Posted on 05/17/2008 3:42:33 AM PDT by Reaganesque
May 15, 2008 With naval battles on the high seas now virtually extinct for the U.S. armed forces, the navy's role has become more one of infantry invasion and airstrike support - and with this new role comes a need for vessels more suited to littoral (just offshore) operations. The initial order was placed back in 2005, and the first delivery, the U.S.S. Independence, has just been launched, a speedy trimaran with helicopter decks, a stealthy radar profile and a healthy array of arms. It's configurable to suit a wide array of littoral combat missions, including minesweeping, anti-submarine and surface combat support - and now that we've seen it in the flesh, it wouldn't look the least bit out of place soaring over the credits of a Star Wars movie.
The U.S.S. Independence is the first of a projected fleet of between 50 and 100 littoral combat ships (LCSs) the US Navy will be adding to their fleet over the coming years. Built on a well-proven Australian-designed trimaran platform from Austal, the LCS is fast, stealthy and well suited to a range of offshore combat support missions.
The rear deck is suitable for two Seahawk helicopters, and can also support Harrier jump-jets if necessary. Onboard weaponry includes a 57mm Bofors gun, four .50 caliber guns, chaff, missile and torpedo decoy launchers, an 11-missile SeaRAM launcher, 8 Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles, mine detection and towed array sonar units, and a vertical launching system for ASROC-style surface missiles or Evolved Sea Sparrow type missile defenses.
The U.S.S. Inedpendence was built and delivered by General Dynamics, as part of a four-ship evaluation plan. Two were to be built by General Dynamics, two by Lockheed Martin, and the designs were to be evaluated to determine the superior design. Sadly, cost blowouts by both General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin have seen the remaining three evaluation ships cancelled and the Navy is putting together a new bidding program to have the remaining three evaluation ships contracted and built.
Interesting. And shows me I’m quite old. When I served, the USS Independence was an aircraft carrier.
Is there a C class ship?
It sure has a big flight deck!
May God always bless this ship and her crew!
Big and multi-purpose flight deck. Down underside, this ship appears to have four water jet ports. Very useful in real shallow waters...
I have no idea.
Yes, it’s called the USS HRC.
Why wouldn’t a ship designed for close to shore work need a lot more guns. After all, land battles seem to rely on big tank guns and howiters etc. It seems the Navy has dropped cannons from almost all its designs.
Wasn’t this tried with aircraft back in the 60’s 70’s when it was thought dogfighting would only be fought with missles?
Using water jets, it’s going to need pretty reliable intake filters that don’t need crewmembers to be constantly clearing them of mud, seaweed, and trash - I take it they’ve got it figured out?
“Cool looking ship”
I disagree. It ain’t pretty, BUT, It does not have to be pretty.
Stealth has taken all the prettyness out of both ships and airplanes. Look at the B-2 bomber Vs. the B-1.
The B-1 looks like it is doing 250 MPH while parked and the B-2 looks like it is still in the packing crate.
The F-117 Vs. the F-16. The F-117 proves that a piano can fly if given enough power, while the F-16 is the perfect meld of man and machine.
A stealthy ship is a strange looking bird, but I am willing to bet that it will be above and beyond anything produced by any other country in the world.
I seem to remember Australia loaning us one of their littoral ships for evaluation a few years ago. I wonder if this ship came out of that experiment.
.....Bob
OK, I need to ask a stupid question. What is “littoral”? I’m not familiar with the term.
“Very useful in real shallow waters...”
Once!!!!!!!!
A concern of mine too. This ship seem under gunned for shore support of infantry. IMO shore support should require either a gun of at least 5" caliber or a very large missile (cruise or short range ballistic) load out, this ship seems to have neither.
But aren’t they all Literal Combat Ships ?
One Phalanx defensive weapon per side, if one fails is that side unprotected? Whats plan B?
Shallow water, generally near shore, less than 300 ft. deep.
Littoral = http://www.blurtit.com/q470662.html
maybe the idea is its protected by helicopters it carries. why waste space and money on fixed gun emplacements on the boat when you can launch killer aircraft for CAP.
