurabak districts; “Not a single person voted,” he said (which should not come as a surprise, given that these districts registered respectively only 161 and 203 voters). He thought there had been some voting in Khakrez, but not in all centres (Khakrez actually had only two polling centres with a voter registration of 409, 32 of which were women). He thought the overall turnout had been good and corruption less than in previous elections, because of the use of biometric checks – based on contacts with observers and what he had seen on social media. He hoped this would lead to a change in the province’s representation. “Thank God,” he said, “it seems that the old members of the Wolesi Jirga did not receive enough votes to return to the parliament.”

Residents in Ghorak district said the security forces were the only ones to cast their votes in that district. Juma Khan, a resident of the Ghorak, told AAN that two IEC teams had gone to Kikak village where the security forces were based (Kikak is also where Ghorak’s district centre was shifted to, in summer 2018). He said “There were no observers in this centre. The security forces voted, but no civilians cast their vote.” According to him, 570 security forces had registered there during registration process, but he did not know how many cast their votes. He said the civilians even hadn’t registered.

Ghausuddin Frotan, a local journalist and observer, told AAN that turnout appeared to be low even close to Kandahar city. By 10:30 on election day he had seen only two voters cast their votes in the polling centre of Mirwais Mena. Mirwais Mena is around five kilometres from Kandahar city.

A repeat of the first two election days: late starts and technical problems

Like in the rest of the country (see earlier AAN reports here and here), Kandahar’s vote was marred by technical and logistical problem, despite assurances by the head of the IEC that the bad experience from 20 October would not be repeated here. According to the IEC, they had provided additional training and had created reserve voters lists as well as backup biometric systems, so that whenever a problem occurred they would be able to quickly address it.

Still there were many complaints: many polling centres did not open on time; voter lists were missing, wrong or incomplete; and there were still problems with the biometric system.

An observer from Kandahar told AAN that polling centres in Kandahar city, Panjwai, Zharai and Arghandab, and Kuchis centres in Spin Boldak districts did not start their work on time – either because of the late arrival of the staff or their unfamiliarity with the biometric system. As a result, the polling centres opened at 9:00 am, 10:00 am, sometimes not until noon. This occurred for instance in Aino Mena’s Sayed Jamaluddin Afghan polling centre, Malalai high school and in Shah Bazar Jama polling centre. Once the centres were open, there were still problems with the voter lists and many people were unable to find their names. In some cases, the lists of one centre had gone to the other and the other to the next, which meant that in those centres nobody could find their names in the list.

Large crowds of people gathered in front of Sayed Jamaluddin Afghan polling centre in Aino Mena, where voting started two hours late. Muhammad Salim, a voter, later told AAN that in this centre the problem had been the biometric system. He said that many of the employees were not familiar with it and many people had been unable to find their names in the voter lists. A journalist who did not want his name to be mentioned gave AAN a different explanation: “The biometric system of Sayed Jamaluddin Afghan polling centre was forcefully taken away by a candidate and then at 11:00 am it was brought back to the polling centre.”

The polling centre in Safiya Ama Jan girls’ high school, nearby, only opened at 11:00 am. Observers said that the ballot papers reached the centre late. Shafia, a voter, told AAN at noon, that she had come at 7:00 am and was still waiting to vote, five hours later. Safiya, a woman in Nahiya three, said that in a polling centre here the biometric system had worked only until noon and after that it no longer worked. “After that,” she said, “the voters were allowed to vote without biometrics.”

In other places it had been possible to vote without biometrics or voter lists, even earlier. A man who was speaking to Radio Liberty’s Pashto service from Kandahar Aino Mena, nearly two hours after the election began said that although he had registered himself in Nahiya two, he now lives in Aino Mena. He said he tried to go to the place where he registered, but because of the ban on transportation he couldn’t. Because he knew someone among the employees of the commission in Aino Mena, they had helped him cast his vote without checking his name in the list. He said he was the first among all those waiting to vote.

In the centre of Mahmud Tarzi high school in Kandahar city, ballot papers ran out and the biometric system was out of order. In Zaher Shahi high school many people could not find their names on the list; many went home without casting their votes. In Shahid Azimullah school, the women polling stations opened very late and the women faced many problems waiting in line. Once it was their turn, many could not find their names on the list. In Malalai high school, in Nahiya one of the city, only one of the three women polling centres was active and had a functioning biometric system. The employees of the remaining two centres were sitting doing nothing, as well as the observers.

In some places, particularly in the districts, staff did not turn up at all. In Moshan village, Panjwai district, for instance, only 12 out of the 20 IEC employees turned up. After a long wait, many people went home without casting their votes.

Missing materials in Kuchi centres

Frotan, the journalist and observer wrote in his face book page at 11:30 on election day, that tens of people were waiting to cast their votes in Ghazi Amanullah Khan polling centre of Kokran area, in an outskirt of Kandahar city. He said the centre was still closed because voting materials had not arrived. This was a separate Kuchi centre. Many people had come to the centre early in the morning and had waited for hours. He later said the centre opened very late in the afternoon.

There were also reports from Spin Boldak in the morning that Kuchis were waiting in front of their polling stations, but that there were no materials. AAN talked to Kandahar’s provincial IEC head, doctor Nematullah Wardak, on election day just before noon. He confirmed that the materials for Kuchis in Spin Boldak had not been sent, but said they were working on it. Wardak later told AAN that they had sent materials in the afternoon. Spin Boldak is nearly one and half hour drive from Kandahar city.

There were also reports of Kuchis being deprived from casting their votes in the Haji Aziz area of Nahiya five of Kandahar city. Muhammad Abdullah, a Kuchi elder, told AAN on 30 October that the Kuchis had a very good in turnout here, but that “the ballot papers finished in the afternoon and many Kuchis could not cast their votes.” He said that in their area there was only one polling station. (There seem to be two possible explanations here. Either the IEC mistakenly sent fewer ballots than had registered as voters, or more people tried to vote than had originally been registered.)

A journalist in Kandahar city who did not want to be named told AAN that he  thought the late opening of polling stations for Kuchis in Spin Boldak, Zhari and Kokaran had been a planned issue, so that a particular candidate could receive – presumably fraudulent – votes and that this candidate was supported by the police in those stations.

Voter influencing

There were also reports of (attempted) voter influencing. For instance Abdul Sabor, a resident of Kandahar city, told AAN that on election day he saw a large candidate photo stuck on a vehicle, close to the polling station, which is contrary to the election law. According to reports from a women polling centre in Sufi Baba in Chawnai area of Kandahar, a woman candidate was telling voters to cast their votes in her favour and was telling election employees to let her voters vote without a thorough check of the registration stickers and lists. According to a complaint from Zhari district, a journalist in Kandahar told AAN, in a Kuchi polling centre the voters were not allowed to cast their votes, unless they voted for a particular candidate. The observer said this took place with the help of the police and the observers who were present.

Muhammad Yar Yar, a famous poet and politician in Kandahar, wrote on his Facebook page “In Abdul Hadi Dawi polling centre of Dand district, the head of police district and the police on duty were forcing people to vote for [three specific candidates]. They did not let the observers of other candidates observe the process. They broke the mobiles of observers and tore their documents.”

Reports of fraud

There were indications of fraud in the election as well. Nematullah Wardak from the IEC said they had received reports of ballot stuffing in Panjwai district, which they were investigating. Abdul Wodud Tarah, a commissioner in Kandahar’s Election Complaint Commission office told AAN on 30 October, that more than 100 employees of the Complaints Commission, in different places, had been forced to leave the polling centres where they were stationed by powerful candidates and had not been allowed to observe the process.” He further said there were reports that some candidates had ballot stuffing done in their favour during the night before the election. He also said that in Spin Boldak a son of a candidate had told the voters they would not be allowed to vote, unless they cast their vote in favour of his father. “Nearly 300 voters went back home without casting their votes,” Tarah said.

Responses by the IEC and ECC

Nematullah Wardak, head of Kandahar election commission, admitted in a press conference just after the election that there had been some “technical problems in the beginning.” He said this had caused “ten per cent of the polling centres” to open late. He also admitted that dozens of election commission employees had not shown up because of security threats and that this had caused polling centres to open late. Wardak also accepted that in some places there had been a shortage of ballots papers and the commission had not transferred all ballots to the centers, but he said they had been able to cover it during the day.

On 30 October Wardak told AAN that “according to the information we have received by phone from all over the province, a total of around 230,000 people voted in Kandahar province.” This represents a little over 40 per cent of the number of registered voters. He said that according to his information all polling centres had been open, although in some cases, he said, “one or two polling stations [in a centre] may have remained closed, either because of technical problem or the low number of voters.”

Some observers, however, estimated that as many as 200 employees of the election commission may have been absent on the day of election. They thought that probably in particular some women staff had not been allowed to go to work by their husbands or family members, because they thought that after the assassination of General Razeq the security situation may get worse.

Karimullah Stanakzai, the head of the Electoral Complaint Commission (ECC) said in the same press conference that they had received around 350 complaints from Kandahar province on its election day. Twelve had been officially submitted and the rest came in by phone. He said the complaints included the late opening of polling centres, nonexistence of voter’s names in the lists, technical problem with the usage of the biometric system or the absence of the biometric system and the influencing of voters. He said that, those complaints would be investigated in 15 days. Abdul Wodood Tarah, a commissioner in Kandahar’s Election Complaint Commission office told AAN on 30 October, that by that time “around 200 complaints” had been officially registered with the commission (so not counting the complaints that had only come in by phone.

The Kandahar IEC’s Wardak told AAN on 30 October that the ballots had reached Kandahar city from all districts, but had not yet been officially handed over to the commission. The ballots were transferred from five districts – Ghorak, Mianeshin, Reg, Khakrez and Shorabak – by air.” Wardak said that turnout had been highest in Kandahar city and Spin Boldak district (which was to be expected, given the registration figures), but that he did not know what other districts had seen significant turnout.

Looking ahead

In the coming weeks, the IEC will be counting Kandahar’s vote and entering the numbers into the database. It will also be deciding what to do with the votes that were cast without voter lists or biometric verification. If the rules are applied strictly, this may become tumultuous. People who have stood in line for hours might see their votes invalidated because of logistical problems, hardware failure or because IEC staff didn’t properly follow the procedures. Candidates are likely to clamour in an effort to get boxes that hold their votes accepted. If the rules are not applied strictly, the IEC might let through clear cases of ballot stuffing.

Edited by Martine van Bijlert

 

(1) The week-long delay of Kandahar’s election was in response to the assassination of General Abdul Razeq, the chief of Kandahar police and General Abdul Momin Hussainkhel, the head of national security department, two days before the country’s parliamentary election (see here).

(2) According to this list of Afghanistan’s Independent Election Commission, the IEC, 567,608 people had registered to cast their votes, 73,595 of which were women and 10,262 of which had registered for the nationwide Kuchi constituency (gender not specified). They could choose between 111 candidates (112 minus one: Nasir Mobariz who was assassinated nearly a month ago in Kandahar), 12 of which were women. The candidates were competing for 11 seats (3 of which were allocated to the women).

 

 

Take a look at the “Evil Eyes” MV-22 Osprey for VMM-163 at MCAS Miramar. Finished just in time for Halloween. The photographs you can find in this post were taken on Oct. 31, 2018 at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, California. They show an MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft belonging to the Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron […]

When the Independent Election Commission (IEC), at the last minute, introduced the use of biometric machines in the Wolesi Jirga election, it approved a procedure stipulating that the votes cast without the new system would be invalid. But it never decidedly clarified what it would do with the polling stations that failed to use them. Then, on election day, the IEC allowed voting in those stations. It has since found itself struggling to decide what to do with the votes that were cast without biometrics. In response, the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) stepped in to try to force the IEC to implement its pre-election day procedures. The controversy has, for now, resulted in a compromise that clarifies the criteria for the validation and invalidation of votes, but is unlikely to pre-empt the problems that will continue to flow from the chaotic implementation of the new system. AAN’s Ali Yawar Adili reports the details.

The problem: Unclear IEC procedures on how to deal with the malfunctioning of the biometrics

The decision by the Independent Election Commission (IEC) to introduce biometric machines in the October Wolesi Jirga elections was made at the last minute and under heavy political pressure (see here for details). As a result, the IEC did not have sufficient time to receive and ship the devices to the provinces, train personnel in how to operate them, or think through the possible problems they might face. While the IEC said the biometric machines would be an important anti-fraud measure, it never definitively clarified what it would do if they were not delivered to the polling centres (a polling centre has at least one male and one female polling station) or if the separate polling stations (within the polling centres that did receive the devices) failed to use them. The scenarios were manifold: The machines were not delivered to polling centres at all, they were delivered but did not work, the employees could not operate them, they were used at the beginning of the day but stopped functioning during the day, their printers ran out of paper, etc.

The IEC’s pre-election day procedure regarding the use of the biometric system had prescribed that ballots without biometric stickers would be considered invalid (the biometric sticker – with the polling centre code, date of voting, time of voting, a unique code and an encrypted QR image – was to be printed and attached to the ballot paper after the voter’s biometric data was captured ). The IEC’s procedure, however, fell short of specifying how votes from polling stations where no biometric machines were used at all would be treated. (1)

As anticipated, it emerged in the early hours of voting on 20 October that biometric machines had not been delivered to some polling stations or failed to work or employees were unable to operate them. This prompted the IEC to take an impromptu decision (No 89-1397), which was read at a noon press conference on the first day of the election (see also AAN’s previous reporting here). It said:

In polling stations where the biometric machines failed to work or have not been delivered, technical options [unclear what this means] should be used to solve the problem. If the problem remains [unresolved], contingency machines or the machines belonging to closed polling centres should be used. If the problem still remains [unresolved], the voting should continue based on the voter list and people should be allowed to vote. At the end, the polling station chairperson and monitors should write the issue in the journal in detail and get the approval of the agents and observers.

While this decision authorised the polling station officials to conduct the voting without biometric machines (if no machine was available), it did not rule expressly on the validity of those votes. But it did appear to indirectly revoke the IEC’s earlier decision that votes without biometric QR stickers would be counted as invalid (as it makes no sense to allow voting if the votes will not be considered valid). The IEC’s failure to clarify this point later put it at loggerheads with the ECC.

Scope of the problem: How many polling stations did not use biometric machines?

There is no real clarity on how many ballot boxes may be affected by the controversy. The IEC has been giving conflicting figures. IEC chairman Gula Jan Abdul Badi Sayyad, on 24 October while inaugurating the IEC’s national tally centre, said that biometric devices had not been used in more than 20 per cent of the polling centres across the country and that IEC employees were trying to tally the votes of those centres more carefully (media report here). Other media (see here and here quoted the IEC as saying that the machines had not been used in around 20 per cent of the polling centres, either because the machines had not been delivered or faced technical problems. IEC spokesman Hafizullah Hashemi, on the other hand, told the BBC on 28 October that they had provinces on their list where biometric devices were used in only 50 per cent of the polling centres.

On 31 October, a deputy spokesperson for the IEC, Zabihullah Sadat, told AAN that the biometric devices had been used in more than 90 per cent of the polling centres. He said that in provinces such as Kunar, Laghman and Panjshir, the biometric devices had been used in 98 per cent of the polling centres, while in some other provinces the biometric machines had been used in 95 or 92 per cent of the polling centres. (The seemingly conflicting figures could both be true at the same time: It is possible that in 20 per cent of the polling centres at least one of the stations had a problem with biometrics and that in 90 per cent of all polling centres at least one station’s biometrics was used correctly. The reality is that ‘polling centre’ is not the relevant unit – the polling station is).

Muhammad Nateqi, the deputy head of Hezb-e Wahdat-e Islami-e Mardom-e Afghanistan and a spokesperson for the political parties,told AAN that the IEC had told the political parties that only 8 per cent of the polling centres had not used biometric machines. He also said that the IEC should validate results coming from the polling centres that had used biometric machines, even if this was done in only 70–80 per cent of all centres, and that in the remaining 20–30 per cent, the IEC could hold a fresh election.

The independent observer organisation TEFA (Transparent Election Foundation of Afghanistan), in its preliminary findings (which it presented in a press conference on 28 October; AAN has a copy of the report), reported the absence of biometric devices in 18 per cent of the polling stations it observed (in 16 provinces) and a malfunction of the devices in 42 per cent of polling stations, “causing hours of delays and eventually forcing workers to continue without using the biometric system.” (TEFA’s preliminary report also said there had been no voter lists in 21 per cent of the polling stations it observed and that the voter lists in the remaining 79 per cent of the centres had problems such as missing names, individuals aged 40 or 50 registered as under-age, and voter lists being sent to the wrong provinces.) (2)

As seen above, there is no clarity and precision on (a) how many (and which) polling centres did not receive biometric devices at all, (b) how many polling stations (and which) in the polling centres that did received the machines could not use them, and (c) how many polling stations (and which) that did use the machines could not use them throughout the election day, for instance because the machine stopped functioning or the printers ran out of paper.

The response: The ECC steps in

In response to the ambiguity, the Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) issued a decision on 27 October, undersigned by all five commissioners, regarding the “implementation of the criteria to separate valid votes from invalid votes” in the 20 October Wolesi Jirga elections. The ECC said it had taken the decision after analysing “the prevailing situation related to the election, the volume and intensity of the complaints, and legal and technical consultation with a broad range of political parties, election related civil society organisations and the Independent Election Commission, in order to manage the current situation based on its legal mandates.”

In its decision the ECC set the following criteria for the validation or invalidation of the votes:

1. Votes that were cast based on biometric registration and in accordance with the relevant and available voter lists are valid (unless there are other reasons to deem them invalid).
2. Votes that were cast based on biometric registration, in the absence of voter lists but based on a manual list, are valid, if the data matches the original list of the relevant centre (unless there are other reasons to deem them invalid).
3. Votes that were cast based on the official voter list but without biometrics are recognised as invalid as they are in contradiction with the polling and vote counting procedure on the use of biometric machines.
4. Votes that were cast without a biometric barcode and without the use of the official lists are completely invalid. (3)

The ECC’s 27 October decision led to heated discussions as to which commission was actually mandated by the electoral law to rule on the validation or invalidation of the votes. (4)The IEC strongly reacted. On 28 October, IEC spokesperson Hashemi told the BBC that the ECC did not have the authority to declare votes that were cast without biometric data capturing as invalid. He called the ECC’s decision “illegal and immoral” saying: “This was a khod namayi wa nomayish (a swagger and a show) to promote themselves and has no legal basis.”

Political parties and figures, on the other hand, welcomed and supported the ECC’s decision. For instance, Muhammad Omer Daudzai, head of the political committee of the Council for Protection and Stability of Afghanistan (AAN’s background here), wrote on his Facebook page that the ECC’s decision “is praiseworthy and supported by us.” He claimed that “incompetence, various types of obvious and widespread violations, and fraud have caused concern for all the people and political currents of Afghanistan.” The ECC, he said, “has the duty and responsibility to address all complaints and objections carefully and comprehensively. That the [ECC] took such a realistic and correct decision at this sensitive and crucial time is appreciable.”

The Wolesi Jirga also backed the invalidation of votes without biometric verification. Its speaker, Abdul Rauf Ibrahimi, said in the house’s 29 October plenary session: “It was a matter of principle to use biometric machines for transparency in the elections. All the political currents of Afghanistan had reached an agreement on it and now this agreement should be acted upon.” Bamyan MP Fakuri Beheshti said that the IEC staff had not allowed anyone in Bamyan “to vote without biometric verification, but now if the votes without biometric [QR sticker] are also validated, it would be an obvious discrimination because the likelihood of fraud in polling centres where biometric system has not been used is higher.” (see here)

Others questioned the ECC’s decision. For instance, Etilaat Roz wrote on 29 October, “With this ECC decision, the votes of a significant number of the citizens which were cast into ballot boxes without biometric [verification] following the IEC’s decision during the first day of the election would be invalidated and this means disenfranchising a large part of the citizens of Afghanistan.” It further said that the ECC “should not burn the wet and dry together.”

A joint IEC-ECC decision

After the ECC’s 27 October decision, the two electoral commissions (the IEC and the ECC) met to discuss their differences, which they now seem to have reconciled. On 30 October, the IEC and ECC issued a joint statement, laying out the following three criteria for votes to be deemed valid:

Votes can be considered valid if coming from polling stations and centres:

• where voting was conducted based on biometric verification and in accordance with the printed voters list;
• where biometric machines were used based on manual lists (because no printed voter lists were available), provided that the names of the voters on the manual list are recorded in the IEC’s central database [i.e. the voters were registered during the voter registration exercise];
• where the biometric devices were not used but a printed voter list was available (the votes from these polling stations are valid provided that (a) the chairperson of the polling station, and the agents and observers that were present approved [signed] them and (b) there are no complaints and objections against those ballot boxes and the votes inside them). (5)

The joint statement implies that the ECC has overturned its previous ruling where it called for the invalidation of all votes that were cast based on the official voter list but without biometrics but has negotiated the addition of two conditions for them to be considered valid (the observers and agent present had signed their consent and there were no complaints against the ballot box in question). The statement also shows that the IEC has now more clearly derogated from its original procedure on the use of biometric machines, which ruled that ballots without biometric barcode stickers would be invalid.

Yusuf Rashid, the executive director of the independent observer organisation FEFA (Free and Fair Election Forum of Afghanistan) told AAN on 31 October that the two new conditions to validate the votes of polling stations that had the printed voter list, but did not use biometric machines, were not sufficient. He said that it was easy to fake the agent and observer signatures and that even as head of FEFA he could not rely on the signatures of his observers in the remote areas (where they can be easily pressured or bought). He said that FEFA’s advice to the ECC was to treat that category of votes more carefully. Rashid said that, on the other hand, it would also be unfair to invalidate all those votes, because they included genuine votes as well. For instance, in Rabia Balkhi High School in Kabul he observed a couple of polling stations that did not use biometric machines, but where at least 200 voters queued to vote. (The author also observed a large number of voters queuing at one of the four male polling stations in his polling centre in PD six of Kabul that was not using biometric machines (see here).

Political parties’ position and reactions to the joint decision

On 31 October, Muhammad Nateqi, the deputy head of Wahdat-e Islami, told AAN that the political parties would stick to their position that votes from polling stations that did not use biometric machines should be invalidated. He said that political parties had been working on another official statement to reiterate their position on non-biometric votes. The statement (see here and here) was issued the following day, on 1 November. They reiterated “that the votes of the [polling] centres where biometric [for capturing the data] of voters was not implemented are not acceptable to the parties and that the [IEC] can hold fresh elections in those areas.” (6)

The political parties had been the main force pushing for the biometric system (see earlier AAN reporting on how their protests forced the government and IEC’s hand here). Two weeks before election day, on 6 October, political parties had already demanded that biometric verification should be used countrywide and that the votes from polling stations where the biometric fingerprint was not carried out should be invalidated. On 22 October, after the second day of the voting, the political parties issued an accusatory statement, saying that “on 20 and 21 October, the biometric system for [capturing the data of] voters was, intentionally, not used in the majority of the polling centres, in order to pave the way for fraud. Therefore, the political parties of Afghanistan consider the election results from polling centres where voting was not conducted with the biometric method as invalid.” (See AAN’s previous reporting here).

Conclusion: IEC and ECC versus political parties

The IEC’s impromptu decision to authorise voting without biometric machines addressed the immediate confusion on election day, but ran contradictory to its pre-election day procedure that called for invalidation of ballots without biometric QR stickers. This pitted the ECC and IEC against each other. It also left genuine voters wondering why their votes, which they had cast without biometric data due to a fault that was not theirs, should be invalidated.

The IEC and ECC have now reconciled their differences and have clarified the procedure. However, the issue is far from solved. The invalidation process is still likely to affect both genuine and otherwise suspicious votes. And the ambiguities in the IEC’s procedure, the changing of the ECC’s position, and the lack of statistics on how many boxes and ballots may be affected have obscured the process of tabulating and tallying the results. This provides a chance for attacks by those parties and candidates who are unsatisfied with the procedure or their specific results.

The political parties’ continued insistence on the invalidation of all votes cast without biometric machines may again lead to an escalation between the IEC and the parties and could delay the announcement of the election results. This, in turn, would likely affect the preparations for the upcoming 20 April 2019 presidential poll.

Edited by Martine van Bijlert

 

(1) The annex on the voting and counting procedures regarding the use of biometric machines said that

The use of biometric machine is mandatory at each polling station. If the biometric machine in a polling station stops functioning for any reason or has not been delivered to a polling station due to problems, the contingency biometric machines or biometric machines of another polling station shall be used.

It also stipulated that “The ballot papers lacking biometric confirmation stickers will be considered as invalid and counted as invalid votes.” The IEC failed to clarify its procedures on what to do if the biometric machines were not working and deferred the decision for the election day.

(2) Other key findings of TEFA include:

• Approximately 91 per cent of the polling centres and stations opened in their pre-determined location.
• Almost 520 centres in 21 provinces (Kabul, Balkh, Samangan, Herat, Paktia, Maidan Wardak, Badghis, Bamyan, Zabul, Nuristan, Parwan, Logar, Ghor, Sar-e Pol, Jawzjan, Faryab, Nangarhar, Laghman, Urozgan, Baghlan, and Kunduz) did not open, mainly due to the absence of IEC workers, insecurity, explosions near the polling centres in provinces like Laghman, Baghlan, and unavailability of sensitive and insensitive electoral materials.
• Twelve per cent of the polling centres opened on time, at 7:00 am.
• Sixty-eight per cent of the polling centres in 33 provinces opened late.
• The security forces were present (as guards) in 98 per cent of the polling centres in 33 provinces.
• The number of IEC workers was insufficient in over 1,600 polling centres in 33 provinces.
• The voter lists were not displayed outside any of the polling stations.
• There were no voter lists in 21 per cent of the polling stations.
• People participated widely, but mismanagement discouraged them.
• Thirty-eight percent of polling stations lacked both sensitive and insensitive polling materials.
• Candidates’ posters were still present within 100 meters of 75 per cent of the polling centres in 33 provinces.
• Over 150 security incidents occurred, including rockets, explosions, conflict between Taleban and security forces, attacks at district centres, and shooting.
• There was a aack of proper coordination between IEC’s headquarters, provincial offices and workers on resolving the ongoing major issues in 17 provinces.
• Coordination between the IEC and the ECC in the polling centres and in handing over complaints forms to ECC delegates was weak.
• Voters’ fingers were not inked in 29 per cent of polling stations in 19 provinces.
• The overwhelming presence of candidates’ agents caused problems in some centres and stations.
• Illegal interventions made by IEC workers were observed in 35 per cent of the centres and station in 28 provinces.
• Problems were created for female voters, observers, and IEC workers due to the extension of the polling phase for another two hours on 20 October.
• A lack of electricity in 79 per cent of the polling centres created challenges in the ballot-counting phase.
• In ninety-three per cent of the polling stations votes were counted in the same station as where they were cast.
• TEFA’s observers were not allowed to observe the ballot-counting phase in 29 per cent of the polling stations.
• The extension of the polling phase for another day facilitated fraud and ballot stuffing in 16 provinces.

(3) The full text of the criteria reads:

1. The votes of ballot boxes from polling stations and centres where the voting had been conducted based on biometric registration in accordance with the relevant and available voter lists are valid, unless they are recognised as invalid due to other credible reasons and evidence in accordance with relevant legal documents.
2. The votes of ballot boxes in which the ballot papers have been cast based on biometric registration in absence of voter list in the polling station but based on manual list, if it matches the original list of the relevant centre, are valid, unless they are recognised as invalid based on credible reasons and documents in accordance with relevant legal documents.
3. The votes cast in the ballot boxes based on voter list and without biometric are recognised as invalid due to contradiction with paragraph four of vote counting section (polling and vote counting procedure of the 2018 Wolesi Jirga elections on use of biometric machines).
4. Votes of ballot boxes in which ballot papers have been cast without biometric barcode and without official list (with manual list) are totally invalidated.

The ECC also ruled that:

• Based on paragraph five of article 94 of the electoral law, if the principles of fair, secret and direct elections in one electoral constituency are compromised, the central complaints commission can declare the elections in that constituency as null. In this case, the IEC shall hold elections in the mentioned constituency within seven days. If based on points three and four of this decision and other legal instances which lead to invalidation of votes inside ballot boxes at the level of a constituency, the fairness, secrecy and other instances of enshrined in the above mentioned article of the electoral law are called into question, fresh elections shall be held in that constituency.
• According to provision of paragraph one of article 87 of the electoral law, in instances where the preliminary vote count or other legal instances are objected, the complaints commission orders full or partial recount of the ballots in the electoral constituency.
• If as a result of reviews it is substantiated based on authentic documents and evidence that employees and managers at any level, candidate or any other individual have committed negligence in their duties or committed electoral crime and damaged or harmed the national process of elections, they shall be introduced to the judicial agencies for prosecution in accordance with the law.

(4) Paragraph one of article 30 of the electoral law sets out the following authorities for the ECC and provincial ECC:

• Addressing objections against the list of candidates and voters, and requirements and qualifications of the candidates brought forward during the election.
• Addressing complaints arising from the electoral violations provided that the complaint is filed in accordance with the provisions of this law within the due period.
• Issuing advice, warning and order of corrective action to the person or organization that has committed the violation.
• Imposing cash fines, depending on the case, in accordance with the provisions of this law.
• Issuing order of recount of votes in specific polling centres prior to announcement of the election results.
• Invalidating the ballot papers not fulfilling the necessary requirements.

Paragraph two of the article says that both the central and provincial ECCs“can remove a candidate from the final list of candidates if proved based on credible documents that he/she was not eligible to nominate according to the provisions of this law.” 

(5) The joint statement also reiterated commitment of both commissions to smooth cooperation and the application of the relevant laws and procedures, saying:

• The electoral commissions are committed to holding joint meetings and taking necessary decisions to enact regulations and procedures related to the work of both commissions.
• The provincial offices of the electoral commissions will do the necessary cooperation to improve affairs in accordance with the law and the relevant procedures and in the presence of agents and observers.
• The electoral commissions will establish a joint committee to speed up the performance [presumably of the count and the complaint adjudication].
• If as a result of reviews it is substantiated, based on authentic documents and evidence, that [electoral] employees and managers at any level, candidates or any other participants in the elections have committed negligence in their duties, electoral crimes or have damaged or harmed the national process of elections, they shall be introduced to the judicial agencies for prosecution in accordance with the law.

