” swap that out for LM2500s and the speed problem is solved.”
Can she carry enough fuel to keep those turbines turning for 7000 miles?
Just wondering.
If fitted with the LM2500s and US weapons systems, THEN she would be a fine ship. But it’s more of a Destroyer than a Frigate at 6,900 tons.
The US needs 50 Frigates in the 4,000 ton class. Small, cheap and capable. 48 VLS tubes, and integrates with Aegis.
I’m a big fan of the National Security Cutter platform by HI.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2014-04/its-time-sea-control-frigate
All classes have had size creep. Our Zumwalt class destroyer is about 15000 tons displacement, Flight III Arleigh Burke class destroyers are almost 10000 tons displacement. The U.K. Type 45 destroyer is 10400 tons.
Most of the off-the-shelf competitors for the FFG(X) buy are in the 6000-7000 tons displacement class - and that’s the common NATO frigate size. A 4000 ton frigate just isn’t going to happen.
No idea on the fuel.
The idea of adapting the NSC to be used as an all up military ship is interesting but the problem is that she cannot be modified to take a Mk41 VLS. None of the Hunter Ingalls adapted designs have a VLS that can mount shipkillers or BMD missiles, instead only having a VLS for Sea Sparrows, a much smaller missile than would be required for a combat frigate.