Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 265
Like Tree9Likes

Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

This is a discussion on Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) within the World Armed Forces forums, part of the World Strategic Defence Area category; I'm a big fan of the LCS modular mission module concept. It gives the ship a lot of flexibility without ...

  1. #121
    adeptitus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,973

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    I'm a big fan of the LCS modular mission module concept. It gives the ship a lot of flexibility without major refit. This is a concept that other navies should seriously consider.

    However, I'm NOT a fan of the LCS project costs. Also, unlike the LCS-1, I think LCS-2 use 11-cel SeaRAM instead of 21-cel RAM? I like the 20mm Phalanx addition but not the reduced number of rounds on the RAM launcher.

    For a 2,000-3,000 ton ship, I'd agree that 76mm might have been a better choice. For Corvette sized surface combatant, I like the German Navy's Braunschweig class weapons load.
    Last edited by adeptitus; 05-05-2008 at 01:19 PM.

  2. #122
    Scratch is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,515

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Regarding the CIWS I think the millenium gun would have been an even better choice. It's able to attack a wide variety of targets, including AShM, with a good caliber and has the AHEAD technology integrated.
    However, I also don't see the point in putting a 11x RAM launcher there? Is the 21x that much more expensive?

  3. #123
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by Scratch View Post
    Regarding the CIWS I think the millenium gun would have been an even better choice. It's able to attack a wide variety of targets, including AShM, with a good caliber and has the AHEAD technology integrated.
    However, I also don't see the point in putting a 11x RAM launcher there? Is the 21x that much more expensive?
    Even only 11 is better than none. But I agree...I believe it is the same box, just fewer missiles. I will have to look into it.

  4. #124
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by adeptitus View Post
    I think LCS-2 use 11-cel SeaRAM instead of 21-cel RAM? I like the 20mm Phalanx addition but not the reduced number of rounds on the RAM launcher.
    Now I have it.

    The SEARAM is what we are seeing.

    It is a single, self-contained unit, combining the missiles of the RAM (but only 11) with the self contained tracking and quick reaction (to engage multiple targets) of the Phalynx.

    Here's some info:

    The SEA RAM Anti-Ship Missile Defense System under development by RSC and RAMSYS is an evolved Close-In Weapon System (CIWS) comprising key attributes of both the existing Phalanx CIWS and the RAM Guided Missile Weapon System. SEA RAM is designed to extend the battle space of the CIWS and enable the ship to effectively engage multiple targets.

    Leveraged technology from Phalanx and RAM integrates elements of each system into the self-contained SEA RAM System. An 11-missile round RAM guide assembly, loaded with RAM Block 1 guided missiles, replaces the 20 mm gun of Phalanx.

    SEA RAM combines the superior accuracy, large intercept range and high maneuverability of RAM with the high resolution search-and-track sensor system and reliable quick response capability of Phalanx Block 1B.
    And a pic.


  5. #125
    adeptitus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,973

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    If you look at the LCS-2 photo, the RAM launcher mounted in the back as the R2D2 style dome on top. Only SeaRAM has that. The regular RAM launcher with 21 rounds doesn't.




    On LCS-2 they have 1 x SeaRAM and 1 x 20mm CIWS. On LCS-1 they have 1 x RAM.

    The SeaRAM is an inexpensive plug-in option or Phalanx replacement/upgrade. But if you're building a ship from scratch, I'd think that you can do the proper system integration to use RAM instead of SeaRAM.

    Here's an article on Malaysian navy regarding SeaRAM:
    http://thestar.com.my/maritime/story...8&sec=maritime

    “It is similar to the ‘plug and play’concept where we can install the vessel with the relevant hardware like surface-to-surface missile system, the Exocet MM40 and anti-aircraft missile system, the SEARAM.

    “It will only take 24 hours to fix the hardware. This is because SEARAM fitting does not involve any extensive module projection from the deck.

    “It only needs a perched missile launcher on the deck.
    Last edited by adeptitus; 05-05-2008 at 04:11 PM.

