The following is the February 2018 Annual Report to Congress for the Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules Program
From the Report:
The LCS Flight 0+ Capability Development Document (CDD) specifies the requirements for the LCS MPs to provide focused capabilities in three areas: Surface Warfare (SUW), Mine Countermeasures (MCM), and Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW). The LCS Mission Modules (MM) Program Office is responsible for oversight, development, procurement, and post-delivery ship integration of these focused-mission payloads.
The Navy’s 2016 Force Structure Assessment revalidated a warfighting requirement for a minimum of 52 Small Surface Combatants (SSCs) (LCS and Frigates). As maritime threats continue to grow, the Navy is placing greater emphasis on distributed operations, highlighting the need for a full complement of SSCs. In February 2016, the Chief of Naval Operations and the Assistant Secretary for the Navy, Research, Development, and Acquisition established an LCS Review Team. The LCS Review Team, led by Commander of Naval Surface Forces, evaluated how to maximize operational availability and increase stability, simplicity, and ownership. The LCS Review Team recommended a shift in LCS crew structure, training, maintenance, and operations. In conjunction with this review, the total quantity of mission packages required for LCS was reviewed to address ship quantity changes and changes in employment approach.
The Navy has revised mission package quantities for the LCS MM Program of Record (PoR). The revised quantities are based upon the total planned 32 LCS class ships and their contribution to the warfighting capability requirements derived from the Navy’s Force Structure Assessment. The revised quantities of deployable MPs for the LCS Mission Modules PoR are as follows: 10 SUW MPs, 10 ASW MPs, and 24 MCM MPs, for a total of 44 deployable MPs. The 44 deployable MPs include the following:
- 24 MPs (8 SUW, 8 ASW, 8 MCM) to outfit the focused mission LCS ships that make up the LCS divisions of 3 deployable ships and l training ship
- 3 MPs (1 SUW, l ASW, l MCM) in Mayport, FL to ensure high operational
availability (Ao) of the training systems for the training ships in the LCS divisions
and to provide spare systems for each focused mission area - 4 MPS (1 SUW, l ASW, 2 MCM) in San Diego, CA to outfit the test ships (LCS l-4)
and provide additional spare capacity for training ships and deployers - 4 MPs (4 MCM) to outfit LCS 29-32 to mitigate warfighting capability needs across the MCM mission area
- 9 MCM MPs for use on other Vessels of Opportunity (V OOs) to meet the warfighting capability requirements and account for MCM maintenance cycles
An overall total of 24 MCM MPs are required to comply with Section 1046 of the FY 2018 NDAA which prohibits the retirement of legacy MCM forces until the Navy has identified replacement capability and procured a quantity of such systems to meet combatant MCM operational requirements that are currently being met by legacy forces.
The program will procure production representative systems for the 44 deployable mission packages. One SUW MP was procured as a production representative Engineering Development Model (EDM) with Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy (RDT&E,N) funds and is included in the inventory objective of 10 SUW MPs. The program has procured four non-deployable EDM assets (one MCM MP, two SUW MPs, and one ASW MP) which are used for integration, test and training efforts.
An updated LCS MM Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) based on changes in quantities and the other LCS Review Team recommendations will be completed in 2018. The Navy routinely assesses evolving warfighting needs to optimize capacity across mission areas which may impact MP quantities. Any changes to MP quantities will be addressed in future budget submissions.
At the time of this report’s submission, an appropriation for FY 2018 has not been approved. This report assumes the LCS MM program is funded in accordance with the FY 2019 President’s Budget. Pending FY 2018 congressional reductions to both RDT&E and procurements will affect the information presented in this report.
