First Littoral Combat Ship Gets Underway

[Roberto]

As part of the commissioning crew of USS FREEDOM, it saddens me to see so many postings by individuals who have absolutely no clue about USS FREEDOM, USS INDEPENDENCE, the Littoral Combat Ship program, naval weapons systems, or naval tactics in general. My recommendation to those of you who are not involved in the program and have no real knowledge of any of the issues you have raised is to remain silent until these ships are delivered to the Fleet and tested to see if their true capabilities match up to the hype.

And just in case you are wondering - everything demonstrated by USS FREEDOM to date says she'll be more than a match for her intended enemies...

Yeah, I'll try to stay away from either one of the completed LCSs while I ride in my super armed and dangerous RHIB.

[Gone Asiatic]

http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2zsjnyNGiA

Not a very impressive product for...was it 550mil?
WWII Fletcher would make mincemeat of this thing. Did anyone notice there wasn`t a RAST track on that flight deck?

[Ultimo Tiger]

A WWII Fletcher would make mincemeat out of most modern ships if it gone into firing range.

[Guest]

As part of the commissioning crew of USS FREEDOM, it saddens me to see so many postings by individuals who have absolutely no clue about USS FREEDOM, USS INDEPENDENCE, the Littoral Combat Ship program, naval weapons systems, or naval tactics in general. My recommendation to those of you who are not involved in the program and have no real knowledge of any of the issues you have raised is to remain silent until these ships are delivered to the Fleet and tested to see if their true capabilities match up to the hype.

And just in case you are wondering - everything demonstrated by USS FREEDOM to date says she'll be more than a match for her intended enemies...

Who could possibly know more about those topics than scale model hobbyists???

JM

[aleccap]

Hello people, may I please probe a question, if the USS Freedom is so bad, cost running over $500,000,000.00, and to use a term I fully understand - a load of dog poo - what actually made this ship so unique in the first place ?

[ASFC]

The problem is that it is so badly under armed. If it was well armed and do all this multi-mission BS they come out with then maybe the cost overruns might be forgiven. As it is it is just a fast ship with a Gun and some AA missiles.

Put it like this-the money they are spending on LCS would replace many other Navies Frigate Fleets with new Frigates like-for like*, so it is not surprising it has detractors that call it a White Elephant.

Whilst I am in no doubt the cost would come down if the 50 odd ships they plan to buy are bought, these are expensive given that they come with very little in the way of weaponry, and everything has to be bought seperately to make sure the ships can do the jobs they are given.


*(LCS 1&2 have cost what, $1billion? Thats about �650million. The RN could have bought 8-10 Type 23s for that sort of money. Nice to know the USN can waste that much money.)

[Gone Asiatic]

The problem is that it is so badly under armed. If it was well armed and do all this multi-mission BS they come out with then maybe the cost overruns might be forgiven. As it is it is just a fast ship with a Gun and some AA missiles.

Put it like this-the money they are spending on LCS would replace many other Navies Frigate Fleets with new Frigates like-for like*, so it is not surprising it has detractors that call it a White Elephant.

Whilst I am in no doubt the cost would come down if the 50 odd ships they plan to buy are bought, these are expensive given that they come with very little in the way of weaponry, and everything has to be bought seperately to make sure the ships can do the jobs they are given.


*(LCS 1&2 have cost what, $1billion? Thats about �650million. The RN could have bought 8-10 Type 23s for that sort of money. Nice to know the USN can waste that much money.)

Ponder what on earth the navy would do with 50 underarmed hyper-expensive gunboats. Add in the mission module costs....when they are eventually procured...

[bengtsson]

Okay, I'm way late to the discussion and never really follow modern naval developments, but looking at this ship's modern Hull Form, I wonder how this ship handles out at sea? I guess the hull form is for inshore work. But out at sea it looks like the slamming of that hull in heavy seas would be dreadful and cause shock damage to the hull and internals.
I mean, any flat bottom gets the hell beat out of it in anything but calm weather. Is there something built into that hull form that prevents slamming when hit from below by waves as it rides through them? Or is it meant to float like a cork and not cut into the seas? Sort of like a WWII destoryer hull cutting into the seas and Corvettes floating like corks on top of the seas.

Bob B.

[Admhawk]

Does anybody know its schedule for leaving the Great lakes? Sure would be cool to catch a glimpse as she goes by some of the locks!

[daveseas]

I have just read LCSS statement about the USS Freedom and It's funny in most form's there should level of understanding and tolerance, also education to the heart of the combat enviroment these ships are entended to operate in.......Not using the format that was used. It serves no purpose!! It's NOT classified nor is a new issue! It's been around since the 70's with the first vessel of this type sailed through the waters of San Francisco bay.....My thought would be to educate those who do not know rather.........


Regards

[Gone Asiatic]

I have just read LCSS statement about the USS Freedom and It's funny in most form's there should level of understanding and tolerance, also education to the heart of the combat enviroment these ships are entended to operate in.......Not using the format that was used. It serves no purpose!! It's NOT classified nor is a new issue! It's been around since the 70's with the first vessel of this type sailed through the waters of San Francisco bay.....My thought would be to educate those who do not know rather.........


