You will notice reading the quote that the USN desk jockeys sort of passed the blame to the shipyard for fitting these digital bridges as if they had no input on the design.
Do not the USN come up with a spec for a vessel , put it out to tender, review the proposals and follow the design and approve drawings before they even cut a piece of steel?
I was working at a shipyard in Tampa that converted 2 Matson container ships into craneships to add to their equivalent of the RFA . It was very similar to a commercial contract.
Later they got the contract to finish outfitting some TAO's , well the paperwork and copies of drawings that had to be sent daily to a myriad of alaphabet soup departments in Washington was enough to sink the ships. All these departments would have civilian contractors or subcontractors below them with everybody rubber stamping the previous persons rubber stamp . So the person at the lowest point actually doing the work decided it.
I once sat in a meeting of this mixed tribe of contractors and naval types and couldn't understand half of what they were talking about as every 3rd word was an acronym. As I had rewritten some technical manuals for the crane ships they gave me all the manuals for the TAO's to mind . I did get to
re-write a commercial manual for a small transfer pump into the format of the Navy system, it was a case of cut and paste (with scissors and glue stick ) and plagiarising, then the secretary typed it up . Nobody knew what they were looking at and it was the format they recognised, so got passed or was it past.
Needless to say the shipyard went bust trying to complete these two ships and was the 2nd one to as Bath Iron Works went bust constructing them previously. So with 3 shipyards being involved I just wonder how many teething troubles they had.