Posted on 12/18/2015 9:36:02 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
In an unusually scathing memo to Secretary of the Navy Ray Maybus, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has demanded severe changes to the troubled Littoral Combat Ship program. It includes instructions to cut the number of Littoral Combat Ships to be built, and as well as focusing on building one variant, from one shipyard and general contractor.
arter has specifically directed Maybus to cut the number of hulls for the LCS program from 52 to 40, and to select a single LCS design-shipbuilder team, instead of the current plan for two completely separate designs and shipbuilders, according to the letter originally obtained by USNI.
Two LCS variants are in production, with six ships operational (three of each type), and 20 more on the order books. The two suppliers include Lockheed/Marinette Marine for the Freedom Class that features a traditional mono-hull design, and General Dynamics/Austral for the Independence Class that features an exotic trimaran design.
Both versions have their strengths and weaknesses, although they are designed to carry out the similar mission-sets.
The building of two LCS variants has long been a controversial concept, considering the Pentagon seeming obsession with paring down its types and suppliers of major weapon systems. Even the F-35, the largest defense program of all time, was not allowed to have an alternative engine, despite the hypothetical alternative’s advanced design stage. Then again, shipbuilding has been, and still is, somewhat of a different animal when it comes to protecting industrial bases, jobs, and the various individual Congressional interests.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com ...
that’s a problem, because the obama administration has classified those Little Crappy Ships as “surface combatants” to disguise the fact that they’re slashing naval strength across the board.
Several of these are to come to Mayport Navy Base in Jacksonville, so I don’t know what effect this will have. Having one having to be towed back into port after it left Norfolk is not a good beginning to a combat ship designed for modern war where we need in close naval support for insertion and extraction.
Freegards
LEX
I suspect the real reason we are building two variants is that the Navy wanted a particular model from a particular contractor and Congress had enough votes for the other version and wanted to share the wealth with their supporters. So, the Navy got both versions because of politics.
In my opinion neither version is a safe platform for the crew. Non-state actors like Hezbollah have antiship missiles, which can be fired from shore. (Having taken several hits and lost lives, the Israelis run along the Lebanese coast with their anti-missile systems active and armed.)
These ships are poorly armored for the in-shore missions they’re supposed to undertake. In practice they’ll need plenty of support from real warships and I think should almost never be deployed alone. These ships are some admirals’ wet dream and should have been killed after a threat analysis.
I still don’t understand the point of these things.
Its a lot of money for a patrol boat, pretty much a USCG cutter.
If they wanted patrol boats there are much cheaper designs.
Jobs for contractors.
Towed back due to metal shavings in oil system.
This is a classic sabotage method. Imbedded ISIS?
I think two kinds of ships may be a good idea. They will have different areas of excellence in performance, which will be discovered as they are used. Then that class can be used in the application / scenario / location where it is superior.
Also, bad guys will need two kinds of defense to counter these two ships differences. I’m talking ECM, stealth, detection, etc.
The evolution of ‘war’ means that we will get ‘asymetrical’ sea conflicts like we got with land-based insurgents. These littoral ships are designed for that. The more the better, I think. There are sea-based threats we haven’t really seen yet. All close to land, small seas, in and around islands, bad places for carriers and cruisers.
But facing this and prevailing means we will have to be haters and intolerant. Can’t threaten bo’s peace prize.
Jobs for politicians’ constituents.
They look to be not much bigger than a Coast Guard Cutter.
I’m OK with a fast attack boat and all of that, but anything procured under this administration is suspect in concept and implementation.
There never was an excuse for these deathtraps and money incinerators. the whole idea of littoral combat was for defense of home shores. If we are concerned about that then we have given up on survival and are just wasting money in the meantime.
This just does look very imposing for a maritime combatant. Large patrol boat or small cutter seems more descriptive.
Reactive armor or prone to major damage from small arms fire I do not know, but I bet the latter.
My Dad served on WW2 plywood patrol boat that had more punch than that thing.
Navy must be getting a real deal on those simulated combatants!
I’d like to see us build a few nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed battleships. A nuclear battleship could produce enough energy to mount sizable railguns and it would have the needed armor to defeat many anti-ship missiles if they managed to get past the ships’ defenses.
But we’ll never have that kind of thing because it might offend someone who hates America.
They aren’t really.
The USCG is building it’s “Legend” class large (”National Security”) cutters. The big difference is the Legends are optimized for longer patrols at lower speeds, while the LCS’s have relatively high dash speeds.
And the article calling the Freedom variant a “traditional monohull” is inaccurate. The Freedoms have a semi-planing hull that conveys higher speeds than a traditional hull would.
Not necessarily home shores, but anywhere we were expected to operate either in the shallows or lower threat environments.
The LCSes are good ships for anti piracy patrols off East Africa, for instance. Or working with special ops teams in areas like the various Pacific Island chains (partnering with the Philippines on putting down Muslim insurrectionist/terrorist cells). Places where a Burke-class DDG is overkill (see the rescue of Maersk Alabama Capt Phillips) but a Cyclone class PC doesn’t have the weaponry or endurance.
I won’t go into the mine hunting or ASW stuff because everyone know thats a joke. Although with the MH-60R the LCSes have close to the capability the Perrys had at the end of their service careers.
Yet for close in fighting in shallow waters against small boat swarm tactics these ships have nothing - they are themselves defensless.
You know where I was going.
In times past, the word ‘boat swarm’ would have been bait for Hillary (i.e., OH, That’s Classified????)
The Cole was doubly defenseless - No ammo for on deck guns (as I recall).
It will take an attitude change for the military, kind of like the US Citizens demanding more CCW, for us to survive, much less prevail.
These littoral boats could be fitted for the additional threat you describe, and supporting tactics added.
The forces will do it, I believe, if they are allowed.
“This is a classic sabotage method.”
It is also what happens when your gear train is a crap design or crap construction.
gear train is a crap design or crap construction.
= = =
But I got the design off of Wikipedia, boss.
And the worker was H2B and saved us money.
So, Do I get my quality bonus?
waste of money - F35 - boondoggles - women in combat - women Seals/Rangers - stupid - more casualties - lost wars ... that’s where I am.
Refit? That’s a joke ... they are already too expensive even for a test bed - send to scrap yard before more money is wasted.
The Cole had guns designed for close in defense, BUT Clinton ordered all ammo to be locked up in port. Apples to Pears comparison.
The Zumwalt et al have no guns designed for close in defense - they are a floating coffins, unless surrounded by DDGs etc, which defeats the whole point of littoral combat in foreign waters.
I have read that these things have no armor. They won’t survive combat. In peacetime the Navy wants fast and light. Come the shooting the Navy wants boats that will survive combat.
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.