Constellation class FFG(X)-US Future Frigate program

[Admiral John Byng]

One area where the USN is a bit short of a specialized surface platform at the moment is ASW. I think they should go for a frigate that is state of the art in that regard. The loss of the S3 Viking means that even carrier groups are short of this capability.

[navydavesof]

One area where the USN is a bit short of a specialized surface platform at the moment is ASW. I think they should go for a frigate that is state of the art in that regard. The loss of the S3 Viking means that even carrier groups are short of this capability.

I agree. The loss of the S-3, the Spruance, and the Perrys-classes, it was a 1, 2, 3 punch the Navy is still struggling to come back from.

A ship specialized in ASW would need a modern bow sonar, a good towed sonar, and a reliable ASW helo capability. Most of us Navy guys have been very dubious about shipboard torpedo tubes. The light weight torpedoes a ship can carry and fired from the Mk32 SVTT do not have the range to really be useful, however, they are such a staple that they are even stored on the weather decks aboard Burke DDGs and suffer the lessons learned that put them inside the skin of the ship aboard Sprucans and Ticos. As a note, the USN did not start putting the SVTT on DDG-51 weather decks, because they were finally adapted to the harsh sea environment but instead, hey were put on the weather decks, because the DDG-51s were never designed to carry torpedo tubes in the first place.

The hangar extension offers the advantage of internal space for combined magazine for the ASW helos and internally stowed SVTT. I will put torpedo tube windows in the forward most part of the extended hangar.

[navydavesof]

Work has begun on the FFG version of the NSC in 1/350 scale!

It's time to dig through my household goods to find my custom resin (Mk41 VLS, domes, Millennium, 76mmSR, and Mk45 Mod4 guns, and TRS3D pieces). One of the challenges is the weird texture the 3D printed material is. I think I will need to clad most of the hull in super thin polystyrene sheet, because the printed material is actually pretty tough and does not sand well.

NSCFFGIMG_4625 small.jpg

NSCFFGIMG_4633small.jpg

As a survey of the readers, two questions:
What should the name of the class be?

What hull number should we start at?

Thanks, guys!

[navydavesof]

why not FFG62 or FFG70?

FFG-62 might be as-on-the-nose as necessary for the project; ie it's not confusing LCS hull numbers with FFG numbers, instead it's picking up right where the Perry-class left off.

Most excellent, DavidP, I like it!

What about a name for the class that does not conflict with current naming conventions? I'm not opposed to continuing with names of cities like the LCSs currently are, afterall SSNs and CA/CLs did it, too.

I will be using elements of Tetra's DDG-89 PE kit for this.

• NOTE: I am moving this WIF project over to my LCS Flight II thread so this thread can continue as a Histroy & Technology thread.viewtopic.php?f=67&t=50783&p=746219#p746219

[SumGui]

Looks like survivability is being better considered - a significant alteration to the propulsion of the Lockheed FFGX proposal:

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... -offering/

[SumGui]

And Ernest E Evans would be an outstanding name for the class.

[Haijun watcher]

Fixing the propulsion for the Freedom-class lengthened LCS variant that may be considered for the FFG(X) program:

Defense News

Lockheed planning big shift away from LCS propulsion system for its future frigate offering
By: David B. Larter ? 22 hours ago

PARIS � Lockheed Martin is planning to shift from its littoral combat ship�s water-jet propulsion to a propulsion system that the U.S. Navy is more familiar with for its future frigate offering, Lockheed�s vice president for small combatants and ship systems told reporters at the 2018 Euronaval show.

As it works through the Navy�s requirements for its FFG(X) program, Lockheed is hoping that a more traditional twin-screw design with independent drive trains will entice the service towards its offering.

One of the major hang-ups with the design requirements for all the competitors has been requirement that the engineering spaces be separated by a certain number of meters so that if the ship takes damage in one area, the other space should be online to drive the ship. If the design can�t meet the spacing requirement, an alternative propulsion unit has to be installed.

For Lockheed, the decision was to try and meet the spacing requirement, which is making its FFG(X) offering a bigger ship than the Freedom-variant littoral combat ship.
(...SNIPPED)

(...SNIPPED)

As for the system itself, Lockheed is keeping its options open, but is looking hard and combined diesel and gas systems, or even combined diesel and diesel, give the speed requirements for FFG(X), which are well reduced from what they were for the speedy LCS.

The fleet has been receptive but mixed on the idea of a straight diesel propulsion system. But the trade-off for gas turbines is less fuel efficiency, which impacts range, DePietro said.

In February, the Navy announced that it had awarded design contracts to asked to Huntington Ingalls, Lockheed Martin, Austal USA, General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, and Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri have all been asked to submit mature designs.

(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

Naval News

Austal Further Improves its Frigate Design to Better Match Latest FFG(X) Requirements
Xavier Vavasseur 16 Jan 2019
At SNA 2019, the Surface Navy Association�s National Symposium currently held near Washington DC, Austal AUSA unveiled the latest variant of its �Austal Frigate�.
The scale model on display at the show features a number of design modifications compared to both the original Austal Frigate design (first unveiled at Sea Air Space 2017) and its earlier update (unveiled one year ago at SNA 2018).

