The LCS consists of two distinct parts: (1) a seaframe, which is essentially the ship itself, and (2) a mission package, which is an interchangeable set of sensors, weapons, aircraft, surface craft, and subsurface vehicles carried on and deployed from the seaframe to perform three different primary missions: mine countermeasures (MCM), SUW, and anti-submarine warfare (ASW). LCS was initially developed to provide a lower-cost surface combatant with a smaller crew than other ships and modest combat capabilities in focused areas, compared to higher cost multi-mission surface combatants like destroyers. LCS is envisioned to operate in both littoral waters and the deep ocean in all theaters of operation. Early in the program, the Navy decided to forgo a number of traditional ship requirements in order to help reduce the costs and the weight and size of LCS, which in turn made the ship less robust in terms of weaponry and survivability than other surface combatants. Those decisions were validated by the Department of Defense’s (DOD) Joint Requirements Oversight Council. Both LCS variants initially leveraged commercial ship designs, and were modified in accordance with established sets of technical criteria, called rules, that were developed by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). ABS is a not-for-profit ship classification society that provides independent technical assessments to ensure vessels are built in accordance with the applicable rules, and can also conduct periodic surveying of in-service ships. ABS was under contract with the Navy to provide technical expertise on the LCS program and to develop rules used in the design of LCS, but this contract ended in June 2012. The Navy awarded contracts to two contractor teams that developed designs for the LCS seaframe reflecting different solutions to the same set of requirements. The Navy is procuring two distinct variants: a steel monohull design with an aluminum superstructure called the Freedom variant, and an all-aluminum trimaran design called the Independence variant. The Freedom variant has odd hull numbers and is being built at Marinette Marine in Marinette, Wisconsin. The Independence variant has even hull numbers and is being built at Austal USA in Mobile, Alabama. The Navy has contracted for 24 seaframes with equal numbers of both variants and has taken delivery of four to date. Twenty seaframes are currently covered under block buy contracts and the Navy anticipates funding construction of seaframes through 2016, with deliveries continuing until 2020. The Navy plans to contract for two additional ships in fiscal year 2016 and plans to award further contracts for three LCS seaframes in both 2017 and 2018—though the Navy’s acquisition strategy for these years is still in development. Table 1 shows the status of the LCS seaframe procurement. The Navy requested $1.4 billion for three LCS seaframes in its fiscal year 2016 budget request. The Navy’s plans to begin development and procurement of the new modified LCS are not yet known, although the Navy has stated that its goal is to begin procurement of the lead ships in 2019. Each LCS will be capable of carrying an SUW, ASW, or MCM mission package, as required by the circumstances. The mission packages are being developed in increments; the Navy plans to develop four SUW increments, four MCM increments, and one ASW increment. The mission packages will provide the bulk of the combat capability or lethality for the ship. The Navy has 10 mission packages in its inventory and currently plans to buy 64 mission packages. According to Navy officials, the recent decision to develop a modified LCS has not changed the current end quantity of mission package purchases. Survivability is the ability of a ship to avoid, withstand, or recover from damage. It consists of three elements: susceptibility, vulnerability, and recoverability. Susceptibility is the degree to which a ship can be targeted and engaged by threat weapons. Some ways of improving a ship’s susceptibility include avoiding or defeating a threat by using a combination of tactics, signature reduction, countermeasures, and self-defense systems. LCS uses speed, maneuverability, modern defensive weapons, organic systems (e.g., 57mm gun), and sensors to counter surface, air, and underwater threats. Vulnerability is a measure of a ship’s ability to withstand initial damage effects from threat weapons and to continue to perform its primary warfare mission areas. LCS design uses three different vulnerability scenarios that, dependent on the severity of the damage, allow it to exit the battle area under its own power; and continue to perform its primary mission; conduct an orderly abandon ship. Recoverability is a measure of a ship’s ability to take emergency action to contain and control damage, prevent loss of a damaged ship, minimize personnel casualties, and restore and sustain primary mission capabilities. The LCS seaframe provides most of the survivability features for the crew, including damage control and safety systems. For example, LCS has three redundant firefighting systems. The Navy specified LCS survivability to be greater than that of auxiliary