The US Navy's LCS As a Case Study
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations Graduate Program in International Studies Fall 2017 Acquiring the Tools of Grand Strategy: The US Navy's LCS as a Case Study Sean P. Murphy Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the International Relations Commons, Military and Veterans Studies Commons, and the Public Policy Commons Recommended Citation Murphy, Sean P.. "Acquiring the Tools of Grand Strategy: The US Navy's LCS as a Case Study" (2017). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/ a3nc-4q05 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/21 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ACQUIRING THE TOOLS OF GRAND STRATEGY: THE US NAVY'S LCS AS A CASE STUDY by Sean P. Murphy B.A. May 1989, Tulane University M.B.A. May 2002, University of South Carolina A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY December 2017 Approved by: Regina Karp (Director) Jesse Richman (Member) Patrick Hester (Member) ABSTRACT ACQUIRING THE TOOLS OF GRAND STRATEGY: THE US NAVY'S LCS AS A CASE STUDY Sean P. Murphy Old Dominion University, 2017 Director: Dr. Regina Karp Grand strategy is about how states allocate resources and employ these resources to achieve desired political conditions. In examining the match between desired ends and available ways and means, an often-overlooked subject is how the specific tools of grand strategy are forged. One of these tools is the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), a Major Defense Acquisition Program (MDAP) that started in 2000. LCS remains a controversial and often unpopular program with many stakeholders to this day. This study examines how the means of grand strategy, in this case a new ship class, are acquired. It also looks at how these means are employed (ways) to achieve the desired outcomes (ends) and the feedback loop between means, ways, and ends. The initial portion of the study examines how the U.S. Department of Defense and Department of the Navy formally acquire systems or “systems of systems.” The second portion of the study examines the design, construction, and fielding of the LCS class or the attainment of Initial Operational Capability (IOC). The final portion analyzes the design, construction, and introduction of the LCS into the fleet in terms of the three models used by Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow in Essence of Decision; the Rational Actor Model (RAM), Organizational Behavior, and Governmental Politics – Models I, II, and III respectively. The hypothesis is that individual personalities may have more influence than any of these models account for and that instances of individual impact may offer more nuanced insights into these models of state behavior. This study reveals that the process of evolutionary acquisition and spiral development caused increased risk in the time-line for achieving Final Operational Capacity (FOC) of LCS. It also provides insight into the reaction and adaption of a large organization to changes in its environment. This study does not however reveal strong evidence to support the hypothesis of individual personalities significantly influencing decision making or action taking compared to organizations in Models I-III. The details of individual participation and internal deliberations are obscured by security and proprietary rules which privileges models I and II in the analysis. iii Copywrite, 2017, by Sean P. Murphy, All Rights Reserved. iv This thesis is dedicated to my parents and especially to my Mom for giving me the tools and support to succeed and for teaching me the determination to work at it. I also need to acknowledge the academic debt I owe to Tulane University, my undergraduate alma mater; many of the academic skills needed for this dissertation were inculcated in me there. To the late Dr. Blake Touchstone, who served as the director for my history department honors thesis and the inimitable Dr. Kenneth W. Harl, who was and still is my academic idol and inspiration; I also owe a debt of appreciation – thank you gentlemen. I also need to thank my fellow GPIS students for their academic interest and expertise, I often learned more from discussions with my classmates than any of the assigned reading or other scholarly works to which we were exposed. Last but most certainly not least, I need to thank my blushing young bride of 20 years for her support and motivation, especially during the research and writing of this work. Thank you Janeth. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are indeed many people who have contributed to the successful completion of this dissertation. I need to thank the various fellow contractors, naval officers, and government acquisition professionals who must remain anonymous but were willing to answer my questions about the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and spared their time to do so. The consummate professionals at Old Dominion University’s Perry Library also earned my appreciation for their research support, Inter-Library Loan program, and workshops on Endnote and other esoteric facets of academe. I also need to thank all of the professors in Old Dominion University’s Graduate Program in International Studies (GPIS) notably Dr. Kurt Gaubatz, Dr. Steve Yetiv, Dr. David Earnest, and Dr. Simon Serfaty. I also very much need to extend my gratitude to the members of my dissertation committee; Dr. Jesse Richman, Dr. Patrick Hester, and most all to my dissertation director, Frau Doktor Professorin Regina Karp – Vielen Dank! vi NOMENCLATURE ACRONYMS A2AD Anti-Area Access Denial ABS American Bureau of Shipping ACAT Acquisition Category AoA Analysis of Alternatives ASN (RD&A) Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition ASROC Anti-Submarine Rocket Thrown Torpedo ASuW Anti-Surface Warfare ASW Anti-Submarine Warfare BAE British Aerospace and Engineering C2 command and control C3 Command, control, and communication CAD Computer-Aided Design CAE Component Acquisition Executive CARAT Cooperative Afloat Readiness and Training CDC Centers for Disease Control CDD Capability Development Document CFFC Command, Fleet Forces Command CJCS Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff CLIN Contract Line Item Number CNAN Capabilities of the Navy After Next CNO Chief of Naval Operations vii COBRA Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis system COCOM Combatant Commander COMOPTEVFOR Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force CONOP Concept of Operations CONUS Continental United States COTS Commercial off the Shelf CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union CR Continuing Resolution CSBA Center for Strategic and Budgetary Studies DAS Defense Acquisition System DDG guided missile destroyer DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement DNS Director Navy Staff DoD Department of Defense (U.S.) DON Department of the Navy DOTMLPF-P Doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership & education, personnel, facilities, and policy DRPM Direct Reporting Program Managers EBO Effects Based Operations EMD Engineering and Manufacturing Development EU European Union EVMS Earned Value Management System EWG Expeditionary Warfare Grid FAR Federal Acquisition Regulations FBE Fleet Battle Experiment viii FF fast frigate FFP firm-fixed price FHA Foreign Humanitarian Assistance FMS Foreign Military Sales FOC Final Operational Capability FRPDR Full Rate Production Decision Review GAO Government Accounting or Accountability Office GDIT General Dynamics Information Technology HM&E Hull, mechanical, and electrical HSV High-speed Vessel HUBZones Historically Under-utilized Business Zones HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning HVU high-value unit IA Information Assurance IAMD Integrated Air and Missile Defense IBR Integrated Baseline Review ICD Initial Capability Document IDIQ Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity IED improvised explosive device IJN Imperial Japanese Navy IOC Initial Operational Capability IOT&E Initial Operational Test and Evaluation ISAR Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance IT Information Technology IWS Integrated Warfare System ix JCIDS Joint Capability Integration Development System JFCOM US Joint Forces Command JMWAG Joint Multi-Warfare Analytical Game JROC Joint Resources Oversight Committee JSF Joint Strike Fighter (F-35 Lightning II) KPP Key Performance Parameters KSA Key System Attributes LCS Littoral Combat Ship LHA Landing helicopter, amphibious LMW Littoral Mine Warfare LPTA Lowest Price Technically Acceptable LSS Littoral Sensor System MAD Mutually Assured Destruction MATOC Multiple Award Task Order Contract MCM Mine Counter Measures MDA Milestone Decision Authority MDAP Major Defense Acquisition Program MDD Material Development Decision MILCON Military Construction MIW Mine Warfare MM Mission Modules MNV Mine Neutralization Vehicle MoD Ministry of Defence (UK) MOE Measure of Effectiveness MOP Measure of Performance x MP Mission Package MPRA Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft MRAP Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (vehicle) MT Metric