Forum Thread

Littoral ships

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 17 1 2 Next
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Just today on Bloomberg: The Navy has been busy building their "fast" ? new ships of the Littoral class. The original budgeted price was $220 million a piece; due to cost overrruns it cost now $440 million a piece. The Navy wants to order 15 more of these ships, while they are not sure if they can do the original job; they are to slow and have not enough armament. Furthermore they do not foresee where these should be stationed related to present world conflicts,which are mostly land based anyway. Again as with the F35 how much more money we can waste which serves no purpose at all related to improvement in our country itself ( infrastructure etc.) Of course the area's in which these products are fumbled together will reap benefits and of course Lockheed Martin and their lobbyists as well Mr. McCain are doing great. Are we nuts or so to keep all these doomed programs going at huge cost for us; while onthe other side the US mail looses a billion over the last period. If I would run my household this way, I would have 10 Ferrari's in the garage and no food on the table let alone pants on.
  • Democrat
    Tulsa, OK
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Who was it that said "DoD is not a jobs program?"

    As with the F-22 Raptor it is time to reassess what we really need to prosecute the next conflict instead of stockpiling to fight the last one.

    Making the Army take another however many dozen M-1 Abrams after they said enough already rises to the level of fiscal deriliction.

    I am a Navy veteran/NavRes retiree and I know there certain missions for which a littoral vessel is entirely appropriate, but do we really need 15 of them? I believe that is a reasonable question.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Figure China is building a navy for a reason. Get enough ships then take Taiwan. Use ships to make U.S. back off. Then take Japan. Shades of Imperial Japan all over. Therefore I would like to see the U.S. drop the supply line problem M-1 and use the money to further offensive and defensive missle capabilities and then build missle frigits.
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch if the price for these ships has doubled, there is nothing unusual about that, in fact it's probably very normal. If you were to look at major military weapons systems procurement over the years, you will see that most or all of them increase in price dramatically, and some of them probably more than double in price. And it's not just limited to weapons systems, it also applies to buildings, bridges, big government projects of all kinds.

    Many times the bids for weapons systems are made far lower than realistic just to get the initial approval, knowing that once the money spigot is opened the flow can be increased. "National Security", you know.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jamesn Wrote: Dutch if the price for these ships has doubled, there is nothing unusual about that, in fact it's probably very normal. If you were to look at major military weapons systems procurement over the years, you will see that most or all of them increase in price dramatically, and some of them probably more than double in price. And it's not just limited to weapons systems, it also applies to buildings, bridges, big government projects of all kinds.

    Many times the bids for weapons systems are made far lower than realistic just to get the initial approval, knowing that once the money spigot is opened the flow can be increased. "National Security", you know.
    If you think that way; do you run your household that way too? So for instance you have a contractor pave your driveway then get the bill which is double of the price you negotiated; I guess you will pay the guy with a smiling face and pat him on the back. In other words you are closing your eyes for the huge corruption in this country; do not forget it is your tax money which gets squandered. Arguments like "this keeps this country safe" are absolute BS.
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Once again Dutch you fail to get my message. I am merely pointing out that cost overruns are normal, but I don't agree with them. I hate the waste of tax dollars just as we all do but instead of pretending they never happen, or pretending to be surprised when they are revealed, I do acknowledge that they happen routinely.

    My quote..."National Security, you know"... was sarcasm and you failed to get that, as well.

    If a contractor presents me with a bill double of the price I will refuse to pay, call the cops, take him to court...whatever it takes. Too many of our government officials, unfortunately, do not take that view. They think since it is not THEIR money, so what's the big deal? They do not care about wasting taxpayer money because it's not coming out of their pockets.

    Let's get those term limits, and soon!
  • Independent
    New Hampshire
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Projects such as ships and aircrafts still rely on the Cost Plus purchasing system. The initial price has nothing to do with the final cost. Over the past half century we have seen contracts that have exceed the quoted price as much as 5X. A rule of thumb is the expense to build plus a 7% profit. System Design has also changed as the ship or aircraft is defined by the envelope required to accept the desired systems which is now based on performance. Two LCS designs exist with a total of about 60 being desired by the US Navy with additional ships being purchased by foreign nations. A study is underway for a price of the LCS's to be fitted with Israeli Weapons Systems replacing the US Systems.

