Brumby
Major
That may require a RQ-180 type air asset in a A2AD environment for that type of off board sensor as I don't think those drones organic to the LCS would survive.
Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
That may require a RQ-180 type air asset in a A2AD environment for that type of off board sensor as I don't think those drones organic to the LCS would survive.
Just caught up on the LCS/SSC developments of the last month or so...
Wow, so much disappointment. No VLS, no SPY-1F, no bigger gun.
The SSCs/"Frigates" will be good ASW vessels, with their sonars and twin helicopters, and will at least have the OTH anti ship missiles that LCS lacked, but it really is considered normal for a modern "frigate" to be equipped with some kind of medium range area air defence, and increasingly a medium range phased array radar, as well as with a modest number of VLS.
I'm sure the USN's new frigates will be able to operate well in low intensity environments independently and take some of the burden off burkes that are overkill for pirate hunting, and they will also be good in the ASW role either semi independently or as part of a larger taskgroup... and their new AShMs mean they can at least put up a fight with any opposing FAC, corvette or other surface combatant lacking meaningful air/cruise missile defence (OTH targeting permitting), but lacking an area air defence is really quite abnormal for a modern frigate.
I suppose the lack of VLS on these new LCS derived frigates also puts the final or at least penultimate nail in the coffin for the initial 32 LCS being refit with VLS as well.
Wow, so much disappointment. No VLS, no SPY-1F, no bigger gun.
The SSCs/"Frigates" will be good ASW vessels, with their sonars and twin helicopters, and will at least have the OTH anti ship missiles that LCS lacked, but it really is considered normal for a modern "frigate" to be equipped with some kind of medium range area air defence, and increasingly a medium range phased array radar, as well as with a modest number of VLS.
I'm sure the USN's new frigates will be able to operate well in low intensity environments independently and take some of the burden off burkes that are overkill for pirate hunting, and they will also be good in the ASW role either semi independently or as part of a larger taskgroup... and their new AShMs mean they can at least put up a fight with any opposing FAC, corvette or other surface combatant lacking meaningful air/cruise missile defence (OTH targeting permitting), but lacking an area air defence is really quite abnormal for a modern frigate.
I suppose the lack of VLS on these new LCS derived frigates also puts the final or at least penultimate nail in the coffin for the initial 32 LCS being refit with VLS as well.
I would not be so sure.
They made these changes and they can make more.
The Independence class has the room set aside for the VLS behind the 57mm gun...it could later be added as long as they add the sensors too.
The Freedom class, while not as obvious, also has the room.
I predict that we have not seen the end of the enhancements that will be made. A more hawkish GOP administration, if it came into office for eight years, might well continue the process.
Time will tell.
Last edited:
Well, maybe -- but if they couldn't even cost effectively fit in VLS on a series of new build and semi-clean sheet ship designs, then I can't really see them refitting it into existing ships that have already been built. The chances of Mk-41 VLS on LCS and its derived frigate design is looking more and more like a pie in the sky, at least in my eyes. The issue is simply funding. Even if they had the money to refit their 32 LCS and 20 LCS-Frigates with VLS, they'd probably debate whether it was more cost effective to do that or use that same amount of money on a new burke or two instead.
The VLS for both LCS-1 and 2 classes were for the NLOS missile, I believe. I'm not sure if they're even compatible with the space and depth that Mk-41 would require. The USN really should have insisted provisions be made with the LCS design from the get go, so Mk-41 could be cost effectively fit into their ship if it was later deemed necessary. It's like they deliberately cut off their future growth opportunities with this ship.
Last edited by a moderator:
The provision for space for the Independence class was for the Mk-41 system. I believe for the Freedom class as well...but it is jnot as clean or clear cut. In either case, the wiring, sensors, etc. would have to be included in addition to the system itself, for it to be added to either of the vessels...or the SSC.
But you can be sure that the designers made provisions for future growth over the life of these ships.
Now...whether they do it or not is a completely different matter...but by the time they are complete and have 55 or so ships, over the life of the vessels, I predict we will see more changes that very well could include the VLS. We will just have to wait and see.
Could you provide a source regarding the space for Mk-41?
Because I've found nothing about provisions of space for Mk-41, and I've found that the space behind the 57mm gun on LCS-2 class was for a VLS intended to hold the NLOS missile, not Mk-41.
Brumby
Major
I think the issues are twofold. Primarily it is cost and funding as the USN needs all the funding it can pull together for the next gen Ohio project. Secondly, the GAO report dated July 2014 reported that the Independence Class do not meet Service Life Allowance. Any addition of Mk-41 (even if the initial design allows for it) would now require modification to existing design to accommodate the additional weight.
Jura The idiot
General
while I gave Likes to recent posts here, I also noticed questions/answers/opinions/posters remained pretty much the same from last summer so let me also repeat myself 
it's from https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/littoral-combat-ships-lcs.t3993/page-27#post-302506
(the link inside it (dated Aug 27, 2014) sends me to a completely different thread though -- a moment ago I reported this to Webmaster)
my point is it's unlikely to fulfill these requirements and add new weaponry like VLS at the same time
it's from https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/littoral-combat-ships-lcs.t3993/page-27#post-302506
(the link inside it (dated Aug 27, 2014) sends me to a completely different thread though -- a moment ago I reported this to Webmaster)
my point is it's unlikely to fulfill these requirements and add new weaponry like VLS at the same time