link to page 1 
November 4, 2020
Navy Large Surface Combatant (LSC) Program: Background
and Issues for Congress
Introduction
the mythical shield that defended Zeus. The first five ships
The Navy’s Large Surface Combatant (LSC) program
in the class, which were built to an earlier technical
envisages procuring a class of next-generation cruisers or
standard, were judged by the Navy to be too expensive to
destroyers to replace the Navy’s aging Ticonderoga (CG-
modernize and were removed from service in 2004-2005,
47) class Aegis cruisers. The Navy wants to procure the
leaving the current force of 22 ships. The Navy’s FY2020
first LSC around FY2028, although that date could change.
30-year shipbuilding plan projected that these 22 ships
The Navy’s proposed FY2021 budget requests $46.5
would reach the ends of their service lives and be retired
million in research and development (R&D) funding for the
between FY2021 and FY2038.
LSC program in one R&D line item and some additional
funding for the program in another R&D line item.
Figure 1. Existing CG-47 Class Aegis Cruiser
USS Antietam (CG-54), commissioned in 1987
The issue for Congress is whether to approve, reject, or
modify the Navy’s FY2021 funding request and emerging
acquisition strategy for the program. Congress’s decisions
on this issue could affect future Navy capabilities and
funding requirements and the U.S. shipbuilding industrial
base.
Terminology
Decades ago, the Navy’s cruisers were considerably larger
and more capable than its destroyers. In the years after
World War II, however, the Navy’s cruiser designs in
general became smaller while its destroyer designs in
Source: Cropped version of U.S. Navy photograph.
general became larger. As a result, since the 1980s there has
been substantial overlap in size and capability of Navy
LSC Program
cruisers and destroyers. The Navy’s new Zumwalt (DDG-
1000) class destroyers, in fact, are considerably larger than
the Navy’s
Navy’s General Concept for the Ship
cruisers.
Navy officials have spoken on and off for years about a
new ship to replace the aging Aegis cruisers. The Navy’s
In part for this reason, the Navy now refers to its cruisers
and destroyers collectively as large surface combatants
concept for the new ship has evolved over that time. The
(LSCs), and distinguishes these ships from the Navy’s
Navy currently envisages the LSC as a ship with a new hull
small surface combatants (SSCs), the term the Navy now
design that would initially be equipped with combat system
uses to refer collectively to its frigates, Littoral Combat
equipment similar to that installed on the Flight III version
Ships (LCSs), mine warfare ships, and patrol craft.
of the Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class destroyer—a type of
ship that the Navy is currently procuring. (For more on the
Surface Combatant Industrial Base
DDG-51 program, see CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-
All LSCs procured for the Navy since FY1985 have been
51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and
built at General Dynamics/Bath Iron Works (GD/BIW) of
Issues for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke.)
Bath, ME, and Huntington Ingalls Industries/Ingalls
Shipbuilding (HII/Ingalls) of Pascagoula, MS. Lockheed
Navy officials have stated that they envision the LSC as
Martin and Raytheon are major contractors for Navy
being larger than the DDG-51 Flight III design, which has a
surface ship combat system equipment. The surface
full load displacement of about 9,700 tons, but smaller than
the Navy’s DDG
combatant base also includes hundreds of additional
-1000 class destroyers, which have a full
component and material supplier firms.
load displacement of about 15,700 tons. The mid-point
between those two figures is 12,700 tons, though the LSC
Existing CG-47 Class Aegis Cruisers
as designed could have a displacement higher or lower than
The Navy procured a total of 27 Ticonderoga (CG-47) class
that. The Navy states that the LSC would
cruisers (one of which is shown in Figure 1) between
initially integrate non-developmental systems into a
FY1978 and FY1988. The ships entered service between
new hull design that incorporates platform
1983 and 1994. They are commonly called Aegis cruisers
flexibility and growth capabilities to meet projected
because they are equipped with the Aegis combat system,
future fleet system requirements. Initial LSCs will
an integrated collection of sensors and weapons named for
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy Large Surface Combatant (LSC) Program: Background and Issues for Congress
leverage DDG 51 Flight III combat systems as well
year shipbuilding plan, suggest a potential LSC annual
as
increased
flexibility/adaptability
features
procurement rate of one to two ships per year.
including expanded Space, Weight, Power &
Cooling, Service Life Allowances (SWaP-C SLA)
Potential Unit Procurement Cost
to allow for more rapid and affordable upgrades in
Ships of the same general type (in this case, large surface
capabilities over the ships’ service life and allow for
combatants) tend to have unit procurement costs roughly
fielding of future high-demand electric weapons
proportional to their displacements. An LSC displacing
and sensor systems and computing resources.
