US Navy CANES Integrate Shipboard Networks Program Mollifies Protesters

Networking the Navy
(click to view full)

The US Navy’s Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES) program is designed to streamline and update shipboard networks to improve interoperability across the fleet. It will replace 5 shipboard legacy network programs to provide the common computing environment on board for command, control, intelligence and logistics. The primary goal of the CANES program is to build a secure shipboard network required for naval and joint operations, which is much easier when you consolidate and reduce the number of shipboard networks. That consolidation can also lower costs and maintenance requirements and reduce training needs, if good choices are made. The intent is to build it as an Infrastructure and Platform as a Service (IaaS / PaaS) and field it on a rolling 4-year hardware baseline and a 2-year software baseline.

In 2010, the US Navy awarded 2 contracts, with a potential value of $1.7 billion, for the design and development of the CANES common computing environment. Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are competing, and a single prime contractor was expected to be picked in 2011. It took until early 2012, but Northrop Grumman won. By 2014, however, a multi-year, multi-vendor contract was in place…

Contracts and Key Events

Note that CANES is about covering ships’ IT systems and networks, not core naval functions. Combat systems, and machinery control networks, are not included in CANES.

CANES is currently in production, after Northrop Grumman beat Lockheed Martin in February 2012. Introduction to the fleet was to begin with a pair of 2012 Engineering Development Model installations on unit level ships, followed by Limited Deployment installations in 2012 that cover force level ships, shore sites, and additional unit level ships. Instead, installations started at the end of 2012, and budget issues created more delays. 2013 saw operational testing, ongoing installs, and fielding of the 1st ship. If the program recovers its schedule, CANES would ultimately be deployed to more than 190 ships, submarines and Maritime Operations Centers by 2021.

NGC on CANES
click for video

Sept 2/14: Bid Protests. Finmeccanica’s DRS Laurel (#B-410330.1) and Obamacare’s infamous implementer CGI Federal (#B-410330.2) both filed bid protests with GAO over their exclusion from CANES. The same sort of behavior has been seen on other large IT contracts, like ITES-II.

Jan 9/15: Navy Concedes to Protesters.
One option (one we’ve seen before) is for the government to add the protesting firms to the list, in order to prevent contract stop-work while everyone waits for a GAO decision. Multiple-award contracts don’t compel the government to award much of anything to winning firms, so it’s a low-cost concession. This is indeed what was decided on January 8, with CGI Federal Inc and DRS Technologies added to the list of available vendors.

March 4/14: FY15 Budget. The USN unveils their preliminary budget request briefings. They aren’t precise, but they do offer planned purchase numbers for key programs.

CANES spending remains steady, growing from FY13$ 323 million to FY14$ 352 million, and FY15$ 386 million. What’s changing is the balance between development and deployment. FY 2015 funds are for the Full Deployment contract award to procure 33 units, and handle associated costs for pre-installation design and installation on 25 afloat ships. A Full Deployment Decision is anticipated in FY 2015. Sources: USN, PB15 Press Briefing [PDF] | USAF, Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Overview.

Feb 6/14: CVN. The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis [CVN 74] is the 1st carrier to be upgraded with CANES. There’s are a lot of wiring pulls and hardware tear-outs involved, which is why they’re doing it during the ship’s Docking Planned Incremental Availability maintenance period at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Sources: USN, “Stennis is First CVN to Receive CANES”.

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). CANES is included for the 1st time, and the report is rather short because it isn’t fully tested yet. The Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force (COTF) conducted an CANES operational assessment from September 12 through October 10, 2012, in a laboratory environment. The next major test involves IOT&E for unit-level ships aboard the ballistic missile defense destroyer USS Milius in June 2014. Worth noting:

“COTF has only tested 4 of 32 baseline applications for CANES. The Navy will conduct developmental test events before the start of IOT&E to test the remaining interfaces and representative applications…. As of November 14, 2012, CANES had a large number of cybersecurity vulnerabilities (29 Category 1 and 172 Category 2). The Navy must mitigate cybersecurity vulnerabilities prior to the IOT&E.”

Nov 25/13: CANES afloat. The 1st installed CANES system sets sail. The Arleigh Burke Flight IIA destroyer USS McCampbell [DDG-85] had it installed during the ship’s 5-month scheduled maintenance at US Fleet Activities Yokosuka, Japan. The ship is now underway sooner than the DDG-51 Flight I destroyer USS Milius (DDG 69, q.v. Dec 7/12), because Milius was in an 11-month long Extended Drydock. According to Northrop Grumman, that installation is still underway.

Northrop Grumman has delivered 11 CANES systems: 10 for guided-missile destroyers and 1 for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Sources: Northrop Grumman, Nov 25/13 release.

June 3/13: A Northrop Grumman release announces that they’ll submit a bid for CANES full deployment contract (q.v. March 23/13). Well, of course.

May 9/13: Is CANES investment and deployment fast enough to handle evolving cyber-security threats? Probably not, and that’s the US Navy’s thinking rather than outside critics. Sources: Inside Defense, “CANES Deployment May Not Be Fast Enough, Stackley Says” [subscription only].