Regards

Not sure what the intent or meaning of your post was, but for $500million USD, the thing is a turkey.

[daveseas]

The meaning is that littoral combat is not a new or classified concept, in other words, it has been in the public domain. The US has been experimenting with this design for a long time as I note in my first comment.

regards

[Roberto]

The meaning is that littoral combat is not a new or classified concept, in other words, it has been in the public domain. The US has been experimenting with this design for a long time as I note in my first comment.

regards

That makes it even worse an eeeexpensiiiiive blunder.
Perhaps the NAVY should have looked at some of the ready made naval vessels from some of Western Europe's navies that better fill the Littoral Warfare category and are available off the shelf.

[G. Shoda]

Let's write our Congressmen.

[Roberto]

Let's write our Congressmen.

[simoni]

The first modern small vessel I know of that was modular multi purpose were the Danish Flyvefisken class. This concept continued on with the MEKO ships built in Germany.
One of the test beds for the trimarine naval vessel concept was the Triton in the UK that is now owned by a company I work for on occasion, Gardline. By all acounts she rolls on wet grass.
A trimarine is, however, faster than a similar displacement monohull, and at loiter speeds has greater fuel efficiency.

But I do not think the ships are the disaster some think they may be.
Yes, there are proven European and other small ship navies that have vessels very suitable for littroral operations.
Also, I must say I am a bit surprised by the apparent short endurance they have.

The one thing that strikes me is that the USN is - without debate - the single most powerful maritime force ever created.
However, in saying that, it was built to fight and win WWIII and project power against adverseries that were sponsored by the USSR - with access to anti ship missiles for example.

With that capability the USN has become used to very expensive, powerful assets, and people get used to having that overwhelming force.
The USN is very much a blue water outfit, with a global reach and mission, and was tailored to confront - as JFK said - a ruthless, monolithic enemy.

Since the fall of the USSR the mission profile has changed utterly.

You dont send a carrier group to deal with pirates in Somalia, as a Merchant Marine officer, I wish you could - but you dont use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Besides, there are not enough carriers to go around, they are a strategic resource, and each unit of this type needs a massive, personel heavy support group.

They are pretty much on call for much bigger scenarios - e.g. China/Taiwan - India/Pakistan - Turkey/Greece - North / South Korea type situations.
These situations are all in fairly confined waters like the Persian Gulf, Yellow Sea, Red Sea, Adriatic sea, Japan sea, east and south china sea, Red sea, Indonesia and Neighbours etc.

The point about personnel numbers is also important, navies are getting smaller with a greater degree of automation.

I dont wish to sound callous - but there is also a growing risk factor.

There are a lot of Kilo, Scorp�ne and modern 201 thru 212 types in those areas, and the number is growing, not to mention developing concepts like the French SMX-23 which are develping in sophistication, automation and ability - we have seen huge strides with conventional submarines, in AIP for example - and they are becoming more affordable and easier to operate with fewer crew.
That is a real threat to a carrier group.

Lets not forget the damage done to the USS Cole, a destroyer that was damaged with a small boat that rammed it. 17 sailors were murdered in that attack, and a vessel as strategically important as a DDG did not deploy from 12 October 2000 - the Attack, until 8 June 2006 when she re-deployed off Lebanon.
If an LCS suffered the same type of attack, the consequences would not be as strategicaly damaging.

In developing a vessel of this type, one has to think of lessons learned and risk management.

It seems to me, having several of these smaller independent littoral vessels they will be able to operate independently or semi independently as part of a small task group - somewhat like the USN submarines blockading Japan in WWII.

A vessel of this type does not smack of gunboat diplomacy either.
It feels older than that, like when the British would send a frigate, just to show who ruled the waves - and in this I can see the argument that a multi role frigate based on a proven european modular design or even a development of the Oliver Hazard Perry or even the USCG's superb cutters might be adapted to do the same job at potentially a lower cost.

But looking at these ships, with the ro-ro ramp and helos, the capability to carry and land and support small to medium task groups - whether thats for evacuations, interventions or humanitarian aid.

In every case above, a vessel of this nature (or an equivalent frigate) can take action without the political repercussions of a larger surface group.

I think the concept for a flotilla of Brown water, Green water or whatever description of littoral one wishes to use is as a concept very astute and relavent at this period.

In addition to the horn of Africa/ East Africa / Red sea region with Yemen, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia the other major region where I could see these vessels being deployed for prolonged periods where a larger surface group could put a strain on resources and cause political resorces is West Africa.
The UN has recently - and its about bloody time as well - expanded the rules of engagement for UN troops in Congo.
In support of that, and in dealing with unforseen developments across a very unstable region with important resources (oil in Nigeria, gas in Ghana) and Russias developing policy of using energy supply as a a lever - this concept of vessel I beieve has a vital and valid function in the future.