ships, which have a comparably low survivability level, but less than that of frigates and amphibious assault ships—as shown in table 2. According to Navy officials, the Navy designed LCS to what they refer to as a Level 1+ standard, meaning it had additional features beyond those of other Level 1 ships, including tailored survivability requirements for underwater shock and limited fragmentation and bullet armor; and improved ability to withstand flooding after a damage event. Lethality is ability of a weapon system—in this case LCS—to damage or destroy threats, including an enemy ship, aircraft, or missile. Lethality enables survivability because if LCS is able to sink or damage an approaching enemy vessel before it attacks, that enemy vessel may be unable to fire at LCS. The LCS CDD defines requirements related to lethality and identifies specific threats that LCS is expected to be able to destroy and the range at which it should do so. The seaframes provide sensors and communications systems needed for ship operations and self-defense weapons for both the SUW mission and defense against enemy aircraft and missiles, called anti-air warfare. The SUW mission package augments the ship’s lethality by adding two 30mm gun mounts and an armed helicopter. Eventually, a surface-to-surface missile is planned to be added to the third increment of this mission package. Table 3 depicts the combat system equipment carried on the seaframes and the weapon systems that are added with the mission packages. LCS was designed to be able to address the threat of small boats. Figure 1 depicts examples of two types of small boats. The Navy uses several types of testing to evaluate the weapon systems it develops, as required by DOD acquisition policy and statute. Developmental testing is typically sponsored by the program office, is often conducted in conjunction with the contractors, and is used to assess whether the system design is satisfactory and meets technical specifications. Developmental test events, such as combat system ship qualification trials, allow the Navy to verify and validate combat and weapon system performance. Technical evaluation is a testing activity used to assess the readiness of the system for operational testing. Operational testing includes live-fire testing, and is used to determine that the system can effectively execute its mission in an operational environment when operated by typical sailors against relevant threats. Operational testing is required by statute. The Navy has used a combination of developmental and operational testing and modeling and simulation to demonstrate the survivability and lethality of LCS. DOD granted the LCS program a waiver to relieve the Navy of the requirement to do full-scale survivability testing. Such waivers are common in shipbuilding, as it is unrealistic to use a production ship and a live test to assess certain types of damage—for example, how fire spreads throughout the ship. DOT&E—the agency responsible for approving test plans—approved a modified live fire test and evaluation plan that takes advantage of testing on similar components and utilizes historical combat data. In place of live testing, the Navy has used a number of surrogate tests and modeling and simulation to try to retire risk in these areas. Surrogate testing uses decommissioned ships (where available) or representative portions of ship structure, and subjects them to damage similar to what might be caused by threat weapons. These tests help inform and validate the results of computer-based modeling and simulation. The Navy also conducts test events to demonstrate the effectiveness of the ship’s weapon systems and sensors, and it has a test plan to demonstrate the effectiveness of each mission package increment on each seaframe variant. We have reported extensively on the risks of proceeding with LCS procurements without the requisite knowledge provided through adequate testing. In 2013 and 2014, we concluded that the Navy continued to make further investment decisions in the seaframes and mission packages with an absence of key information. In these reports, we identified that until the Navy completes operational testing, the Navy could invest approximately $34 billion (in 2010 dollars) for up to 52 seaframes and 64 mission packages that may not provide a militarily useful capability. We also found in 2013 and 2014 that unknowns persist with the Independence variant given that it had not completed the same testing as the Freedom variant. We recommended that the Navy re-evaluate its business case for LCS and conduct a number of operational test events on both variants prior to making a decision to contract for more ships, including the following: Deploying to a forward overseas location. The Freedom variant has deployed overseas twice; the Independence variant has not yet deployed. Completing rough water, ship shock, and total ship survivability testing. Both variants have now completed rough water trials; the Freedom variant completed total ship survivability testing in 2014, but the Independence variant has not yet conducted this testing. Neither ship will complete full-ship shock trials until 2016.