Government Executive reports that Navy Secretary Donald Winter is echoing a criticism of defense procurement that we're hearing a lot: there's not enough of an emphasis on trying to control things early in the process to get the requirements right during the design stage. "Every quality analysis that's ever been done...suggests that the hardest way to build quality is by inspecting at the end," said Winter to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "You've got to start at the beginning, you've got to design the right way, you've got to build the right way."
Most recently, the media has been shining a light on the many problems with the Navy's LPD-17 San Antonio. Time called it a floating fiasco, with design flaws so profound that they may never be able to be "made right." From the article:
Navy inspections of the San Antonio have found a raft of problems so baked into its design that many Navy officials fear it can never be made right, despite its price tag's having risen from $644 million to $1.8 billion. "Some significant fraction of the welds in that ship were flawed and had to be redone," John Young, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, told Congress in June. "I shouldn't be forced to pay on behalf of taxpayers any price for any level of deficient performance."
The Navy Times reports that some experts are even calling the workmanship on the ship criminal. For a disturbing slideshow of the lube oil leaking from failed welds in the ship's main machinery, go here (or see below). The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has also cited the LPD-17 as an example of how the Navy need to improve business cases to prevent San Antonio class cost overruns of $1.3 billion, an almost 77 percent increase above the initial budgets.
Winter has criticized warship builder Northrop Grumman Corp in the past for their mismanagement of the project, despite the fact that he used to be a corporate VP at the company. We've also questioned the company's management and performance concerning the Coast Guard Deepwater project (Northrop Grumman Corp's profile in POGO's Contractor Misconduct Database can be found here). And not surprisingly, Secretary Winter "continues to be unsatisfied" with the performance of the LPD-17, saying there needs to be a "culture of quality" for Navy acquisitions. We couldn't agree more. And while we're at it, how about if we actually complete developmental and operational testing before going into production?
-- Mandy Smithberger
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/lpd17-reliability-issues-surface-again-03235/
Bondo, you're right, there were problems with LPD-17 throughout the process. As this article shows, there were design problems in using a computer system "was reportedly not up to the task of designing an entire ship." And numerous other problems along the way, failing several inspections, leaks, etc.
Posted by: Mandy | Dec 02, 2008 at 09:37 AM
You pay for process and you get lots and lots of process. You pay for results and you get results. The longer NG drags out the development and building of this ship the more money they make. There's no mystery. It's not illegal. What's wrong is right there in plain sight, and even then you can't figure it out?
The Navy can write all the requirements they want. They can try to mandate quality and they can try to force the contractor to do the smart thing every step along the way, but in the end as long as the Navy is stupid enough to provide the contractor a financial incentive to fail they are going to fail. They will show incredible energy and inginuity in finding new ways to fail so they can milk the maximum profit out of the US taxpayer.
Here is the cold reality, capitalism works. It can work for you or against you, but either way it's going to work.
Posted by: Dfens | Nov 19, 2008 at 03:01 PM
I'm sure the LPD-17 underwent a design review and approval before being launched. So, the problem is probably more related to skill levels and unrealistic deadlines to complete work. If the designs were faulty, that's a patent defect and several levels of approval were involved in the scam.
Posted by: bondo | Nov 18, 2008 at 11:07 PM