(6) The political parties raised the following points:

• The political parties emphasise on separating the clean votes from the fraudulent votes in the central server by considering the biometric [QR sticker] as the criterion and implementing other criteria enshrined in the [IEC’s] annex to polling and vote counting procedures in order to safeguard the clean votes of the people and prevent systematic fraud. If the procedure for using biometric machines is not acted upon, political parties will use [all] necessary tools [after] consulting the people [to reject the results]. We call on the electoral commissions to carry out their legal responsibility in this regard.
• Providing the ground for political parties’ effective monitoring of the consolidation and counting of the results from the beginning to the end can contribute to the legitimacy of the elections. Therefore, no operation in the absence of the effective monitoring by political parties agents [of] the process of consolidation and tallying, review of complaints, quarantining of ballot boxes, recounting of votes and invalidating of the counted votes by the electoral commissions will be acceptable to the political parties. We reiterate that the votes of the [polling] centres where biometric [for capturing the data] of voters was not implemented are not acceptable to the parties and the Election Commission can hold fresh elections in those areas.
• The political parties once again insist on changing the current electoral system and call on the government and the Independent Election Commission to pave the way for the implementation of the MDR [Multidimensional Representation] system in the provincial and district council elections.
• The existing voter list is in no way credible. Therefore, political parties insist on fresh voter registration based on the biometric fingerprint of ten fingers [for] the presidential elections.
• Given that the presidential election date has neared, the Independent Election Commission should publish the electoral calendar for the presidential election as soon as possible and pave the way for transparent and fair elections as it had announced earlier.

 

Americas

The US Marine Corps is buying an additional training system for its pilots. Lockheed Martin will procure one F-35 training device under the awarded $64.3 million contract modification. The F-35 Full Mission Simulator is fitted with a 360° visual display system, which accurately replicates all sensors and weapons employment and uses the same software as the aircraft. Each simulator carries the most recent software load, or operational flight program (OFP), so it can most accurately replicate the capabilities and handling qualities of the aircraft as it is concurrently developed, tested and fielded through various block upgrades. F-35 pilots complete 45% to 55% of their initial qualification flights in the simulator. Work will be performed at multiple locations including Orlando, Florida; Reston, Virginia and London, United Kingdom. The contract is expected to be completed in July 2021.

The US Navy is modifying a contract with Raytheon. The additional $34.1 million allow Raytheon to support the Navy’s Zumwalt-class ships with integrated logistics support and engineering services. The DDG-1000 ship’s prime missions are to provide naval gunfire support, and next-generation air defense, in near-shore areas where other large ships hesitate to tread. All three Zumwalt-class vessels equipped with latest electric propulsion systems, wave-piercing tumblehome hulls, stealth designs and advanced war fighting technology. The ships will have the capability to carry out a wide range of deterrence, power projection, sea control, and command and control missions once operational. Work will be performed at multiple locations. Around 52% of the work will be performed in Portsmouth, Rhode Island; 24% in Tewksbury, Massachusetts; 10% in San Diego, California; 6% in Nashua, New Hampshire; 5% Bath, Maine; 1% in Marlboro, Massachusetts; 1% in Ft. Wayne, Indiana and last 1% to be done in St. Petersburg, Florida. The contract is expected to be completed by September 2019.

Northrop Grumman is being tapped to continue development of the Common Missile Compartment (CMC). The awarded $10.8 million cost-plus incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee modification covers a number of technical engineering services; design and development engineering services; component and full scale test services and tactical underwater launcher hardware production services. The CMC will be fitted on the US future Columbia-class and UK Dreadnought-class SSBNs. The new generation of submarines will carry their Trident D5 nuclear-armed SLBMs in multiple “quad pack” Common Missile Compartments, a deliberate decision to simplify the process of building the two types of subs and hopefully save money. Nuclear missile submarines are a nation’s most strategic assets, because they are its most secure and certain deterrence option. Work will be performed at multiple location including – but not limited to – Sunnyvale, California; Kings Bay, Georgia and Barrow-In-Furness, England.

Middle East & Africa

General Electric is being contracted to support the Egyptian Air Force F-16 Service Life Extension Program. The company will deliver an unspecified number of F110-GE-100 engine conversion kits at a cost of $273.5 million. The Egyptian Air Force operates 220 F-16s, making it the 4th largest F-16 operator in the world. The F-16 is the EAF’s primary frontline aircraft. Among other operational roles, the F-16s perform missions which include intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, as well as air-to-air and air-to-ground attacks. Also known as the Block 30 powerplant, the F110-GE-100 is the alternate engine for the Block 30/32/40-variants of the F-16 that was fitted from December 1985. Work will be performed at General Electric’s Cincinnati, Ohio facility. This contract involves foreign military sales and is scheduled for completion by October 30, 2023.

Sierra Nevada will upgrade two aircraft as part of the Saudi King Air 350 program. The company will add an intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance/synthetic aperture radar capability to the two King Air 350 extended range aircraft. The twin-propeller King Air 350 is an affordable, long-endurance option for effective manned battlefield surveillance and attack. US aircraft in their ISR configuration are equipped with signals intelligence (SIGINT) electronic interception capabilities, and carry L-3 Westar’s MX-15i surveillance turrets. One transportable ground station; one fixed ground station; and one mission system trainer are also included in the contract. The definitization modification is priced at $23.8 million and involves 100% foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia. Work will be performed at Sierra Nevada’s facility in Hagerstown, Maryland and is expected to be completed by May 2020.

Lockheed Martin is being tapped to keep two of the UAE’s THAAD batteries operational. The $129.5 million noncompetitive, cost-plus-incentive-fee and firm-fixed-price contract provides for maintenance and sustainment work needed to keep the two Terminal High Altitude Area Defense batteries combat ready. Lockheed Martin will be responsible to provide the United Arab Emirates with software and hardware development, contractor logistics support, engineering services, and missile field surveillance. The THAAD system is a long-range, land-based theater defense weapon that acts as the upper tier of a basic 2-tiered defense against ballistic missiles. Work will be performed at Lockheed’s facilities in Sunnyvale, California; Dallas, Texas; Huntsville, Alabama; Anniston, Alabama; Troy, Alabama; Lakeland, Florida; and the United Arab Emirates. The contract performance period is from November 1, 2018 through July 2, 2021.

Europe

Thales UK is being awarded with the $105 million Future Air Defence Availability Project (F-ADAPT) that seeks to enhance the Starstreak High Velocity Missile (HVM) and Lightweight Multi-role Missile (LMM) systems. The Starstreak is a dual-stage shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile that flies at 4 times the speed of sound, uses advanced laser-guidance to home in on fast-flying aircraft, pop-up helicopters, or UAVs, then uses a system of 3 individually-guided dart-like projectiles and warheads to shred any target they hit. The LMM is a very short-range, precision strike air-to-surface and surface-to-surface missile designed to deliver high accuracy and precision strike capabilities with low collateral damage effect against a variety of threats encountered by APCs, small vessels and artillery. The upgrades under the F-ADAPT project include thermal imaging which ensures the HVM system can be used 24 hours a day and ‘Friend or Foe’ identification, which will maximize intelligence on potential threats and targets.

Asia-Pacific

India is procuring an air-defense command-and-control (C2) system from Israel. Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) will deliver the Sky Capture system to the Indian Army at a cost of $550 million. Sky Capture is a C2 system for anti-aircraft artillery and Very Short Range Air Defense (VSHORAD) systems that transforms legacy air defense systems into modern, accurate and effective weapons by applying modern sensors, communications and computing capabilities. The system integrates several sensors, including target acquisition and fire control radar systems which are optimized to detect targets with low radar cross-section, such as low-velocity UAVs and ultralights that can be detected from 40-60 km. This is the second high value deal IAI signed with India in recent weeks, with the first being a $770 million deal for the Barak-8 system.

Today’s Video

Watch: Two lranian fast boats approached the US Wasp-class amphibious assault ship

67% of the fleet
(click to view full)

DID’s FOCUS Article for the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class “destroyer” program covers the new ships’ capabilities and technologies, key controversies, associated contracts and costs, and related background resources.

The ship’s prime missions are to provide naval gunfire support, and next-generation air defense, in near-shore areas where other large ships hesitate to tread. There has even been talk of using it as an anchor for action groups of stealthy Littoral Combat Ships and submarines, owing to its design for very low radar, infrared, and acoustic signatures. The estimated 14,500t (battlecruiser size) Zumwalt Class will be fully multi-role, however, with undersea warfare, anti-ship, and long-range attack roles. That makes the DDG-1000 suitable for another role – as a “hidden ace card,” using its overall stealth to create uncertainty for enemy forces.

True, or False?
(click to view full)

At over $3 billion per ship for construction alone, however, the program faced significant obstacles if it wanted to avoid fulfilling former Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter’s fears for the fleet. From the outset, DID has noted that the Zumwalt Class might face the same fate as the ultra-sophisticated, ultra-expensive SSN-21 Seawolf Class submarines. That appears to have come true, with news of the program’s truncation to just 3 ships. Meanwhile, production continues.

Zumwalt Class: Program and Participants

As of December 2012, DDG 1000 Zumwalt was about 80% complete and scheduled to deliver in July 2014, with an Initial Operating Capability in July 2016. DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor was about 48% complete, and DDG 1002 (now Lyndon B. Johnson) was just beginning construction preparations.

The most striking thing about the Zumwalt Class program as a whole is the seismic jump in R&D costs. This is hardly surprising given the number of very new technologies involved, and the 2 program restarts along the way. Overall procurement costs have dropped as ship numbers dropped from 32 to 3, but on a per-ship basis they soared from $1.02 billion to $3.71 billion.

The Navy’s build-cost figure has been disputed by past Congressional Budget Office reports, which placed the total even higher at $5.1 billion. The Navy claims that the CBO’s estimate doesn’t consider shipyard improvements that change the build process, a more mature detailed design that has been built several thousand times by computer (a capability developed as a “lesson learned” from the Arleigh Burke program); and the roughly $500 million per ship that is being contracted for on a firm-fixed-price basis. On the other hand, the CBO has been right, and the Navy wrong, when estimating other recent shipbuilding programs.

With DDG 1000 Zumwalt rounding toward completion, we should know who’s right pretty soon. Key members of the DDG-1000’s industrial team include:

Program History: The Long and Winding Road

2006 Schedule
(click to view full)

The Zumwalt Class’ path to fielding has taken a long time, and seen several twists and turns. Given the sheer number of new technologies involved, that may have been a good thing, but the long gestation period has also hurt the program in other ways.

Northrop Grumman Ship Systems’ Ingalls shipyard led the “DD 21 Gold Team” through Phase I (System Concept Design) and Phase II (Initial Systems Design) from 1995-2001, until the program was suspended on May 7/01 pending that Quadrennial Defense Review and other key studies.

In November 2001, the DD 21 Program was restructured as the DD (X) Program. The Navy was directed to conduct a Spiral Development Review (SDR), to revalidate some requirements; and to assess the merits of achieving various levels of capability across a family of ships, including a Littoral Combatant Ship (LCS) and the next-generation CG (X) cruiser. The Request For Proposal for Phase III was issued Nov 30/01.

The Gold Team won on April 29/02, but the contract was delayed until the US Government Accountability Office denied General Dynamics’ protest On Aug 19/02. At that point, a firm winner could be declared. The winning “National Team” was led by Northrop Grumman, and included Raytheon IDS as the prime mission systems equipment integrator for all electronic and combat systems. Other major subcontractors included Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, and Boeing. It even incorporated “Blue team” leader General Dynamics Bath Iron Works as a subcontractor for design and test activities.

By mid-spring 2005, however, a new DDI (design, development & integration) contract was signed. The Navy designated 4 Prime Contractors, to be coordinated through a Navy-Industry DDG-1000 Collaboration Center run by Raytheon. The current Prime Contractors are:

• General Dynamics Bath Iron works (ship design & build)
  
• Raytheon (mission systems integration which includes sensors, combat systems, electronics, and the PVLS)
  
• BAE Systems (AGS gun system)
  
• Northrop Grumman Ingalls (ship design & build, relinquished build role)

On Nov 23/05, the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition signed the “destroyer acquisition memorandum,” approving the DDG 1000 program to proceed with Milestone B, and commencing detail design and construction of the first ships. On April 7/06, the program got its second name change from DD-21 and then DD (X), to its official and formal designation as the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class.

As construction begins, Congressional resolutions have dissolved the US Navy’s original “winner take all” shipbuilding approach; the first 2 DDG-1000 destroyers will now be built at Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls yard in Pascagoula, MS; and at General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine. This was expected to add up to $300 million to the cost of each ship, but was expected to help to keep the USA’s industrial base options open for future efforts like CG (X) etc.

Strong arguments can be made for both the Navy’s original option and Congress’ mandated approach… and have been. Under the Navy’s proposed new “Dual Lead Ships Strategy,” the USN planned to benchmark these lead ships from each shipyard against each other, and revisit its options around FY 2009.

That became a moot point when the DDG 1000 program was truncated at 3 ships, a development that ironically led the program back to its original single-builder strategy. Zumwalt Class ships will be built at Bath Iron Works, with Northrop Grumman (now Huntington Ingalls) supplying the composite deckhouse superstructure for all 3 ships.

CG (X) was slated for termination in the FY 2011 budget, and will be replaced by DDG-51 “Flight III” destroyers as of about 2016. Those ships will be built in alternating yards by General Dynamics Bath Iron Works and by Northrop Grumman. The question now is whether cost growth and engineering challenges for the Flight IIIs will begin to push them to a level that re-starts debate over building more Zumwalts.

DDG-1000 Key Technologies and Features

DDG-1000: key features
(click to view full)

The Zumwalt Class is currently in the middle of the production phase. When finished, the class is projected at 14,500t, almost 3 times the displacement of some frigates. In other eras, it would have been called a cruiser or even a battlecruiser. A follow-on CG (X) cruiser was also contemplated, and the issues faced by the DDG-1000 Program had a significant influence on its ultimate cancellation. In practice, the 3 DDG-1000s are America’s future cruisers.

Several of the Zumwalt Class’ sub-systems represent entirely new technologies, as seen in the graphics above and below. Some of the key innovations include:

All-aspect Stealth. To achieve survivability in littoral regions close to shore, DDG-1000 ships will be reliant on their ability to see their surroundings and counter threats, while being difficult to detect. The goal is a 50-fold radar cross section reduction as compared to current DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyers.

To achieve that stealth, the destroyer’s “tumblehome” inward-sloping hull, shaping, composite superstructure, and other stealth measures are meant to reduce radar, infrared, and other signatures. The ship’s shape reduces its visible wake in the water, and its all-electric power system is quieter. Even the ship’s internal lighting system represents advances in this area.

Sensors

Tech features

Dual-Band Sonar. A dual-band hull sonar is a first for American naval ships, and so is its packaging. The Zumwalt Class’ AN/SQQ-90 sonar system includes the AN/SQS-60 hull-mounted mid-frequency sonar; the AN/SQS-61 hull-mounted high-frequency sonar; and the AN/SQR-20 multi-function towed array sonar and handling system. The sonar system can reportedly be operated by 1/3 the number of crew members required for the AN/SQQ-89 systems on current Arleigh Burke Class destroyers and Ticonderoga cruisers, and the range of frequencies should help find submarines in a wider variety of conditions. Correlation between the ship’s 3 sonars may even produce improved resolution, but the Navy isn’t talking.

Like the ship’s computing environment, the sonar system is packaged in Electronic Module Enclosures (EMEs), which roll in as units and combine the commercial off-the-shelf electronics that power the hull-mounted sonars with shock mitigation, electromagnetic interference protection, thermal conditioning, security and vibration isolation. The electronics to power and control the ship’s hull-mounted sonar arrive in a single, smaller package that’s fully integrated and tested, including the transmit/receive amplifiers, and associated processors that distribute signals and data to the ship’s command center.

Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE). Rather than doing this piecemeal on a per system basis, the idea is to have an integrated but open architecture approach from the very beginning. This creates a single IT framework, and makes it easier to integrate commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware and software like IBM blade servers and Cisco routers. That allows the Navy and the prime contractors to use more conventional commercial acquisition approaches/ partnerships to support and upgrade the technology, and also improves wider interoperability. A total of 16 factory configured and tested Electronic Modular Enclosures (EMEs) are distributed throughout the ship. EMEs protect the equipment inside, and the client/server architecture ensures that any workstation can run any task, unlike past ships that have depended on task-focused consoles. The entire assembly is controlled by the TCSE software.

TSCE will be about 8 million lines of code, but it actually connects with about 20 million lines of code reused from other programs (AEGIS, SPQ-89, NAVSSI), plus the secured commercial operating systems, databases, and middleware that underpin the entire infrastructure. TSCE’s functionality is being developed as services, with set interfaces to the underlying commercial software and proprietary code. This allows changes to take place on both ends with minimal disruption of each service. The advances made by TSCE will in turn be reused in the new CVN-78 carriers and CV-X cruisers because of its services framework, design for reuse, and open architecture. That’s good, because $117 million per Zumwalt Class ship is a sizeable investment[1].

TSCE is currently at Release 5/6, and coding for Release 6 is underway. IBM is partnered with prime contractor Raytheon for this component; other key subcontractors include Lockheed Martin.

Dual-Band Radar (now just SPY-3 X-band). For detection and self-defense, the DDG-1000 was going to rely on a new approach called the Dual-Band Radar, but will now use only the SPY-3. Raytheon’s X-Band SPY-3 radar provides air and surface detection/tracking, and supports fire control. Its use of active array radar technology makes it far more survivable against saturation missile attacks, since it can track and guide against tens of incoming missiles simultaneously. In comparison, the passive S-band phased array SPY-1D radars that equip American AEGIS destroyers and cruisers are limited to terminal guidance against just 3-4 targets at any one time. Active array radars also feature superior reliability, and recent experiments suggest that they could also be used for very high-power electronic jamming, and high-bandwidth secure communications.

The SPY-3 was to be integrated with Lockheed Martin’s active array S-Band volume search radar, and collectively the SPY-3 fore control radar and SPY-4 search array would comprise the Dual Band Radar (DBR) system. The idea was to have the destroyer benefit from the best capabilities of both X-band’s outstanding medium to high altitude performance, and the S-band VSR’s performance in clutter, in order to create a single combat picture. The goal was a 3x improvement over existing AEGIS ships like the DDG-51 destroyers and CG-47 cruisers. In 2010, however, the S-band SPY-4 was cut from the DDG-1000 program. SPY-4 VSR testing will finish, but Raytheon’s X-band SPY-3 fire control radar would be given volume search upgrades, and become the destroyer’s sole radar. DBR will be retained, in smaller form, on the USA’s new CVN-78 Gerald Ford Class aircraft carriers.

Weapons

BAE’s AGS
(click for video)

Advanced Gun System. The supposed rationale for the DDG-1000 centers around naval gunfire support for troops ashore. While US battleships with 9 massive 16-inch guns have performed extremely well in this role to date, the DDG-1000 intends to rely on 2 of BAE Systems’ rapid fire 155mm Advanced Gun Systems (AGS), each firing up to 304 advanced Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) GPS-guided shells that give the AGS a greatly-extended range of 70-100 nautical miles. The gun will use the AGS Intra-Ship Rearmament System (AIRS) for reloading, providing a safe way of moving AGS pallets between the flight deck and the gun magazine’s pallet hoist, with full performance in conditions up to Sea State 3. Read “Next-Gen Naval Gunfire Support: the USA’s AGS & LRLAP” for fuller coverage of those systems.

BAE is reportedly working on a lighter 155mm AGS assembly that might be suitable for new DDG-51 Flight III destroyers, but it would still weigh twice as much as existing MK45 127/62 caliber naval gun systems. Their joint work with Lockheed Martin on a 5″ LRLAP shell seems likely to pay better dividends,

Beyond the USA, AGS doesn’t have any direct counterparts in other navies yet, but Italy’s OtoMelara has created a rocket boosted, 127/64 caliber GPS-guided shell system called Vulcano, whose shorter range is offset by lower cost compatibility with many existing ships. TBAE and Lockheed Martin are responding with the LRLAP round that fits BAE’s 5″ naval guns, and other firms like Raytheon (Excalibur naval) are offering guided long-range projectiles of their own.

Finally, the Zumwalts have a growth path that other top American ships do not: electro-magnetic weapons. The Zumwalts produce enough power to add lasers for last ditch missile defense and small boat/ anti-helicopter work, once laser technology takes its final operational steps. If enough power can be stored within the ship, future upgrades might even include an electro-magnetic rail gun for ultra-long-range, high capacity guided fire.

Anyone else firing?
(click to view full)

PVLS Missile Launchers. Some additional survivability will come from automated firefighting systems, and even the ship’s missile launchers are designed to contribute. Zumwalt Class destroyers will distribute their 80 missile cells among 20 reinforced launcher sets along the edges of the ship, rather than concentrating them in one central cluster that can be directly targeted by modern missiles. The PVLS system is designed to release and direct the energy from a magazine explosion away from the ship, in order to avoid situations in which the detonation of a round in one cell spreads into catastrophe.

Mk 57 Peripheral Vertical Launching System (PVLS) cells will be larger than the current Mk 41 VLS, allowing them to carry larger missiles, or multi-pack smaller missiles. Raytheon is the prime contractor, with BAE Systems as a subcontractor.

Propulsion

Critical tech & status
(click to view full)

All-Electric Power. Another challenge the Zumwalt Class will face is power. Ship electronics continue to require more and more power, and this class is also envisioned as an all-electric ship wherein even gun turrets and other mechanical systems will be electrical, and having separate systems for propulsion and power will no longer be necessary. The use of electric drive also eliminates the need for drive shaft and reduction gears, which brings benefits in ship space, acoustic signature reduction to enemy submarines, and less interference with the ship’s listening devices. Not to mention better fuel efficiency, and the potential to accommodate new electronics, more powerful radars, or even energy weapons and rail guns. The DDG-1000’s expected electrical output is 78 MW, compared to 7.5 MW for the current DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class – a capacity limitation that’s endangering plans to refit the Burkes with more advanced radars.

The exact choice of engine systems was somewhat controversial. The concept was originally for an integrated power system (IPS) based on in-hull permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMMs), with Advanced Induction Motors (AIM) as a possible backup solution. The design was shifted to the AIM system in February 2005 in order to meet scheduled milestones; PMM technical issues were subsequently fixed, but the program has moved on. The downside is that AIM technology has a heavier motor, requires more space, requires a separate controller to meet noise requirements, and produces one-third the amount of voltage. Once adopted, however, there was little prospect of going back. These very differences would create time-consuming and expensive design and construction changes if the program wished to “design AIM out”.

The AIM system is made by Alstom, who also makes electric-drive motors for cruise ships. CAE will supply the integrated platform management system. A Rolls-Royce MT30 36MW gas turbine has powered the IPS Engineering Development Model in Philadelphia, and has now been ordered for production ships. The MT30 has 80% commonality with the Rolls-Royce Trent 800 aero engine used on the Boeing 777, and Rolls-Royce states that it is the most powerful marine gas turbine in the world.

DRS Technologies Power Technology unit had received development contracts for the PMM motors, electric drive, and control system for the IPS, but lost that role when the program switched to AIM technology. The firm does retain involvement in the ship’s “Integrated Fight-through Power” modules and load centers that take converted electrical power, condition it to get it to the right voltages, and distribute it to 8 redundant zones. If you lose power on the port side of the ship, for instance, you can cross-connect it to the starboard side.

DDG-1000 Issues and Controversies

Plan B?
(cick for alternative view)

The Zumwalt Class will incorporate a number of new technologies and capabilities that will make it a very formidable combatant – but it has also had its share of controversies that have included questions concerning its stealth, weapon choices, at-sea stability, cost growth, and the Navy’s future force mix.

Stealth. While the DDG 1000 is designed as a low-emissions ship across a number of wavelengths, it is 50% larger than the already large Arleigh Burke Class destroyers – very nearly the same displacement as the WW2 German ‘pocket battleship’ Graf Spee. On the high seas, it’s a very big ocean; but the Navy wants to take them into the shallow-water littoral zone, where a number of alternative technologies (including swarms of small-medium UAVs with electro-optical equipment, or dhows will cell phones) can be used to find a ship. Once the ship fires its weapons, methods for detecting the ship expand further via options like acoustic sensors. Stealth will still make the ship harder to target and engage, but unlike the Iowa Class battleships, a DDG-1000 will not be able to ignore an Exocet missile strike to its hull.

The Navy believes it can still produce a stealthy enough ship, with enough stand-off range to avoid some threats, and to buy reaction time against others. Naval personnel add that they’re testing the platform to ensure that these goals are met. Some observers are less certain. They also wonder whether a serious, realistic ‘hunt the Graf Spee’ test, using a properly equipped opposing force cleared to use innovative approaches, is even thinkable for a Navy that has invested its prestige and several billion dollars. Without such tests, of course, the only way to find out for sure is the hard way, in battle.

Weapons. One of the issues that did a lot of damage to the DDG-1000 program in its late stages was the revelation that its radar system would not be suited to ballistic missile defense roles, and that modifications to make the radar powerful enough would be problematic. This lack of flexibility proved costly, since cheaper DDG-51 destroyers can be made fully ABM capable using known technologies, while the DDG-1000’s SPY-3 radar and combat system would require the same sort of research program the AEGIS ships went through in order to add BMD capability. The Navy also began to contend that the DDG-1000 wouldn’t be able to use Standard family missiles (SM-2, SM-3, SM-6), a charge that has been vehemently and persuasively disputed by Raytheon and others. Raytheon also disputes the charge that its SPY-3 radar would be less suited to the BMD role once software additions were made, contending that its performance would be superior to current ships.

Indeed, Raytheon announced in January 2015 that the Navy has approved the SM-6 for additional Aegis systems, to include those Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers from the 1994-keel-laid The Sullivans (DDG-68) onward.

The other weapons-related issue was the 155mm Advanced Gun System. It will be capable of rapid, long range, accurate fire that far out-ranges even a battleship gun. War is also about intimidation, however; otherwise, the inaccurate, slow, but loud and intimidating musket would never have replaced the faster, longer-range, more accurate, but less intimidating crossbow. A 155mm shell doesn’t have quite the psychological impact of a 16-inch, volkswagen-size battleship round, and rapid fire to create that effect risks exhausting the DDG 1000’s limited ammunition supply very quickly. Reactivating the battleships was considered, and had some supporters in Congress, but never became a serious option.

Meanwhile, other navies are developing rocket-boosted guided ammunition for existing 127mm guns, to give them 60+ mile ranges. Are the expensive and specialized AGS guns simply unnecessary? Can the killing effect of GPS-guided shells from any gun of 5″/127mm or less provide enough suppression and decapitation to make up for lower intimidation value? Even if they could, can the small number of Zumwalts adequately fulfill that role? Or is the AGS/Zumwalt combination simply the wrong concept for naval fire support?

The 3rd issue is that the Zumwalts falter after the AGS gun and PVLS missiles. These huge and expensive ships lack an interior missile defense using systems like RAM missiles, or last-ditch defenses like the radar-guided Phalanx 20mm gatling gun. That’s a troubling weakness for a ship that has to come in close to shore for naval gunfire support. The original design included 2 BAE Mk.110 57mm guns for that purpose, mounted in stealth cupolas near the helicopter hangar. They serve as main guns for the USA’s Littoral Combat Ship and Legend Class Coast Guard Cutters, combining rapid fire fused-fragmentation air defense, and medium-range targeting of inshore enemies like explosives-laden fast boats. The DDG-1000 program said that the Mk.110s didn’t perform as advertised in tests, removed them, and replaced them with 2 less expensive Mk.46 30mm turrets that can’t engage missiles, helicopters, or other aerial opponents. Until and unless the ships add effective laser weapons, this is going to be an important weakness.

In January 2015, General Dynamics was indeed given the contract for Modification 2 M k.46 guns, for $26.2 million in weapons production to be fitted to both the Zumwalt and LCS. This will add to the 38 Mk.46s already delivered and be completed by late 2016, according to the schedule.

Tumblehome hull
(click to view full)

Ship shape. Tumblehome hull designs that slope outward to the waterline have had a less-than-stellar naval history. The design offers important stealth benefits, but some experts believe that the ship could capsize in a following sea at the wrong speed, if a wave at an appropriate wavelength hits it at an appropriate angle. That would be… expensive, on many levels. Then again, so is a missile in your hull. Experiments have been run in simulated conditions up to hurricane-level and with scale models up to 1/4 scale, in order to determine safety. The Navy believes the design to be safe across an array of conditions whose breadth matches current ships.

As a new design type, however, the Zumwalt Class can never have the certainty of designs that are known and proven over the immense array of conditions encountered by thousands of ships sailing over many decades. New capability comes with risk, but if it proves out, the USA will have expertise in stealthy ship design and construction that puts it well ahead of other countries. Are the experts who believe the design to be unsafe rigid traditionalists, of the same species that dismissed the aircraft carrier when it was new? Or are they offering a prescient warning?

Cost Growth. In the end, this is the biggest issue faced by the DDG-1000 program. Originally slated to cost under $1 billion per ship, the program has grown to the point that 2005 GAO estimates placed likely average construction costs at $3.2 billion per ship, with ship life cycle costs at about double that of the DDG-51 Arleigh Burk Class ($4 Billion vs. $2.1 billion). Further cost increases are possible based on technical project risks, with some estimates climbing as high as $5 billion.

At that cost level, even the US Navy will find itself priced out of the water, unable to maintain enough ships to serve in the envisaged role. That cost profile also leads one to ask whether the Navy would really send something that expensive into harm’s way in dangerous shallow waters near an enemy coast, knowing that they’re gambling with a $3+ billion asset whose cost makes it an extremely attractive enemy target.

Force Structure. The original plan called for 32 DD (X) ships. That shrank to 8, and now just 3. Reagan’s 600-ship Navy is now projected to shrink to just 313 ships in official plans, and even this may not be achievable; a 2005 Pentagon study stated that the Navy was likely to be up to 40% short on expected funding toward their 375 ship goal, based on reasonably-expected funding profiles.

Even an 8-ship class certainly isn’t going to succeed in replacing 62 DDG-51 AEGIS destroyers – but something will have to do so beyond 2030, or the Navy’s planned force will start becoming ineffective at all levels, as the intended “high-low” mix fails on both ends. DID has already discussed the light armament profile being built into US Navy versions of the Littoral Combat Ship, and their corresponding and compounding lack of weapon flexibility. As Vice-Admiral Mustin (ret.) and Vice-Admiral Katz (ret.) put it in a 2003 USNI Proceedings article:

“Because the Navy has invested heavily in land-attack capabilities such as the Advanced Gun System and land-attack missiles in DD (X), there is no requirement for [the Littoral Combat Ship] to have this capability. Similarly, LCS does not require an antiair capability beyond self-defense because DD (X) and CG (X) will provide area air defense. Thus, if either DD (X) or CG (X) does not occur in the numbers required and on time, the Navy will face two options: leave LCS as is, and accept the risk inherent in employment of this ship in a threat environment beyond what it can handle (which is what it did with the FFG-7); or “grow” LCS to give it the necessary capabilities that originally were intended to reside off board in DD (X) and CG (X). Neither option is acceptable.”

