Defense Tech: You're Fired!


	Subscribe via RSS


	Archives by Date
		June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 See all Archives


	Archives by Category
		'Canes Afghan Update Ammo and Munitions Armor Around the Globe Av Week Extra Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere) Bizarro Blimps Blog Bidness Body Armor Blues Bomb Squad Brownshoes in Action Bubbleheads, etc. Cammo Green Catch the "Buzz" Chem-Bio Civilian Apps Cloak and Dagger Commandos Comms Contingency Ops Cops and Robbers Cyber-warfare Data Diving Defense Tech Poll Defense Tech Radio Dissent Tech Door Kickers Drones DT Administrivia Eat DT's Dust Extra! Extra! Eye on China Fast Movers FCS Watch Fire for Effect FOS Files Friday Funnies Gadgets and Gear Going Green Grand Ole Osprey Ground Vehicles Guns Homeland Security In the Weeds with Eric Info War Iraq Diary Jarhead Jazz JSF Watch Just War Theories Lasers and Ray Guns Less-lethal Logistics Los Alamos and Labs M4 Monopoly Medic! Mercs Missiles Money Money Money Most Wanted MRAP Edge Net-Centric Nukes Old Skool Our Shrinking Planet Planes, Copters, Blimps Podcast Politricks Polmar's Perspective Popular Mechanics Rapid Fire Raptor Watch Red Team Retro-Futuro Robots Roll Your Own Sabra Tech Ships and Subs Snipertech Soldier Systems Space Special Ops Star Wars Strategery Stray Trons Tactical Development Terror Tech The Deadlies The Defense Biz The Peoples' Site The Sunday Paper The Tanker Tango The View from Av Week Those Nutty Norks Training and Sims Trimble on the Case Video Lounge War Update Ward'z Wonderz You can run... See all Archives


	Newsletters


Edited by Christian Lowe \| Contact

You're Fired!

Navy chief Admiral Mike Mullen has fired the captain overseeing the Littoral Combat Ship program, Defense News reports:

Lcs Capt. Donald Babcock, the Navy’s LCS program manager, was relieved of his duties Jan. 29 by his boss, Rear Adm. Charles Hamilton – who also is being reassigned. Hamilton relieved Babcock due to “loss of confidence in his ability to command,” according to a Navy source, who added that Babcock would be reassigned to “administrative duties.”

Both men got their pink slips after an audit revealed that the Lockheed Martin version of the LCS would come in at around $400 million, nearly double the target cost. Two weeks ago the Navy suspended work on the second LockMart LCS for 90 days, long enough to get new managers in place and, hopefully, put the fear of God in Lockheed Martin.

With 55 ships planned, the LCS is a lynchpin of the Navy's future fleet. The class is designed to work close to shore at high speeds and to carry "modular" weapons and sensors packets to enable it to swing between missions. The idea was to populate coastal waters with large numbers of LCSs anchored by a Zumwalt-class land-attack destroyer. But that concept is in jeopardy if the Navy can't keep down costs on both ships. Already the first Zumwalt is careening towards a $3-billion pricetag. Toss in cost overruns on the LCS and the Navy's future surface fleet is dead in the water.

Far from being discouraged, naval analyst Bob Work sees the pink slips and the work stoppage as positive signs. "The Navy needed to say it had a problem. The second thing they had to say was that we have to build affordable ships. Mullen has shown that he is dead serious about doing that."

--David Axe, cross-posted at Ares and War Is Boring

Comments

LCS is a real joke -- the technologies being proposed by both the Lockheed and General Dynamics teams are "old technology" being repackaged for a new hull.

This program definitely requires government oversight with an eye for "what are we really paying for?"

Why is it costing so much to deliver a working prototype?

What systems are going to be employed, and how much for each one?

I could never figure out why we are paying for two very different ship types in the same class?

Posted by: BrutallyFrank at June 11, 2007 09:42 PM

Yeah, they could have this made in China for a mear 300 thousand. The military weapons procurement system is inexorably linked to the pork-barrel politicians on Capitol Hill. "Never a job w/o cost overruns! - that's our motto."

Posted by: JoSchmo at February 10, 2007 06:08 AM

previous posts relevence to LCS?

Posted by: G at February 9, 2007 10:17 PM

Another neo-con (Will) threaten another soverign nation like his political master at the White House does everyday. Leave other countries alone. Just because they don't agree with us on every issues doesn't give us or your kind any right in naming them as if they were at war with us. How can you guys be so naive and believe the lies GWB has been spinning out of his dug out? Don't you guys have a mind of your own and any common sense?
Who gave us the right in effecting a regime change in another soverign nation?

Posted by: flower at February 2, 2007 01:21 PM

Ouch. I wonder how much that set back will cost? Further, I hope they do not take short cuts to make production deadlines or ineffective systems.

Posted by: TechSay at January 31, 2007 05:07 PM

While there are multiple parties to blame in this incident, it is also a sign of very poor management. Why are we getting such a windfall of Bad News About the LCS all of a sudden? Up until about two months ago, LCS was the favored son of the Navy, and now it's getting beaten like the red-headed stepchild.

"Hoping" is not a successful form of program management. There is no excuse for the acquisition costs of a program to suddenly double -- as a result of an *audit*. NAVSEA 05 has got to learn to keep an accurate record of its own expenses. I had heard of misgivings of the LCS over a year ago, with cost overruns and incomplete contracts. It's a shame that people have tried to cover this up for the past 18 months, as the damage is so much worse now.

Posted by: thermopile at January 31, 2007 08:13 AM

>US shipyards doing military-work should be threatened with the work being sent overseas if
>they can't either budget correctly

That won't happen, the lobbyists won't let that happen, the congress will probably not, and many Americans will be pretty upset for jobs lost to other countries. Do you also want top secret equipment being built and setup by foreigners? Capitalism should do the job for struggle for firms fighting to get the job with lower price, but the involvement of foreign firms is not very wise when you deal with sensitive top secret and national strength on military technology.

Posted by: pedestrian at January 31, 2007 04:54 AM

These Defense contractors better clean up their act. If the US is going to compete in a post cold war world we need to stop this nonsense. Sometime soon China is going to more actively threaten the US, and the west. If we have any hope of deterring them, we can not play catch up to them, the way the Soviets played catch up to us during the cold war.

I guess what I am hoping for is a utopia where everyone in America is not selfish, and they put the country first before themselves. And while I am making wishes, maybe people will wake up and realize that America became great because of hardworking individuals, and not a huge bloated, corrupt goverment.

Posted by: Will at January 30, 2007 09:47 PM

US shipyards doing military-work should be threatened with the work being sent overseas if they can't either budget correctly, or stay within budget. Cost over-runs MUST be capped...or just nationalize the shipyards as a contract-penalty and sell the asstes and contracts for $1.00 to management that can. Everyone just to fat-and-happy withthe current situation...and the revolving door that allows (incompetent or corrupt) naval officers supervising to "retire" and go to work as yard employees or "consulatants".

Posted by: Ted B. (Charging Rhino) at January 30, 2007 04:16 PM

You're Fired!

Comments

Post a comment