[MalmZoon]

This incident happened before US entered the war but the ship was not sunk.
I think the first USN warship sunk in WW2 was at Pearl Harbor on December 7th. Cant say which one.

[Haijun watcher]

Defense News

The US Navy is planning for its new frigate to be a workhorse
By: David B. Larter ? 2 days ago
WASHINGTON � The U.S. Navy is looking to get a lot of underway time out of its new frigate and is eyeing a crewing model that swaps out teams of sailors to maximize the operational time for each hull.
The so-called blue-gold crewing model effectively creates two crews for each ship of the class. The blue crew and gold crew switch out to keep the ships at sea for as long as possible without breaking the sailors and their families.
It�s the model the Navy has used for years on the ballistic missile submarines and is employing on the littoral combat ships, but now the model is likely to extend to the LCS successor, said Rear Adm. Ron Boxall, the Chief of Naval Operations� surface warfare director.
(...EDITED)

[Haijun watcher]

Another belated post:

US Naval Institute

Navy Issues Draft RFP for FFG(X) Next-Generation Frigate
By: Sam LaGrone
March 2, 2019 8:31 AM � Updated: March 3, 2019 4:30 PM

The Navy has issued a draft request for proposal to design and build its planned class of 20 next-generation guided-missile frigates (FFG(X)).

Posted late Friday, the detailed design and construction RFP draft will serve as a practice run for shipbuilders to pitch their designs for the small surface combatants that are set to follow on the two classes of Littoral Combat Ships currently in production.

The document lays out a schedule to produce 10 ships � a lead ship that would deliver 72 months after contract award and options for nine follow-ons hulls. Later this year, the Navy plans to issue a final detailed design and construction RFP with the contract to be awarded in 2020. Submissions for the work have to be based on an existing U.S. or allied hull currently in service as part of an ongoing rapid acquisition scheme for the class.

(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

The first in the new class on its way?

Military.com

First New Frigate, Unmanned Surface Ships in 2020 Navy Budget Request

12 Mar 2019
Military.com | By Gina Harkins

The Navy Department wants more than $205 billion for thousands more sailors, new ships, unmanned vessels and aircraft that will help prep pilots to battle adversaries in the air. But the service also plans to send one of its aircraft carriers into retirement early.

The department's 2020 budget request, released Tuesday, includes $115 billion in base funding for the Navy and another $46 billion for the Marine Corps.

The Navy's end strength could jump from 335,400 in fiscal 2019 to 340,500 next year, according to the budget request. The bulk of the increase will be on the enlisted side. Sailors will also be part of a 3.1 percent pay increase next year, requested across the defense department.

(...SNIPPED)

As the Navy progresses toward a planned fleet of 314 ships by fiscal 2023, up from 289 today, it's also requesting a robust shipbuilding budget: $23 billion in total. The funds will include, among other vessels, the very first guided-missile frigate as part of the Navy's new FFG(X) program and two large unmanned surface ships.

The frigate, which follows the Navy's rapidly concluding littoral combat ship program, is expected to be able to tackle a variety of missions so larger combatants can spend time on bigger operations.

The unmanned surface ships are part of a broader Navy investment in unmanned vehicles. The budget request also includes three dozen unmanned undersea vehicles and two more MQ-4C Tritons, a high-altitude unmanned aerial vehicle that conducts surveillance.

(...SNIPPED)

[Haijun watcher]

Congressional protectionism at work:

Defense News

The US Navy�s new frigate program is careening toward a roadblock
By: David B. Larter ? 46 minutes ago
WASHINGTON � The U.S. Navy�s program to buy a new frigate, known as FFG(X), has been smooth sailing since it was announced in 2017, but congressional protectionism could torpedo much of the progress the service has made to date.
The House Appropriations Committee�s defense bill withholds funds from the Navy�s frigate program if the service tries to contract for any auxiliary equipment, such as pumps, or propulsion equipment or shipboard cranes not manufactured in the United States. In other words, those components must be manufactured in the United States, or Congress won�t fund them.
The Navy opposes the measure, saying the provision would increase the cost of the program and delay it by at least a year.
�The Navy does not agree with the proposed language in the HAC-D bill,� the Navy said in an information paper dated May 17, referring to the Defense Sumcommittee. �If enacted, it will result in the potential for: redesign, loss of commonality with the rest of the US Fleet, increases in cost, and delay to the FFG(X) Detail Design and Construction (DD&C) contract award.�
(...SNIPPED)

[Admiral John Byng]

It looks like the "off the shelf" design requirement will be wasted if the ships can't enter service as soon a possible. That, together with cost, is the main reason for buying a proven design. As to cost, it is usually a bit of a mirage. Saving money by buying a proven design is good in theory, but once you start tinkering the costs rise and rise. Discipline is needed and steely determination to stick to what you want and get it done ASAP!