And yet, here we are in 2012, facing their worst case scenario as our current and future reality.

SSN-21: shared fate?

The SSN-21 Seawolf Class remain the best fast attack submarines in the world, with capabilities – and costs – that no other sub can match. That cost eventually led to program cancellation after 3 boats, and replacement by an SSN-774 Virginia Class that integrated many of their key technologies and design approaches at only 60-70% of Seawolf’s cost. In effect, the Seawolf Class became a set of 3 technology demonstrators.

If the Zumwalt Class cannot overcome these controversies with cost-effective performance, DID warned that it could end up sharing Seawolf’s fate. With the 2008 suspension of construction at 2-3 ships, that appears to be exactly what has happened. Even so, spiraling cost growth for the planned DDG-51 Flight III may yet get the Zumwalt Class back into contention as part of the US Navy’s future. If, and only if, the DDG-1000 program can demonstrate promised build and operational costs.

Zumwalt Class: Contracts and Key Events

DDG-1000 vs. DDG-51/2A
(click to view full)

Contracts for the Zumwalt’s AGS/LRLAP long-range naval gun system, and Dual-Band Radar, are each covered in separate in-depth articles. While both systems are integral to the Zumwalt Class, they’re also present, or have the potential to be retrofitted, in other ship types.

Note that frequent references to “Mission Systems Equipment” can cover a wide range of items: Dual Band Radar, external communications suite, Total Ship Computing Environment set, MK 57 Vertical Launching System, AN/SQQ-90 Integrated Undersea Warfare Combat System, Electro-Optical/Infrared suite, IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) integrated sensor suite; and the Zumwalt ship control hardware, including an integrated bridge, navigation, EO surveillance, and engineering control system components.

Unless otherwise noted, contracts are issued by the USA’s Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC.

FY 2014 – 2018

Zumwalt christened; Why the switch from 57mm to 30mm guns?; Final composite deckhouse delivered.

Float-out
(click to view full)

November 2/18: Support The US Navy is modifying a contract with Raytheon. The additional $34.1 million allow Raytheon to support the Navy’s Zumwalt-class ships with integrated logistics support and engineering services. The DDG-1000 ship’s prime missions are to provide naval gunfire support, and next-generation air defense, in near-shore areas where other large ships hesitate to tread. All three Zumwalt-class vessels equipped with latest electric propulsion systems, wave-piercing tumblehome hulls, stealth designs and advanced war fighting technology. The ships will have the capability to carry out a wide range of deterrence, power projection, sea control, and command and control missions once operational. Work will be performed at multiple locations. Around 52% of the work will be performed in Portsmouth, Rhode Island; 24% in Tewksbury, Massachusetts; 10% in San Diego, California; 6% in Nashua, New Hampshire; 5% Bath, Maine; 1% in Marlboro, Massachusetts; 1% in Ft. Wayne, Indiana and last 1% to be done in St. Petersburg, Florida. The contract is expected to be completed by September 2019.

November 06/17: Raytheon received Tuesday a modified $29 million contract for mission systems equipment for the Navy’s DDG 1000, or Zumwalt-class destroyer. The order calls for the firm to deliver total ship computing environment hardware, and software research, test and development for the Zumwalt—the largest and most technologically advanced guided missile surface combatant ship in the world. Work will be performed across the country, with 46 percent place in Portsmouth, Rhode Island., and the work is expected to be completed by September 2018.

August 14/17: Rolls Royce Marine North America has won a $27.3 million US Navy contract to provide parts and engineering services on power plants for DDG 1000 Zumwalt destroyers. The agreement includes item orders, mounting equipment and other services for DDG 1000 gas-turbine generators, which provide the destroyer’s main source of electric power. Work will be conducted in Indianapolis, Ind., and Walpole, Mass., and is scheduled for completion by September 2022. The power plants are designed for future weapons systems like electromagnetic railguns and lasers, which would require huge amounts of electricity to operate.

June 30/17: BAE Systems and Leonardo are to team up in an effort to offer the latter’s Vulcano guided munitions to the US Navy. Designed in a variety of sizes for the 76mm, 127mm naval guns and 155mm land artillery systems, the joint effort will see the munitions modified to be fired from BAE’s Advanced Gun System (AGS), which is currently installed on the Navy’s Zumwalt-class destroyers. The firms will also seek to offer the munition for use with the M777 and M109 howitzers for the US military.

September 15/15: The final Zumwalt-class destroyer undergoing construction by General Dynamics Bath Ironworks – the future USS Lyndon B. Johnson (DDG 1002) – is facing the chop by an independent team of Pentagon cost assessors, with the third-in-class vessel already under construction. Estimated to cost $3.5 billion, the destroyer was originally supposed to be the third of 32 destroyers, with numbers revised down to first eight then three ships. Cancelling the third ship would effectively cancel the most cost-efficient of the three, as the line becomes more streamlined through each iteration of construction.

Oct 12/14: Weapons. The US Navy has removed BAE’s Mk.110 57mm naval gun from their DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class ships, but it wasn’t clear why (q.v. Aug 5/14). Current revelations now say that the 30mm Mk.46 RWS did better against key target types like small boats than the Mk.110 or notional 76mm guns. That’s more than slightly surprising to some observers, who note that a 30mm cannon’s lethal range is about 1 mile rather than 4-6 miles – but the Navy is saying that they were equally surprised. Program Manager Capt. Jim Downey:

“They were significantly over-modeled on the lethality…. The results of the actual live test-fire data was that the round was not as effective as modeled…. it gets into the range of the threat – the approach of the threat, what the make-up of the threat is and how it would maneuver, how it would fire against our ship. There is a whole series of parameters that are very specific on what the threat is and how you take it out through a layer of defenses…. not what we expected to see.”

Downey categorically denies that the Mk.110’s 10+ ton weight difference was an issue, but doesn’t mention cost. Interestingly, his program’s test findings haven’t been shared with other NAVSEA entities like PEO LCS, let alone the Coast Guard who uses the gun on some cutters. The Navy is working on creating those mechanisms, but they don’t exist yet. Defense News, “Experts Question US Navy’s Decision To Swap Out DDG 1000’s Secondary Gun”.

Oct 2/14: Support. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $6.5 million contract modification for FY 2015 Zumwalt class services engineering efforts, supporting their Mission Systems Equipment (MSE). Raytheon is already the contractor lead for class MSE, and the support contract involves MSE design and analysis, engineering and life cycle supportability, architecture and design studies, concept of operations, crewing, mission and requirements analyses, interoperability, mission support services, and test & evaluation.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, Rhode Island (48%), Tewksbury, MA (26%), and Sudbury, MA (26%), and is expected to be complete by September 2015. US Navy Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract (N00024-10-C-5126).

Aug 7/14: DDG 1001. HII announces that they’ve delivered DDG 1001’s composite deckhouse. Ingalls built and delivered the composite deckhouse and hangar for DDGs 1000 and 1001 at the company’s Composite Center of Excellence in Gulfport, MS, but this will be the last one (q.v. Sept 4/13, Aug 2/13).

The deckhouse will be placed on a barge and shipped to General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Maine, to be integrated onto the steel hull of DDG 1001. Sources: HII, “Ingalls Shipbuilding Delivers Composite Deckhouse for Michael Monsoor (DDG 1001)”.

Aug 5/14: Weapons. The US Navy discusses the switch away from Mk.110 57mm secondary guns and their tri-mode ammunition, to much smaller Mk.46 30mm guns.

“The results of the analysis for alternative systems to the Mk 110 CIGS [through 2010] were not conclusive enough to recommend a shift in plan.,” but a 2012 review “concluded that the MK46 was more effective than the MK110 CIGS…. In addition to the increased capability, the change from MK110 to Mk 46 resulted in reduction in weight and significant cost avoidance, while still meeting requirements…”

The Mk.110 has a maximum range of about 9 nautical miles, with fuzing modes and rates of fire that can deal with boats, helicopters, or even incoming missiles. Its 30mm replacement has a maximum range of around 2 miles, a lower rate of fire, and lacks the 57mm shell’s fuzing options. It seems to be a puzzling choice, unless it’s simply a weight shift or a sacrifice to shave a small amount off of ship costs. Sources: USNI, “Navy Swaps Out Anti-Swarm Boat Guns on DDG-1000s”.

Cost changes
(click to view full)

May 21/14: CRS Report. The Congressional Research Service talks about the Zumwalt and DDG-51 Flight III programs. This bit about the Zumwalts’ cost history is useful:

“Some of the cost growth in the earlier years in the table was caused by the truncation of the DDG- 1000 program from seven ships to three, which caused some class-wide procurement-rated costs…. a series of incremental, year-by-year movements away from an earlier Navy cost estimate for the program, and toward a higher estimate developed by Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation (CAPE) office within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). As one consequence of a [2010] Nunn-McCurdy cost breach… the Navy was directed to fund the DDG-1000 program to CAPE’s higher cost estimate for the period FY2011-FY2015, and to the Navy’s cost estimate for FY2016 and beyond. The Navy states that it has been implementing this directive in a year-by-year fashion with each budget submission since 2010, moving incrementally closer each year to CAPE’s higher estimate. The Navy states that even with the cost growth shown in the table, the DDG-1000 program as of the FY2015 budget submission is still about 3% below the program’s rebaselined starting point…”

Sources: CRS, “Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress” update (April 8 and June 25) | USNI, “Two Billion Dollar DDG-1000 Cost Growth Explained”.

Christening

April 12/14: DDG 1000. USS Zumwalt is christened, commander by… Captain James Kirk. Not a joke.

Formal delivery is expected in September 2014. Sources: Pentagon, “Navy to Christen future USS Zumwalt, New Class of Destroyer” | Inquisitr, “USS Zumwalt Destroyer To Have Captain James Kirk At The Helm [Video]”

Zumwalt christened

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. A subsequent CRS report offers a full breakdown:

“The Navy estimates the combined procurement cost of the two DDG-51s requested for procurement in FY2015 at $2,969.4 million, or an average of $1,484.7 million each. The two ships have received a total of $297.9 million in prior-year advance procurement (AP) funding. The Navy’s proposed FY2015 budget requests the remaining $2,671.4 million to complete the two ships’ combined procurement cost.”

Sources: USN, PB15 Press Briefing [PDF] | CRS, “Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress” update (April 8 and June 25).

Oct 28/13: Float-out. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works successfully launches the DDG 1000 Zumwalt from a floating dry dock, then moors it to a pier on the Kennebec River for final fitting-out.

Construction began in February 2009, and Bath Iron Works will deliver the completed ship in late 2014. Navy tests and trials will follow, and the current schedule would achieve Initial Operating Capability in 2016. Sources: USN, “First Zumwalt Class Destroyer Launched”.

Oct 22/13: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $58 million fixed-price incentive, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for deferred mission systems equipment. The purpose of this modification is to complete the remaining MSE for DDG 1000 and DDG 1001, buy the remaining long-lead mission systems equipment for DDG 1002, and do one-time engineering related to mission system equipment design and development.

DDG 1002 will get”non-hatchable” Mission Systems Equipment. This involves items that are too large to be installed after the ship is built, as they can’t fit through the ship’s hatches. DDG 1002 Lyndon Johnson’s Mk57 VLS, AN/SQQ-90 sonar, etc. all fall into this category. Deferred MSE items for Zumwalt and Michael Monsoor include the MK57 VLS Launcher’s electronics and mechanical kits, below-deck radio terminals for external communications, and dry-end portions of the sonar suite.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (56%), Dallastown, PA (24%); Minneapolis, MN (16%), and Moorestown, NJ (4%), and is expected to be complete by April 2017.

Oct 11/13: Christening of USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000), originally scheduled for Oct 19/13, is postponed by the Navy because of the government shutdown.

FY 2013

DDG 1000 deckhouse delivered & fitted; Agile software development.

Deckhouse erection
click for video

Sept 26/13: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine, is being awarded a $13.3 million contract modification for material and labor to complete work on the DDG 1000 deckhouse, which was provided by Northrop Grumman. $6.7 million in FY 2012 USN Shipbuilding and Conversion funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Bath, Maine, and is expected to be complete by June 2014. The USN Supervisor of Shipbuilding, Conversion, and Repair in Bath, Maine (N00024-06-C-2303).

Sept 25/13: Sub-contractors. Huntington Ingalls Industries announces that they’ve delivered DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor’s 220 ton composite hangar. This follows the peripheral vertical launch system (PVLS) delivery in July 2013, and the deckhouse delivery expected in 1st quarter of 2014 will complete the company’s work on the DDG 1000 program. Sources: HII release, Sept 25/13.

Sept 4/13: Industrial. HII will be closing its Composite Center of Excellence in Gulfport, MS, once they’ve completed work on DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor’s deckhouse and the mast of LPD 27 Portland. That work is expected to finish in early 2014, with closure expected by May.

Total costs of the shut-down are expected to be about $59 million, with over 400 employees affected. Sources: HII, Sept 4/13 release.

Aug 11/13: Industrial. HII’s Composite Center of Excellence in Gulfport, MS is unsure of its future. Fabrication of masts for the LPD-17 San Antonio Class is ending, and the DDG 1002 deckhouse decision shortens their transition period. NAVSEA spokesman Chris Johnson gives $767 million as HII’s estimate for the value of their DDG 1000 & 1001 contracts, and they’ll still be contracted for the aft PVLS cells on DDG 1002, but they’ll need more than that.

Tim Colton suggests selling the center to their next-door neighbor Gulf Coast Shipyard Group, who is “building and repairing all types and sizes of naval and commercial boats, in steel, aluminum and composites, for markets that Ingalls has never had a chance of penetrating.” Sources: Virginian-Pilot, “Navy switch could hurt Ingalls Miss. composite center” | Time Colton’s Maritime Memos, “Curious Developments in Bath”.

Aug 3/13: Industrial. GD Bath Iron Works requests a tax break from Bath, Maine. They want to improve areas like their blast and pain facilities, and create a new 110-foot-high, 51,315-square-foot outfitting hall by 2015. Their submission is blunt about why they want the funds, citing a recent DDG-51 program award that saw them get 4 ships to HII’s 5, calling that “a strong message about where BIW stands relative to its competition.”

Tim Colton is even blunter:

“BIW is not expanding. It already has way more capacity than it needs…. new shop is designed to improve its productivity and, potentially, increase its throughput with minimal increase in employment…. BIW needs a second program [beyond the DDG-51s] for long-term security…. Its best bet is the LSD program and they probably regret now that they traded one third of the LPD 17 program for extra DDGs, after designing their land-level facility specifically for LPD construction. And then there’s the polar icebreaker program, which may be just their thing.”

Sources: Kennebec Journal, “BIW asks Bath for tax break to expand shipyard” | Time Colton’s Maritime Memos, “Curious Developments in Bath.”

Aug 2/13: DDG 1002. GD Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $212 million firm target fixed-price incentive to build a steel (not composite this time, q.v. March 28/13) deckhouse and hangar superstructure for DDG 1002 Lyndon B. Johnson, and supply the ship’s aft PVLS launchers. That leaves only DDG 1002’s mission systems contract to finish the order. All funds are committed immediately, using a combination of FY 2010 and FY 2013 shipbuilding dollars.

That steel deckhouse will be considerably heavier than its composite counterparts. Subsequent reports involving NAVSEA spokesman Chris Johnson indicate that the Navy thinks they have enough weight margin in the ship to do it.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME (80.5%), Corona, CA (4.1%), Coatesville, PA (2.6%), South Portland, ME (1.4%) and other various locations with less than 1% each (11.4%), and is expected to be complete by December 2016. This contract was a limited competition solicited via FBO.gov by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-11-C-2306). Sources: Pentagon | BIW Aug 5/13 release | Virginian Pilot, “Navy switch could hurt Ingalls Miss. composite center”.

DDG 1002 will have a steel deckhouse

July 24/13: DDG 1001. HII announces that they’ve delivered DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor’s final aft PVLS assemblies to the US Navy a week early. They’ll go to GD Bath Iron Works, who is building the hull and performing final assembly.

HII manufactures the composite superstructure for DDG 1000 and 1001 at the company’s composite center of excellence in Gulfport, MS, and makes all of the ship’s 4-cell PVLS launchers in Pascagoula, MS. DDG 1001’s first 2 PVLS units were delivered in July 2012, and the rest of the work is expected to be complete in the Q1 2014. HII.

May 23/13: DDG 1001 Keel Laying. Formal keel-laying, which is actually the 4,400 ton, heavily outfitted mid-forebody section of the ship. The ship is named for Michael Monsoor, a Navy SEAL whose Medal of Honor information is an appropriate Memorial Day reminder. GD BIW [PDF].

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. As of December 2012, the first 2 ships were 80% and 48% complete, with all contracts awarded. TSCE Release 6 software has begun integration and testing, and the follow-on release that would activate the mission systems is under contract.

Even at this late stage, issues remain. Most critical technologies won’t be fully mature and demonstrated in a realistic environment until after they’re installed in DDG 1000. One such technology, the GPS-guided LRLAP long-range shell, recently had its rocket motor redesigned and tested.

DDG 1002 began fabrication in April 2012, with pending contracts for the deckhouse, hangar, aft peripheral vertical launching system, and mission systems equipment. The Navy is considering a downgrade of the deckhouse to save money. Composite materials are better for stealth, but steel is cheaper, and both shipyards report that it’s a feasible alternative.

March 19/13: Support. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine receives an $18 million contract modification, exercising an option for DDG 1000 class services. This modification provides technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design to construction of DDG 1000 class ships.

They seem to need quite a few contracts for this.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by September 2013. FY 2013 Shipbuilding and Conversion funding is being used, and all funds are committed (N00024-06-C-2303).

Dec 28/12: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a not-to-exceed $169 million fixed-price incentive, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for deferred mission systems equipment for DDG 1000 and DDG 1001, scheduled critical DDG 1002 non-hatchable mission systems equipment, and non-recurring engineering applicable to mission system equipment design and development.

Discussion with Raytheon clarified that “non-hatchable” Mission Systems Equipment is too large to be installed after the ship is built, as it can’t fit through the ship’s hatches. DDG 1002 Lyndon Johnson’s Mk57 VLS, AN/SQQ-90 sonar, etc. all fall into this category. Deferred MSE items for Zumwalt and Michael Monsoor include the MK57 VLS Launcher’s electronics and mechanical kits, below-deck radio terminals for external communications, and dry-end portions of the sonar suite.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (37%); Largo, FL (14%); Marlborough, MA (14%); Portsmouth, RI (13.2%); Cordova, AL (10%); Andover, MA (7%); Tewksbury, MA (2%); Sudbury, MA (1.5%); San Diego, CA (1%), and Aberdeen, MD (0.3%), and is expected to be complete by May 2018. $117 million is committed immediately (N00024-10-C-5126). See also Raytheon.

Dec 14/12: DDG 1000. The future USS Zumwalt has its deckhouse superstructure attached to the ship’s hull. “General Dynamics Bath Iron Works Completes Historic DDG 1000 Deckhouse Module Erection” describes the 900-ton static lift in detail: it involves 4 cranes, lifting a 900-ton, 155 x 60 x 60 foot deckhouse about 100 feet in the air, and moving the 610-foot hull beneath the suspended module using the shipyard’s electro-hydraulic ship transfer system. Total tonnage involved was over 13,000 tons.

With the successful lift and integration of the deckhouse, 9 of 9 ultrablock units are now on land level at Bath Iron Works. Construction is now 80% complete, with ship launch and christening planned for 2013. Construction on DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor continues, with delivery planned in 2016. DDG 1002 Lyndon B. Johnson is expected to reach the Navy in 2018. US Navy | GD Bath Iron Works | Erection on video.

Nov 9/12: Support. Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA received an $19 million contract modification for Zumwalt class services engineering efforts, including participation in the joint test team. Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (50%); Andover, MA (15%); Moorestown, NJ (10%); Sudbury, MA (10%); Tewksbury, MA (10%); and San Diego, CA (5%); and is expected to be complete by December 2014. US Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-05-C-5346).

Nov 6/12: Agile software. Aviation Week quotes Bill Marcley, Raytheon’s DDG-1000 program manager and VP of Total Ship Mission Systems, who cites the firm’s use of agile software development processes for the ship’s voluminous software. Agile development methods have become common in high-tech industries, and are spreading, but they’re a very uncommon approach in the defense industry. They focus on delivering small bits of working and tested software in a series of short timelines, generally under a month each. The most common status quo alternative involves a series of months-long sequential or slightly overlapping “waterfall” stages of specification, development, testing, and fixes that each encompass the entire project.

Air and missile defense are current foci for Raytheon’s agile ‘stories,’ and a major software review is scheduled for December 2012. Meanwhile, the Navy is sitting in on the scrum teams’ weekly software status reviews, and monthly combat system reviews. One of agile’s benefits is a greater level of assurance and visibility into project progress. It will be interesting to see if this approach spreads within the firm, and the industry. Aviation Week | See also DID: “Sharpen Yourself: The Agile Software Development Trend”

Oct 9/11: Deckhouse. HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding division has delivered DDG 1000 Zumwalt’s 900-ton composite deckhouse to the U.S. Navy. The deckhouse contains the ship’s bridge, radars, antennas and intake/exhaust systems, and will be welded to DDG 1000 at the steel base plates that are bolted to the core composite structure. Ingalls has also delivered DDG 1000’s composite hangar and aft PVLS units, and has begun work on the composite components for DDG 1001. HII.

DDG 1000 deckhouse

Oct 1/12: HII in Pascagoula, MS receives an $11.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercising an option for FY 2013 class services for the Zumwalt Class.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by July 2013 (N00024-06-C-2304).

FY 2012

DDG 1000 Zumwalt keel-laying; Could DDG-51 Flight III cost spirals reignite the DDG-1000s?

Deckhouse build
(click to view full)

Sept 19/12: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $38.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercising options for additional class and engineering services, involving “technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design.” The firm describes this work as “manufacturing support services such as engineering, design, production control, accuracy control and information technology… [plus] program management, contract and financial management, procurement and configuration/data management.”

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by October 2013 (N00024-11-C-2306). See also GD release.

Sept 5/12: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $26 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercising options for additional class and engineering services involving “technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design.” Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by March 2013 (N00024-11-C-2306).

A piece in the Bangor Daily News may offer a more revealing and candid explanation for these continued contracts, so late into the construction process:

Rep. Chellie Pingree echoed the senators’ statements and said the contract will ensure steady design work at BIW through March. “The contract will help keep workers on the job designing and building the DDG 1000 this winter,” she said. “It’s critical to keep up the employment levels at the yard.”

Aug 16/12: Huntington Ingalls Industries in Pascagoula, MS receives a $7.2 million contract modification for research, development, test, and technical services in support of DDG 1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer. DDG 1000 technical services include technology development, analytical modeling, qualification of materials, potential design/process improvements, and design excursions.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (80%), and Gulfport, MS (20%), and is expected to complete by September 2013 (N00024-06-C-2304).

June 26/12: Move it on over. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $9.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification. It will pay for the fabrication of cradles, fixtures, and other equipment that are necessary to safely and securely transport their Zumwalt Class assemblies from HII in Pascagoula, MS, to Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by June 2014 (N00024-06-C-2304).

May 31/12: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $17 million contract modification, exercising an option for “technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design to support construction and the maintenance of the ship design.” Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-06-C-2303).

April 30/12: Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $11.5 million contract modification, exercising an option for FY 2012 class services in support of Zumwalt Class product fabrication, delivery, engineering, engineering support and integrated logistics support.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by October 2012 (N00024-06-C-2304).

April 16/12: DDG 1002 named. Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announces that the last planned ship of class, DDG 1002, will be named after President Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson was a naval officer in the Pacific theater during World War 2, so all 3 ships have been named after Navy personnel, but American ships named after Presidents have been American carriers. The lone exception had been Jimmy Carter, a submariner who had the 3rd and last SSN-21 Seawolf Class fast attack submarine named after him.

We can’t wait until the new ship visits Cam Ranh Bay. US Navy | US DoD.

April 16/12: Sonar. Raytheon announces delivery of DDG 1000 Zumwalt’s dual-frequency AN/SQQ-90 tactical sonar suite, completely assembled and integrated into its Electronic Modular Enclosure (EME). Both the dual-band hull sonar and the EME represent firsts for American naval ships, and the system can reportedly be operated by 1/3 the number of crew members required for the AN/SQQ-89 systems on current Arleigh Burke Class destroyers and Ticonderoga cruisers.

The AN/SQQ-90 includes the AN/SQS-60 hull-mounted mid-frequency sonar; the AN/SQS-61 hull-mounted high-frequency sonar; and the AN/SQR-20 multi-function towed array sonar and handling system. The EME takes a page from the TSCE, in that it efficiently packages the commercial off-the-shelf electronics that power the hull-mounted sonars with shock mitigation, electromagnetic interference protection, thermal conditioning, security and vibration isolation. The electronics to power and control the ship’s hull-mounted sonar arrive in a single, smaller package that’s fully integrated and tested, including the transmit/receive amplifiers, and associated processors that distribute signals and data to the ship’s command center.

April 2/12: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $9.4 million contract modification, exercising an option for additional class services. Specifically, BIW will provide “technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design to support construction and the maintenance of the ship design.”

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to complete by May 2012 (N00024-06-C-2303).

March 2012: The Pentagon’s Developmental Test and Evaluation and Systems Engineering’s FY 2011 annual report offers an update on the class’ IPS and radar testing:

“The preparations and [land based] testing at the [all-electric Integrated Power Systems’] LBTS were exemplary and undoubtedly resulted in avoiding cost and delay… DDG 1000 program is executing to the current approved TEMP [testing program]. The TEMP is inadequate in that it lacks details of the [SYPY-3 Multi-function Radar’s added Volume Search] T&E. Revision E, on schedule for submission for approval in FY 2012, will contain details of the MFR VS test program.”

March 30/12: GAO report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012. Lead ship delivery is expected in July 2014, with the class expected to be ready to deploy by July 2016. Expected cost per ship remains around $3.5 billion, where it has been for some time now. A number of technologies remain delayed, however, even though the Zumwalt Class has spent more than 3.5x its original R&D projections:

“Three of DDG 1000’s 12 critical technologies are currently mature and the integrated deckhouse will be delivered to the first ship for installation in fiscal year 2012. However, the remaining eight technologies will not be demonstrated in a realistic environment until after ship installation…

“According to program officials, [TSCE] software release 5 has been completed and was used in land-based testing in fiscal year 2011. The program has made changes to release 6, and has prioritized the software needed to support shipyard delivery over… activating the mission systems. This functionality was moved out of the releases and will be developed as part of a spiral… the gun system’s long-range land-attack projectile [LRLAP] has encountered delays, primarily due to problems with its rocket motor. The Navy plans to finalize and test the rocket motor design by March 2012… guided flight tests using older rocket motor designs… demonstrated that the projectile can meet its accuracy and range requirements… Shipbuilders have experienced several challenges in constructing the first and second ships, including issues with the manufacture and installation of certain composite materials.”

Jan 31/12: AGS. BAE Systems in Minneapolis, MN receives a maximum $52 million contract modification, exercising the option for DDG 1002’s Advanced Gun System (AGS). This seems to finalize the Oct 26/11 contract at $125 million.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (37%); Cordova, AL (30%); Minneapolis, MN (28%); and Burlington, VT (5%), and is expected to be complete by January 2018 (N00024-12-C-5311).

December 2011: Hand-over. The Pentagon’s Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (AT&L) delegates authority for future DDG 1000 acquisition decisions to the Navy. Source: GAO.

Dec 22/11: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $17.6 million contract, exercising an option for DDG 1000 class services, esp. technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design to support construction, and the maintenance of the ship design profile.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by April 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12 (N00024-06-C-2303).

Dec 16/11: TSCE order. Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA receives a multi-year, not-to-exceed $254 million letter contract modification. They’ll deliver a set of DDG 1000 Total Ship Computing Environment software for the US Navy’s Self Defense Test Ship, and support post-delivery and post-shakedown work involving the former Spruance Class destroyer Paul F. Foster [DD 964, now SDTS]. They’ll also perform SPY-3 volume search software and firmware development, as their active X-band radar takes over those functions from Lockheed Martin’s active S-band SPY-4. The final set of exercised options and changes here involve general software maintenance in support of the DDG-1000 program.

Work will run until January 2016; $11 million will be provided upon contract award, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year on Sept 30/12. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (40%); Portsmouth, RI (24.8%); Marlborough, MA (12.7%); Fort Wayne, IN (10.3%); Sudbury, MA (5.8%); Dahlgren, VA (2.7%); Indianapolis, IN (2.3%); and San Diego, CA (1.4%). (N00024-10-C-5126). See also Raytheon’s release says that the DDG 1000 program employs more than 800 Raytheon employees, as well as by approximately 1,800 subcontractors and supplier partners in 43 states across the country.

Dec 2/11: 1002 lead-in. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $46.1 million contract modification to procure long lead time material and related support for DDG 1002. A copy of their recent release quotes DDG 1000 program manager Karrie Trauth, who calls the contract strategic to the firm because of the advanced composite shipbuilding capabilities it supports.

Work will be performed at the company’s Composite Center of Excellence in Gulfport/ Pascagoula, MS (28%); as well as Benicia, CA (24%); Burns Harbor, IN (10%); Corona, CA (9%); Monroe, CT (4%); Deerpark, TX (3%); Patterson, NJ (3%); and other various locations with less than 1% of the total (19%). Work is expected to complete by March 2012 (N00024-06-C-2304). See also MarineLog.

Nov 18/11: 1000 keel-laying. The Zumwalt’s Keel is formally laid, in the form of a 4,000 ton ultrablock (vid. Oct 22/11 entry). The physical change is a corollary of using modern block construction techniques. GD-BIW.

Nov 16/11: DDG-51 or Zumwalt? Jane’s Navy International is reporting that DDG-51 flight III destroyers with the new AMDR radar and hybrid propulsion drives could cost $3-4 billion each.