  6. #126
    harryRIEDL is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    81

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Im not a fan of the LCS apart from the huge cost overruns its under gunned and LCS2 is all Aluminum which would lethal if theres a fire.
    Also the moudal are ill defined
    lastly the 40kn requirement is absurd

  7. #127
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by adeptitus View Post
    If you look at the LCS-2 photo, the RAM launcher mounted in the back as the R2D2 style dome on top. Only SeaRAM has that. The regular RAM launcher with 21 rounds doesn't.
    See my post 21.

    At first glance I thought there were two weapons system on the deck house there. As it turns out, there is only the one SEA RAM.

    SEA RAM, with its own tracking and engagement capability, is something that puts less burden on the overall sensor suite when place in "God" or auto mode. Still, I agre e that a RAM installation with the necessary ship-borne sensors would be best.

  8. #128
    planeman's Avatar
    planeman is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,484

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    sketch of FFG version with Mk41 VLS, 2 x 35mm CIWS


  9. #129
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by planeman View Post
    sketch of FFG version with Mk41 VLS, 2 x 35mm CIWS

    [qimg]http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/1165/lcsffgkq9.jpg[/qimg]
    Nice sketch. But I believe that they will not sacrifice flight deck space. The parameters for the design call for, in several of the mission packages, large flight deck space for standard and unmanned helos for the types of operations envisioned.

    Perhaps a international/export version dimilar to what you envision could be developed to meet needs more suited to a true FFG where such a design would be desirable.

  10. #130
    Troika is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kanadskaya Oblast
    Posts
    276

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    I have some misgivings about the modular concept. You have ONE set of crewmen trained for the ship, and the do the work of maintenance, operation, DC for a half-dozen mission packs... granted the DC part would be relatively small, but we are still talking about giving a big subset of the crew different sorts of jobs to do. I think there may be problems with training and organisation. I'd be interested to see how this works out.

  11. #131
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by Troika View Post
    I have some misgivings about the modular concept. You have ONE set of crewmen trained for the ship, and the do the work of maintenance, operation, DC for a half-dozen mission packs... granted the DC part would be relatively small, but we are still talking about giving a big subset of the crew different sorts of jobs to do. I think there may be problems with training and organisation. I'd be interested to see how this works out.
    I believe it will work out fine. You have ASW, anti-mine, and anti-surface that will not be a problem because existing fire control and other techs on other vessels handle all of that now.

    With the multi-mission tasking it's just that you will have the equipment/ordinance necessary for that poackage available on board as required (as opposed to it all being there all of the time) while the crew is trained to operate them all.

    For the Spec Ops you will definiately bring in spec ops personnel, but the sea handfling and operations of the ship will remain the same.

    My bigger concern is that they require a different package while out performing a different task. For example, they are taked with anti-surface but run up against enemy subs and need the anit-sub too. Something like that. They may end up going out in small task forces or flotillas where all the conceivably necessary needs are covered within the flotilla by different ships.

  12. #132
    Troika is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kanadskaya Oblast
    Posts
    276

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Head View Post
    I believe it will work out fine. You have ASW, anti-mine, and anti-surface that will not be a problem because existing fire control and other techs on other vessels handle all of that now.

    With the multi-mission tasking it's just that you will have the equipment/ordinance necessary for that poackage available on board as required (as opposed to it all being there all of the time) while the crew is trained to operate them all.
    I am not so sure about that. Crew complement is a concern. An OHP has 170 crew, give or take. An LCS has, what? Half that? Each crewman will have to learn more, unless they have specific mission specialists for the combat package (which they seem to?). What do they do in the mean time? A big part of being a crewman is familiarising yourself with the ship, being on it, technical expertise is only half the battle.

