Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

Its a ironic program to be sure, starts off aimed more as a patrol ship that became a corvette moved to the scale of a Frigate and now sits to move to a full frigate.
I can see the issues some might have but then again I can see the advantages as well.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Its a ironic program to be sure, starts off aimed more as a patrol ship that became a corvette moved to the scale of a Frigate and now sits to move to a full frigate.
I can see the issues some might have but then again I can see the advantages as well.

Click to expand...

The basic problems IMHO ...if you boil it down...is that some forward thinking planners thought they could replace the Perry FFGs with a new, modular design that tried to be too many things...and sacrificed a lot to get the high speed the deemed necessary for the Littorals..

IMHO, they should have come up with a multi-role FFG design to begin with that had some modularity incorporated into it, and pushed maybe 35 knots.

But. it is what it is...and as I say, I believe at this point with the corrective actions they are taking they will end up with something that fills that multi-role FFG need, and more, particularly for MCM and SpecOps.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Naval Today said:

Secretary of the U.S. Navy Ray Mabus announced Saturday that the next Freedom-variant littoral combat ship will be named USS Cooperstown (LCS 23).

The future Cooperstown will be the first ship to bear the name. It was named to honor the veterans who are members of the National Baseball Hall of Fame located in Cooperstown, New York. These 64 men served in conflicts ranging from the Civil War through the Korean War.

A fast, agile surface combatant, the LCS provides the required war fighting capabilities and operational flexibility to execute a variety of missions in areas such as mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare and surface warfare.

Cooperstown will be built with modular design incorporating mission packages that can be changed out quickly as combat needs change in a region. These mission packages are supported by detachments that deploy both manned and unmanned vehicles, and sensors in support of mine, undersea, and surface warfare missions.

The ship will be 388 feet long and will be capable of traveling at speeds in excess of 40 knots. The construction will be led by a Lockheed Martin industry team in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Click to expand...

Keeping pace with the USS independence class names from last week. This will be the twelfth Freedom class vessel. I expect this week we will also here about LCS-21...which is yet to be named yet.

We can update the list with this one though:

USS Freedom LCS-1 Launch: 9/23/2006 Commission11/8/2008 Active
USS Independence LCS-2 Launch: 4/26 2008 Commission 1/16/2010 Active
USS Fort Worth LCS-3 Launch: 12/7/2010 Commission 9/22/2012 Active
USS Coronado LCS-4 Launch: 1/12/ 2012 Commission: 4/5/2014 Active
USS Milwaukee LCS-5 Launch: 12/18/2013 Fitting out
USS Jackson LCS-6 Launch: 12/14/2013 Fitting out
USS Detroit LCS-7 Launch: 10/18/2014 Fitting out
USS Montgomery LCS-8 Launch: 8/6/2014 Fitting out
USS Little Rock LCS-9 Launch: 7/18 2015 Fitting out
USS Gabrielle Giffords LCS-10 Launch 2/25/2015 Fitting out
USS Sioux City LCS-11 Under construction
USS Omaha LCS-12 Under construction
USS Wichita LCS-13 Under construction
USS Manchester LCS-14 Under construction
USS Billings LCS-15 Under construction
USS Tulsa LCS-16 Under construction
USS Indianapolis LCS-17 Under construction
USS Charleston LCS-18 Under construction
USS St. Louis LCS-19 On order
USS Cincinnati LCS-20 On order
LCS-21 (Not named) On order
USS Kansas City LCS-22 On order
USS Cooperstown, LCS-23, On Order
LCS-24 On order

Hmmm definitely a theme here with the exception of the USS Gabrielle Giffords all the ships are based on US city and town names, some are legacy names others first timers. But all fit the theme. Even Freedom and Independence with Freedom NH (just to name one of the namesakes') and Independence Mo.

This is awesome news for Kansas City!!!! Way better than our last ship which was an oilers.... But proud of my city, I saw a lot of dummies talking ish on the country saying stuff like, "A city known for arts, water fountains and BBQ, is pretty ironic to have a weapon of war named after it"- Damned hippies complain about EVERYTHING. But back to KC proud to have a warship named after this great city! Just wish it was a new Ford or a Burke

US Navy LCS 22 to be named as USS Kansas City

[/URL][/URL]
[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]

Bernard said:

This is awesome news for Kansas City!!!! Way better than our last ship which was an oilers....

US Navy LCS 22 to be named as USS Kansas City

Click to expand...

Hehehe...USS Kansas City, LCS-22, is going to be a fine ship, particularly now that they are working out the armament details and issues.

here

TerraN_EmpirE said:

..., and both classes have already got requests for export and licensing.

Click to expand...

and in the Australia Thread

TerraN_EmpirE said:

..., Freedom and Independence (which already has a licensee developing one in Japan) ...

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I can't find any link(s) confirming this

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

thanks TE but it doesn't alleviate my criticism of the USN LCS summarized in:
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/littoral-combat-ships-lcs.t3993/page-83#post-353949

as to the info you posted, I found just two related articles: one from wantchinatimes and the other is probably worth reading:



but I noticed in the discussion below it people challenged the translation of the original Japanese source, including the idea of "Japan building LCS"

A number of countries have expressed interest in and considered both Lockheed's and General Dynamic's LCS designs...and not just the US adopted designs (because both companies have like three separate, varying size and capability designs of each vessel).

Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan and other have considered them.

The designs have numerous good points. I personally believe that if they had experienced a very clean and positive development and building experience with the US Navy...others may have already made a decision to use them in one form or another.

But they have not. It has been protracted, contentious, and clearly has had to be revised mid-stream. This tends to put a damper on anyone else wanting to potentially experience the same thing.

So, to date...there have been not actual, verified takers. Perhaps after the designs are finalized and shaken out and seen to be working for the US Navy, others will decide in their favor.

Lockheed and GD are going to end up each building 28 or so of their vessels, so the design, in its final forms will be around for a long time. And as I have said...now that their issues have been exposed, analyzed and are being corrected, in the end I think it will work out.

Time will tell whether any other nations ever decide to take them on