If that’s true, it’s about the same cost as a DDG-1000 ship, in return for less performance, more vulnerability, and less future upgrade space. AMDR isn’t a final design yet, so it’s still worthwhile to ask what it could cost to give the Flight IIIs’ radar and combat systems ballistic missile defense capabilities – R&D for the function doesn’t go away when it’s rolled into a separate program. If the Flight III cost estimate is true, it raises the question of why that would be a worthwhile use of funds, and re-opens the issue of whether continuing DDG-1000 production and upgrades might make more sense. DoD Buzz.

Nov 10/11: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $20.7 million contract modification, exercising options for FY 2012’s DDG-1000 program engineering, production, and integration services. That doesn’t mean the whole ship, just Raytheon’s Mission Systems Integrator role. $5.4 million has already been committed, and the rest will follow if needed.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (25%); Tewksbury, MA (25%); Marlboro, MA (20%); Dulles, VA (20%); San Diego, CA (5%); and Alexandria, VA (5%), and is expected to be complete by November 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year (N00024-10-C-5126).

Nov 7/11: Aviation Week:

“Enhanced ballistic missile defense (BMD) missions will stretch the future U.S. Navy destroyer force beyond its fleet limits as well as put even more pressure on the service’s already stressed funding accounts, according to an Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) analysis and a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report.”

Nov 1/11: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $14.4 million contract modification, exercising options for DDG 1000 class services and class logistics services associated with detail design and construction. Logistics services include development of training curriculum, supply support documentation, maintenance analyses, and configuration status accounting. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by November 2012 (N00024-06-C-2303).

Oct 31/11: Huntington Ingalls, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS received a $13 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification, exercising FY 2012 Zumwalt destroyer class services. They’ll support fabrication, delivery, engineering, and engineering support. Ingalls is building the deckhouse, hangar and peripheral vertical launch systems for DDG 1000 and DDG 1001, with plans to build a third. The deckhouse for DDG 1000 is expected to be delivered in Q2 2012. As HII’s DDG 1000 program manager Karrie Trauth notes:

“This contract modification provides additional funding for the composite work we’re doing on the deckhouse for this shipbuilding program… This is a significant program for our composite shipbuilders in Gulfport, and this award ensures the valuable expertise and technological advancements in composites continue through the detail design and construction of these ships.”

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by April 2012 (N00024-06-C-2304).

Oct 26/11: AGS. An unfinalized $73 million fixed-price incentive-fee firm target contract action for the Advanced Gun System (AGS) for DDG 1002, the last planned Zumwalt Class ship. This contract includes options, which could bring its cumulative value to $168 million.

Work will be performed in Louisville, KY (40%), Minneapolis, MN (30%), and Cordova, AL (30%), and is expected to be complete by January 2018. This contract was not competitively procured (N00024-12-C-5311).

Oct 22/11: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works completes the largest and most complex ship module movement ever executed at the shipyard, as the move the mid-forebody section of Zumwalt 900 feet inside the Ultra Hall construction facility. The heavily outfitted module is about 180 feet long, over 60 feet high and weighs more than 4,000 tons. The next step will be to integrate it with 3 additional “ultra units” that comprise the ship’s unique wave-piercing hull form. GD-BIW [PDF]

FY 2011

DDG-1001 and 1002 contracts, at last; Program update, incl. TSCE delays.

DDG 1000 Ultrablock
(click to view full)

Sept 30/11: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $13 million contract modification for additional class services associated with detail design and construction. It’s mostly industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detail design, to support construction, and ship design updates based on feedback. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-06-C-2303).

Sept 29/11: Design. Exactly the same as the Sept 30/11 contract, but $22.5 million, under another agreement that appears to be the go-forward contract for DDG 1000 class services (N00024-11-C-2306).

Sept 25/11: Progress report. Defense News offers a progress report from program manager Capt. James Downey. Negotiations are now under way with major suppliers HII (composite superstructure, some hull), Raytheon (Radar, electronics, combat system), and BAE (gun, launchers) for DDG 1001 and 1002, and the Navy hopes to come in slightly under DDG 1000’s $3 billion or so overall cost. The whole program is said to be within current time and budget, but that’s not the same as original plans because there have been many revisions over the years.

Tests of the AIM all-electric power system, new AGS guns & LRLAP precision shells, and EMEs (electronic modular enclosures) have gone well, EMEs are already shipping, and re-work on delivered components is under 1%. DDG 1000 Zumwalt is expected to be 60% complete at its keel-laying on Nov 17/11, because of the ship’s modular block construction approach. At 4,000 tons, the forward midbody block alone is heavier than some frigates. The 1,000+ ton composite superstructure is more than 75% complete, and is expected to be barged from Mississippi to Maine in late spring 2012. DDG 1000 Zumwalt is scheduled for launch in July 2013, with initial delivery set for 2014, and completion of the combat system to follow in 2015.

That’s an odd sequence, and managing it effectively will require the Navy to take delivery without releasing the contractors from financial responsibility for fixes – something the Navy has not always been able to do. Part of the issue involves delays in the Total Ship Computing Environment, whose 6th software release will start testing in January 2012, with a combat system release to follow. Both must then be tested on a ship equipped with all of the systems they control, which doesn’t exist yet, and that takes more time. TSCE 6 is scheduled for final delivery from Raytheon in January 2013, but until the combat system gets the final go-ahead in 2015, the ship won’t really be operational, regardless of its official status. The good news, such as it is, is that this qualification is only a problem once – unless issues are discovered later in the ship’s career. DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor is currently about 25% complete, and scheduled for delivery in 2015, so delays to the combat system could affect both ships. DDG 1002 construction won’t really start until spring 2012.

Sept 15/11: 1001 & 1002 contract. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $1.826 billion fixed-price-incentive contract to build DDG 1001 and DDG 1002, the 1st major Zumwalt Class contract since February 2008. This contract includes options which could raise its value to $2.002 billion. Work will be performed in Bath, ME (59.9%); Parsippany, NJ (3.5%); Coatesville, PA (3.2%); Falls Church, VA (2.6%); Pittsburgh, PA (1.3%); Augusta, ME (1.3%); and other various locations (28.2%), each having less than 1%. This contract was not competitively procured.

Discussions with GD BIW clarified this is the full shipbuilder’s contract for both ships, which includes remaining construction, integration of many expensive items like the radars, weapons, etc. which are bought separately by the government, and initial testing/ qualification work. The September 2001 contract builds on long-lead materials and initial fabrication that have been bought for both DDG 1001 and 1002, using funds from the February 2008 contract, and subsequent interim awards.

At present, DDG-1000 Zumwalt is over 50% complete, and is scheduled to be delivered in 2014. DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor is currently scheduled for delivery in December 2015, and DDG 1002 is scheduled for delivery in February 2018. (N00024-11-C-2306). See also GD BIW | Sen. Snowe [R-ME].

Aug 4/11: 1001 & 1002 lead-in. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a not-to-exceed $110.8 million contract modification for more long lead time construction on DDG 1001, long lead time material for DDG 1002, and engineering and production support services. It’s not the big production contract everyone is expecting, but it is the first large award in over 2 years, and a necessary precursor to the full production deal.

Work will be performed in Coatesville, PA (23.3%); Erie, PA (13%); Walpole, MA (12.9%); Parsippany, NJ (11.1%); Loanhead, Midlothian, United Kingdom (5.4%); Deer Park, TX (5.4%); Newton Square, PA (4.5%); Kingsford, MI (4.4%); Milwaukee, WI (2.8%); South Portland, ME (2.7%); and other various locations with less than 2% (14.5%). Work is expected to be complete by October 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303).

July 26/11: After a gap of more than 2 years since the last major contract for this ship class, the US Navy has reached an agreement with General Dynamics-Bath Iron Works for pricing, terms and conditions for DDGs 1001 and 1002. Final contract details are being worked out, and the multi-billion dollar award is expected before the end of FY 2011.

With agreement reached, a 2011 budget passed, and Northrop Grumman’s shipbuilding changes resolved, all elements are now in place for the next step. Once construction on the Zumwalts is finished, Bath Iron Works will continue building DDG-51 destroyers, but the deal that gave it all 3 Zumwalts means BIW is no longer the DDG-51’s lead yard. Sen. Susan Collins [R-ME] | Maine’s Morning Sentinel | Defense News | Portland Press Herald.

July 22/11: IPS. US Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Gary Roughead observes a live test of the DDG 1000 Integrated Power System (IPS) at Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division’s land-based Ship Systems Engineering Station (NSWCCD-SSES). The next IPS test, scheduled for early 2012, will integrate and test portions of the DDG 1000 Engineering Control System software with the IPS, to verify compatibility.

The US Navy’s July 28/11 release adds that DDG 1000 Zumwalt is more than 50% complete and scheduled to deliver in FY 2014, with an Initial Operating Capability in FY 2016. DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor is about 20% complete, as key contracts must be forthcoming before much more build work can proceed.

May 11/11: IPS. The U.S. Navy successfully tests DDG 1000’s Integrated Power System (IPS) at full power, at the Philadelphia Land Based Test Site. The test included 1 of 2 shipboard shaft lines, 1 main and 1 auxiliary gas turbine generator set, all 4 high voltage switchboards, 2 of 4 shipboard electrical zones of Integrated Fight Through Power (IFTP) conversion equipment, and 1 of 2 propulsion tandem advanced induction motors with their variable control drives.

The IPS for an all-electric ship like the Zumwalt generates all ship electric power, then distributes and converts it for all ship loads, including electric propulsion, combat systems and ship services. defpro.

May 17/11: 1001 lead-in. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a not-to-exceed $29.9 million contract modification for DDG 1001 long-lead-time materials, engineering and support services. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by July 2011. (N00024-06-C-2303).

May 4/11: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives an $18.8 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for “technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detailed design to support construction and the maintenance of a safe and operable ship design.”

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by July 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303). Meanwhile, the pattern continues – a lot of minor, “keep ’em working” contracts, without a major purchase contract (vid. Feb 15/11 entry).

March 30/11: TSCE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $7.6 million contract modification for class services engineering efforts involving their Total Ship Computing Environment.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (29%); Tewksbury, MA (26%); Sudbury, MA (26%); Moorestown, NJ (10%); Marlboro, MA (6%); Herndon, VA (1%); Houston, TX (1%); Leesburg, VA (0.5%); and Minneapolis, MN (0.5%). Work is expected to be complete by November 2011, but $5.1 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (N00024-10-C-5126).

March 21/11: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $10.9 million contract modification, exercising an option for DDG-1000 class services engineering. Efforts include non-recurring engineering in support of mission systems equipment (MSE) system/design verification testing; 1st article factory test site preparation and plans; maintenance of MSE packaging, transportation, assembly, activation, and preservation documentation; maintenance of shipboard MSE installation and check-out plans; as well as the measurement, tracking, and reporting of MSE weight and power usage documentation to support the shipbuilders in meeting lead ship integration and construction schedules.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (50%); Andover, MA (15%); Moorestown, NJ (10%); Sudbury, MA (10%); Tewksbury, MA (10%); and San Diego, CA (5%), and is expected to be complete by December 2014 (N00024-05-C-5346).

March 18/11: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a not-to-exceed $28 million contract modification for long lead time material and engineering and support services for DDG 1001, the Michael Monsoor.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME (77.49%); Middletown, NY (7.8%); Stamford, CT (2.28%); Willimantic, CT (2.01%); South Portland, ME (1.69%); Windsor, CT (1.65%); York, PA (1.64%); and various other locations of less than 1.64% each (totaling 5.44%), and is expected to be complete by June 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303). See Feb 15/11 entry, re: efforts to avoid layoffs at Bath Iron Works.

March 10/11: CSC announces a Seaport-e task order from the U.S. Navy to provide engineering and program support for PMS-500, the DDG 1000’s program office. The task order has a 1-year base period and 4 one-year options, bringing the estimated total 5-year value to $110 million.

Under the terms of the task order, CSC will provide engineering and program management support for development, design, building, outfitting and testing, including program, business, financial and risk management; software and mission systems integration; hull, mechanical and electrical systems engineering; and naval architecture.

Feb 15/11: Don’t empty the Bath. The Portland Press-Herald reports that:

“The long-term details aren’t all worked out yet, but the Navy will send enough money to Bath Iron Works to avoid lay-offs at least through April while contracts are finalized for two more DDG-1000 destroyers. Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-1st, said she got that promise earlier today from Navy Secretary Ray Mabus.”

Perusal of this article will bear out the issue at hand. The last significant DDG 1000 program contract was Feb 15/08. At this point, DDG 1000 is mostly funded, and long-lead items for DDG 1001 are funded, but contracts do not exist yet to finish DDG 1001, and build DDG 1002. Bath Iron Works and the US Navy are reportedly still negotiating, and the current budgetary uncertainty can’t be helping.

Feb 14/11: FY 2012 request. The Pentagon issues its FY 2012 budget request, even as the disaster of the 111th Congress leaves the Navy uncertain of its FY 2011 funding, and forces it to make emergency maintenance cuts and other related measures.

For FY 2012, the Zumwalt Class program would receive $453.7 million. US Navy FY 2012 Budget: Shipbuilding & Conversion [PDF].

Feb 14/11: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $7.9 million contract modification, exercising options for DDG-1000 program engineering, integration, and production services like test and evaluation, design solution, and integrated logistics support.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (65%), Dulles, VA (25%), Largo, FL (8%), Tewksbury, MA (1%) and Washington, DC (1%), and is expected to be complete by November 2011. $1,904,468 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/11 (N00024-10-C-5126).

Feb 7/11: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $6.7 million contract modification for detail design systems engineering services before the 1st ship’s Post Shakedown Availability. Work includes detail design excursions, shock qualification, production process prototype manufacturing, and life cycle support services. Work will be performed in Bath, ME and is expected to be complete by September 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303).

Jan 25/11: NAVDDX. Raytheon announces that the US Navy successfully tested their Next Generation Navigation System (NAVDDX). System development was a joint effort between Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) and the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific in San Diego, CaA, through a private party sales agreement.

NAVDDX adheres to the TSCE standards of open architecture, and display of its product (navigation and high-precision time data) to any ship display on board. This makes it a potential add-on to other ships receiving TSCE-derived systems during overhauls, like the CVN-68 Nimitz Class carriers and LPD-17 San Antonio Class amphibious assault ships.

Jan 11/11: Control Systems. Northrop Grumman Corporation says that it has delivered Engineering Control System (ECS) Units for the first 2 Zumwalt ships to Raytheon IDS, nearly 6 months ahead of schedule and under budget. Each ship set involves 16 Distributed Control Units (DCUs) and 180 Remote Terminal Units (RTUs). The ECS takes in all of the destroyer’s hull, mechanical and electrical (HME) signals, which come from a wide variety of systems such as the fire detection systems and the integrated power plant. The RTU then distributes the signals to the DCU for analysis and control.

The company produced and assembled two shipsets of 16 DCUs and 180 RTUs each, for a total of 392 units. The July 2008 cost-plus-incentive-fee contract had a scheduled completion date of May 31/11. Production and assembly of the units were completed 23 weeks ahead of schedule, and inspection and sell-off tasks will be completed in the weeks to come. Northrop Grumman is also developing ensemble software for the DCUs, under a different contract.

Jan 7/10: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $15 million contract modification, exercising an option for DDG 1000 class services engineering efforts to help test mission systems equipment, produce test documentation, conduct component and design level verification tests, and maintain related design and test class documentation.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (40%); Moorestown, NJ (26%); Sudbury, MA (12%); Tewksbury, MA (8%); San Diego, CA (6%); Marlborough, MA (3%); Minneapolis, MN (3%); and Largo, FL (2%), and is expected to be complete by September 2012 (N00024-05-C-5346).

Dec 29/10: Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $12 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification to ship government-furnished equipment from Northrup Grumman Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, MS, to Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME. This includes material required for the fabrication of cradles, fixtures, and other necessary equipment that are necessary to safely and securely transport these products. Northrop Grumman is no longer a full shipbuilding partner to the program, but it still provides the ships’ composite-built superstructure.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by December 2011 (N00024-06-C-2304).

Dec 22/10: 1002 IPS. Converteam, Inc. in Pittsburgh, PA receives a $21.8 million contract modification for DDG 1002’s Integrated Power System high voltage subsystem, including the baseline tactical advanced induction motor and its associated motor drive, and the main turbine generator and auxiliary turbine generator harmonic filters. Work will be performed in Pittsburgh, PA, and is expected to be complete by August 2012 (N00024-09-C-4203).

Nov 29/10: Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $26.1 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification, exercising an option for FY 2011 class services in support of the DDG 1000 program. Services included product fabrication, delivery, engineering, and engineering support to integrated power system operations and the land-based test site; support for work to test and refine the ships’ radar cross section and other selected signatures; and integrated logistics support.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by October 2011 (N00024-06-C-2304).

Nov 12/10: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives an $8.5 million contract modification to provide additional systems engineering services associated with Zumwalt Class detail design and construction. Systems engineering efforts include detail design excursions, shock qualification, production process prototype manufacturing, and life-cycle support services before the initial ship’s Post Shakedown Availability.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by September 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303).

Nov 5/10: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, in Tewksbury, MA receives an $8.5 million contract modification, exercising options for Zumwalt Class engineering services. Work includes performing test and evaluation, design solution, shock qualification testing, training, and life time support class services for the parts of the ship that are Raytheon’s responsibility: TSCE, ship control systems, radar and combat system, PVLS launchers, etc.

Work will be performed in Dulles, VA (31.0%); Portsmouth, RI (19.7%); Moorestown, NJ (13.7%); San Diego, CA (11%); Sudbury, MA (6.6%); Bath, ME (5.5%); Philadelphia, PA (5.5%); Arlington, VA (5.5%); Tewksbury, MA (1.1%); and Washington, DC (0.4%). Work is expected to be complete by September 2011, and $3.8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, On Sept 30/10.

Nov 1/10: TSCE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $10.3 million modification to a previously awarded contract, exercising “an option for the next phase of production design verification for the Zumwalt destroyer program.” A Raytheon representative helped translate this into English:

“Raytheon will be taking the first units of DDG 1000’s Total Ship Computing Environment, command and control systems, and ship control systems and performing extensive testing to ensure that they meet all of the ship’s design requirements. This includes integration testing of subsystems as they are combined into larger systems.”

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (42.3%); Moorestown, NJ (36.6%); Portsmouth, RI (14.2%); Leesburg, VA (2.7%); Sudbury, MA (2.4%); San Diego, CA (1.1%); and Minneapolis, MN (0.7%). Work is expected to be complete by March 2012 (N00024-05-C-5346).

Oct 6/10: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME received a $27.1 million cost-plus-fixed fee contract modification, exercising an option for additional class services. Specifically, they’re on contract for technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the Zumwalt Class’ detailed design.

Whether it’s done on computers or on blueprint paper, there’s always a place for engineering where design meets reality. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by December 2010 (N00024-06-C-2303).

FY 2010

Still waiting for significant contracts; Cut to 3 ships; Numbers cut creates cost breach; Dual-Band Radar now just 1 band; GAO report; Long-lead for DDG 1001/1002; Pentagon Value Engineering Award.

BIW builds a Section
(click to view full)

Sept 7/10: TSCE to TRL 6. A key Technology Readiness Assessment by the US Navy certifies that Raytheon’s Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE) is now at Technology Readiness Level 6. That means that a a representative model or prototype of the system’s hardware and software code has been tested in a “relevant” environment that is similar to the actual platform.

Asked about this certification, Raytheon representatives said that the certification applied to TSCE R5, and progress on the final TSCE R6 version.

See also March 30/10 entry for more background on TSCE progress. As noted above, TSCE encompasses all shipboard computing applications, including the combat management system, command and control, communications, ship machinery control systems, damage control, embedded training, and support systems. Raytheon says that the review “revealed a high pass rate for system requirements as well as low software defect counts… commended the robustness of Raytheon’s simulation environment and the company’s thorough approach to integration and testing.” Raytheon.

Aug 11/10: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $6 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for changes to the delivery requirements of Mission Systems Equipment (MSE) for the Zumwalt Class. These changes include additional storage space, and services and shipping fixtures that are required to support the revised DDG-1000 program ship production schedules and in-yard-need-dates at the production shipyards.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (88%); Tewksbury, MA (11%); Cordova, AL (0.5%); and North Kingstown, RI (0.5%). Work is expected to be complete by December 2013. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

Aug 11/10: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MaA receives a $36.1 million contract modification (N00024-05-C-5346) for mission systems equipment (MSE) that will be used on the US Navy’s Self Defense Test Ship, in support of the Anti-Air Warfare Self Defense Enterprise Test and Evaluation Master Plan. The equipment will support the DDG 1000 and CVN 78 classes of ships, in addition to follow-on operation test and evaluation efforts for the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (RIM-162 ESSM) and Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP).

Work will be performed in Andover, MA (58.7%); Portsmouth, RI (32%); Sudbury, MA (5.4%); Tewksbury, MA (2.7%); and San Diego, CA (1.2%). Work is expected to be completed by March 2013. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages this contract.

Aug 5/10: Award. The U.S. Navy and members of the DDG 1000 industry team have been honored with a 2010 US Department of Defense Value Engineering Award. Their Surface Ship Affordability Initiative was created by the Navy’s DDG 1000 program office, who partnered with the US Office of Naval Research and industry to improve the efficiency of development, production and shipbuilding processes.

Using program funds, and monies from the USA’s Manufacturing Technology Program, $49 million was invested in 35 manufacturing technology projects during the past several years, with estimated total savings of $138 million. Raytheon.

Aug 2/10: Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS receives a $17.2 million cost-plus-fixed-fee option for FY 2010 class product fabrication, delivery, engineering and engineering support services for the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class. Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (95%), and Gulfport, MS (5%), and is expected to be complete by December 2010 (N00024-06-C-2304).

July 6/10: 1001 & 1002 lead-in. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $105.3 million contract modification for long-lead time construction for DDG 1001; long-lead time materials for DDG 1002; and engineering and production support services.

Work is expected to be performed in Bath, Maine (52%); Parsippany, NJ (21%); Iron Mountain, MI (8%); York, PA (7%); Mississauga, Canada (6%); Vernon, CT (3%); and South Portland, Maine (3%). Work is expected to be complete by February 2011 (N00024-06-C-2303).

June 24/10: PVLS. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives an $8.3 million contract modification to support the outfitting of DDG 1000 Peripheral Vertical Launch System (PVLS) units. As noted above, each PVLS compartment holds a MK57 Vertical Launching System, which are spaced around the ship edges to make targeting the “missile farm” impossible, while providing a buffer at the ship edges that helps protect the interior crew and equipment spaces from battle damage.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME (92%); Glendale, CA (6%); and Montville, NJ (2%); and is expected to be complete by December 2010 (N00024-06-C-2303).

June 15/10: IPS. Converteam, Inc. in Pittsburgh, PA receives a $9.9 million contract modification, covering long-lead materials for the DDG 1002’s Integrated Power System, including the baseline tactical Advanced Induction Motor and its associated VDM25000 motor drive, and the main turbine-generator and auxiliary turbine-generator harmonic filters.

Work will be performed in Pittsburgh, PA, and is expected to be complete by December 2011 (N00024-09-C-4203).

June 11/10: Rep. Barney Frank’s [D-MA-4] “Sustainable Defense Task Force” left wing/ libertarian coalition issues its report. They claim to identify $1 trillion in Pentagon budget cuts over the next decade, and the DDG-1000 is one of the programs recommended for complete cancellation, along with any new construction of DDG-51 destroyers. The move would effectively close Bath iron Works, and while the report identifies DDG-1000 cancellation as saving $1.6 billion in FY 2010, that budget is already committed. Procurement savings from FY 2011 onward would be minimal, with most of the savings coming from the difference (if any) between the cost to man and maintain the ships over the 10 years, plus any available refunds on contracts past 2011, minus contract cancellation penalties and ship disposal costs.

It should be noted that the participants do not represent a substantial faction within the American political system, but their recommendations could acquire more weight in the event of a US sovereign debt crisis. Full report [PDF].

June 2/10: DBR removed. As expected, the Pentagon this week certifies that the DDG-1000 destroyer program is vital to national security, and must not be terminated, despite R&D loaded per-ship cost increases that put it over Nunn-McCurdy’s legislated limit. There will be at least one important change, however: Lockheed Martin’s S-band SPY-4 Volume Search Radar will be deleted from the DDG-1000’s DBR.

Performance has met expectations, but cost increases reportedly forced the Navy into a cost/benefit decision. The Navy would not release numbers, but reports indicate possible savings of $100-200 million for each of the planned 3 ships. Raytheon’s X-band SPY-3 has reportedly exceeded technical expectations, and will receive upgrades to give it better volume search capability. The move will save weight and space by removing the SPY-4’s aperture, power, and cooling systems, and may create an opportunity for the SPY-3 to be upgraded for ballistic missile defense – or replaced by the winner of the BMD-capable AMDR dual-band radar competition.

The full DBR will be retained on the USS Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78] aircraft carrier, as Lockheed’s SPY-4 replaces 2 air search radars, and will be the primary air traffic control radar. No decision has been made for CVN 79 onward, however, and AMDR’s potential scalability may make it attractive there instead. Gannett’s Navy Times | US DoD | Maine’s Times Record | Associated Press | Reuters.

June 2/10: Sonar. Tods Defence Ltd. in Portland, UK announces that it has completed and shipped its 2nd composite bow sonar dome for the US Navy’s Zumwalt Class program to Bath Iron Works, in Maine. Tods’ composite domes have been used on other warships, but the firm says that this is the first time the US Navy has specified British designed bow sonar domes.

May 7/10: Design. A $26.8 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) to provide additional systems engineering services associated with the detail, design, and construction of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer. Systems engineering efforts include detail design excursions, shock qualification, production process prototype manufacturing, and life cycle support services prior to post shakedown availability.

General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME will perform the work and expects to complete it by December 2010.

April 19/10: 1001 lead-in. A $16 million contract modification for long lead time materials, construction, related support, and engineering and production support services associated with the construction of DDG 1001, the Michael Monsoor.

General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine will perform and/or contract work in Coatesville, PA (41%), Burns Harbor, IN (41%), and South Portland, ME (18%). This funded effort is expected to be complete by July 2010 (N00024-06-C-2303).

April 19/10: A $9.8 million contract modification to support 2010 transportation of DDG-100 Class products to Bath, Maine, in order to meet critical construction milestones. This contract modification procures the labor and material required to fabricate cradles, fixtures, pedestals, etc., as required.

Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Pascagoula, MS will perform and/or contract work in Pascagoula, MS, and Gulfport, MS, and this funded effort will be complete in December 2010 (N00024-06-C-2303). Northrop Grumman had been a partner in DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class construction, until a major reorganization gave Bath Iron Works all DDG-1000 Class work, while making Northrop Grumman the new lead yard for existing DDG-51 destroyers. Northrop Grumman will also continue to build the Zumwalt Class’ composite superstructures, under the new arrangements.

April 1/10: SAR & breach. The Pentagon releases its April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report, covering major program changes up to December 2009. The DDG 1000 program features as a major Nunn-McCurdy breach, as a result of its reduction to 3 ships:

“The PAUC (Program Acquisition Unit Cost, incl. R&D) increased by 25.5% and APUC(Average Procurement Unit Cost, no R&D) increased 24.9% to the current and original Acquisition Program Baseline due to the truncation of the number of ships in the program. The original program baseline was for a ten-ship program. That quantity was reduced to seven ships in the fiscal 2009 President’s Budget. However, it did not impact unit costs enough to trigger a Nunn-McCurdy breach. The quantities were further reduced in the fiscal 2011 President’s Budget to the program’s current profile of three ships. Neither reduction was a result of poor program performance. However, the total quantity reduction from ten to three ships resulted in a Nunn-McCurdy breach.”

March 30/10: GAO. The US GAO audit office delivers its 8th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. With respect to the Zumwalt Class, the GAO reports that lead ship construction began in February 2009 and 68% of the units that make up DDG 1000 are now in fabrication. The Navy anticipates awarding construction contracts for DDG 1001 and DDG 1002 by June 2010. Beyond that, while the GAO acknowledges that “[p]ractical limitations prevent the Navy from fully demonstrating all technologies in a realistic environment prior to installation,” they are concerned that key systems will not be tested before ships are delivered. Those areas include:

Superstructure. GAO states that the Navy planned to fully demonstrate the integrated deckhouse prior to ship construction start in February 2009, but land-based testing was delayed. Testing is now scheduled to complete by March 2010 – over a year after deckhouse construction began. That means expensive rework, if problems are found.

Software. GAO reports that the Total Ship Computing Environment is behind, and will not be complete until after the lead ship’s systems are activated. While TSCE R5 resolved TSCE R4’s problems based on underway integration testing, the US DCMA(Defense Contract Management Agency) expects release 4 & 5’s problems to lead to “higher defect rates than planned” in the final TSCE R6, with additional cost and schedule delays. The Navy responds that The TSCE R5 includes “most” combat system features, and release 6 focuses on engineering control. They believe the software schedule has a margin available before it is needed for land-based and ship testing.

Power. GAO says that the integrated power system will not be tested with the control system until 2011 – nearly 3 years later than planned. In practical terms, that means after its installation on the first 2 of 3 ships. The Navy responds that the power system will be tested on land in 2011, using components of the final DDG 1002 ship, before DDG 1000 testing begins.

Radar. GAO acknowledges that the SPY-4 volume search radar has become more mature, and began testing with the main SPY-3 MFR in January 2009, but without the VSR’s radome and at a lower voltage. Under present schedules, the lead ship’s volume search radar “will be installed in April 2013 – after the Navy has taken custody of the ship.” The Navy does not dispute either of these notes, but says that prototype integration tests are not dependent on the voltage or radome. Full-voltage modules have been produced and tested, and the lead-ship radar will be tested in 2012 with a radome. The installation date is not contested.

Feb 19/10: TSCE. A $27.8 million not-to-exceed modification covers common display system (CDS) hardware and software integration with the DDG 1000’s Integrated Bridge Console and Distributed Control Workstation hardware, to ensure that these changes to the TSCE are incorporated by 2011.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (66.1%); Tewksbury, MA (22.9%); Moorestown, NJ (8.3%); the remaining 2.7% will be performed in San Diego, CA; Andover, MA; and Sudbury, MA. Work is expected to be complete by May 2012.

Feb 17/10: 1001 lead-in. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $7.9 million contract modification for long lead time material (LLTM) associated with the construction of DDG 1001 Michael Monsoor. Materials already bought or manufactured for DDG 1001 under a previously contract awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) are expected to be transferred with its associated costs to the as-yet-to-be-negotiated DDG 1001 ship construction contract. This modification adds plate, shapes, and pipe to support a construction start in FY 2010.