    Don't consider the profit as being 7% as the items purchased parts are usually marked up 25% with the labor for installation of at 7%. Overhead is allowed to be added in. Included in overhead are all business activities which companies refer to as non-productive labor and includes everything else from advertising to the lobby effort and contributions to the political campaigns and entertainment. The actual profit may be close to $80,000,000.00 per ship x 60 ships makes the total profit $3,600,000,000.00 It would take years to produce 60 ships, during that time New Technologies may make some of the existing systems obsolete. The New Systems will be more expensive and cost over will do nothing but add to the cost. I also like the names given to the two differing designs, Freedom and Independence which should do much to stir the Patriotic feels of all. It has been decades since I have been involved in this pricing system, maybe Dutch as something to add or correct. I know some rules have changed in the pricing; but am not sure which sections etc,
  • Other Party
    Nebraska
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jperry you and Dutch may both know more about Pentagon purchasing than I do. I do know that I am constantly amazed at the cost overruns in major weapons systems and also with just about all big government contracts. If I were to learn more about the process, I'm afraid that I would be even more angry at the waste, and fraud in the process.

    I have heard that the Pentagon will approve a contract then later go back and modify the specs/requirements which adds to the cost.

    Then there are the different ways for the accountants to figure the cost of the weapons systems. Whether or not to add in the costs associated with Research, Development, and Testing, or to just count the manufacturing costs alone.

    All big complex weapons systems seem to be modified and upgraded from the day they are fielded. That makes sense to a point but it seems the Pentagon goes to the extreme.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jamesn Wrote: jperry you and Dutch may both know more about Pentagon purchasing than I do. I do know that I am constantly amazed at the cost overruns in major weapons systems and also with just about all big government contracts. If I were to learn more about the process, I'm afraid that I would be even more angry at the waste, and fraud in the process.

    I have heard that the Pentagon will approve a contract then later go back and modify the specs/requirements which adds to the cost.

    Then there are the different ways for the accountants to figure the cost of the weapons systems. Whether or not to add in the costs associated with Research, Development, and Testing, or to just count the manufacturing costs alone.

    All big complex weapons systems seem to be modified and upgraded from the day they are fielded. That makes sense to a point but it seems the Pentagon goes to the extreme.
    Yes both of you got it right; indeed as "jperry" says it they always keep changing the spec. or upgrade to something new; it drives you nuts; since these projects are very complex, changes may impact design and have consequencial effects. Just take for example the wiring and loads; everything has to be redesigned and tested. The idiots in the Pentagon do not care what these changes cost; they just want these regardless. Often tests afterwards point again to problems and so on etc. I guess you are familiar with the 787 battery problems; this is then out in the open and this fix has cost Boeing millions; however if the same happens for any Pentagon project no one will hear from it the cost is always covered somehow.
  • Independent
    New Hampshire
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    So all of you fell better when you flyl A friend was a designer at Boing and his last project was a analysis of the effect of a blade coming off an engine fan and crashing through the plane. I asked about the results but he wouldn't say. I believe the engines on the F25 had developed crack in that area which grounded them for investigation.

    Our Congress does a special appropriation to cover the over run costs.

    If the tea party is so concerned about the national debt why don't they delay the purchase of the LCS ships for a few years and pay off the debt. It wouldn't take long to pay it off if the would hold off on buying the F25s, the LCS and the tanks the Army says it doesn't need or want.
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Biggest reason for more and more military hardware is "jobs" and jobs is a priority over keeping America strong in the world. Both of course go hand-in-hand where jobs helps create a diverse and technically proficent workforce thus helping to keep America strong in the world. The cost over-runs are typical of any business, but the difference for DOD, DOT, DOC, DHS and CIA there's Mil-Specifications, a robust R&D environment and the character of Congressman to advocate funding at any cost. Nobody can dispute that the spin-offs in technology that go into the public sector business is largely the result of Military and Government funding these high cost items. The space race is a prime example from everything in cameras, controls, programming, new materials, ceramics, glass, plastics, electronics, and the list is enormous of the benefits to the public. The same is for the military, for example, look at those deep submersible, sleak and fast submarines. The technology is what world spies around the world are seeking to find how America builds them. The metal used on the hulls used to be classified, today I don't know. The propellar design that speeds the submarine through water quickly and ever so quite used to be classified. I remember when sonar techs would tell stories about signatures of all the spunds ships, subs and animals make in the water. America's submarines were so quite that they could travel without detection. All the other coutries that had submarines were noisy and distinctive to point the sonar's computers would immediately provide a name/number and country origin of the vessel. The American submarine have all the information they need to know about their listening targets. Now after over thirty years, I don't know how much has changed, but I do know the advances in technology would be a thrill to see how far it has come. You get a glimpse of advancing technology from aviation magazines, Jane's Book of Military Hardware, Science American magazine, NOVA TV series and just watching the news. All this technology advancing has enormous R&D up-front and then there's cost over-runs that add additional funding because of mostly change-orders and correcting failures. All this is built in to contracts. If you make a contract make only a final cost-basis contract, however businesses will be slow to accept such a contract, unless it is a boiler time-proven project. The costs would have to be all identified and no surprises. With something new, advanced technology and alot of R&D, you don't get a cost-basis contract, it just doesn't make good business sense.

