The Navy is done leaning on a single shipyard to build the landing craft that will replace a fleet it has kept in service for more than 50 years. In a Navy Public Affairs announcement carried by Seapower Magazine, the service said it has awarded three competitive Prototype Other Transaction (OT) agreements worth a combined $280,521,389 to Conrad Shipyard LLC of Orange, Texas; Master Boat Builders Inc. of Coden, Alabama; and Saronic Technologies of Brownsville, Texas, to build Landing Craft, Utility (LCU) 1700-class vessels. The move puts three separate production lines to work on a boat class the Navy previously sourced from a single builder.
The agreements are funded through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and executed under prototype authority in 10 U.S.C. § 4022, which lets the Navy sign construction deals faster than a traditional Federal Acquisition Regulation competition allows. Each of the three yards will build two or three prototype craft and use the process to refine its own manufacturing plan, with the goal of validating a production-ready Technical Data Package (TDP) at each site before the Navy commits to high-rate production orders.
Why Three Yards Instead of One
Spreading the initial construction obligation across Conrad Shipyard, Master Boat Builders and Saronic Technologies is a deliberate hedge, not a coincidence. William F. Mahan, performing the duties of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, framed the approach as an industrial-base strategy rather than a one-off purchase. "By selecting three distinct shipyards, the Navy is expanding its shipbuilding industrial base capacity and building a resilient 'second source' of supply for landing craft," Mahan said. "Other Transaction prototype authority allows the Navy to move at the speed of relevance."
That framing matters because it signals the Navy does not want a repeat of the delivery bottlenecks that have slowed other shipbuilding programs when a single yard falls behind. By qualifying three builders in parallel through the prototype phase, the Navy is positioning itself to steer high-rate production orders toward whichever yard, or combination of yards, proves it can execute on cost and schedule once the TDPs are validated. Saronic Technologies' inclusion is notable on its own: Naval News, in covering the award, described the mix as blending traditional shipbuilders with "technology-focused companies like Saronic," and its selection alongside two established landing-craft builders suggests the Navy is also testing whether newer, commercially oriented shipbuilders can scale into conventional, crewed hull production.
Replacing a Fleet That Has Outlasted Its Designers' Expectations
The LCU 1700 is designed to replace the legacy LCU 1610 class, which has logged more than 50 years of active service moving vehicles, equipment and troops between amphibious ships and the shore. That longevity is less a testament to good design than a sign of how long the Navy has gone without recapitalizing this part of its fleet. The 1700-class craft are built to add payload capacity, reliability and operational reach over the 1610s, and they are designed for compatibility with the Navy's current and planned amphibious warfare ships, a requirement that shapes everything from ramp geometry to well-deck fit.
The Navy already has a proof point that the design works in the fleet: in August 2026, the service took delivery of LCU 1710, the first LCU 1700-class craft, built by Austal USA under a separate, earlier production contract that is not part of the new prototype agreements announced this month. That delivery gives the Navy an in-service baseline to compare against as Conrad Shipyard, Master Boat Builders and Saronic Technologies move through their own prototype builds.
What the Schedule Says About How Fast the Navy Actually Wants This
Deliveries under the new prototype agreements are scheduled to begin in late 2028 and run through 2029, a timeline that puts real craft in the water roughly two to three years after contract award. That is not an unusually fast schedule for military shipbuilding, but it is fast enough to let the Navy compare three yards' prototype output within a tight window rather than staggering results over a decade. A compressed comparison period is useful if the point of the exercise is picking winners for high-rate production: the Navy will have data from all three yards landing close together, rather than judging an early mover against a late one on different cost curves and different supply-chain conditions.
The use of OT prototype authority rather than a standard FAR-based contract is also a scheduling choice as much as a legal one. OT agreements let the Navy negotiate terms directly with each shipyard and move into construction without the extended proposal-evaluation cycle a traditional competitive contract requires, which is part of why the service can credibly promise craft in the water within a few years of signing.
What It Means for Contractors
For shipyards outside this initial group, the award is a signal that the Navy is actively looking to expand, not consolidate, its base of qualified landing-craft builders, and that OT prototype authority remains a live pathway into a program rather than a one-time mechanism reserved for legacy suppliers. Yards that can demonstrate a production-ready TDP and a credible cost and schedule case may find future openings as the Navy scales toward high-rate production, particularly if any of the three current awardees struggles to hit the late-2028 delivery window.
For Conrad Shipyard, Master Boat Builders and Saronic Technologies, the prototype phase is effectively an audition with real money attached: a combined $280.5 million to prove out manufacturing plans the Navy will use to decide who gets the bulk of the LCU 1700 production run. Subcontractors and suppliers tied to any of the three yards should expect near-term work tied to prototype construction, but the bigger production dollars will follow validation of each yard's TDP, not the initial award itself. Companies watching the broader amphibious shipbuilding market should also note the OBBBA funding source: dollars from that law behind this award suggest the Navy has near-term budget authority to move fast on landing craft specifically, which could open related solicitations for ramps, propulsion components or other 1700-class subsystems before the decade is out.