Work is expected to be performed in Bath, ME (38%); Coatesville, PA (31%); and Burns Harbor, IN (31%). Work is expected to be complete by August 2010.

Feb 17/10: TSCE. Raytheon announces a successful Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE) Release 6 software specifications review, which sets a final goal for its coders. Release 6 is meant to be the “Version 1.0” release of mission-ready software for the Zumwalt Class, following years of iterative development. It will implement more than 25,000 software requirements over Release 5, and will raise the total number of delivered lines of software code for Zumwalt to more than 9 million. With this review, all of the Zumwalt software requirements are complete, and more than 80% of software coding is complete.

Raytheon performs software work for the Zumwalt program at a number of mission centers across the country, including IDS Headquarters in Tewksbury, MA; its Seapower Capability Center in Portsmouth, RI; the Surveillance and Sensors Center in Sudbury, MA; and the Expeditionary Warfare Center in San Diego, CA. TSCE infrastructure is also finding its way into upgrades for the USS Nimitz [CVN 68] and USS San Antonio [LPD 17].

Feb 4/10: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine receives a $9 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) to provide additional systems engineering services associated with the detail design and construction of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer.

Systems engineering efforts include detail design excursions, shock qualification, production process prototype manufacturing, and life cycle support services prior to post shakedown availability. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by April 2010.

Feb 1/10: Down to 3 ships. The FY 2011 budget request removes the CG (X) and Future Surface Combatant programs. That shrinks the DDG-1000 program’s ship total back to 3, removing the legerdemain that had kept the program’s total cost per ship delivered from breaching legislative limits.

While per-ship construction costs have risen less than 25%, spreading the same R&D dollars over fewer ships results in a technical increase of 86.5%. Under Nunn-McCurdy legislation, that forces cancellation, unless Congress accepts the Pentagon’s submitted justification for continuing the program. With most of the Zumwalt Class shipbuilding funds already spent, and the program already set at just 3 ships, cancellation is very unlikely. See also Jan 26/09 and Feb 4/09 entries for more background. Reuters.

Jan 25/10: TSCE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received an $11.2 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for changes to software development efforts due to revised missile interface control documents and related power density implementation for the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer program.

The purpose of this modification is to incorporate software changes that affect the combat system and Dual Band Radar, in light of MICDs Rev B+ and related power density implementation changes to the current TSCE requirements. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA, and is expected to be complete by March 2012.

Jan 6/10: General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $6.9 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303), exercising an option for additional systems engineering and class logistics services associated with DDG-1000 detail design and construction. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by November 2010.

Systems engineering efforts include detail design excursions, shock qualification, production process prototype manufacturing, and life cycle support services prior to post shakedown availability. Class logistics efforts provide for the continued development of integrated logistics support for the DDG 1000 class, including development of training curriculum, supply support documentation, maintenance analyses, and configuration status accounting.

Dec 16/09: IPS. Converteam, Inc. in Pittsburgh, PA received a $7 million modification to previously awarded contract for the DDG 1002 baseline tactical high voltage power distribution switchboard. They will be used at the US Navy’s land-based test site for the ship’s integrated power system. Work will be performed in Pittsburgh, PA, and is expected to be complete by July 2011 (N00024-09-C-4203).

Nov 25/09: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received an $84.4 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346), exercising an option for FY 2010 Zumwalt Class services engineering efforts. Raytheon will help test mission systems equipment, produce test documentation, conduct component and design level verification tests and maintain related design and test class documentation.

Work will be performed in Portsmouth, RI (38.5%); Moorestown, NJ (19.3%); Marlborough, MA (16.6%); Sudbury, MA (12.6%); Tewksbury, MA (5.5%); Minneapolis, MN (3.5%); San Diego, CA (2.2%); and Towson, MD (1.8%); and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/13.

Nov 25/09: Design. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $46.6 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346), exercising an option for class services engineering to support design assurance, develop verification plans, and conduct tests for the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer program. Hard to tell if this is TSCE or MSE.

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (28.3%); Portsmouth, RI (27.1%); Falls Church, VA (12.8%); Sudbury, Mass. (11.9%); Minneapolis, MN (7.4%); Washington, DC (6.9%); Moorestown, NJ (3.7%); San Diego, CA (1.1%); and Marlborough, MA (0.8%); and is expected to be complete by December 2010. Hard to tell if this is TSCE or MSE.

Nov 13/09: Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $46.7 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346), exercising an option for “the next phase of verification of the production design for the DDG 1000…”

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (48.2%), Tewksbury, MA (38.3%), Portsmouth, RI (7.8%), Sudbury, MA (4.3%), Minneapolis, MN (1.2%), and Marlborough, MA (0.2%), and is expected to be complete by December 2010.

Nov 12/09: TSCE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA receives a $241.3 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) to complete the Total Ship Computing Environment software for the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer Program, and meet lead ship integration and construction schedules. There are 2 major components of the scope for this effort: re-planning of TSCE Release 6 software to align with the re-phasing in detail design and integration Revision F; plus additional Release 6 efforts, implementation of engineering control/damage control human computer interface for distributed contract work stations, Release 4 and 5 software maintenance, and implementation of required changes to support both land-based test site testing and ship activation software deliveries needed to maintain shipyard schedules. See also the March 31/09 entry for the US GAO’s overall report, which includes TSCE concerns.

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (64.7%), Moorestown, NJ (27%), Indianapolis, IN (2.7%), Burlington, MA (1.5%). The remaining 4.1% will be performed at the following locations: Marlborough, MA; Falls Church, VA; King George, VA; Fort Wayne, IN; Aurora, CO; and Marlborough, MA. Work is expected to be complete by March 2012.

Oct 28/09: FY 2010 budget. President Obama signs the FY 2010 defense budget into law. That budget provides the full requested amount of $1,084.2 million to finish the 3rd ship, but the reconciled bill stripped out the $539.1 million in RDT&E funding the Pentagon had requested. White House | House-Senate Conference Report summary [PDF] & tables [PDF].

Oct 21/09: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works Corp in Bath, ME received a $79.5 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303). It exercises an option for additional class services associated with the detail design and construction of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer.

Bath Iron Works will provide technical and industrial engineering in the interpretation and application of the detailed design to support construction and the maintenance of a safe and operable ship design. Work will be performed in Bath, ME and is expected to be complete by November 2010.

FY 2009

GD-BIW handed the lead role; Fixing the books to avoid a breach; GAO points to tech-driven delays; Mission systems pass preliminary readiness review; Radar lightoff; SQQ-90 designated; DDG 1001 named Michael Monsoor; DDG-51 vs. Zumwalt; Still waiting for significant contracts; “I’d like to see how it goes…”.

DDG-1000 concept
(click to view full)

Sept 10/09: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $22.5 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for continuing Mission Systems Equipment (MSE) software development and additional design verification for the Zumwalt Class Destroyer Program. Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (64%), Tewksbury MA (20%), Baltimore, MD (10%) and Dahlgren, VA (6%), and is expected to be complete by March 2012.

Timely software development has been flagged as a potential issue by recent GAO reports (q.v. March 31/09 entry).

Aug 19/09: Small business qualifier Temeku Technologies, Inc. in Herndon, VA received a $7.95 million firm-fixed-price contract for DDG 1000’s Flight Deck Lights (FDL) System, mounted on and near the flight deck and hangar face as next-generation visual landing aids for helicopters.

Work will be performed in Herndon, VA (60%); Bologna, Italy (30%); and Point Mugu, CA (10%) and is expected to be complete in April 2011. This contract was competitively procured via electronic request for proposal, with 3 offers received by the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ (N68335-09-C-0425).

Aug 17/09: Progress report. Gannett’s Navy Times updates the current status of major DDG-1000 sub-systems in “DDG 1000 project quietly logs successes.”

In production: Ship hull, Northrop Grumman’s composite upper-level deckhouse; Raytheon’s Advanced Vertical Launch System; Integrated Power system including RR MT-30 engine; Automatic fire suppression system.

Finished development: Tumblehome hull form; BAE’s 155mm AGS gun, Lockheed Martin’s LRLAP GPS-guided long-range shell; Infrared suppression engine exhaust and heat suppression system, incl. 4 major at-sea tests; Crew multi-skill training plan.

Still in development: Dual-Band Radar (Raytheon’s X-band SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar, Lockheed Martin’s S-band SPY-4 Volume Search Radar), Raytheon’s Total Ship Computing Environment, 3-D CAD models.

The first 2 X-band SPY-3 arrays are being assembled, and “minor” manufacturing issues have been resolved, following completion of at-sea testing in Spring 2009. The DBR has also been installed at the Wallops Island test facility, where aircraft detection tests are ongoing and will continue into the fall. Below-deck components of the S-band SPY-4, are in full-rate production, and 6 arrays are under contract. Of the 3-D CAD models, 90 of 94 are completely released and locked down, and the remaining 4 are expected by September 2009.

July 23/09: AGS. LaBarge, Inc. announces a $6.1 million contract from BAE Systems to continue producing electronic assemblies for the Advanced Gun Systems that will be installed on both ordered Zumwalt Class destroyers. The Company expects this latest award will continue production on the AGS program at its Huntsville, Ark., facility through December 2009.

July 20/09: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $60 million cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346), exercising an option for Mission System Equipment (MSE) Class Services for the Zumwalt Class Destroyer Program.

Work will be performed at Raytheon facilities (85%) in San Diego, CA; Marlboro, MA; Sudbury, MA; Tewksbury, MA; Towson, MD; and Portsmouth, RI; at Lockheed Martin facilities (12%) in Moorestown, NJ and Akron, OH; and at BAE’s facility in Minneapolis, MN (3%), and is expected to be complete by March 2013.

June 19/09: IPS. Converteam, Inc. in Pittsburgh, PA received a $23 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-09-C-4203). They will provide a DDG 1000 Baseline Tactical High Voltage Power Subsystem (HVPS) for use in the Navy’s integrated power system land based test site. These components will meet the same specification established by the DDG 1000 shipyards for lead ship installation. Work will be performed in Pittsburgh, PA, and is expected to be complete by March 2011.

The HVPS distributes electrical power from the ship’s turbine-generators to the ship’s propulsion and electronic equipment. It includes an advanced induction motor, motor drive, harmonic filters and resistors for dynamic braking and neutral grounding.

May 4/09: Gannett’s Navy Times interviewed US Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead 3 times during March and April 2009, and publishes excerpts. With respect to the DDG-1000, Roughhead sees the new design as something they can only learn from if it’s deployed and used, and he’s especially interested in the real-world, full-scale performance of its radically different hull form. Beyond that:

“I’d like to see how it goes. And if it really is a breakthrough technology, can it be scaled up and can it be scaled down? Because if you start getting into nuclear power and bigger radars [for CG (X)], can the DDG hull form take it? My sense is, it can. But if it can’t and you have to scale up, does it scale?

…There’s no question we will employ those ships once they’re delivered. Deploy them and employ. I see them in the deployment rotation because, quite frankly, it will be important to operate those ships in different environments, get them up in the high latitudes. What happens when that hull form starts to ice up? What’s the effect of that? If people are talking about having to be up in the Arctic areas, it’s a good thing to know. How well are they sustained logistically at great distances? We’ve got to get them out. Get them deployed.”

April 23/09: DBR. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $217 million cost plus fixed fee modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for 2 Volume Search Radars (VSR). Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (95%) and Sudbury, MA (5%), and is to be complete by March 2013.

These S-band naval radars will be used as part of the Dual-Band Radar (DBR) systems mounted on one of the new Zumwalt Class destroyers, and on the inaugural CVN-21 carrier USS Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78]. See “The US Navy’s Dual-Band Radars” for full coverage.

April 13/09: Builder Shift. Defense News reports details of the agreement between the US Navy and its 2 shipyards for major surface combatants.

The deal reportedly includes a provision for Northrop Grumman’s shipyard in Avondale, LA to continue building LPD-17 San Antonio Class amphibious transport docks. Unfortunately, that shipyard has displayed severe and consistent quality problems building the first 2 ships of class.

Under the agreement, the FY 2010 budget would fund the second half of the 3rd Zumwalt Class ship [DDG 1002], and the Arleigh Burke Class DDG 113, with full ballistic missile defense capabilities installed at the outset. That a departure, because all previous BMD ships in the US Navy have been refits of existing vessels. DDG 113 will be built by Northrop Grumman at Ingalls in Mississippi. That would be the first DDG-51 destroyer ordered since 2002, and it would be followed by orders for similar ships in FY 2011: DDG 114 (Northrop) and DDG 115 (Bath Iron Works).

April 7/09: DBR. Raytheon announces a successful initial “lightoff” test of the Dual Band Radar, which includes the X-band AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar and S-band Volume Search Radar. Both radiated at high power during lightoff at the Navy’s Engineering Test Center in Wallops Island, VA. Following this successful lightoff test, the radar suite will begin an extended period of operational performance testing.

April 7/09: Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS, Seapower subcommittee chair] announces that the Pentagon has reached agreements with General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works in Maine, and with Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls Shipyard in Mississippi. Read “Bath, Ingalls Agree to Navy’s Surface Combatant Plans” for details of the arrangements.

April 6/09: US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announces his recommendations for the FY 2010 defense budget:

“…in this request, we will include funds to complete the buy of two navy destroyers in FY10. These plans depend on being able to work out contracts to allow the Navy to efficiently build all three DDG-1000 class ships at Bath Iron Works in Maine and to smoothly restart the DDG-51 Aegis Destroyer program at Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls shipyard in Mississippi. Even if these arrangements work out, the DDG-1000 program would end with the third ship and the DDG-51 would continue to be built in both yards.

If our efforts with industry are unsuccessful, the department will likely build only a single prototype DDG-1000 at Bath and then review our options for restarting production of the DDG-51.”

April 1/09: The Mississippi Press reports that Raytheon Company is footing the bill for the recently created www.ZumwaltFacts.info:

“Spokeswoman Carolyn Beaudry initially denied Tuesday any corporate involvement in the Zumwalt campaign. She later called back to say that others within the company had since told her Raytheon is supporting “a lot of public efforts, including ZumwaltFacts.info,” to provide third-party advocacy.”

This is not unusual for corporations or other organizations when lobbying government; indeed, a recent Washington Times article by USN Adm. James Lyons (ret.) lamented the retreat of America’s shipbuilding industry from its previous public advocacy role. Non-disclosure of such involvement is less customary, though the Times report could also describe a simple mistake that was quickly corrected. When the funding is meant to be covert, the technical term is an “astroturf” (artificial grassroots) campaign.

March 31/09: GAO. The US GAO audit office delivers its 7th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. It rates 4/12 critical technologies in the DDG-1000 program as fully mature (demonstrated in a sea environment), and 6/12 as approaching maturity, but 5 of the 6 will not demonstrate full maturity until after they’re installed on the ship. Lockheed Martin’s S-band volume search radar, and the Total Ship Computing Environment, are rated as immature. The report adds:

“Land-based tests of the volume search radar prototype originally planned for before ship construction will not be completed until June 2009 – over 2 years later. Software development for the total ship computing environment has proved challenging; the Navy certified the most recent software release before it met about half of its requirements…”

“The integrated power system will not be tested with the control system until 2011 – nearly 3 years later than planned. The Navy will buy a power system intended for the third ship and use it in land- based tests… Land-based tests of the volume search radar prototype will not be completed until June 2009 – over 2 years later than planned… The Navy will not demonstrate a fully capable radar at its required power output until testing of the first production unit in 2011… installation [of the volume search radar) will occur in April 2013 – after the Navy has taken custody of the ship. The Navy initially planned to develop and demonstrate all software functionality of the total ship computing environment (phased over six releases and one spiral) over 1 year before ship light-off… However, the contractor delivered release 4 without incorporating all software system requirements and deferred work to release 5, primarily due to issues with the command and control component. Problems discovered in this release, coupled with the deferred work, may be a sign of larger issues…”

March 17/09: ZumwaltFacts.Info publishes an “admirals’ letter to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates from USN Adm. Henry H. Mauz (ret.); USN Rear Adm. Philip A. Dur (ret.); and Phil Depoy, Director of the US Naval Postgraduate School’s Systems Engineering Institute. Zumwalt Facts is 3rd party site chaired by USMC Col. James G. Zumwalt, Esq. (ret.). Full letter [PDF].

March 6/09: MSE. Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA received a $57 million cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346). These funds will buy selected Zumwalt Class mission system equipment which will be checked out and integrated at Wallops Island, VA, for the program’s Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) aboard the US Navy Self Defense Test Ship (SDTS). The SDTS is a best described as a barge that can mount and use installed radars and weapons for tests. See also the related Dec 15/08 and Dec 5/08 awards.

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (40%); Andover, MA (40%), Wallops Island, VA (10%) and Portsmouth, RI (10%), and is to be completed by March 2011. Contract funds in the amount of $27.5 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Feb 12/09: Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $9 million modification to a previously awarded contract for systems engineering, design and technical services. The contract will support the detail design and construction of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyers.

Northrop Grumman is currently expected to design and build DDG-1001, the Michael Monsoor. Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS, and is expected to be completed by December 2009 (N00024-06-C-2304).

Feb 4/09: DDG-51 vs. Zumwalt. Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS-4] chairs the US House Armed Services Committee’s Seapower and Expeditionary Forces subcommittee. He is a vocal critic of the US Navy’s current shipbuilding strategy, while remaining one of Congress’ strongest advocates for a larger shipbuilding budget and a larger Navy. His statement on the future of US Navy shipbuilding reiterates his support for more DDG-51 type destroyers, and says:

“For far too many years I have watched as the size of the Navy fleet has decreased… In particular, the failure of the [Littoral Combat Ship] program to deliver on the promise of an affordable, capable, and reconfigurable warship only puts the exclamation point on a Bush administration’s strategy that was neither well envisioned nor properly executed. As for the DDG 1000, we will not know the true cost of that program for a number of years but significant cost growth on that vessel will require diverting funding from other new construction projects to pay the over-run…”

Feb 4/09: “The Navy’s New Battleship Budget Plan” at the naval policy discussion site Information Dissemination addresses the proposed DDG-1000 program approach in an op-ed:

“Of all the different ships in the Navy’s FY10 shipbuilding budget, there are actually only 3 mature ship designs [out of 11 ship types]… This reflects the inability of naval leadership to set requirements. This reflects a long standing policy where accountability has not been a priority. This reflects an industry without enough oversight. This reflects weak political leadership willing to ignore deception and deceit. Let me explain that last point.

…John Young was absolutely right to force the Navy to go through a requirements study process, but the rest of the memo should be raising serious questions in Congress. The very intent of the memo, which comes from the top acquisition official in the Department of Defense, is a signed specific instruction to the Navy to intentionally ‘pad’ the budget of the DDG-1000 program with money from a completely new program… in its first year of construction the DDG-1000 could now potentially go over budget by several hundred million dollars and still not trigger a breach of Nunn-McCurdy… With the leak of this memo, all of our Congressmen and Senators must now intentionally look the other way, with both eyes shut and index fingers jammed into their ears, and ignore that the top DoD financial officer is intentionally padding the books to circumvent the law.”

Feb 2/09: Raytheon announces that the first production equipment has been delivered for the U.S. Navy’s DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer – a Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) planar array antenna assembly.

Jan 26/09: Fixing the books. Pentagon undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics John Young’s “DDG 1000 Program Way Ahead” memo sets out alternatives for the program, and touches off controversy.

The reduction from 7 ships to 3 will spread the same R&D funds over fewer ships, raising their accounting cost per ship but not their actual purchase cost. So far, actual program costs and timelines remain on track, but under America’s Nunn-McCurdy procurement laws, the accounting cost change forces the Pentagon to meet 4 tests or cancel the program: (1) the weapon is essential for national security; (2) the new unit costs are reasonable; (3) management structure can control future growth; and (4) that no substitutes exist that provide equal or greater military capability at less cost.

Meeting tests 1 and 4 will be difficult, and the fact that the Navy has never really done a direct comparison of the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class vs. the existing DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class in key areas makes the problem worse (see Oct 12/08 “Heritage Foundation: Questions to Ask re: DDG-51 vs. DDG-1000” for more). Young’s memo offers the option of adding a “Future Surface Combatant” class to the DDG-1000 program, increasing the number of ships technically in the program without specifying what type they would be. It appears to be an effort to buy time for a year, while the Navy looks at the actual cost of fielding new-build DDG-51 ships with the radar modifications, software modifications, and power upgrades required to serve in a ballistic defense role. This, too, is something that is not currently known. Information Dissemination explains the accounting | Defense News re: FSC | Defense News: Young on DDG-1000 options and relative ship costs.

Jan 12/08: Defense News reports that a deal may be in the works to build both DDG-1000 Zumwalt and DDG-1001 Michael Monsoor, in exchange for having more of the Arleigh Burke Class destroyers that Congress is expected to ask for built at Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls shipyard in Pascagoula, MS. The Pascagoula shipyard was scheduled to begin fabrication of DDG 1001 in fall 2009.

The move would reportedly leverage Bath Iron Works’ investments toward DDG-1000 production, and keep Pascagoula more focused, given the diverse ship classes (DDG-51, LPD-17, LHD-8) it is already building in Mississippi.

Dec 22/08: Bloomberg News reports that an Oct 31/08 budget memo from Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England approved shifting away as much as $940 million from the P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft program, in order to complete payment for the 3rd DDG-1000 destroyer that Congress partially funded in FY 2009. The Navy proposed getting 2 P-8A aircraft instead of 6 during the initial production phases.

Meanwhile, the US Navy faces significant challenges keeping the existing fleet of P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft in the air. Almost 1/4 of this aging fleet has been grounded due to safety concerns, and the Navy is forced to retire some aircraft every year. Even though they are in greater demand over key sea lanes, and in overland surveillance roles on the front lines. Early introduction of the P-8A has been touted as critical to maintaining these capabilities, without creating both near-term and long-term shortfalls.

The proposed FY 2010 ship plan also reportedly includes the purchase of 2 more DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class destroyers.

Dec 15/08: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received $10.1 million modification to a previously awarded contract. They will furnish the test assets and infrastructure material required, in to support the integration, testing, and facilitation of DDG-1000 Mission Systems Equipment. See also Dec 5/08 entry for more background.

Work will be performed in Burlington, MA (75%) and Tewksbury, MA (25%), and is expected to be complete by September 2009 (N00024-05-C-5346).

Dec 9/08: SQQ-90 named. Raytheon announces that its integrated undersea warfare combat system for the Zumwalt Class has received its official U.S. Navy nomenclature: AN/SQQ-90.

The SQQ-90 includes the ship’s hull-mounted mid-frequency sonar (AN/SQS-60), the hull-mounted high-frequency sonar (AN/SQS-61), and the multi-function towed array sonar and handling system (AN/SQR-20). These systems are fully integrated with the MH-60R helicopter‘s combat system, and improved automation and information management allows the SQQ-90 to be operated by 1/3 the crew of current AN/SQQ-89v15 anti-submarine systems used on DDG-51 and CG-47 AEGIS destroyers and cruisers.

Dec 5/08: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $9 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for one time engineering efforts. The purpose of this effort is to initiate the non-recurring engineering work required to make the selected Mission System Equipment (Dual Band Radar SPY-3 Array and REX; MK57 Vertical Launch System Electronics Module Controller Unit; Canister Electronic Units, and Total Ship Computing Environment) compatible with the Navy’s remote controlled Self Defense Test Ship (SDTS). The SDTS test will include the first missile firing with this advanced Mission System, against a difficult target set.

Raytheon will update selected Zumwalt Class Destroyer Mission Systems Equipment (MSE) for initial integration efforts at Wallops Island, VA, and follow-on installation on board the SDTS, in support of the Zumwalt TEMP (test and evaluation master plan). Work will be performed in Portsmouth RI (55%), Tewksbury, MA (25%), and Andover, MA (20%) and is expected to be complete by August 2009. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

Dec 2/08: MSE. Raytheon announces a successful production readiness review of the mission systems equipment (MSE) for the DDG-1000 program. This comprehensive review was the culmination of more than 90 separate design and production reviews, and afterward the Zumwalt program completed a total ship system production readiness review – the final formal review before ship construction begins.

The Zumwalt Class MSE includes the following major subsystems: the Total Ship Computing Environment; Dual Band Radar; the external communications suite; MK 57 Vertical Launching System; AN/SQQ-90 Integrated Undersea Warfare Combat System; the Electro-Optical/Infrared suite; the Identification Friend or Foe integrated sensor suite; and the Zumwalt ship control hardware, including an integrated bridge, navigation, EO surveillance, and engineering control system components.

Dec 1/08: Design. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works Corp in Bath, Maine received a $45.8 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303). It exercises an option for services associated with the detail design and construction of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer, and modifies the contract issued on the Feb 15/08 for the first ship of class.

Work will include configuration management and maintenance of class design products; program management; configuration and data management; system and ship integration services; production engineering services; and ship system segment management. Work will be performed in Bath, ME, and is expected to be complete by November 2010. See also GD release.

Oct 29/08: 1001 named. At a Navy SEAL Warrior Fund Benefit Gala at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City, Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter announced that DDG-1001 will be named USS Michael Monsoor after the Congressional Medal of Honor winner.

Petty Officer 2nd Class Michael Monsoor was a Navy SEAL who was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for his heroic actions in Ramadi, Iraq on Sept 29/06. Monsoor was asthmatic as a child, but his determination led him to conquer his condition and pass SEAL training. The 25 year-old machine gunner was providing security at a sniper lookout post with SEAL Team 3, when a fragmentation grenade hit his chest and bounced to the floor. Monsoor was near the only exit, and was the only one who could have escaped. Instead, he threw himself on the grenade before it exploded, and died half an hour later. Though some of his SEAL brethren and their Iraqi allies were wounded, all survived because of his sacrifice. USN release | USN coverage of award ceremony | Official USN Medal of Honor page for Michael Monsoor.

Oct 7/08: DDG-51 or Zumwalt? The right-wing Heritage Foundation publishes its in-depth paper concerning the DDG-1000 vs. DDG-51 debate: “Changing Course on Navy Shipbuilding: Questions Congress Should Ask Before Funding.”

The report can be characterized as leaning toward further DDG-1000 ships, but it offers key questions to ask rather than recommendations. This is more than just a rhetorical device. The answers to those questions could tip the debate either way, and the report points to discrepancies between recent and past Navy statements that need clarification. It also offers research evidence that disputes some recent statements, with an especial focus on the Zumwalt Class’ air defense and anti-submarine capabilities.

FY 2008

DDG 1000/1001 contract; Dead at 2? Asking to build a 3rd; Official SAR drops from 10 to 7 ships; EO/IR suite; Air & missile defense controversy; Deckhouse problems? TSCE release 5; MK 57 PVLS wins system engineering award; DDG-51 vs. Zumwalt.

Zumwalt model

Sept 24/08: The House and Senate Armed Services Committees have reconciled their versions of the FY 2009 defense budget. The reconciled budget provides $2.5 billion for the 3rd Zumwalt Class ship, “without prejudice to any potential future Department of Defense decision to truncate the DDG-1000 class acquisition program in favor of a return to DDG-51 class destroyers.”

House Seapower subcommittee chair Gene Taylor [D-MS] continues to doubt the Navy’s ability to build DDG-1002 for $2.5 billion, a sum that is about half the amount predicted in some CBO reports. He cites the language noted above as a satisfactory compromise, because it allows the Secretary of the Navy to divert the $2.5 billion into more Arleigh Burke Class destroyers if problems continue. MarineLog | Gannett’s Navy Times.

Sept 22/08: Deckhouse problems? Defense News caries a story offering Northrop Grumman’s replies to its own Sept 15/08 publication, which quoted inside sources alleging concerns inside Northrop and the US Navy regarding construction problems involving the ship’s composite superstructure, or deckhouse. The Zumwalt Class uses composites rather than metal, because it improves radar stealth. All composite superstructures will be made by Northrop Grumman in its Gulfport, MS facility, even the structures that will fit on top of ships built by General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works.

While Defense News’ unnamed sources stand by their assertions, Northrop Grumman replied that the deckhouse design meets all technical and load requirements, that the Navy remains closely involved in all aspects of the process, that over 6,000 test articles fabricated from 2001 onward have surfaced and addressed the risks. Fabrication was supposed to begin in Q4 2008, but Northrop Grumman says they are on track to start fabrication in February 2009.

Sept 17/08: The US Senate passed its FY 2009 defense budget proposal by a vote of 88-8. The bill includes $2.6 billion for a 3rd DDG-1000 destroyer. In contrast, the House bill allocates no funding at all for a 3rd ship. Brunswick Times Record report.

That difference will have to be settled in “reconciliation” conferences, in order to produce a final FY 2009 defense bill. Will the House give up on some of its priorities, or will the Senate have to drop this item?

Aug 31/08: Capabilities controversy. The Los Angeles Times interviews CNO Adm. Gary Roughead, and includes the following quotes in its report:

“I started looking at the DDG-1000. It has a lot of technology, but it cannot perform broader, integrated air and missile defense… Submarines can get very close [due to design compromises], and it does not have the ability to take on that threat… And I look at the world and I see proliferation of missiles, I see proliferation of submarines. And that is what we have to deal with.”

With respect to a 3rd destroyer, the LA Times report writes:

“But he was less enthusiastic about building a third ship. The Navy agreed to the additional vessel because money was already in the current budget proposal, he said. “It will be another ship with which to demonstrate the technologies,” he said. “But it still will lack the capabilities that I think will be in increased demand in the future.” “

Aug 15/08: 3rd Zumwalt? Gannett’s Navy Times reports that the US Navy has changed course, and now plans to ask Congress for the funds to build a 3rd DDG-1000 destroyer.

The question is whether Congress is inclined to give them those funds. The Senate’s FY 2009 defense bill includes $2.6 billion for this purpose, but the House bill had $0, and Seapower subcommittee leaders Taylor [D-MS] and Bartlett [R-MD] appear to have other shipbuilding priorities. The Navy’s reported compromise apparently involves ordering parts for the DDG-51 class, in order to make a production restart feasible. In a letter to Collins, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England reportedly wrote that:

“This plan will provide stability of the industrial base and continue the development of advanced surface ship technologies such as radar systems, stealth, magnetic and acoustic quieting, and automated damage control…”

If these reports are true, the US Navy and Department of Defense appear to be betting that House Armed Services Committee Chair Ike Skelton [D-MO] and company will be inclined to give in during reconciliation negotiations, and forgo their proposed funding for projects that matter to key Democrats like Taylor, in order to boost key Zumwalt Class advocates like Sen. Susan Collins [R-ME].