The U.S.S. Independence is the first of a projected fleet of between 50 and 100 littoral combat ships (LCSs)
The "official" number in the USN 30-year shipbuilding plan is 55. Given the cost overruns of the program, and the fact that the plan isn't remotely a achievable in the USN budget, the actual figure is going to end up being some number under 55.
The rear deck is suitable for two Seahawk helicopters, and can also support Harrier jump-jets if necessary.
There are not going to be any Harriers going anywhere near this thing.
Onboard weaponry includes a 57mm Bofors gun, four .50 caliber guns, chaff, missile and torpedo decoy launchers, an 11-missile SeaRAM launcher, 8 Harpoon surface-to-surface missiles, mine detection and towed array sonar units, and a vertical launching system for ASROC-style surface missiles or Evolved Sea Sparrow type missile defenses.
There's NO provision or intention of carrying Harpoon missiles and there's no VLS for ASROC or Evolved Sea Sparrow. There's no on-board sonars at all. All sonars, towed arrays, etc. are on unmanned boats in the ASW package.
There are, however, small VLS units for the small NLOS missile.(US Army program.)
THere’s no Phalanx CIWS on LCS.
However, the Surface Warfare Module consists of an additional two 30mm stabilized gun turrets in addition to the base 57 mm gun forward.
Despite what may be implied in some articles there’s no intention of LCS to provide gunfire support for troops ashore.
Would have been slick to put jet ports on the outer hulls.
SEARAM is a combination of the CIWS radar and fire control with the RAM missiles, removing the 20mm gun.
“One Phalanx defensive weapon per side, if one fails is that side unprotected? Whats plan B?”
Appeasement? /s
In other words we spent billions on a Navy Seal deployment platform with enough firepower to protect them if hostiles are chasing them back to the ship.
looks way cool ... but how many skiers can it pull?
And if the crew is half-female that would make it...
Just my SWAG - This design presumes our dominant air power, information acquisition and precision firepower. It's not made to support an assault where the enemy is indicriminantly lobbing big metal and expolsives in your direction because that kind of threat does not seem to be around so much any more.
This thing is made for missions that would seriously degrade the ability of the Chicoms to wage an amphibious assault, IMHO
...a clitoral warship with a Phallus system and a SEA RAM?
Damn! I knew we forgot something!!
Does this replace the 16” guns of the battleships?
Way cool.
I am coming, reluctantly, to the decision that the Navy doesn’t put large guns on their ships because large guns cause collateral damage and the JAG boys (and girls) don’t think it is legal. The same philosophy seems to hold for 155 mm artillery. Too much collateral damage; 14 terrorists killed and one child. etc. etc.
The bottom line is that we will pay for our mistakes in blood.
Jeez, I don’t get the fixation on the lack of gunnery. It’s not the only boat in the navy. Aircraft carriers don’t have deck guns, and neither do submarines.
The Greeks have a ship that patrols the isle of Lesbos— it’s a
(wait for it...)
Clitoral Combat Ship!
Are you saying you don’t think the F-22 Raptor is beautiful?
GPS and Laser guided missiles....
Big guns and their ammunition are heavy. The LCSes are near their weight margins with their mission packages as it is.
THere’s a big gun on the DDG-1000. Research on the railgun continues.
The reality is that an aircraft carrying an assortment of gps bombs is a more accurate, efficient means of delivering ground support firepower now than a gun.
ping
You may have missed a big one:
"the remaining three evaluation ships cancelled "
It's my recollection that one of the Lockheed boats was already launched, but not yet commissioned
The profile from the waterline up makes me think of the Ironclads!
Why are folks so fixated on the weapons systems of the past? There has been a LOT of research and development of new systems that don’t take up as much space, don’t need as many folks to operate, and provide as much, if not more, firepower. The era of the big battleship lobbing ordnance on shorelines is way past. There are more efficient ways to deliver the hurt, when it needs to be done, and it has nothing to do with ‘political correctness’.
BINGO!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.