    I am sure the problem is not insurmountable, and somebody'd thought of that before, but this, more than anything else, is what I consider might be bigger problem. Ships are just toys, software's the thing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Head View Post
    My bigger concern is that they require a different package while out performing a different task. For example, they are taked with anti-surface but run up against enemy subs and need the anit-sub too. Something like that. They may end up going out in small task forces or flotillas where all the conceivably necessary needs are covered within the flotilla by different ships.
    I think that'll definitely be one of the possible solutions, they operate in flotillas of four ships, maybe, and fit out their kit according to mission profile. That'd be what give them an edge over larger generalist ships, you get more bang for your buck, cutting away the redundant capabilities but still having exactly what you need to do the job, on a smaller and faster platform.

  13. #133
    Jeff Head's Avatar
    Jeff Head is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Idaho - Beautiful Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    5,419

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by Troika View Post
    I am not so sure about that. Crew complement is a concern. An OHP has 170 crew, give or take. An LCS has, what? Half that? Each crewman will have to learn more, unless they have specific mission specialists for the combat package (which they seem to?). What do they do in the mean time? A big part of being a crewman is familiarising yourself with the ship, being on it, technical expertise is only half the battle.
    There is also a high degree of automation with these vessels, which will reduce significantly crew numbers and tasks. I believe that the fire control speacialists, the seamen, the electronics techs, etc., etc. will be able to aptly handle the mission requiremnts for the various packges.

    Of course the Spec Ops missios are the exception where those personnel will e brought on board the vessel..

    But time will tell.

    Both LCS entrants (Lockheed and GD) have been built with these very requirements in mind.

  14. #134
    bd popeye's Avatar
    bd popeye is offline The Last Jedi
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Cedar Rapids Iowa
    Posts
    15,670

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    believe it will work out fine. You have ASW, anti-mine, and anti-surface that will not be a problem because existing fire control and other techs on other vessels handle all of that now.
    Correct. From what I understand multiplie ships will eventually deploy. Each one suited for diffrent missions. Perhaps the mission modules will be pre-positioned.

    I am not so sure about that. Crew complement is a concern. An OHP has 170 crew, give or take. An LCS has, what? Half that? Each crewman will have to learn more, unless they have specific mission specialists for the combat package (which they seem to?). What do they do in the mean time? A big part of being a crewman is familiarising yourself with the ship, being on it, technical expertise is only half the battle.
    The USN has this covered. They are "cross training" sailors for duty on these ships as I write this. The crew will be multi-tasked.
    Be sure to check out...


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    don't forget


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    am what I am.... 'Dat's all what I am"

  15. #135
    adeptitus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,973

    Re: US Navy LCS-2 Independence Floated/Launched

    Quote Originally Posted by Troika View Post
    I have some misgivings about the modular concept. You have ONE set of crewmen trained for the ship, and the do the work of maintenance, operation, DC for a half-dozen mission packs... granted the DC part would be relatively small, but we are still talking about giving a big subset of the crew different sorts of jobs to do. I think there may be problems with training and organisation. I'd be interested to see how this works out.
    Just because it has a modular design doesn't mean they'd change the load-out every other month. @_@ The importance here is having the option to easily swap out mission modules, versus "fixed" systems that require major retrofitting.

    Think of it as an easy way to upgrade, or change mission profile/load-out.
    Last edited by adeptitus; 05-08-2008 at 06:07 PM.

Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4567891011121314 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Type 071 LPD
    By Sczepan in forum Navy
    Replies: 308
    Last Post: 09-24-2012, 06:23 PM
  2. Soviet carrier development, lessons for China as well??
    By Gollevainen in forum Professional Discussions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 03:42 PM
  3. Jian's vs F-22/F-35??
    By Ender Wiggin in forum Air Force
    Replies: 190
    Last Post: 12-23-2007, 03:45 PM
  4. Soviet Navy(Voyenno-morskoy flot SSSR)
    By isthvan in forum Professional Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-12-2007, 09:26 AM
  5. US Navy wants to add 32 ships by 2020
    By bd popeye in forum World Armed Forces
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-11-2005, 01:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13