You got three of them. Add undermanned and overcomputerized, too expensive, and the fact that while proponents like to tout the multipurpose roles of LCS, none of the swappable mission modules that will supposedly support this capability exist, except on paper.
The Austal produced version is multi hulled and a lot faster, more fuel efficient and all but still a little light on armament.
Navy seems to be afraid of packing any of the big guns. They really blew it when they backed off the 155mm wep as built now by BAE. NGFS capable inland beyond 60 miles.
Maybe they should have asked the Marines what they would prefer.
I cannot disagree...I have heard that a lot of modern navy designs are geared towards fewer humans and more computers. Which makes them more expensive, and vulnerable.
As for the swappable modules for different missions..that sounds like a level of operational rigidity that is disturbing if true.
“We can’t look for that downed pilot because we have different mission modules loaded in...”