    However, remember it's all about jobs in America and those jobs are in the congressional and senatorial districts that fight the hardest during sessions passing the funding bills. The Congress and Senate representatives will always say this bill is for making a stronger America, well duh!
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Biggest reason for more and more military hardware is "jobs" and jobs is a priority over keeping America strong in the world. Both of course go hand-in-hand where jobs helps create a diverse and technically proficent workforce thus helping to keep America strong in the world. The cost over-runs are typical of any business, but the difference for DOD, DOT, DOC, DHS and CIA there's Mil-Specifications, a robust R&D environment and the character of Congressman to advocate funding at any cost. Nobody can dispute that the spin-offs in technology that go into the public sector business is largely the result of Military and Government funding these high cost items. The space race is a prime example from everything in cameras, controls, programming, new materials, ceramics, glass, plastics, electronics, and the list is enormous of the benefits to the public. The same is for the military, for example, look at those deep submersible, sleak and fast submarines. The technology is what world spies around the world are seeking to find how America builds them. The metal used on the hulls used to be classified, today I don't know. The propellar design that speeds the submarine through water quickly and ever so quite used to be classified. I remember when sonar techs would tell stories about signatures of all the spunds ships, subs and animals make in the water. America's submarines were so quite that they could travel without detection. All the other coutries that had submarines were noisy and distinctive to point the sonar's computers would immediately provide a name/number and country origin of the vessel. The American submarine have all the information they need to know about their listening targets. Now after over thirty years, I don't know how much has changed, but I do know the advances in technology would be a thrill to see how far it has come. You get a glimpse of advancing technology from aviation magazines, Jane's Book of Military Hardware, Science American magazine, NOVA TV series and just watching the news. All this technology advancing has enormous R&D up-front and then there's cost over-runs that add additional funding because of mostly change-orders and correcting failures. All this is built in to contracts. If you make a contract make only a final cost-basis contract, however businesses will be slow to accept such a contract, unless it is a boiler time-proven project. The costs would have to be all identified and no surprises. With something new, advanced technology and alot of R&D, you don't get a cost-basis contract, it just doesn't make good business sense.

    However, remember it's all about jobs in America and those jobs are in the congressional and senatorial districts that fight the hardest during sessions passing the funding bills. The Congress and Senate representatives will always say this bill is for making a stronger America, well duh!
    Sure a nice story; what you are saying is an poor excuse; technology can also be civil and have spun offs to society; like racing cars, high speed trains, new design bridges, building materials, propane use, hybrids etc. I guess you keep forgetting the military is a wastefull excercise; no one benefits from it in the end, since this is not a usefull product for civilian use other than to kill or attack. Europe and Japan are way ahead of the US for instance on public transportation, bridges, water management, airports, no slum cities like in the US. Wasting trillions on defense is self destructive. Employment for this industry should not be our goal; only a few states benefit from it and keep their lobby going to enrich only a few billionairs.
  • Independent
    New Hampshire
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    How can never be peace if you accept purchasing War equipment as only existing to provide jobs. I can see reality, I don't have to support it.
    NASA was not put into place for the Military, it was a number 1 PR program and the spinoffs in technology were split pretty equally between the Military and civilian sector. Two items which have had the greatest impact on us are civilian, computers and cell phones. At least I like computers. I can't imagine how a person going through life with a cell phone attached to their ear. Why do these Zombies have to use these mind draining devices in super markets, driving etc. I had contacted both reps and senators and suggested they revive NASA to develop alternative energy sources and give the new technologies to industry.
  • Democrat
    Missouri
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I'm waiting for the cloaked hardware that makes invisible to the human eye those devices and people wearing it. Drones buzzing over head and you don't see it. Authorities peering inside your property without your knowledge. It's being developed now and possibly used in public. Read some of the past year of American Scientific, IEEE Periodicals or go to your nearest science library, you can get yourself up-to-date. Here in Kansas City we have the Linda Hall Library on the UMKC campus. It is a private library for science periodicals, much like a libary you would find at MIT, USC, Livermore Labs and other University campuses and science centers. The things they are developing just boggels the mind and makes you say to self, "beam me up scotty".