about 12,700 tons would have a displacement roughly 30%
Additional capabilities of interest that will be
greater than that of the DDG-51 Flight III design. The
DDG-51 Flight III design currently has a unit procurement
evaluated for the initial ship include the ability of
cost of about $1.9 billion. Increasing that figure by 30%
the ship’s Vertical Launch System [VLS] to
would suggest a potential LSC unit procurement cost of
accommodate longer and larger-diameter missiles
roughly $2.5 billion in today’s dollars, though the cost
for increased speed and range of weapons,
could be initially higher because the first several LSCs
additional capacity for an embarked warfare
would be at the top of the LSC production learning curve,
commander and staff, support for 360-degree
whereas at least some aspects of the DDG-51 Flight III
coverage with directed-energy weapons, and
design reflect design features that have been in production
improved signatures with support for additional
for many years and are thus well down the production
improvements over time. The new ships will be
learning curve. The first LSC, moreover, would be
designed to provide these initial capability increases
considerably more expensive than follow-on ships in the
as well as the growth capacity to support projected
program, because its procurement cost would incorporate
future systems requirements. The design will also
the detailed design and nonrecurring engineering
incorporate flexibility features to quickly back-fit
(DD/NRE) costs for the class.
and forward-fit systems to pace known threats and
meet future emergent needs through evolutionary
FY2021 Program Funding
block upgrades and modernization.
The Navy’s proposed FY2021 budget requests $46.5
million in R&D funding for the LSC program in Project
(Source: Department of Defense Fiscal Year (FY)
0411, Future Surface Combatant Concept, within Program
2021 Budget Estimates, Navy, Justification Book,
Element (PE) 0603564N, Ship Preliminary Design &
Volume 2 of 5, Research, Development, Test &
Feasibility Studies, which is line 46 in the Navy’s FY2021
Evaluation, Navy, February 2020, p. 518; includes
R&D account. Some additional funding supporting the LSC
some minor typographic edits by CRS for
program is in Project 2196, Design, Tools, Plans and
readability.)
Concepts, within PE 0603563N, Ship Concept Advanced
Design, which is line 45.
Procurement Date for Lead Ship
As mentioned earlier, the Navy wants to procure the first
Congressional Action in FY2020
LSC around FY2028, though the date for procuring the first
The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its report
ship has changed before and could change again.
(S.Rept. 116-48 of June 11, 2019) on the FY2020 national
Procurement of DDG-51 Flight III destroyers would end at
Defense Authorization Act (S. 1790) raised questions about
about the time that procurement of LSCs would begin. The
the program’s capability requirements and technologies.
Navy’s FY2021 budget submission suggests that the final
Section 131 of the FY2020 National Defense Authorization
DDG-51 Flight III ship would be procured around FY2027.
Act (S. 1790/P.L. 116-92 of December 20, 2020) prohibits
the LSC program from receiving Milestone B acquisition
Potential Procurement Quantities
approval until certain conditions are met.
The Navy has not specified the total number of LSCs that it
wants to procure. Procuring a total of 8 to 11 would provide
Congressional Action for FY2021
1 LSC for each of the 8 to 11 large aircraft carriers that the
The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its report
Navy reportedly would aim to have in the future, under a
(S.Rept. 116-236 of June 24, 2020) on the FY2021 National
plan called Battle Force 2045 that Secretary of Defense
Defense Authorization Act (S. 4049), says it lacks sufficient
Mark Esper announced in October 2020. (For more on the
clarity regarding the LSC program’s capability
Battle Force 2045 plan, see CRS Report RL32665, Navy
requirements and its compliance with Section 131 of P.L.
Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and
116-92. The committee recommended reducing the Navy’s
Issues for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke.) Procuring a
FY2021 funding requests for the program and directed the
total of 22 would provide one-for-one replacements for
Navy to submit a report regarding the program’s
each of the current 22 Aegis cruisers. Keeping the design in
compliance with Section 131.
production so as to additionally replace at least some of the
Navy’s older DDG-51s as those ships start to retire in the
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs
2030s could result in a larger total procurement quantity.
Numbers such as these, as well as the Navy’s FY2020 30-
IF11679
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Navy Large Surface Combatant (LSC) Program: Background and Issues for Congress
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11679 · VERSION 1 · NEW