July 31/08: DDG-51 or Zumwalt? The US House Armed Services Seapower and Expeditionary Forces subcommittee holds in-depth hearings regarding the DDG-1000 and DDG-51 programs. Ranking minority member, Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD]

“When the Ranking Member and I first called for this hearing, the purpose was to ensure that all of the facts associated with the capabilities and procurement costs of the DDG 1000 and the capabilities and procurement costs of the DDG 51 were discussed… Predictably, this [subsequent program termination] announcement from the Navy has generated a firestorm here on Capitol Hill… So, we still need a hearing to clear the air on mission capabilities and costs of the two destroyer programs…

This subcommittee was, and is, concerned with cost estimates for the DDG 1000. But let me be very clear – this subcommittee did not recommend canceling the DDG 1000 as we have been accused in the press. What this subcommittee recommended, and the full House adopted in May of this year, was a pause to the third DDG 1000 while the development of technologies and true costs of construction became known on the first two ships… We have two panels of experts today to walk us thorough all these issues…”

See: Rep. Bartlett opening statement | Video of Navy Panel 1 and Analysts Panel 2 [Windows Media] | P1: Allison Stiller – USN Deputy Assistant Secretary, Ship Programs | Vice Admiral Barry McCullough – USN || P2: Ron O’Rourke – Congressional Research Service re: shipbuilding options | Dr. Eric Labs, Congressional Budget Office | Paul Francis, US GAO. All testimonies are PDF format.

July 23/08: Dead in the Water. Widespread reports indicate that the Navy is canceling the DDG-1000 program, capping construction at the 2 ships already ordered.

Reports indicate that the service will keep the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class production line open instead, producing either more Flight IIA ships, or inaugurating a Flight III that incorporates some technologies from the DDG-1000 program and/or an active array radars like Lockheed Martin’s S4R. The most reasonable estimates suggest that the trade-off would amount to about 11 DDG-51 destroyers instead of 5 Zumwalt Class light cruisers. The key assumptions behind that figure are twofold. The first assumption involves full funding for the actual cost of the first 2 DDG-1000 ships as an extraneous item, rather than having additional DDG-51s used as bill payers if the CBO’s estimate turns out to be correct again and the Navy is wrong again. Absent that assumption, the trade-off becomes about 9 DG-51s and 2 DDG-1000s vs. 7 DDG-1000s. The second assumption is that any modifications made don’t change the costs for the future DDG-51 destroyers by more than $100 million per ship.

Raytheon’s SPY-3 active array radar, dual-band radar fusion technologies, and open-architecture combat system appear to be the biggest technology losers from this decision, unless elements are incorporated into other ships. General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works is the obvious contractor loser, unless an equivalent number of DDG-1000 destroyers replaces Zumwalt Class orders at a man-hours ratio of 2.0-2.2 DDG-51s for each DDG-1000 destroyer not purchased from Bath Iron Works. Lockheed Martin’s AEGIS naval combat system is the likely technology winner, via the removal of a key challenger. Sen. Collins [R-ME] confirms it | House Armed Services Committee applauds the decision | Virginia Pilot | Reuters | WIRED’s Danger Room | Navy Times | Maine’s Morning Journal | Wall St. Journal | Associated Press | National Journal’s Congress Daily | NY Times.

The excellent naval blog Information Dissemination includes a full analysis of the decision in “DDG-1000 review“, including this quotes from a May 2008 letter from Adm. Roughead to Sen. Kennedy [D-MA]:

“Since we are phasing out production of the DDG 51 class, there would be start-up costs associated with returning this line to production. As a result, the estimated end cost to competitively procure a lead DDG-51 (Flight IIa – essentially a repeat of the final ships currently undergoing construction) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 assuming a truncation of the DDG 1000 class after the two lead ships would be either $2.2B for a single ship or $3.5B for two lead ships (built at competing production yards). This estimate is based on a Profit Related to Offer (PRO) acquisition strategy. The average cost of subsequent DDG 51 Flight IIa class ships would be about $1.8B (FY09) per ship…

While there are cost savings associated with the DDG 1000’s smaller crew, they are largely offset by higher estimated maintenance costs for this significantly more complex ship. Clearly the relative value of the DDG 1000 resides in the combat system (Dual-Band Radar, Volume Search Radar, ASW Suite, etc) that provide this ship with superior warfighting capability in the littoral. However, the DDG 51 can provide Ballistic Missile Defense capability against short and medium range ballistic missiles and area Anti-Air Warfare capability (required in an anti-access environment) where the DDG 1000 currently does not. Upgrading the DDG 1000 combat system with this capability would incur additional cost. The DDG 51 class also possesses better capability in active open ocean anti-Submarine Warfare than does the DDG 1000. On balance, the procurement cost of a single DDG 51 is significantly less than that of a DDG 1000, and the life-cycle costs of the two classes are similar. “

The Congressional Budget Office’s Eric Labs, who has been proven right on several cost estimates for modern shipbuilding programs, estimates construction costs of the first 2 DDG-1000 destroyers are $5.1 billion each, with costs expected to decline to an average of $4.14 billion over the next 5 ships.

July 15/08: Gannett’s Navy Times reports that the DDG-1000 program’s odds of surviving beyond the first 2 ships appear to be fading. The Senate Armed Services committee included funding for a 3rd ship in its FY 2009 budget, but the House Armed Services committee did not. See March 14/08 entry for an indication of the prevailing opinion among HASC leaders. The 3rd ship’s fate will be decided in “reconciliation”, as the House and Senate hammer out a single agreed-upon budget for submission.

Meanwhile, work continues on the US military’s 2010 Program Objective Memorandum that lists multi-year goals and numbers for key projects. Inputs from the services are due by the end of July 2008, and a strained shipbuilding budget could force choices between the DDG-1000 program and closing more than one active shipbuilding line. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, Secretary of Defense Gordon England, and Defense Assistant Secretary John Young will meet at the end of July to discuss the DDG-1000 program directly. Meanwhile, the GAO is preparing a report on the program’s status, and the House Seapower subcommittee under powerhouse Rep. Gene Taylor [D-MS] will hold July 31/08 hearings concerning the program. Any one of these events could end up determining the program’s future.

April 7/08: SAR – down to 7. The Zumwalt Class appears in the Pentagon’s Selected Acquisition Report to December 2007:

“Program costs decreased $7,135.4 million (-19.8%) from $36,022.1 million to $28,886.7 million, due primarily to a quantity decrease of 3 ships from 10 to 7 ships (-$8,495.0 million) and revised estimates for budget reductions and inflation impacts on future ships (-$275.8 million).

These decreases were partially offset by increases in fiscal 2009 to fully fund ships 5-7 (+$693.6 million), quantity allocations

• for schedule, engineering, and estimating (+$603.7 million), additional funding for the Advanced Gun System Pallets and Sea Strike capabilities (+$308.3 million), and the application of revised escalation indices (+$291.0 million).

…Note: Quantity changes are estimated based on the original SAR baseline cost-quantity relationship. Cost changes since the original baseline are separately categorized as schedule, engineering, or estimating “allocations.” The total impact of a quantity change is the identified “quantity” change plus all associated “allocations.”

March 14/08: DDG-51 or Zumwalt? The US House Armed Services Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee meets to hear testimony on the FY 2009 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for Navy Shipbuilding. The DDG-1000 comes under fire from both sides of the political aisle. Chairman Taylor [D-MS] notes that a:

“…cost overrun of only 10% for the first two ships, which would be excellent for a first in ship class, is still close to $700 million dollars. With all the new technologies that must work for this ship to sail, a cost overrun of 20% or even 30% is not out of the question.”

He relays a scenario he has heard from Navy personnel, and it is amplified by ranking minority Rep. Bartlett [R-MD], who lays that scenario out as a choice:

“…is it wise to buy destroyers that at best will cost $3 billion a copy, and more likely $5 billion a piece if the Congressional Budget Office is right, while we shut down stable, more affordable production lines, such as the DDG-51 line? How much risk are you buying down with only 7 DDG 1000s, at a cost of $21 – $35 billion, when you could likely have at least 14, upgraded DDG-51s for that same amount?”

Read: “US Navy’s 313-Ship Plan Under Fire in Congress” for more excerpts, and additional materials from the day’s testimony.

March 12/08: TSCE. Raytheon announces the successful completion of key electronics system reviews, including the 6th major software review for the Zumwalt program, an applications preliminary design review for Release 5 of the TSCE (Total Ship Computing Environment) software, and a critical design review of the TSCE Release 5 infrastructure. The reviews reportedly verified that Raytheon and its teammates remain on schedule and on budget.

TSCE Release 5 adds 5 million delivered lines of code to the Zumwalt baseline, introducing surface warfare, integrated undersea warfare, information operations and general naval operations capabilities to the combat system. On the combat front, it also adds post-launch missile support for both RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and Standard family missiles, and can use the full capabilities of the Mk110 57mm Close-in-Gun System and 155mm Advanced Gun System. On the operational front, TSCE R5 provides the framework to support the ship’s engineering control system.

As a point of comparison, TSCE R5 adds almost as many lines of code as Windows NT v3.1 possessed in total. Release 6 will have about 8.1 million lines, and all this is on top of about 20 million reused modules from other programs of record (AEGIS, SPQ-89 towed array programs, NAVSSI), plus all the code that makes up the commercial operating systems, database systems, middleware, et. al. used in the TSCE system. As a modern and familiar set of comparisons, Windows XP possesses about 40 million lines of code in total, and MacOS 10.4 possesses about 86 million.

Feb 15/08: 1000 & 1001 contract. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $1.402 billion modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2304). This contract will begin construction of the as-yet unnamed DDG-1001, as well as and construction of the DDG 1000 superstructure and hangar under a work share agreement with Bath Iron Works. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, a newly-formed company sector comprising the former Ship Systems and Newport News divisions, will build the composite deckhouse for all Zumwalt Class destroyers.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (34%); Gulfport, MS (12%); Pittsburgh, PA (7%); Burns Harbor, IN (4%); McLean, VA (4%); Walpole, MA (1%); Seattle, WA (1%) and various other locations (37%), and is expected to be completed by July 2014. Fabrication of the DDG 1000 Zumwalt’s deckhouse will start in Q4 2008, and construction of DDG 1001 is expected to begin in Q4 2009, with an expected delivery date of 2014. US Navy release | Northrop Grumman release.

Feb 15/08: 1000 & 1001 contract. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, Inc. in Bath, ME received a $1.395 billion modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303). The effort includes construction of the DDG 1000 destroyer USS Zumwalt, and construction of DDG 1001’s mid-forebody under a work share agreement with Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (NGSS).

Work will be performed in Bath, ME (83%); Pittsburgh, PA (5%); Milwaukee, WI (4%); and various other locations (8%), and is expected to be complete by June 2013. The Zumwalt is currently scheduled to be delivered to the US Navy in 2014. US Navy release | GD release.

Dec 17/07: EO/IR. Raytheon announces a successful critical design review of the DDG-1000’s electro- optical/infrared (EO/IR) system, resulting in approval to advance the design into the production phase. The design review took place at Raytheon’s Maritime Mission Center in Portsmouth, RI, and participants included representatives from Raytheon, NAVSEA, the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, and Lockheed Martin MS2 in Akron, Ohio. All review objectives were successfully met.

The Zumwalt Class’ EO/IR suite combines 5 individual sets of hardware and embedded software from Lockheed Martin, with the Raytheon-developed Total Ship Computing Environment as resident core software. That core software allows the sensors to be used as one or, when necessary, as 5 individual sensors with 5 different missions – including guidance for the ship’s self-defense gunnery. The system can be operated manually, and also delivers 360-degree, 24-hour situational awareness for the ship via features like automated mine-like object detection, and detection and tracking algorithms that discern targets in day and night, as well as high and low contrast environments. During final integration, Raytheon will complete the entire EO/IR “sensor-to-glass” thread – from target detection to workstation display.

EO/IR systems are becoming popular on modern warships, for two reasons. One is that they improve the ship’s capabilities against unconventional threats like fast boats, and also improve its ability to work in surveillance mode when patrolling near ports, energy infrastructure, and key waterways. The other reason is that modern ships feature more and more stealthy designs, which can be ruined if the ship must emit large amounts of radiation at all times via radar scans.

Dec 13/07: Award. Raytheon announces that the DDG-1000’s MK 57 PVLS sub-program, which enhances ship survivability as well as holding current and future missiles within an open architecture firing system, has been recognized by the Department of Defense and the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) as a 2006 Top 5 DoD program award winner for excellence in systems engineering. Members from Raytheon’s joint government-industry team were presented with the award during NDIA’s 10th Annual Systems Engineering Conference in San Diego, CA.

Nov 9/07: 1000 lead-in. Bath Iron Works, Inc. in Bath, ME received a $142 million cost-reimbursement modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) for DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer additional long lead material and pre-production planning to support detail design and construction.

Work will be performed in Bath, Maine (23%); Parsippany, NJ (18%); Pittsburgh, PA (12%); Sanford, ME (3%); Newtown Square, PA (3%); Brunswick, GA (2%); Paterson, NJ (2%); York, PA (2%); Baltimore, MD (2%); Erie, PA (2%); Iron Mountain, MI (2%) and various other locations of 1% or less each (total 29%), and is expected to be complete by January 2008.

Nov 9/07: 1000 lead-in. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (NGSS) in Pascagoula, MS received a $90 million cost-reimbursement modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2304) for DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer additional long lead material and pre-production planning to support detail design and construction.

Work will be performed in Pittsburgh, PA (42%); Pascagoula, MS (11%); Parsippany, NJ (7%); Dallas, TX (7%); Walpole, MA (5%); Erie, PA (5%); York, PA (4%); Herndon, VA (4%), Hampton, NH (3%) and various other locations of 2% or less (total 12%), and is expected to be complete by January 2008.

Nov 5/07: PVLS. BAE Systems announces an $8 million contract from Raytheon Company for the first 2 shipsets of MK57 Vertical Launching System (VLS) for the U.S. Navy’s DDG 1000 Zumwalt destroyers, which begins the transition from design to production. Work will be performed at BAE Systems facilities in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Cordova, Alabama; and Aberdeen, South Dakota.

The MK57 VLS is being developed under a collaborative partnership between Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems and BAE Systems. The contract covers the continuation of design, integration, requirements verification, and the initial purchase of materials for the first 2 ship sets; it has the potential to increase up to $64 million, depending on future DDG-1000 production. Work on this contract award begins immediately and continues until January 2012.

Nov 5/07: CEDS. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Fairfax, VA received a maximum $83 million cost-plus-award-fee, fixed-price incentive/ firm-fixed-price hybrid, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contracts for the Phase II development, qualification, production, and support of the Common Enterprise Display System (CEDS) Display Consoles. The CEDS is a family of displays that will be implemented across platform systems on Navy surface ships, submarines, and aircraft, providing a common interface to the Platform Open Architecture Computing Environment. Remote displays will be used in conjunction with display consoles.

Work will be performed in Fairfax, VA (69.34%); Fremont, CA (8.52%); Washington, DC (7.64%); Tallman, NY (4.90%); Smithfield, PA (4.65%); Scottsdale, AZ (4.34%); Virginia Beach, VA (.41%); Huntsville, AL (.19%); Arlington, VA (.01%), and is expected to be complete by November 2008. The contract was competitively procured via full and open competition and was solicited through the Navy Electronic Commerce Online and Federal Business Opportunities websites, with 2 offers received (N00024-07-D-5222)

Nov 5/07: CEDS. DRS C3 Systems, LLC in Gaithersburg, MD received a maximum $62.6 million cost-plus-award-fee, fixed-price incentive/ firm-fixed-price hybrid, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contracts for the Phase II development, qualification, production, and support of the Common Enterprise Display System (CEDS) Display Consoles. The CEDS is a family of displays that will be implemented across platform systems on Navy surface ships, submarines, and aircraft, providing a common interface to the Platform Open Architecture Computing Environment. Remote displays will be used in conjunction with display consoles.

Work will be performed in Duluth, GA (45%); Gaithersburg, MD (20%); Dahlgren, VA (20%); Johnstown, PA (10%); and Chesapeake, VA (5%), and is expected to be complete by November 2008. This contract was competitively procured and advertised via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online and Federal Business Opportunities websites, with 2 offers received (N00024-07-D-5223).

Oct 30/07: TSCE. Raytheon announces a successful preliminary design review for the “Release 5” of the Total Ship Computing Environment Infrastructure (TSCEI), which comprises six releases of software and more than 5 million lines of code. TSCEI provides computer support for Zumwalt ship control, maintenance, logistics, training and other deployment functions. This level of integration and automation is far ahead of other warships, and is a primary driver for the DDG 1000’s 60% personnel reduction.

Oct 1/07: DBR. Raytheon announces a milestone in advancing the final development of the company’s Dual Band Radar (DBR) for the Zumwalt Class destroyers. Raytheon IDS led the government-industry team in the successful installation of the Lockheed Martin Volume Search Radar (VSR) array at the Surface Warfare Engineering Facility at the Naval Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, CA. After extensive testing, Raytheon will now integrate the VSR with the SPY-3 X-band Multi-Function Radar to form the DBR.

Another 5 months of extensive testing is set to begin, representing a critical step in testing the maturity of the technology prior to advancing to full system production. Raytheon’s X-band, SPY-3 has successfully completed extensive land- based and at-sea tests over the last 2 years. Raytheon release.

FY 2007

Shipyard shift: Bath Iron Works to build #1; DDG 1000 long-lead; 2 ships authorized; Tumblehome hull risky?; DDG-51 vs. Zumwalt; Naval Fire Support study.

1/4 scale model, testing

Sept 25/07: Jane’s Naval Intelligence reports being told by the US Navy that the first DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer will be produced by General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works (BIW) Maine shipyard instead of Northrop Grumman Ship Systems’ (NGSS) Ingalls shipyard. This announcement confirms rumors noted in the July 17/07 entry.

Sept 21/07: MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a $994.3 million cost-type modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346), covering key mission system equipment (MSE) production and engineering support services for the first 2 ships of class. The MSE includes the total ship computing environment infrastructure; acoustic sensor suite element – including the bow array sensor suite; dual band radar; electro-optic/infrared sensor; ship control system; identification of friend or foe; common array power and cooling systems; electronic module enclosures; and Mark 57 vertical launcher system. Raytheon is the mission systems integrator for the Zumwalt Class ships.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, N.J. (21%); Portsmouth, R.I. (20%); Andover, Mass. (18%); Tewksbury, Mass. (17%); Marlborough, Mass.; St. Petersburg, Fla.; Ft. Wayne, Ind. (17%); and Sudbury, Mass. (7%), and is expected to be complete by December 2012. The MSE is being procured for the program executive office for ships [PMS-500].

Aug 23/07: IASS. Raytheon announces a successful design review of the Zumwalt Class’ integrated acoustic sensor suite. IASS is a modular, open architecture combat system designed to provide the ship with a complete undersea warfare picture. It integrates the ship’s acoustic undersea warfare systems and subsystems, including the dual frequency bow array sonar, towed array sonar, towed torpedo countermeasures, expendable bathythermograph, data sensor, acoustic decoy launcher, underwater communications, and associated software.

The design review – which also determined that predefined space and weight allocations on board a Zumwalt Class ship are adequate to house the components of the acoustic sensor suite – took place at the Raytheon IDS Maritime Mission Center, Portsmouth, R.I. Participants included representatives from Raytheon, Naval Sea Systems Command, the Naval Undersea Warfare Center and the Naval Surface Warfare Center, as well as Lockheed Martin and other subcontractors. Raytheon’s OpenAIR business model also leveraged the help of small businesses including Argon ST, Applied Acoustic Concepts, and Adaptive Methods.

With this success, the U.S. Navy has given Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) approval to advance the acoustic sensor suite’s design into production. Raytheon release.

July 24/07: DDG-51 vs. Zumwalt. In a statement before the US House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces, Congressional Budget Office representatives testify that [PDF]:

“The service’s 2008 budget suggests that the Navy expects the first two ships to cost $3.0 billion each and the following five to cost an average of $2.0 billion apiece – meaning that the entire class would have an average cost of $2.3 billion per ship.18 CBO, by contrast, estimates that the first two DDG-1000s would cost $4.8 billion apiece and the next five would cost an average of $3.5 billion each. The average per-ship cost of the class would be $3.9 billion.”

They go on to explain the Navy’s objections to their estimate, as well as their reasons for setting those objections aside. Summary:

“The Navy has stated that if the Congress authorized and bought two additional DDG-51s in 2008 – which would be the 63rd and 64th ships of their class – those destroyers would cost a total of $3.0 billion to $3.1 billion, or $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion apiece (in 2008 dollars). At the same time, the Navy’s 2008 budget submission to the Congress estimates the cost of building the seventh DDG-1000 in 2013 at about $2.1 billion (in 2013 dollars). Deflated to 2008 dollars (using the inflation index for shipbuilding that the Navy provided to CBO), that estimate equals about $1.6 billion – or the same as for an additional DDG-51, which would have the benefit of substantial efficiencies and lessons learned from the 62 models built previously. The lightship displacement of the DDG-1000 is about 5,000 tons greater than that of the DDG-51s under construction today. In effect, the Navy’s estimates imply that those 5,000 extra tons, as well as the 10 new technologies to be incorporated into the DDG-1000 class, will be free.”

July 17/07: Shipyard switch? Defense News reports that U.S. Navy and industry officials are discussing a plan to shift construction of the first DDG 1000 destroyer from Northrop Grumman’s Ingalls shipyard to the General Dynamics yard at Bath, ME. Bath Iron works has begun construction of the last Arleigh Burke Class destroyer (DDG 112), and has no work after it is delivered in 2011. Northrop Grumman Ingalls, meanwhile, is building its own Arleigh Burke ships, an LPD 17 San Antonio class ship, and the Coast Guard’s National Security Cutters.

Navy officials reportedly insist that the proposed shift does not reflect dissatisfaction with Northrop Grumman, which has been stung by public criticism of its work on LPD 17 amphibious ships and the Coast Guard’s Deepwater program. Perhaps, and perhaps not. What is certain is that building the second Zumwalt Class destroyer allows Ingalls to gain lessons learned from the first ship, and may also provide a break from the criticism of problems with its own first-in Class ships (LPD 17 amphibious assault ship, LHA 6 LHA-R mini-carrier, National Security Cutter). As long as they are awarded one of the 2 ships to build, the timing will make little difference to them.

If the Navy and the two shipyards agree on a lead ship swap, Secretary of the Navy Winter will make the final decision, which is not expected before July 23/07.

June 11/07: 1000 lead-in Bath Iron Works Inc. in Bath, ME received a $197.1 million cost-reimbursement type modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) for DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer long lead material, and pre-production planning to support detail design and construction.

Work will be performed in Bath, Maine (44%), Parsippany, NJ (16%), Pittsburgh, PA (10%), Iron Mountain, MI (5%), Erie, PA (4%), Kingsford, MI (4%), Mississauga, Ontario, Canada (4%), York, PA (3%), Kent, WA (3%), Indianapolis, IN (3%), Hudson, ME (2%), and Newton Square, PA (2%).

June 11/07: Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (NGSS) in Pascagoula, MS received a $10 million cost-plus-award-fee modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2304) for procurement of DDG 1000 research, development, test and technical services.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (45.09%); Herndon, VA (26.66%); Annapolis, MD (6.53%); Aberdeen, MD (4%); West Bethesda, MD (3.75%); Linthicum, MD (2.68%); San Antonio, TX (3.76%); Washington, DC (2.32%); Reston, VA (2%); Arlington, VA (1.20%); Pt. Mugu, CA (1.01%); Newport News, VA (0.75%); and Tacoma, WA (0.25%), and is expected to be complete by December 2007.

June 5/07: 1000 lead-in. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $191.1 million cost-reimbursement type modification to previously-awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2304). It covers DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer long lead material such as steel plates, pipe, cable and other major equipment. It also covers production planning labor, integrated logistics support, and systems integration engineering to support detail design and construction.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (47%), Pittsburgh, PA (30%), Parsippany, NJ (12%), Indianapolis, IN (5%), Erie, PA (4%), and Iron Mountain, MI (2%), and is expected to be completed by November 2007. Northrop Grumman release.

(click to view full)

May 15/07: Fire Support Study. US Joint Forces Staff College JAWS Masters Thesis by Col. Shawn Welch, USARNG, is published: Joint and Interdependent Requirements: A Case Study in Solving the Naval Surface Fire Support Capabilities Gap [PDF]. Wins National Defense University 2007 Award for best thesis. Persuasively argue that current capabilities are insufficient, casts doubt on the DDG-1000 Class as an adequate solution, and makes a case that faulty assumptions have helped to create this problem. Includes a number of interesting anecdotes, as well as analysis.

April 6/07: Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $7.5 million cost-plus-award-fee modification to previously awarded contract N00024-06-C-2304, for DDG 1000 research, development, test and technical services.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS (75.53%); Herndon, VA (9.77%); Aberdeen, MD (3.33%) Annapolis, MD (2.93%); San Antonio, TX (2.00%); El Segundo, CA (1.99%) Pt. Mugu, CA (1.28%); Linthicum, MD (0.69%); West Bethesda, MD (0.67%); Washington, DC (0.57%); Reston, VA (0.51%); Arlington, VA (0.40%); and Newport News, VA (0.33%), and is expected to be completed by September 2007. All contract funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

April 2/07: Tumblehome tumble-over? Defense News runs an article that openly questions the DDG-1000 design’s stability at sea:

“At least eight current and former officers, naval engineers and architects and naval analysts interviewed for this article expressed concerns about the ship’s stability. Ken Brower, a civilian naval architect with decades of naval experience was even more blunt: “It will capsize in a following sea at the wrong speed if a wave at an appropriate wavelength hits it at an appropriate angle”…”

Rigid traditionalism of the same species that dismissed the aircraft carrier? Prescient early warning of a catastrophe? Or something else? Read DID’s report.

March 21/07: 1000 turbines. Rolls Royce Naval Marine, Inc. received a $76.6 million firm fixed price contract for DDG-1000 main turbine generator sets (N00024-07-C-4014). No specifics yet, but see DID’s coverage of the MT30 engine in the technology section, above. Work will be performed in Walpole, MA and is expected to be complete by September 2009. The contract was competitively procured and advertised on the Internet, with 2 offers received. GE Marine would have been the other offeror.

March 20/07: Bath Iron Works Inc. received a $12.6 million cost-plus-award-fee modification under previously awarded contract N00024-06-C-2303, for DDG 1000 research, development, test and technical services.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME (39.08%), Brunswick, GA (19.70%), West Bethesda, MD (12.22%) Groton, CT (9.55%), Arlington, VA (6.10%), Elk Grove, VA (4.33%), Herndon, VA (3.79%), Annapolis, MD (2.73%), Pt. Mugu, CA (1.72%), Montgomeryville, PA (0.50%), Washington D.C. (0.25%), and San Antonio, Texas (0.03%), and is expected to be complete by January 2008. Contract funds in the amount of $3.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

March 7/07: PMM research. DRS Power Technology Inc in Fitchburg, MA received a $19.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for Integrated Power Systems research, and development of a Permanent Magnet Motor (PMM) System Land Based Test Site and Next Generation Design.

DRS’ PMM was taken out of the DDG 1000 design to keep it on schedule, and a proven but heavier and less productive AIM system was installed instead. Continuing research could add new options to future Zumwalt Class destroyers – or more likely, to successor ships like the CG (X). See full DID coverage.

Feb 12/07: PVLS. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems and BAE Systems announce completion of a restrained test firing of a Standard Missile-2 Block IV MK72 rocket booster on the new MK57 PVLS missile launcher. The test at White Sands Missile Range, NM demonstrated the system’s ability to safely withstand a static burn of an MK72 rocket motor in the new launcher. See Raytheon release.

Feb 12/07: 1000 MSE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems in Tewksbury, MA received a not-to-exceed $305.7 million cost-type modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-5346) for DDG 1000 Mission System Equipment (MSE) and engineering support services. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (47%); Portsmouth, RI (28%); and Moorestown, NJ (25%), and is expected to be complete by September 2007.

This is part of the DDG 1000 Ship Systems Detailed Design and Integration effort, and the hardware involved includes: Total Ship’s Computing Environment Infrastructure; Acoustic Sensor Suite Element – including the Bow Array Sensor Suite; Dual Band Radar; Electro-Optic/ Infrared Sensor; Ship Control System; Identification of Friend or Foe; Common Array Power and Cooling Systems; Electronic Module Enclosures; and the Mark 57 PVLS Vertical Launcher System.

Feb 6/07: IPS R&D. General Atomics in San Diego, CA, who is also well known for designing power distribution systems used by the US Navy on its aircraft carriers, receives a $10.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to research and develop Integrated Power Systems (IPS).

A spokesman for the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center in Charleston, SC said that the contract is not specifically geared to any platform already under construction like the DDG 1000. Instead, technologies developed and lessons learned under this R&D contract will be integrated into future IPS systems generally.

Jan 29/07: Design. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $268.1 million cost-plus-award-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2304) to exercise an option to complete the detail design of the Zumwalt Class Destroyer. The total value of the detail design effort is $307.5 million (see Aug 31/06 entry).

The contract funds further DDG 1000 detail design and procurement of vendor-furnished information and long-lead materials, and runs through 2013. Work will be performed at Northrop Grumman Ship System’s Pascagoula, MS; Gulfport, MS; and Washington DC facilities. See also Northrop Grumman release.

Jan 29/07: Design. Bath Iron Works Inc. in Bath, ME received a $257.5 million cost-plus-award-fee/cost-plus-fixed-fee modification under previously awarded contract (N00024-06-C-2303) to exercise an option to complete Zumwalt Class Destroyer detail design. The total value of the detail design effort is $337.4 million – $79.9 million for advanced zone detail design was awarded as part of the basic contract (see Aug 8/06 entry).

DDG-1000: night moves…
(click to view full)

Jan 19/07: Lighting. Skyler Technologies Group subsidiary RSL Fiber Systems, LLC in Salem, New Jersey announces a contract from Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS to supply the Advanced Lighting System (ALS) for the U.S. Navy’s DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class. Their Advanced Lighting System offers significant benefits to stealth, durability, and maintainability, and has already been installed in several new US Navy ships.

In a conversation with DID, RSL Fiber systems estimated a total contract value is in excess of $12.5 Million for the six (6) DDG 1000 class ships planned. The estimated contract value for the two (2) DDG 1000 class ships already approved by Congress is in excess of $4.9 Million, and includes engineering support services and the supply of remote source lighting systems and related hardware. See our article “DDG-1000 ‘Destroyers’ to get ALS Lighting System” for more coverage of ALS details, advantages, and resources.