    I admit that using the military as an example of reasoning the development of weaponry so that we can get spin-offs into the public sector is a poor excuse. However, it is fact and just the way it is. Where other countries enjoy high speed trains and exotic transportation, America does lag behind. So ask yourself does Russia and China have these, No. The United States has a large territory to cover and it does cost a tremendous amount of funding to do these kind of projects that smaller countries enjoy today. Those countries that have those state-of the art transportation systems didn't commit to the wars and conflicts we have been in during the last 75 years. Some of those countries were enhanced with our help as a result of war recovery. There's argument here when comparing what they have done and we haven't because of our war envolvement. We could of avoided all those wars and conflicts, but the dialog would be heavy of if we hadn't this would have happened.

    Even the advancement of nuclear research during development of our nuclear weapons has spun off advancement in xray, medicine, power plants, cancer research, spaceship engines that will propell us to the far stars. In our rage for having the better defense and offense, just like sports, we funded heavy in weaponry and a world race to the moon and Mars. This continues and since it creates enormous job growth, you'll be admonished by protestors in trying to prevent a new building dedicated for an industry in some new weapon, airplane, submarine, ship, or jump to the stars. We had some protestors here in Kansas City trying to prevent the new building of a complex dedicated for working with the nuclear industry. It is known for the highly delicate triggers used in nuclear bombs. They went out getting all the signatures for a ballet vote to the public. They were soundly defeated by a heavy margin. Like I said, it's all about jobs. Even all those little guns we call assault weapons, where did that technology blossom from? It sure wasn't deer hunting. It was war and now we are confronted with gun control questions.

    Just sit back enjoy your internet, computer, cell phones, Ipads, Ipods, 3D printers, 120in wall display for Satellite TV, Tesla automobile (no gas here), and all those other items you see advertised and are now plotting to buy. Just enjoy and shut-up about America and their efforts to build the big war machine. It can't be stopped, because the robots have already taken over.
  • Independent
    Dover, TN
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Just today on Bloomberg: The Navy has been busy building their "fast" ? new ships of the Littoral class. The original budgeted price was $220 million a piece; due to cost overrruns it cost now $440 million a piece. The Navy wants to order 15 more of these ships, while they are not sure if they can do the original job; they are to slow and have not enough armament. Furthermore they do not foresee where these should be stationed related to present world conflicts,which are mostly land based anyway. Again as with the F35 how much more money we can waste which serves no purpose at all related to improvement in our country itself ( infrastructure etc.) Of course the area's in which these products are fumbled together will reap benefits and of course Lockheed Martin and their lobbyists as well Mr. McCain are doing great. Are we nuts or so to keep all these doomed programs going at huge cost for us; while onthe other side the US mail looses a billion over the last period. If I would run my household this way, I would have 10 Ferrari's in the garage and no food on the table let alone pants on.
    Dutch did you make that up, or quote someone or article? I'm curious as to what these statements are based upon.

    All US Naval Ship's "full ahead" speeds are classified, 33 knots is what you see or hear most of the time. Rest asured that most combatant ships are capable of greater than that. 33 knots is roughly 38 mph which is not slow on the water. I have seen the sea trials on this ship, and it's very obvious that the ship is making well above 33 knots

    they do not foresee where these should be stationed related to present world conflicts,which are mostly land based; This makes no sense at all, as this ship is capable of attacking land targets at greater than 1500 miles.


    not enough armament, AAW, SAW, Surface and land targets are covered well as are the EW, I'm a little rusty so things may have changed, but at this time the only targets that I'm aware of that it can not attack and destroy are orbital