whatever I think here in Prague, Europe
USS Milwaukee Completes Acceptance Trial
The beat goes on.
Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
The beat goes on.
And the existing LCS will also be upgraded during their maintenance rotations.
BTW, the official designation in now FF. SSC was an intial descriptor but the Secretary of the Navy has made clear that it will be FF (Fast Grigfate) and I agree with it.
The upgrades to the LCS, and the FFs are much needed.
The upgraded LCS (which may receive the FF designation after upgrade...we just do not know yet) and the FF vessels, will not be able to actually perform their roles much more capably and safely.
I still hold out hope that a new Admin and Congress after the 2016 sections will revisit adding a fw more things to these vessels. But for now...we know what they are going to have and I am glad they made the changes they did,.
Some of us have been watching this unfold...and clamoring for these types of much needed upgrades...for well over ten years.
Many of SD thread are well over 100 pages long.
And we have a lot of threads. As conversation gets off topic (OT) myself and other moderators will step in and get things back in line. it's what we do,, among other things. It's also one reason SD is such a great place, along with out very knowledgeable posters.
still like your idea for the ffg from Huntington Ingals I would add another 4 cell mk 41 though for various weapons asroc maybe for true asw capabilities
This kind of dumb but if we are going to add all this stuff to the future ff/lcs then why cant we add them to the ones that we are are building or are in the process building right now?
Brumby
Major
IMHO there are two primary drivers that constrained a more ambitious upgrade to the existing design, i.e. weight issues and funding. I do not believe they can add a MK41 onto the existing hull without some form of modification. Secondly, the original premise of the LCS was a low end littoral vessel with a cost cap (from memory) of $300 million per vessel. As is, the planned upgrade itself is likely to put it closer to double the original target. The main issue in my view that is unresolved is the strategic utilisation and CONOPs for such a vessel. When it is all said and done, the LCS/FF will account for more than 1/4 of the surface combatant of the USN. The problem with the existing design besides it is under armed is its endurance capability and in my view will severely constrain Burkes when operating as part of a SAG. In my view, they should have downsized the engine in the FF proposal as it will immediately address both endurance and weight issues. The whole notion of a high speed LCS in my view was girded on a weak concept and that was the ability to quickly transit between missions to swap mission modules. Unfortunately the idea that modules that can be swapped in days versus reality has made the whole notion of speed a moot consideration.
I agree that seems to have been the idea kind of modeled after the European stan flex sys. unfortunately I think politics interfered with idea to a very large extent I do think they can be serviceable in some roles but they are just not up to the idea that they are frigs. in any shape or form what they are is the feel good idea of jobs for those employed and death traps for those who have to serve on them still have not heard anything at all about damage control have you? except they are supposed to survive and limp back to base some how real comforting to know.
I seem to recall that one actually did a module swap in about 96 hrs don't know if it was real module or an inert practice one in any case they had to fly in contractors to assist with the procedure. in todays war fare 4 days is very long time after all we liberated Kuwait in 100 hrs as I recall