US made equipment might have to be redesigned to fit the hulls or, more likely, the hulls will be redesigned to take the equipment. Once hull redesign is on the table, the "while we're at it" brigade will come up with all sorts of extras that can easily be slotted in. Delays and a huge cost hike ensue until everything gets completely muddled and someone finally says "enough!" and we go right back to square one, or the project is scrapped in favour of some stealthy corvette or a flying submarine or some other wonder weapon.

[Haijun watcher]

Now entering the RFP stage:

Naval Today

US Navy issues RFP for FFG(X) frigate contract
The US Navy released a request for proposals (RFP) for the guided missile frigate FFG(X) detail design and construction contract on June 20.
Now Austal, Huntington Ingalls Industries, Fincantieri Marinette Marine and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works will compete for the contract to build the first 10 ships (one base ship and nine option ships).
Lockheed Martin withdrew from the competition earlier but said it would supply systems to the winning company.
The RFP provides for a full and open competition and will result in a contract awarded to one company in fiscal year 2020.
Major warfare systems that the US Navy would like to have on the frigate include an Aegis-derivative COMBATSS-21 combat management system, a C4I suite, an Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR), Mk53 Decoy Launching System (Nulka), a SeaRAM Mk15 Mod 31 in addition to a UAV and an MH-60R helicopter.
What the navy is particularly interested in is the ship�s vertical launch cell potential to support Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile Block 2 and/or Standard Missile-2 Active missiles.
(...SNIPPED)

[Juan]

Also today was released publicly the fremm do NOT comply with the US survivability standards and the design will require additional 200 tons of steel to match those standards. How that jeopardize the design must be proven?

so the F100 family is, as many of you said, an evolution of the Perry class and already comply with these US standards.

[Timmy C]

Also today was released publicly the fremm do NOT comply with the US survivability standards and the design will require additional 200 tons of steel to match those standards. How that jeopardize the design must be proven?

so the F100 family is, as many of you said, an evolution of the Perry class and already comply with these US standards.

300 tons, actually: https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/ ... mpetition/

�We did, like all the competitors, monthly technical exchange meetings with the government to make sure we were as compliant as possible going into detailed design and construction,� he said. �One of the things that the Navy wasn�t going to budge on, and we agreed, was the toughness of the ship. So we added about 300 tons of steel on the design for the FREMM.�

As for the F100, maybe it has sufficient scantlings and armour in vital areas, but those didn't help Helge Ingstand when she sunk due to a design flaw in her engineering spaces.

[maxim]

The article refers to the changes to FREMM already executed to the design to fit to the requirements.

I do not think that the final results regarding the analysis why Helge Ingstad sunk, are released. I still think that not many ships would survive the collision with the ice-strengethened bow of a 112,939 t tanker.

It would be interesting to know if the OHP class fits to the US Navy's current requirements - it was a very austere design, with only one shaft. The Spanish F 100 has significant changes regarding propulsion and is not really similar to a OHP.

If they upgrade the FREMM than also the Independence-based design and likely also a Legend class-based design should have no chance to win. The Freedom class design was already withdrawn, but there can be additional designs still entered into the competition.

[Admiral John Byng]

How can the aluminum hulled Independence class meet the survivability requirement? Seems odd to me.

The FREMM is probably the best design of the competitors and yet it is being singled out for criticism? Or perhaps the USN is leaning toward FREMM and therefore wants the spec beefed up before it announces it is the winner?

I hope this is not heading for disaster! If they keep tinkering with the designs they will end up with an armed garbage scow.

[Haijun watcher]

Another potential roadblock:

Breaking Defense

If Congress Punts Spending Bill, Navy�s New Frigate Would Suffer
The Navy is looking to get a new class of frigates in the water as soon as possible, but the budget wrangling between Congress and the White House might mean that gets put on hold.
By Paul McLeary on July 17, 2019 at 1:01 PM
WASHINGTON: If lawmakers can�t patch together a big budget deal to avoid a debt default and hold off billions in automatic spending cuts across the government, the Navy�s new frigate program could wind up being punted down the road, putting the service�s goal of a 355-ship fleet in jeopardy.
The Navy � which continues to struggle with readiness and maintenance issues � has moved quickly on its FFG(X) program in an effort to get the new class of ships into the water and make up for some of the deficiencies of the Littoral Combat Ship, which lacks both the offensive and defensive capabilities needed to meet the Pentagon�s new effort to confront China and Russia.
Congressman Rob Wittman said in an emailed statement that any delay in the FFG(X) program �would be absolutely unacceptable and is yet another example of how harmful CRs are for our military.� He pointed out that fiscal 2019 �was the first time in decades our service members received funding on time and the result has been a stronger military. I have constantly heard from top military leaders that CRs not only waste money, but are a broken promise and one more chip away at our service members� ability to survive.�
(...SNIPPED)