Nov 7/06: TSCE. Raytheon announces the delivery of a complete set of specifications, design documents, source code and user guides for the DDG-1000 Total Ship Computing Environment Infrastructure (TSCEI) Release 4.1, which will be made available to other US Navy open architecture programs via the PEO IWS SHARE (Software-Hardware Asset-Reuse Enterprise) repository. The TSCE is a robust, enterprise-network computing system on which all DDG-1000 application software programs run. IBM blade servers are the Zumwalt Class’ hardware medium.

Under the Navy’s DDG-1000 Detail Design and Integration contract awarded in 2005, Raytheon IDS serves as the prime mission systems equipment integrator for all electronic and combat systems. See Raytheon release.

Oct 24/06: DBR. Raytheon reports successful on-schedule integration of Lockheed Martin’s engineering development model S-Band array with receiver, exciter, and signal/data processing equipment for the Volume Search Radar (VSR) portion of the DDG-1000 destroyer’s Dual Band Radar (DBR). Raytheon had already developed and tested the X-band component of the DBR, known as the AN/SPY-3. Now the challenge is to integrate them together.

Oct 17/06: 2 ships authorized. President George W. Bush signs the FY 2007 defense appropriations bill into law as Public Law 109-364. The final bill authorizes the buildout of 2 DDG-1000 ships, to be incrementally funded. It is silent re: future years or future ships, imposing no limits.

FY 2006

Milestone B go-ahead; Design & reviews ongoing.

Zumwalt concept: inshore

Aug 31/06: QTA, DDI IBR. Raytheon issues a release reporting the successful completion of two significant events for the DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer Program: the third Quarterly Technical Assessment (QTA) and the Detail Design and Integration (DDI) Integrated Baseline Review (IBR), both of which were conducted at the DDG 1000 Collaboration Center in Washington, DC.

The QTA reviewed and assessed the following major design and development categories: System Integration, Ship Detail Design, Mission System Equipment Development, Mission System Design and System Software Development. Participants included representatives from the U.S. Navy PEO Ships/PMS 500, PEO IWS, Naval Surface Warfare Dahlgren Division and the DDG-1000 industry teammates including Raytheon, Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works.

The program’s DDI IBR involved the US Navy assessing the program scope, resources, Integrated Master Schedule and Earned Value Management processes. This key milestone was also successfully completed, and concluded with the Navy’s approval of the $2.7 billion Program Management Baseline. Firms involved in this stage included Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, General Dynamics/ Bath Iron Works, Northrop Grumman Defense Missions Systems, Boeing and L-3 Communications.

Aug 31/06: Design. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (NGSS), Pascagoula, MS is being awarded a $95.9 million cost-plus-award-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class destroyer detail design, maintenance of the DDG-1000 integrated data environment for those designs (IDE), and procurement of vendor furnished information (VFI) and long lead material (LLM) to support detail design. Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS and is expected to be complete by September 2007. The contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-06-C-2304).

The total value of this detail design effort is $307.5 million, with $39.4 million funded at contract award for advanced zone detail design. The remaining detail design efforts are included in a priced option valued at $268.1 million. The IDE maintenance effort will be fully funded at contract award in the amount of $11.5 million, and Northrop Grumman will be awarded a Not-to-Exceed (NTE) line item for vendor furnished information and long-lead materials valued at $45 million. The maximum amount for which the Government is liable under that NTE is $22.5 million, prior to further definitization.

Aug 8/06: Design. General Dynamics subsidiary Bath Iron Works Inc. (BIW) in Bath, Maine recently received a $115.8 million cost-plus-award-fee/ cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer detailed design, and procurement of vendor furnished information (VFI) in support of the detailed design. Work will be performed in Bath, ME and is expected to be complete by December 2008. Per the previous contract announcement, this contract was not competitively procured by the Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington DC (N00024-06-C-2303).

The total value of the detail design effort is actually $336.3 million. This initial award consists of $78.5 million funded at contract award, plus a not-to-exceed (NTE) line item for procurement of “vendor-furnished information” valued at $37.3 million, for a total of $115.8 million. Note that the maximum amount for which the government is liable under the NTE line item prior to definitization is $18.6 million, so the $115.8 million total may not be reached. The remaining detail design efforts are included in a priced option valued at $257.7 million.

May 25/06: DBR. Raytheon announces that the U.S. Navy’s first shipboard active phased array multifunction radar, Raytheon’s AN/SPY-3, has successfully participated in a series of at-sea tests, including the first time the radar has acquired and tracked a live controlled aircraft while at sea. Raytheon release.

May 1/06: Reader Justin Hughes notifies us that under a motion approved by the US House Force Projection Subcommittee, the DDG-1000 program would be capped at 2 ships as a technology demonstrator for the forthcoming CG (X) cruiser program. This is all part of the US FY 2007 defense budget process, and does not represent a final decision, but could be influential. Chairman Bartlett [R-MD] did acknowledge that the CG (X) cruiser are slated to incorporate a new type of radar that “might not be ready for use for a decade.” See Defense News article.

There’s also an interesting but completely unofficial discussion here re: what might be done with those funds – see esp. the information re: the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class upgrades. This tip would prove prophetic.

April 13/06: Design. Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME receives a $42.8 million cost-plus-award-fee modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-2310) for the continuation of DD (X) transition design efforts and initial detail design and long lead material procurement for DD (X) ship construction.

This effort is for transitional and detail design for DD (X), such that work can be accomplished prior to the award of a detail design completion contract in order to minimize impact on the ship industrial base. Work will be performed in Bath, ME and is expected to be complete by June 2006.

April 12/06: DID’s “The Lion in Winter: Government, Industry, and US Naval Shipbuilding Challenges” reproduces a speech by Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter. In many ways, the DDG-1000 class is a poster-child example of the shipbuilding dynamics he discusses. This has implications for overall US naval policy, and also for the program’s future.

March 2/06: Design. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, MS received a $42.8 million cost-plus-award-fee, level of effort modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-05-C-2311) for continuation of DD (X) transition design efforts, initial detail design and long lead material procurement for DD (X) ship construction.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS and is expected to be complete by June 2006.

Nov 23/05: Milestone B Go-ahead. See DID coverage, and Navy Times article.

Nov 11/05: DAB Review. DD (X) Destroyer Program Has Its Defense Acquisition Board Review. Inside Defense goes over some of the issues and considerations.

FY 2005

$3 billion mission systems integration contract; Flag-level Critical Design Review passes; IBM picked for TSCE; PVLS passes factory acceptance testing; TSCE R2 software certified; SPY-3 radar passes Milestone B; Underwater eXplosion testing.

DD (X) Destroyer

Sept 30/05: Design. Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME (N00024-05-C-2310) and Northrop Grumman Ship Systems in Pascagoula, ME (N00024-05-C-2311) each receive a not-to-exceed ceiling price $53.4 million (with a limitation of $26.7 million) cost-plus-award-fee, level of effort letter contract for the Phase IV DD (X) program transition design effort. They will provide vendor furnished information for key equipment, completion of system diagrams and maintenance of the DD (X) integrated data environment for design.

Work will be performed in Bath, ME and Pascagoula, MS and is expected to be complete by January 2006 (BIW: N00024-05-C-2310, NGC: N00024-05-C-2311).

Sept 14/05: CDR. The DD (X) Program’s Flag-Level Critical Design Review (CDR) is completed for the overall system design, marking the end of Phase III and a process advertised as being “on schedule and within 1% of stated budget.” See the release for more details, which include important information about the program.

Note that this effort included an unusually thorough approach of CDRs for each of 10 Engineering Development Models, representing a judgment that they have achieved enough have achieved both technical maturity and cost insight. The 10 EDMs were:

• Wave-Piercing Tumblehome Hull
  
• Infrared Mockups
  
• Composite Deckhouse and Apertures
  
• Dual Band Radar (DBR)
  
• Integrated Power System
  
• Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE)
  
• Integrated Undersea Warfare System (IUSW)
  
• Peripheral Vertical Launching System (PVLS)
  
• Advanced Gun System (AGS)
  
• Autonomic Fire Suppression System (AFSS)

Aug 4/05: IBM for TSCE. Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems has selected IBM to supply core computing and storage equipment for the DD (X) multi-mission destroyer. The equipment will form the backbone of the Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE), based on an Open Architecture approach that makes it easier to integrate commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware and software and makes wider interoperability easier.

The selection of IBM followed a competition in which Raytheon solicited proposals from leading computer suppliers, noting the complex requirements of the TSCE and the challenges of operating electronic equipment in the harsh environment aboard a surface combatant. IBM will work with Raytheon to complete detailed specifications and supply COTS equipment to Prime contractor Northrop Grumman for the first DD(X) ship delivery.

August 2/05: PVLS. The MK57 Vertical Launching System (VLS) Engineering Development Model (EDM) successfully passes Factory Acceptance Testing two weeks ahead of schedule. The testing was designed to prove that the MK 57 PVLS system has a sound open architecture, capable of receiving and processing missile select and launch commands within the mission timelines. See release. Back on June 23/05, another release noted a Maximum Credible Detonation Event (MCDE) test at the Aberdeen Test Center. That test was designed to confirm that that weapons stored in a PVLS module will not detonate during a worst case scenario in an module next to it.

July 26/05: DID’s “DD (X) Program Passes Review, But Opposition & Reports Cloud Future (Updated)” Notes political opposition from various circles. Also notes recent Congressional testimony from the CBO and GAO discussed cost estimates that have risen from $1 billion to $3.2 billion average per ship, ship life cycle costs likely to be about double that of the DDG 51 Arleigh Burk Class ($4 Billion vs. $2.1 billion), possible further cost increases, and technical project risks that still remain.

July 19/05: GAO. US GAO submits a briefing to Congress: “Progress and Challenges Facing the DD (X) Surface Combatant Program.” The Congressional Budget Office also submits a briefing: “The Navy’s DD (X) Destroyer Program” [PDF].

AGS fires LRLAP
(click to view full)

July 18/05: The National Team announces that they have successfully completed the Initial Critical Design Review for the DD (X) overall system design, allowing the program to pass on toward the Flag level review in September 2005 and enter detail design. This was a DD (X) Phase III program event that addressed the total system’s design maturity, and overall progress made to date on DD (X) engineering-development models of hardware and software components that have already been built, tested and reviewed by the National Team and the Navy. Examples include the integrated deckhouse and apertures, total ship computing environment, dual-band radar system, integrated under-sea warfare system, MK 57 advanced vertical launching system, automated gun system and wave-piercing tumblehome hull.

July 5/05: DID’s “DD (X) Program: Developments & Alternatives.” Notes ongoing Congressional discussions re: cost caps, despite Congressional action that had hiked the price per ship. Also notes the lobbying effort underway to reactivate Iowa Class battleships instead.

June 14/05: “GAO Delivers DD (X) Program Interim Report.” Among other things, it says that technology development for the U.S. Navy’s advanced DD (X) destroyer is still lagging despite progress in a number of areas.

June 1/05: UX testing. The DD (X) National Team announces the successful completion of Underwater Explosion testing on the ship’s Quarter Scale Model. The tests were done to determine the unique destroyer hull form’s reaction to underwater explosions. Explosive charges were placed at predetermined distances from the model, and the intensity of the charges was stepped up as the test series progressed. The release reports that the new design’s wave-piercing bow, tumblehome cross section, step deck area and rising stern responded as envisioned. See release.

May 23/05: $3 billion contract for DD (X). A consortium led by Raytheon Co. Integrated Defense Systems (IDS) in Tewksbury, MA received a cost-plus award-fee letter contract with a not-to-exceed ceiling of $3 billion for DD (X) ship system integration and detail design. Raytheon and its partners will develop systems for the new destroyers that improve on existing technology, including radar, sonar, the ships’ computing network and external communications network and missile launchers. The consortium will also be integrating the systems to make sure they work together.

Work will be performed by Raytheon IDS in Tewksbury, MA; Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems and Sensors in Moorestown, NJ; BAE acquisition United Defense LP in Minneapolis, MN; Northrop Grumman Mission Systems in King George, VA; and Ball Aerospace & Technology Corp. in Westminster, CO; and is expected to be complete by December 2009. This contract was not competitively procured. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C. issued the contract (N00024-05-C-5346).

April 18/05: “Senate Hearing On DD (X) Procurement Strategies.” The legislature doesn’t like the “winner take all” approach, and wants the funding spread around. The Navy disagrees, citing additional costs of up to $300 million per ship. DID covers the issue.

March 31/05: TSCE. Software Release 2 of DD (X) Total Ship Computing Environment (TSCE) receives formal certification from the Navy, after successfully meeting all entrance and exit criteria. Two successful demonstrations of Software Release 2 at the U.S. Navy’s Open Architecture Test Facility (OATF) in Dahlgren, VA demonstrated that the open-architected TSCE is easily portable between different computing platforms, can be reconfigured quickly without having to write new code, and delivers the functionality essential for DD(X) to perform its multiple missions.

The first large-scale implementation of the US Navy’s Open Architecture (OA) strategy, the TSCE integrates all shipboard warfighting and peacetime operations into a single, common enterprise computing environment. This approach gives the Navy increased ability to use standardized software and commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware across a family of ships. See release.

March 9/05: Design. Northrop Grumman Ships Systems in Pascagoula, MiS received a $10 million cost-plus-fee modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-02-C-2302) to refine the DD (X) Program Life Cycle Cost Estimate deliverable. This effort modifies Contract Data Requirements List A.20 with additional requirements in order to provide greater detail into the DD (X) Program Life Cycle Cost Estimate.

Work will be performed in Tewksbury, MA (35%); Pascagoula, MS (23%); Bath, Maine (18%); Minneapolis, MN (7%); Moorestown, NJ (4%); Farmington, UT (4%); King George, VA (4%); Chantilly, VA (3%); and Alexandria, VA (2%), and is expected to be complete by March 2005.

Jan 14/05: DBR. DD (X) AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar Passes Milestone B Criteria Tests. The Engineering Development Model (EDM) for the AN/SPY-3 S-Band Multi Function Radar has successfully completed the Milestone B test event at the Navy’s Wallops Island, VA test range. The test served to assess radar performance with regard to environmental, detection, and tracking performance.

FY 1998 – 2004

DD-21 becomes DD (X); Northrop Grumman wins DD-X, 2.9 billion contract; DD-21 development contracts.

April 14/04: Design. $78 million to Northrop Grumman under DD (X).

April 29/02: Design. Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (NGSS) division Ingalls Shipbuilding Inc. in Pascagoula, MS wins the down-select, and a $2.879 billion cost-plus-award-fee contract for DD (X) Design Agent activities. These include the design, build and test of engineering development models (EDMs) for major subsystems and components for the DD (X) destroyer.

Work will be performed in Pascagoula, MS and Bath, ME (38%); Portsmouth, RI (16%); Minneapolis, MN (13%); Tewksbury, MA (9%); Reading, MA (4%); Andover, MA (4%); Newport News, VA (3%); Fullerton, CA (2%); Fort Wayne, IN (2%); Bethesda, MD (2%); Anaheim, CA (2%); Cincinnati, OH (2%); Hudson, MA (2%); and Philadelphia, PA (1%) and is to be complete by September 2005.

This contract is incrementally funded; funding in the amount of $273.2 million has been committed with this award (N00024-02-C-2302). It was competitively procured via publication in the Commerce Business Daily and the solicitation was posted to the Navy Electronic Commerce Online (NECO) Internet web page, with 2 offers received.

See also US assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition John Young, Jr’s briefing regarding the downselect:

“The award will be made to Ingalls Shipbuilding, Incorporated, the Gold Team lead. Their proposal was selected due to its overall management and technical approach, coupled with superior engineering development models and exceptional specified performance features of the proposed design. The superior EDMs and features included an innovative peripheral vertical launch system, dual-band radar suite, two-helicopter spot flight deck, and stern boat-launching system.

The contract was competitively awarded based on best value… The source selection process was the first of a kind for a Navy shipbuilding program and will be the model for future Navy acquisitions… BIW will continue to be involved in the design of the ship and development of the EDMs, to ensure that both shipbuilders can product DD(X) and can compete for the detailed design and construction of the lead ship in fiscal year 2005.”

Dec 21/01: End of DD-21, Birth of DD (X). US under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics Pete Aldridge announces that the DD-21 program has been terminated, following the Quadrennial Defense Review. It will be replaced by a program called DD (X). Pentagon transcript.

Oct 25/01: $60.2 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

June 14/01: A not-to-exceed $124.3 million firm-fixed-price advance agreement modification for the extension of the DD 21 Phase II period of performance.

Work will be performed by the “Blue Team” (42%) led by Bath Iron Works in Bath, Maine and Lockheed Martin Government Electronic Systems in Moorestown, N.J.; the “Gold Team” (42%) led by Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, MS, with Raytheon Systems Co. in Falls Church, VA; and United Defense Limited Partnership (UDLP) in Minneapolis, MN (16%). Work is expected to be complete by September 2001 (N00024-98-9-2300, modification 0037)

May 31/01: $7.1 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

May 29/01: $6.7 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

May 17/01: $7.1 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

May 1/01: $5.4 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

April 2/01: $29 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

Jan 9/01: $12 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

Jan 9/01: 7 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

Nov 2/2000: $10.6 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

May 1/2000: $16 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

Nov 23/99: A $238 million contract modification to the DD-21 Alliance for the DD-21 Phase II effort, which includes the development of 2 competitive DD-21 initial systems designs with accompanying DD 21 virtual prototypes.

Work will be performed in Bath, Maine (21%); Moorestown, NJ (21%); Pascagoula, MS (21%); Falls Church, VA (21%); and Minneapolis, MN (16%), and is expected to be complete by January 2001 (N00024-98-9-2300).

Feb 17/99: $12 million to the DD-21 Alliance (N00024-98-9-2300).

Aug 18/98: The DD-21 Alliance, comprised of Bath Iron Works Corp. in Bath, Maine, and Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, MS received is being awarded a $16.5 million agreement modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-98-9-2300) for the Phase I development of DD-21 design concepts. Bath Iron Works Corp. has been selected by the DD-21 Alliance to lead the alliance and execute the Phase I agreement, which provides for the establishment of 2 competing teams who will perform requirements analyses and trade studies, and develop 2 competitive DD-21 system concept designs. Each team will implement total ship systems engineering and cost as an independent variable principles in order to achieve significant reductions in ship procurement costs, operation and support costs, and manning levels over current Navy combatants. This agreement has a potential cumulative value of $68.5 million.

Work will be performed in Moorestown, NJ (30%), Pascagoula, MS (25%), Falls Church, VA (25%), and Bath, Maine (20%), and is expected to be complete in October 1999. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Arlington, VA is managing the contract.

Additional Readings & Sources

• US Navy PEO Ships – DDG 1000

• Naval Technology – Zumwalt DD (X) Class – Multimission Destroyer: Advanced Technology Surface Combatants, USA

• Raytheon – DDG 1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer: Critical technologies

• Carbon Fiber Guru, via WayBack – The Navy’s Carbon Fiber Composite Stealth Warship. The deckhouse that sits on DDG 1000/1001 is.

• DID – Next-Gen Naval Gunfire Support: the USA’s AGS & LRLAP

• DID Spotlight – The US Navy’s Dual Band Radars

• Maritime Business Strategies, LLC, via WayBack – The Cost of the DDG-1000. Lists and totals all contracts under the DD-21, DD (X), and DDG-1000 programs. Note that the total given assumes that every contract spent its maximum, which is not necessarily so.

• Raytheon, via WayBack – Raytheon’s Electronic Modular Enclosure for DDG 1000. They contain the Total Ship Computing Environment.

• ZumwaltFacts.Info – A 3rd party site chaired by Col. James G. Zumwalt, Esq. (USMC Ret.). It was supported by external donors, which include Raytheon.

• DDG-1000 National Team Site. Since deactivated, archived from end 2008. See also the DD (X) National team site archive, which covered the period up until September 2005 very well.

Official Reports

• US Congressional Research Service (#RL32109, April 8/14 update) – Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress. Compare to Sept 11/08 update.

• US House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces (July 24/07) – Congressional Budget Office, Statement of J. Michael Gilmore, Assistant Director for National Security and Eric J. Labs, Senior Analyst: The Navy’s 2008 Shipbuilding Plan and Key Ship Programs [PDF]

• US Government Accountability Office (GAO-06-279R, Dec 13/05) – Issues Related to Navy Battleships. Just looks at the various issues and options around reactivating Iowa Class battleships, and states the various positions, without doing a lot of in-depth analysis.

• Pentagon Office of Force Transformation’ (2005) – Alternative Fleet Architecture Design study [PDF]. Note esp. their estimates re: the lack of realism in US Navy funding, and hence ship-building, projections. The US Congressional Research Service also tabled an April 2007 research report discussing this and other Navy force structure studies.

• US Government Accountability Office (GAO-05-924T, July 28/05) –
  

Defense Acquisitions: Progress and Challenges Facing the DD (X) Surface Combatant Program [PDF]. Paul L. Francis, GAO director of acquisition and sourcing management, in testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Projection Forces.

• US Government Accountability Office Briefing (GAO-05-924T, July 19/05) – Defense Acquisitions: Progress and Challenges Facing the DD (X) Surface Combatant Program. Paul L. Francis, GAO director of acquisition and sourcing management, in testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Projection Forces. Includes GAO cost estimates.

• US Congressional Budget Office (Doc #6561, July 19/05) – The Navy’s DD (X) Destroyer Program [PDF]. Statement of Assistant Director for National Security J. Michael Gilmore before the House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Projection Forces. It’s worth looking at their methodology for calculating program costs, and the conclusions they’ve come to.

• US Congressional Research Service (June 24/05) – Navy DD (X) and CG (X) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress

• US Government Accountability Office (GAO-05-752R, June 14/05) – Progress of the DD (X) Destroyer Program. Report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Seapower; and the House Committee on Armed Services, Subcommittee on Projection Forces. Discusses the state of various key technologies in the program.

News & Views

• USN All Hands (May 27/14) – An inside look at the Navy’s newest destroyer class. USS Zumwalt, with 13,800 volt power and the capacity to deliver 12MW of spare power while stealing at 30 knots.

• AOL Defense, via WayBack (Nov 12/12) – Can Navy Afford Next-Gen DDG-51 Destroyer, Packard Award Or Not? The official estimate is $2.6 billion, but the unofficial estimate is up to $3.6 billion – which may be equal to or higher than a DDG-1000.

• DID – USA: A 21st Century Maritime Posture for an Uncertain Future. Guest article by the Heritage Foundation.

• Information Dissemination (Aug 10/10) – Happy Thoughts and DDG-1000. “The real reason the Navy is dropping the VSR on DDG-1000 is because the Navy intends to put… AMDR [vid. DID article] on the DDG-1000… because the timeline works out. The thing is the Navy can’t actually say this because there is no official AMDR program yet and the DDG-1000 isn’t supposed to be a ballistic missile defense ship – remember? This story in Navy Times is what it is because when it comes to US Navy shipbuilding, the Navy under CNO Roughead is never completely honest with the American people about what the Navy is doing. Sorry if the truth hurts.”

• c|net, via WayBack (Aug 4/10) – Inside the Navy’s next-generation destroyer. A bit breathless in tone. Conveys program intent and some technical aspects, but without critical analysis.

• Ganett’s Navy Times, via WayBack (Aug 17/09) – DDG 1000 project quietly logs successes [now subscriber-only]. Updates current progress on major systems.

• Heritage Foundation, via WayBack (Oct 7/08) – Changing Course on Navy Shipbuilding: Questions Congress Should Ask Before Funding. Looks at the issue of DDG-1000 vs. DDG-51 designs.

• US Naval Institute Proceedings Magazine, via WayBack (Aug 2007) – The Navy and Its DDG-1000 – Heading Wrong [member-only]. By Captain Robert H. Smith, U.S. Navy (Retired). One can also find an excerpt in the Information Dissemination milblog’s Aug 7/07 entry: “14,500 Tons of Littoral Cruising, Invisible, Survivable, Multi-Mission Capable, NSFS, Sea Striking, Deep Reach Firepower.”

• US Joint Forces Staff College (May 15/07) – JAWS Masters Thesis by Col. Shawn Welch, USARNG: Joint and Interdependent Requirements: A Case Study in Solving the Naval Surface Fire Support Capabilities Gap. National Defense University 2007 Award for best thesis; persuasively argue that current capabilities are insufficient, casts doubt on the DDG-1000 Class as a solution, and makes a case that faulty assumptions have helped to create this problem. Includes a number of interesting anecdotes, as well as analysis:

“The history of NSFS, current national strategy, joint and service specific doctrine, current and alternative capabilities associated with providing NSFS are evaluated against current attempts to bridge NSFS gaps with naval aviation and missiles alone. This study will demonstrate a credible case for re-examining major caliber guns and the ships that mount them as part of the NSFS solution set. This thesis identifies five [5] courses of action to meet the NSFS requirements to defeat a future near-peer competitor in the littorals in a timely and affordable manner.”

• Popular Science, via WayBack (November 2006) – The Invisible Warship. Of course, the moment it begins performing naval gunfire support, triangulating its location with acoustic sensors becomes very possible. Missile firings present smaller but similar issues.

• Sea Power magazine, via WayBack (September 2006) – Integrated Fight Through Power Provides Electrical Redundancies

• DID (April 12/06) – The Lion in Winter: Government, Industry, and US Naval Shipbuilding Challenges. Lays out, and discusses, Secretary of the Navy Winter’s speech concerning the state of the Navy and its future. Money quote:

“The greater the capabilities, generally, the higher the costs – which means that the Navy can afford to buy fewer platforms. But that too drives up the cost per ship. Both factors – greater capability and lower numbers of ships – are pushing the cost of shipbuilding to prohibitive levels.”

• LA Times, via WayBack (Nov 24/05) –

SSBN Vanguard Class
(click to view larger)

The USA’s Ohio/ Henry M. Jackson Class and Britain’s Vanguard Class SSBNs (i.e. nuclear missile submarines) will begin experiencing age-related risks by the late 2010s, and military programs of this type can easily take 15-20 years from concept to fielding. The Common Missile Compartment (CMC) sub-program will help to define one of the next-generation SSBN’s most important constraints.

CMC aims to define the missile tubes and accompanying systems that would be used to launch new ballistic missiles, successors to the current Trident II/ D5 missile fleet used by the USA and Britain. Key options under consideration include a widened diameter for each tube from 2.21m – 3.04m, and the potential for flexibility beyond nuclear missiles.

Imperatives and Opportunities

Trident D5 (larger)
and C4 predecessor
(click to view larger)

The USA needs new SSBN submarines. Their existing Ohio Class boats will begin to retire at a rate of 1 hull per year, beginning in 2027, as they reach the end of their 42-year operational lifetimes. Britain, meanwhile, relies on its Vanguard fleet for the entirety of its nuclear deterrent. Their alternative to replacement involves becoming a non-nuclear power. In both cases, the first step involves a new Common Missile Compartment and Advanced Launcher for current and future nuclear missiles. Both countries have also taken the next step, and begun designing the submarines that will carry CMC.

The USA and Britain aren’t alone in their pursuits. At present, France, India, Russia, and China are all working on successor sub-launched ballistic missile systems and/or SSBN submarines.

CMC: Present and Future

Virginia Block III bow
(click to view full)

The new CMC/AL assemblies are slated for production in blocks of 4 tubes, allowing each partner to tailor the total number of missile tubes to its final submarine design. Current American Ohio Class SSBNs have 24 tubes, but SSBN-X currently plans to reduce that to 16 tubes. Britain’s current Vanguard Class has 16 tubes, but the number of tubes in its Successor Class hasn’t been set yet.

While CMC will define key constraints for America and Britain, it may also create opportunities.

One is built-in: commonality between their respective launch systems makes it easier to share changes and advances.

The other opportunity is about flexibility. There is no question that the future Common Missile Compartment will be built around the nuclear deterrence mission as its primary focus. That is unlikely to be its sole use, however, and it would not be surprising if some of those other potential uses ended up influencing the CMC’s design.

Converted Ohio class SSGNs, for instance, have already replaced nuclear missiles with American special forces, land attack missiles, and UAVs. In a similar and related vein, the Virginia Class Block III fast attack submarine replaced their 12 vertical-launch cruise missile tubes with 2 Common Weapon Launcher (CWL) “six-shooters” derived from the SSGNs’ converted missile tubes. The size of those CWLs allows Virginia Class Block III submarines to launch cruise missiles, UAVs, UUVs, and more from these same tubes.

Nuclear missile submarines are a nation’s most strategic assets, because they are its most secure and certain deterrence option. One does not commit them casually, to any purpose. As key trends like cheaper sensors and the Robotic Revolution grind onward, however, the next 40 years will see big changes in the underwater environment. SSBNs will need the flexibility to adapt and leverage these changes if they intend to survive. For the USA and Britain, the CMC needs to be part of that adaptation.

Contracts and Key Events

BAE is hiring

Unless otherwise indicated, the The US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC manages the contract.

FY 2018

SSBN-X design.

SSBN-X concept
(click to view full)

November 2/18: Development Northrop Grumman is being tapped to continue development of the Common Missile Compartment (CMC). The awarded $10.8 million cost-plus incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee modification covers a number of technical engineering services; design and development engineering services; component and full scale test services and tactical underwater launcher hardware production services. The CMC will be fitted on the US future Columbia-class and UK Dreadnought-class SSBNs. The new generation of submarines will carry their Trident D5 nuclear-armed SLBMs in multiple “quad pack” Common Missile Compartments, a deliberate decision to simplify the process of building the two types of subs and hopefully save money. Nuclear missile submarines are a nation’s most strategic assets, because they are its most secure and certain deterrence option. Work will be performed at multiple location including – but not limited to – Sunnyvale, California; Kings Bay, Georgia and Barrow-In-Furness, England.

FY 2013 – 2014

April 7/14: Specifications. The US Navy has reportedly finalized the specifications for their new SSBNs. They’ll be about as long as the current Ohio Class, but with 8 fewer missile tubes (16 total). The submarines will have a new electric propulsion system, and the same kind of no-refuel reactor enjoyed by recent US boats.

The latest Navy figures reportedly estimate $110 million per boat per year in operating costs. Sources: USNI, “Navy Has Finalized Specifications for New Ohio-Replacement Boomer”.

March 31/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2013, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to SSBN-X, the numbers are very large: $95.103 billion total for 12 boats, split $11.718 billion RDT&E and $85.385 billion in procurement costs.