March 27/13: RFP. The Space and Naval Warfare System Command (SPAWAR) releases a draft RFP N00039-13-R-0013 for the procurement of CANES full deployment production units in order to promote the early exchange of information. The core contract would be a firm fixed price (FFP) complemented by FFP and cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) CLINs for associated analysis and assessment support services. The draft documents are available from a secure Navy website for authorized US DoD personnel and contractors.

Feb 21/13: Delays. Inside Defense reports that uncertainty regarding fiscal sequestration has delayed 8 CANES installations, just as it’s delaying a number of other ship maintenance plans.

Jan 17/13: DOT&E testing. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). CANES is mentioned peripherally, mostly with respect to carrier integration:

“The Navy conducted developmental testing on the unit-level CANES configuration used on Aegis destroyers in the lab from July 11 – 24, 2012. The Navy has scheduled developmental and follow-on testing of the force-level CANES configuration used on the Nimitz and Gerald R. Ford [aircraft carrier] classes for the 4QFY14.

Currently, the ALIS [F-35 fighter maintenance support] system has provided all required parametric information to interface properly with CANES, but CANES is not fully developed yet, as the contract was awarded in August 2012. ALIS is expected to undergo Application Integration Process testing in FY13 to ensure proper interface with CANES. DOT&E will be able to better assess the impact on JSF operations aboard CVN-78 [the Gerald R. Ford] after the test. Currently, data are planned to be exchanged manually until ALIS and CANES properly interface.”

May 7/12: Contracting strategy. The good news is that Navy officials say CANES is turning out to be about 44% cheaper than they predicted. CANES program manager Capt. DJ LeGoff attributed the savings to competition, and said that the Navy would repeat the competition process every 4 years. That’s possible because CANES requires commercial off-the-shelf components, and also because the Navy is maintaining control of the SOA. From Federal News Radio 1500AM, “Navy says CANES network is 44 percent cheaper than expected”:

“To up the ante on the anti-proprietary attitude toward CANES, the Navy is taking the lead on much of the software work that might ordinarily be handled by a traditional systems integrator. A segment of CANES called Afloat Core Services (ACS) – the services-oriented architecture that will form a key part of the common system – was not part of the contract the Navy awarded earlier this year. The Navy will maintain ACS on its own as a government set of services and the result will be products that are entirely open-source, Legoff said.”

March 4/12: On second thought… That was fast: Lockheed Martin dropped its GAO protest.

Feb 13/12: Protest. Lockheed Martin files a bid protest with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), claiming “flaws in the evaluation process preclude consideration of the best solution for the customer”, without elaborating further.

Feb 13/12: FY 2013 budget. The US Navy announces its FY 2013 plans. They want to buy 21 CANES afloat units, 6 ashore units, 1 unit of technical training equipment (TTE), integration, with associated costs for pre-installation design and activity drawings, and installation. Funds are also requested for continued development on Platform Set 3 and 4 baselines, Developmental Testing and Initial Operational Testing & Evaluation on a unit level platform in support of Full Deployment Decision in FY 2013.

The Navy is asking for $435 million (CANES + CANES Intell P-40s), an average unit cost of about $10.9 million. Installation costs actually vary from less than $5 million to more than $12 million apiece, depending on ship class, level of the platform, variant of predecessor system the hull currently has installed (ISNS Alpha/Charlie/Delta/Legacy), and the geographic location of the installation. Spending for following years through the current FYDP stays in the $450 million ballpark.

In FY 2012 CANES is procuring for: DDG (11), LHD (1), CVN (1). In FY 2013 CANES is procuring: DDG (18), CG (3), LHD (2), LSD (2) CVN (2). FY13 PB Navy Highlights | Justification book [PDFs].

Sept 12/11: Lockheed Martin has submitted its final CANES proposal to the US Navy. Lockheed Martin.

July 27/11: US Navy SPAWAR provides an update on CANES, which has just completed its Critical Design Reviews for both competing systems. A Test Readiness Review will be followed by formal Contractor System Integration Test, and selection of a single CANES winner.

The failure of the last Congress to pass a budget has delayed CANES by 5 months, and forced it to change its schedule. They still believe that the major milestones set out in the Milestone B approval can be achieved; the 1st CANES installation on a fleet destroyer is now planned for late in FY 2012 (late summer 2012).

Aug 16/10: NGC. Northrop Grumman announces a successful 2-day Preliminary Design Review at its CANES program office in San Diego, CA. The PDR and subsequent approval of the CANES design are milestone along the way to the CANES critical design review later this year, and planned shipboard installation of the first system in fiscal year 2012.

Northrop Grumman team members contributing to the Navy PDR included IBM Global Business Services, as Northrop Grumman’s major technology and services partner on CANES; and small-business partners Atlas Technologies, Beatty and Company Computing, Juno Technologies, Syzygy Technologies, and CenterBeam.

Additional Readings

• Northrop Grumman – Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES)

• US Navy SPAWAR – CANES Application Integration

• USN SPAWAR PEO C4I, via Facebook – CANES Installation Snapshot video with Rob Adams.

• RAND (2012) – CANES Contracting Strategies for Full Deployment

• IEEE (July 13/09) – Toward Consolidated Tactical Network Architecture: A Modeling and Simulation Study

• US Navy CHIPS Magazine, via Docstoc (December 2007) – The CANES Initiative: Bringing the Navy Warfighter onto the Global Information Grid [PDF]