“The Navy has set initial configurations for areas including the torpedo room, bow, and stern. In 2014, the program expects to complete initial specifications, set ship length – a major milestone – and start detailed system descriptions and arrangements.”

Navy officials are trying to reduce costs for boats 2-12 from an estimated FY10$ 5.6 billion to FY10$ 4.9 billion, and one approach is to seek commonalities with the Virginia Class and the UK’s Successor SSBN. The CMC itself is already doing some of that.

ULRM
(click to view full)

Feb 28/14: Long-lead. GD Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $16 million cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously awarded contract for CMC missile tube long-lead-time materials. This contract combines purchases for the government of the United Kingdom (67%) and the US Navy (37%) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Program.

All funds are committed immediately, using British FMS and USN FY 2014 RDT&E funds. Work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by February 2016. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-13-C-2128).

Jan 30/14: UUV launcher. A joint effort between the US Navy and General Dynamics Electric Boat is now testing a prototype Universal Launch and Recovery Module (ULRM) system that would launch and capture underwater drones from SSBN/SSGN vertical launch tubes, and from the Virginia Payload Module on forthcoming Virginia Class submarines. Diagrams show payloads up to a pair of Bluefin-21 (future SMCM mine countermeasures) UUVs, but the extend and launch method itself is adaptable to any new UUV that fits within the space.

This isn’t a development that touches the CMC directly, nor is it new. Indeed, engineer Steve Klinikowski’s idea was tabled in 2005, and a model was exhibited at DSEi 2011 in Britain. This article is particularly helpful in showing pictures of the mechanisms, and in confirming that ULRM has progressed to testing. If there was any doubt that the CMC’s tubes are likely to include payload options beyond nuclear missiles, those doubts are effectively removed. The time to contemplate those needs is right now, during the CMC’s design phase. Engineering.com Designer Edge, “Navy Begins Test of UUV Launch System” | Fox News, “Navy, Electric Boat test tube-launched underwater vehicle”.

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). CMC is included indirectly, as part of the “SSBN Ohio Class Replacement Program”.

SSBN-X is currently slated to include a new propulsor, a new electric drive system, and a degaussing system, all of which should make the new submarines harder to detect. The new nuclear reactor won’t require mid-life refueling, a long refit whose operational impact would have forced the USA to build 14 submarines instead of the planned 12. CMC provides the main weapons interface, and there’s currently a debate about whether to even give the SSBNs torpedo tubes. The Strategic Weapon System includes the Trident II D5 Life Extension missile, launcher, fire control, navigation systems, and associated support systems. Most of the SWS will be carried over from existing submarine classes, as will items like communications, sonar, and internal computer networks.

From September 2012 – July 2013, the Navy conducted an Early Operational Assessment (EOA) – an extensive review of Ohio and Ohio Replacement documentation to identify program risks, and a modeling and simulation study to compare the survivability of the existing and future submarine classes. The EOA did come up with some program risks, which are classified. The modeling and simulation was informative, but the acoustic and threat models need updating.

Jan 9/13: Long-lead. GD Electric Boat in Groton, CT receives a $15 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for integrated tube and hull long-lead-time material in support of the Ohio Class Replacement Program. This contract combines purchases for the US Navy (50%) and the Britain (50%).

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 RDT&E budgets and UK government monies. Work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by November 2016. The USN’s Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-13-C-2128).

Dec 19/13: R&D. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA, is being awarded a maximum $61.1 million, sole-source, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering services and various low-value missile test hardware to support CMC integration and design/development. This contract covers integration of the Trident II missile and reentry subsystems into the CMC, designing a testing fixture for nozzle shield retention, and designing an integrated test facility that will be compatible with existing and new submarine fleets. Efforts will address integration impacts to the deployed and expected future configurations of the Trident II SWS.

Work will be performed at Cape Canaveral, FL (52%); Sunnyvale, CA (33%); Magna, UT (7%); Groton, CT (2%); Titusville, FL (1%); and other locations of less than 1%, with an expected completion date of Dec 18/18.

Funding is complex, involving $57.2 million in immediate commitments from 8 different US and UK budget lines stretching from FY 2014 – 2016. The USN total is $51.5 million, while the UK commits $5.7 million. Strategic Systems Programs, Washington, DC, is the contracting activity (N00030-14-C-0013).

Dec 6/13: Support. BAE Systems Technology Solutions Inc. in Rockville, MD receives a $56.5 million cost-plus-fixed fee, cost-plus-incentive fee base year contract to support the USA and UK’s D5 strategic weapons systems (SWS) programs, U.S. guided missile submarine attack weapons systems programs, Nuclear Weapons Security, and future concepts. Services will include both research and operations-related activites. All base year funds are committed immediately, using $10.3 million from the UK, and the rest from various FY 2012-2014 USN procurement and operations budget lines. The maximum dollar value, including the base period and 2 option years, is $171.4 million.

BAE will provide coordination documentation; electrical diagrams; systems publications; shipyard installation test support; test equipment and test data analysis; support for re-engineering the SWS as appropriate in response to guidelines resulting from continuous improvement initiatives, configuration management through SSP Alterations program, logistics engineering, Preventive Maintenance Management Plan, Standard Maintenance Procedures; systems level documentation and training curriculum support; logistics planning; logistics engineering; field logistics services; network development and maintenance.

In addition, BAE Systems will provide the following products for the Common Missile Compartment (CMC) concept development effort to ensure that the existing TRIDENT II (D5) SWS is compatible with the Concept Development efforts being pursued for the CMC Program: weapon system coordination, class engineering, configuration management, logistics engineering, systems-level documentation, network development and maintenance and facility engineering and design support. They will also provide technical and engineering support to the CMC concept development efforts for SWS life cycle cost control evaluations.

Work will be performed at Rockville, MD (73%); Washington, DC (13%); Silverdale, WA (5%); St. Mary’s, GA (4%); Portsmouth, VA (3%); San Diego, CA (1%); the United Kingdom (0.6%), and Mechanicsburg, PA (0.3%). The base year will last until Sept 30/14, at which point $34.3 million in funding will expire if not used. This contract was a sole source acquisition in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1) via US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-14-C-0009).

Nov 15/13: GD Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $28.9 million cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously awarded contract for procurement of missile tube integrated tube and hull weldment fabrication, missile tube assembly fixture design and manufacture, and missile tube material procurement. This contract combines purchases for the United States (71%) and the United Kingdom (29%) under the Foreign Military Sales program.

All funds are committed immediately. Work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be completed by November 2016. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair, Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-13-C-2128).

Nov 14/13: CMC. GD Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $22.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously awarded contract for continued procurement of CMC prototype material for the UK, plus manufacturing and test. All funds are committed immediately.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by October 2015. The Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-13-C-2128).

Jan 26/13: Electrical. TG Daily reports that the next American SSBNs will be doing away with their mechanical drivetrain, which connects the reactor turbines directly to the boat’s propellers. In order to make the boat quieter, and free up electricity for other functions, power from the reactor would flow into an all-ship electrical grid. Some of that power would be harnessed by electric motors connected to the shortened propeller shafts, and it would probably be more than the 20-25% available in more conventional nuclear designs.

This kind of “all-electric” system is becoming more and more common on naval surface ships, so its adaptation to next-generation submarines is unsurprising. Even so, the cramped, no-failure world of submarine design always adds new engineering challenges. The USN also plans to field its new SSBN submarines with reactors that don’t require mid-life refueling, something they’ve already accomplished on the Virginia Class fast attack boats.

Jan 17/13: Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $12.8 million cost-plus fixed-fee modification for continued CMC work, including materials and testing of the equipment that will manufacture CMCs for the USA’s Ohio Replacement Program.

Work will be performed in Steelton, PA (60%), and Spring Grove, IL (40%), and is scheduled to be completed by November 2015. All contract funds are committed immediately by the Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT (N00024-09-C-2100).

Sub design 101
click for video

Dec 21/12: SSBN Design. Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $1.849 billion cost-plus-fixed-fee with special incentives contract to design America’s new class of ballistic missile submarines. GDEB will also undertake shipbuilder and vendor component and technology development; engineering integration; concept design studies; cost reduction initiatives using a design for affordability process; and full scale prototype manufacturing and assembly. Additionally, this contract provides for engineering analysis, should-cost evaluations, and technology development and integration efforts. This contract includes options which could bring the cumulative value to $1.996 billion.

Other efforts contemplated under this contract include the continued design and development of US unique Common Missile Compartment efforts; and continuing the design and development of the joint US Navy/UK CMC. About 8% of the contract involves foreign military sales to the United Kingdom.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (91%); Newport News, VA (7%); Quonset, RI (1%); and Bath, ME (1%), and is expected to be complete by September 2017. $183.1 million is committed immediately, with the rest allocated as needed; $8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with FAR 6.302-1 by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-13-C-2128).

Initial design for Ohio Class Replacement SSBN

Nov 20/12: Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $61.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for continued procurement of CMC prototype materials, manufacturing, and test for the Ohio Replacement Program. This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy (79%) and the Government of Great Britain (21%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT and is expected to be completed by October 2015. $48.6 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. The US Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT (N00024-09-C-2100). See also GD release.

FY 2012

TD prep. The case for the program.

Ohio class SSBN, tubes open
(click to view full)

Sept 28/12: TD Phase prep. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a $76.8 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-incentive, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to support the Trident II fleet, which could rise as high as $111 million with options. This will include:

1) Ongoing SSBN/SSGN fleet support including engineering refueling overhaul shipyard support, spares (SSP), SSP alterations and non-compliance report projects for the USA & UK, launcher trainer support for the USA & UK, vertical support group e-mount and shims, nuclear weapons safety and security review, missile hoist overhaul, underwater launch technology support, gas generator refurbishment, and case hardware.

2) Specialized technical support includes missile tube closure production, technical engineering services, and tactical hardware production efforts for the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

3) New designs. Technical engineering services and analysis to support the USA & UK’s Advanced Launcher Development Program and Common Missile Compartment concept development and prototyping. This work will support the military’s efforts to pick a preferred system concept, including both critical costs, and clear awareness of risks from immature launcher technologies and/or immature requirements. The technology development phase for the next-generation launcher will be based on those conclusions.

The contract was not competitively procured. Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (79%); Kings Bay, GA (10%); Silverdale, WA (10%); and Camarillo, CA (1%), and will run to Sept 30/15. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procure in accordance with l0 U.S.C. 2304c1, and 10 U.S.C. 2304c4 (N00030-13-C-0010).

Sept 27/12: Integration. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a sole-source $51.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering efforts to support next-generation SSBN programs. The firm was deemed to be the only company that could integrate the TRIDENT II Missile and Reentry Strategic Weapon System subsystems into the CMC, and design an updated missile service unit that will be compatible with both current and new submarine fleets. With options, this contract could rise to $52.2 million.

Work will be performed in Cape Canaveral, FL (50%); Sunnyvale, CA (34%); Syracuse, NY (10%); Magna, UT (2%); Washington, DC (1%); yet to be determined locations (2%); and other locations of less than 1% (1% TL); and will run until Dec 31/17 (N00030-12-C-0058).

Sept 24/12: Program Risk. US Navy Director, Undersea Warfare Rear Adm. Barry Bruner pens a blog post about the Ohio Class Replacement Program. He defends the Navy’s vision of 12 sub marines instead of 14, with 16 tubes each instead of 24, at a target cost of $FY10 4.9 billion per hull for boats 2-12. At the same time, he acknowledges that the existing SSBN force will have a problematic period, which will become very problematic if the replacement program suffers any significant delays:

“Because ship construction of the Ohio Replacement shifted from the year 2019 to 2021, there will be fewer than 12 SSBNs from 2029 to 2042 as the Ohio-class retires and Ohio replacement ships join the fleet. During this time frame no major SSBN overhauls are planned, and a force of 10 SSBNs will support current at-sea presence requirements. However, this provides a low margin to compensate for unforeseen issues that may result in reduced SSBN availability. The reduced SSBN availability during this timeframe reinforces the importance of remaining on schedule with the Ohio Replacement program to meet future strategic commitments. As the Ohio Replacement ships begin their mid-life overhauls in 2049, 12 SSBNs will be required to offset ships conducting planned maintenance.”

If the Ohio Class Replacement Program manages to come in on time, and anywhere close to its budget, it will be a very unusual example within recent US Navy shipbuilding programs. The higher-odds bet, unfortunately, is that the USA is headed for serious problems with the readiness of its SSBN deterrent.

Sept 6/12: SSBN-X Specifications. US Navy, “Navy Signs Specification Document for the Ohio Replacement Submarine Program, Sets forth Critical Design Elements”:

“The Navy formalized key ship specifications for both the United States’ Ohio Replacement and United Kingdom’s Successor Programs in a document signed Aug. 31 at the Washington Navy Yard…. Ship specifications are critical for the design and construction of the common missile compartment, which will be used by both nations’ replacement fleet ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) programs. Specifically, the First Article Quad Pack Ship Specification establishes a common design and technical requirements for the four missile tubes and associated equipment that comprise each quad pack.”

CMC specifications

Dec 21/11: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $191.3 million contract modification for continued engineering, technical services, concept studies, and design of a common missile compartment for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio replacement SSBN. This contract will be incrementally funded with $23.1 million up front, and the firm says that the FY 2009 contract could end up having a total value over $708 million, if all options are funded.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (93%); Quonset, RI (3%); Newport News, VA (2%); and Newport, RI (2%), and is expected to be complete by December 2012. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-09-C-2100). See also General Dynamics.

Dec 9/11: BAE Systems in Rockville, MD receives a $58.3 million cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-plus-incentive-fee contract to provide Systems Engineering Integration support for the TRIDENT II D5 Strategic Weapon System (SWS) Program, the SSGN Attack Weapon System (AWS) Program, and the Common Missile Compartment (CMC) Program. Options could bring the contract’s total value to $123.3 million.

Work will be performed in Rockville, MD (70%); Washington, DC (20%); St. Mary’s, GA (5%); Bangor, WA (4%); and Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, United Kingdom (1%), and is expected to be completed Sept 30/12, or Sept 30/13 if the options are exercised. $38.3 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured (N00012-C-0009).

Dec 2/11: Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems – Marine Systems in Sunnyvale, CA, received an $83.2 million firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide FY 2012 support for the TRIDENT II D-5 launchers, submarines, and next-generation development efforts. This contract contains options, which could bring its total value to $123.1 million.

Northrop Grumman will provide services to help with existing SSBN/SSGN Underwater Launcher Systems; Engineering Refueling Overhaul shipyard support; spares procurement; United States and United Kingdom launcher trainer support; Vertical Support Group E-mount and shim procurement; TRIDENT II D-5 missile tube closure production; Launcher Initiation System (LIS) Critical Design Review and Nuclear Weapons Safety and Security Review; TRIDENT II D-5 missile hoist overhauls; underwater launch technology support; U.S. and U.K. Strategic Systems Programs alterations and non-compliance report projects; gas generator refurbishment and case hardware production; LIS Trainer Shipboard Systems Integration Increment 11 conversion; and ancillary hardware and spares.

Technical engineering services and container production restart efforts for the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty will also be included, as will technical engineering services to support the Advanced Launcher Development Program and Common Missile Compartment concept development and prototyping efforts for the U.S. and U.K.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (80%); Bangor, WA (10%); and Kings Bay, GA (10%); and will end with the fiscal year on Sept 30/12, whereupon $45.3 million of these funds will expire; or it will end on Sept 30/14 if all options are exercised. The contract was not competitively procured (N00030-12-C-0015).

Nov 30/11: Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $9.5 million contract modification for continued procurement and testing of Common Missile Compartment prototype materials and manufacturing equipment.

Work will be performed in Switzerland, and is expected to be complete by December 2013. This contract combines purchases for the US Navy (50%), and the government of the United Kingdom (50%); it’s managed by the US Navy Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT (N00024-09-C-2100).

Nov 25/11: General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, Inc. in Pittsfield, MA receives a $96 million cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, fixed-price incentive contract to provide FY 2012 and FY 2013 engineering support to United States and United Kingdom Trident II SSBN Fire Control Subsystems, Ohio Class SSGN Attack Weapons Control Subsystem, and the Common Missile Compartment. This contract contains options which could bring its total value to $225 million over almost 4.5 years.

Work will be performed in Pittsfield, MA, and could run to April 14/16. $35.1 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/12. This contract was not competitively procured by the US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC (N00030-12-C-0006). See also GD-AIS release.

Oct 18/11: No Virginia. The US Navy has reportedly shelved the idea of a Virginia Class SSBN variant (vid. July 20/11), in favor of a new and quieter SSBN design that will carry the CMC. The question is whether that stance can last, given the new design’s current estimated cost of $7 billion per boat. If those costs rise, or budgets shrink, that Navy may find itself with fewer submarine platform choices than it would like. AOL Defence

Oct 12/11: Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $7.1 million contract modification for preliminary design of an integrated tube and hull robotic welding system, as part of continued CMC procurement. New designs require new manufacturing techniques.

This contract action combines purchases for the U.S. Navy and the government of the United Kingdom. Work will be performed in Fort Collins, CO (48%), Knoxville, TN (32%), and Coatsville, PA (20%). Work is expected to be complete by March 2013. The USN Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-09-C-2100).

FY 2011

Britain is in.

HMS Vanguard
(click to view full)

Aug 19/11: GD Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $21 million contract modification for CMC manufacturing and testing equipment, under the Ohio [Class] Replacement Program. The majority of the work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by May 2013.The US Navy’s Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-09-C-2100). GDEB’s release adds that:

“The $21 million award modifies a $76 million contract announced in December 2008… If all options are exercised and funded, the overall [2008] contract has a potential value of more than $692 million.”

July 29/11: GD Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $16.2 million contract modification for CMC manufacturing and testing equipment, under the Ohio [Class] Replacement Program. The majority of the work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by August 2013. The US Navy’s Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-09-C-2100).

July 20/11: Virginias? To date, the assumption in America has been that CMC would equip a newly designed SSBN submarine, and GD Electric Boat has been hiring with the idea in mind. Connecticut’s The Day now quotes vice-Adm. Cartwright, Vice-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as saying that budget cuts may force the Navy to lengthen its Virginia Class attack submarine, in order to fit ballistic missile compartments and act as an SSBN.

By nature fast attack submarines tend to be less optimized for stealth than SSBNs, though the Virginia Class is said to be remarkable in that respect. A more challenging difference is the weight/ size gap. Ohio Class SSBNs are about 18,750 tons submerged. Britain’s Vanguard Class SSBNs are 17,800 tons, and France’s Triomphant Class SSBNs are 15,800 tons. In contrast, the basic Virginia Class is about 7,800 tons. Even with fewer missile tubes on board, finding a solution that offers an affordable extension, instead of a full submarine redesign that defeats the point of starting with the Virginia Class, will be challenging. The Day.

July 6/11: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $15.8 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-09-C-2100) for continued engineering, technical services, concept studies, and design of a common missile compartment for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio replacement SSBN submarine.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (93%); Quonset Point, RI (3%); Newport News, VA (2%); and Newport, RI (2%). Work is expected to be complete by December 2011. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

May 18/11: British go-ahead. Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox announces government approval for the early phase of design to replace the existing Vanguard Class. The new submarines will be powered by a new nuclear propulsion system known as the Pressurised Water Reactor 3, which is more expensive but safer. The design phase as a whole could be worth up to GBP 3 billion.

The Initial Gate approval ensures that more detailed design work will be undertaken and long-lead items ordered, even though the main build decision for the submarines will not be taken until 2016. Under current plans, the first replacement submarine is expected in 2028. For all further coverage of Britain’s new submarines, see “New Nukes: Britain’s Next-Gen Missile Submarines“.

Britain in

Jan 6/11: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $152 million contract modification for continued engineering, technical services, concept studies, and design of a common missile compartment for the United Kingdom successor SSBN and the Ohio-class replacement SSBN.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (93%); Quonset, RI (3%); Newport News, VA (2%); and Newport, RI (2%), and is expected to be complete by December 2011 (N00024-09-C-2100).

FY 2008 – 2010

Initial concept studies.

USS Ohio
(click to view full)

June 28/10: Backward compatibility. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA received a $29.7 million sole source cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for systems engineering services, to help integrate current Trident D5 nuclear missiles into the new submarine’s common missile compartment.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA (53.38%); Cape Canaveral, FL (40.02%); Magna, Utah (3.54%); Groton, CT (1.55%); Olathe, KS (0.67%); Melbourne, FL (0.50%); Bangor, WA (0.27%); Dallas, TX (0.03%); and Port Washington, NY (0.01%). Work is expected to be complete by the end of FY 2011, on Sept 30/11. The US Strategic Systems Programs in Arlington, VA issued the contract (N00030-10-C-0043).

June 16/10: Northrop Grumman receives a $148.6 million sole-source cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to work on the CMC’s advanced launcher development program for FY 2010-2011. Specific efforts include technical engineering services to support the common missile compartment concept development and prototyping effort.

Work will be performed in Sunnyvale, CA from June 16/10 through June 15/11, with an additional one-year option to June 15/12. The Navy Strategic Systems Programs (SSP) in Arlington, VA manages this contract (N00030-10-C-0024).

May 6/10: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT received a $6.4 million contract modification to design special tooling for the CMC. The award modifies a $76 million contract announced in December 2008 (see Dec 23/08 entry) for engineering, technical services, concept studies and design of the CMC for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio Replacement SSBN. If all options are exercised and funded, the overall contract (N00024-09-C-2100) would have a value of more than $638 million.

Feb 16/10: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT received an $26.3 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-09-C-2100) for continued procurement of common missile compartment prototype material, as well as manufacturing and testing activities for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio Replacement SSBN. Work will be performed in Groton, Conn., and is expected to be complete by January 2012. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

The award modifies a $76 million contract announced in December 2008 for engineering, technical services, concept studies and design for the CMC (see Dec 23/08 entry) If all options are exercised and funded, the overall contract would have a value of more than $630 million. GDEB release.

Jan 21/10: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT received an $118.2 million modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-09-C-2100), exercising options for continued engineering, technical services, concept studies and design of a common missile compartment for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio Replacement SSBN. Work will be performed in Groton, CT (89%); Newport News, VA (7%); Quonset, RI (3%); and Newport, RI (1%), and is expected to be complete by December 2010. The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

This modification exercises an existing option that provides for continuation of CMC design, CMC concept studies, ship concept studies, engineering, and technical services, and whole ship integration engineering and concept studies to determine key ship attributes that impact CMC design. Additionally, this contract action will support completion of studies and design work including completion of a preliminary design review, a missile tube critical design review, and a missile module critical design review. See also GDEB release.

Sept 28/09: General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems in Pittsfield, MA receives a $152.8 million cost-plus-incentive fee contract, with 2 parts to it. General Dynamics will perform the work in Pittsfield, MA, and expects to complete it by December 2012. The US Navy’s Strategic Systems Programs in Arlington, VA manages the contract (N00030-10-C-0005).

One part provides for FY 2010 and FY 2011 production and deployed systems support for the US and UK SSBN fire control system (FCS) and the SSGN Attack Weapon Control System (AWCS). GD AIS will provide annual and other periodic procurements of support equipment and SSP alterations (SPALTs) necessary to sustain the SSBN FCS and the SSGN AWCS, including engineering support, performance evaluation, logistics, fleet documentation, reliability maintenance, engineering services, and training.

In addition, this contract includes the FY 2010 and FY 2011 US and UK Sea Based Strategic Deterrent (SBSD) Strategic Weapons System (SWS) fire control subsystem efforts necessary for the concept development, prototyping, and initial design efforts for a common missile compartment (CMC), prior to and following, the initiation of a ACAT 1D class program to replace the SSBN Ohio class. This part of the contract will provide technical and engineering support to the CMC concept development efforts for SWS life cycle cost control evaluations, related to the fire control subsystem, and verify the operational and ongoing sustainment requirements for the SSBN FCS and SSGN AWCS, including training, support, and advanced development laboratory equipment.

March 17/09: British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says that Britain’s next class of SSBN missile submarines will carry just 12 launch tubes, instead of the current Vanguard Class’ 16, or the 24 tubes on American Ohio class boats. Jane’s report.

Dec 23/08: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corporation, Groton, CT receives a $75.6 million sole-source, cost plus fixed fee contract to perform concept studies and design of a Common Missile Compartment (CMC) for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the USA’s Ohio Class Replacement program. This contract includes options which would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $591.8 million, and take design work to December 2013.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (92%), Newport News, VA (4%), Quonset, RI (3%), and Newport, RI (1%), and is expected to be complete by December 2009 for the base contract, and December 2013 if all options are exercised. This contract was not competitively procured, and is formally run through the Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, DC (N00024-09-C-2100). At present, this contract involves Foreign Military Sales to the United Kingdom (100%), but that may change.

Initial concept studies

Additional Readings

• DID – New Nukes: Britain’s Next-Gen Missile Submarines

• Defense One (April 30/14) – Funding to Replace Nuclear Subs Up in the Air. It may be moved outside the Navy shipbuilding budget, as a national strategic item.

• Defense Tech (Oct 24/13) – Ohio Replacement Submarine Starts Early Construction

Tag: ssbncmc, cmcssbn

IqAF 350-ISR
(click to view full)

In recent wars, a lot of high tech gear has been upstaged by a surprising contender. Countries like the USA, Canada, Britain, Egypt, Iraq, and others are flying low-end turboprop business aircraft fitted with an array of sensors and a small crew. They’re cheap to buy, don’t use technology that makes export approval difficult, and are easy to maintain. Operating them is well within the capabilities of any country with an air force. Their sensors also offer more diversity and power than all but the highest-cost UAVs, in exchange for having just 1/2 to 1/3 of a high-end UAV’s mission endurance. No wonder many countries see them as a good complement to, or substitute for, existing UAV offerings.

Saudi Arabia has the money and clout to buy the expensive stuff. Nevertheless…

Contracts & Key Events

350 ISR layout
(click to view full)

A number of years ago, the Saudis had 3 of their military’s Boeing 707 derivatives converted into RE-3 TASS planes that perform light battlefield surveillance, as well as COMINT/SIGINT roles intercepting enemy communications and electronic signals. Unfortunately, those planes will be in the shop until 2015. They need a quick substitute that will still be useful when the RE-3s come back. It turns out that the substitution won’t be very quick after all, but their new planes will still be useful.

November 2/18: Sierra Nevada will upgrade two aircraft as part of the Saudi King Air 350 program. The company will add an intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance/synthetic aperture radar capability to the two King Air 350 extended range aircraft. The twin-propeller King Air 350 is an affordable, long-endurance option for effective manned battlefield surveillance and attack. US aircraft in their ISR configuration are equipped with signals intelligence (SIGINT) electronic interception capabilities, and carry L-3 Westar’s MX-15i surveillance turrets. One transportable ground station; one fixed ground station; and one mission system trainer are also included in the contract. The definitization modification is priced at $23.8 million and involves 100% foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia. Work will be performed at Sierra Nevada’s facility in Hagerstown, Maryland and is expected to be completed by May 2020.

April 4/16: Sierra Nevada Corp. has been awarded a $71.4 million contract to participate in the Saudi King Air 350 program. The contract includes modification of two King Air 350 extended range (KA350ER) aircraft with intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance/synthetic aperture radar (ISR/SAR) capability, one transportable ground station, one fixed ground station and one mission system trainer. Completion of the contract is expected for April 2020.

Aug 21/14: L-3 Communications’ Integrated Systems Group in Greenville, TX receives a $61 million firm-fixed-price, undefinitized contract to modify 2 King Air 350s, and integrate intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. $30 million is committed immediately, and the price suggests that L-3 will also buy the planes from Beechcraft.

Work will be performed at Greenville, TX and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/15. The USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Wright-Patterson AFB< OH manages the contract on behalf of its Saudi client (FA8620-14-C-4023).

2 ordered

Aug 15/12: The US DSCA announces [PDF] an official request from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The Saudis want to buy:

• Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) suites to be provided and installed in 4 King Air 350ER aircraft, which the Saudis themselves will provide.
  
• 4 new King Air 350ER ISR planes with enhanced PT6A-67A engines and the same ISR suites pre-installed.
  
• 10 Link-16 capable data link systems and associated ground support.
  
• Ground Stations for processing the data.
  
• Plus spare and repair parts, support equipment, publications and technical data, personnel training and training equipment, aircraft delivery, and other forms of U.S. Government and contractor support.

Each ISR suite includes:

• A modern, fully qualified CNS/ATM cockpit.
  
• RF-7800M-MP High Frequency Radios with encryption.
  
• AN/ARC-210 VHF/ UHF/ Satellite Communication Transceiver Radios with Have Quick II and encryption.
  
• A high speed Datalink.
  
• An AN/APX-114/119 Identification Friend or Foe Transponder.
  
• Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigations Systems (GPS/INS) with a Selective Availability Anti-spoofing Module (SAASM) to make jamming difficult.
  
• AN/AAR-60 Infrared Missile Warning and AN/ALE-47 Countermeasures defensive systems.
  
• An unspecified Electro-Optical Sensor.
  
• An unspecified SIGINT(SIGnals Intelligence) System.
  
• An unspecified Synthetic Aperture Radar to scan the ground.

The estimated cost is up to $257 million, but contract prices will depend on successful contract negotiations. As the DSCA puts it:

“The RSAF needs additional ISR capability to provide persistent, real-time route surveillance, facility, infrastructure and border security, counter-terrorism and smuggling interdiction, support for naval and coastal operations, internal defense and search and rescue operations. Currently, the RSAF’s RE-3 aircraft is in depot maintenance and will not be available until after 2015. In the interim, the King AIR 350ER-ISR aircraft will allow the RSAF to perform a portion of the RE-3 mission. All systems will be compatible with and will continue to supplement the capabilities of the RSAF RE-3 aircraft. The KSA will have no difficulties absorbing and using these King Air ISR aircraft.”

DSCA request: 4 King Air 350ER ISR

ADB SAFEGATE has agreed a GBP22 million (USD28.4 million) deal to acquire the Airport Systems (AS) business of Ultra Electronics Holdings, with a planned completion date of 31 January 2019. The purchase price includes a deferred GBP2 million payment to be made after “certain commercial

The New Zealand government has signed an agreement with Airbus to collaborate on unmanned systems and related technologies. The government said in a statement that the letter of intent (LOI) will support the testing in New Zealand of unmanned aircraft technologies and collaboration on developing

US High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) manufacturer AM General announced on 1 November that it had made an investment in Mandus Group, a supplier of innovative artillery technology. The investment, the nature or value of which was not disclosed, aims to accelerate the deployment of