From DefenseNews

 

[excerpt]

 

LCS: Quick Swap Concept Dead

U.S. Navy Revising Ships’ Operational Plans

Jul. 14, 2012 - 12:50PM

By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS

 

The original idea for the littoral combat ship (LCS) envisioned modular mission packages that could be rapidly swapped, so one ship could change missions easily from mine warfare, for example, to anti-submarine warfare over the course of a single deployment.

"History teaches us, mankind learns NOTHING from history." Hagel

 

The LCS multi-mission concept is something akin to the old TV show WKRP in Cincinnati's episode about the turkey giveaway at Thanksgiving. The plan was to release a bunch of live turkeys from a helo above a shopping center parking lot. Cool concept on paper, by lousy in the execution phase - as the station's air asset wound-up carpet bombing gobblers and causing considerable property damage to patron's cars.

All of the eggheads who conceived LCS failed to examine the results of Denmark's excursion into this endeavor. The Flying Fish (Flyvefisken) class ship was a white elephant and the Dane's gave them away to Lithuania, Finland and a couple of other smaller navies.

On top of this, one flavor is all-aluminum. (doesn't anyone remember what happened to the USS Stark?)

This goes to show me a lot of the US Navy brass are insane. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different results.

I would be interested hear the thoughts of others on this issue.

Seems like many of the reasons for building the LCS are no longer applicable to me.

 

The LCS was supposed to be flexible because of the modules, now the modules can't be swapped out in less than weeks

The LCS was supposed to be cheap, They now cost about $480 million before any modules are added

The were supposed to be reduced manpower ships, now the crew size has been increased by 50%, so far

They were supposed to be able to operate as a group without a lot of support but now we need motherships to support them

Their unreplenished endurance was supposed to be 21 days but the OPNAV report has reduced that to 14 days and the report was written before the crew size was increased.

Now the Motherships will have to replenish the LCS at least every 9 days and the mothership will require an escort, what ship is best suited for a light escort duty like this? A frigate, which the navy says they don't need.

The navy has yet to produce a single working module even though we have orders in place for, or taken delivery of 22 ships

 

So now we have a ship that is going to cost 5-600 million each, then add in a mothership for every (call it) 8 LCS'. Call the mothership cost $75 million per LCS

 

What we now have is a single mission ship that costs almost $700 million each that needs unrep every 9-10 days. A ship that currently only has extremely short ranged weapons. For a few hundred million more they could have a true multi-role FFL with endurance. JMO but the guys in pascagoula have the right idea. Patrol Frigate

 

Really, what advantages does the LCS still have over a more traditional frigate? Speed is all that comes to mind, as long as they don't use that speed too often or the unrep requirements probably fall to even less than every 9 days.

Clemens,

Nice breakdown of the problem with LCS. I was at SAS in April HII has a patrol vessel (their submission for the CG OPC). They have fitted it out with an array of weapons and are hoping to get foreign sales for it. I say build the freakin' things here! They are cheaper than LCS and they have REAL teeth.

The people who designed the LCS concept need to be reduced in rank to E-1 snipes and sent to the bilges with toothbrushes. As far as naval engineers go, they suck like a CHT pump!

Clemens,

Nice breakdown of the problem with LCS. I was at SAS in April HII has a patrol vessel (their submission for the CG OPC). They have fitted it out with an array of weapons and are hoping to get foreign sales for it. I say build the freakin' things here! They are cheaper than LCS and they have REAL teeth.

The people who designed the LCS concept need to be reduced in rank to E-1 snipes and sent to the bilges with toothbrushes. As far as naval engineers go, they suck like a CHT pump!

 

 

What is HII estimating for the cost of a patrol frigate? I would guess a base package of ESSM, sea ram, harpoon, and a sonar suite (towed array and variable depth dipping). That would give the navy a ship capable of self defence against air threats, ASUW and ASW. Give it the same guns as a cyclone class plus the 57MM on the NSC or a 76MM otobreda and you are covered against swarming small craft too. Like you say that would give the navy a ship with teeth and it could get in close and slug it out with smaller craft. Manpower requirements would be higher but I don't believe the LCS crew will stay at 60 men and it is a ship that can fight.

 

JMO but I think they should cap LCS construction at about 10 units, outfit them all for MCM, then build patrol frigates for ASW and escort duties. I just don't see how the navy can say they don't need a ship for escort duties, it is so cost ineffective if they have to assign DDG's for this purpose.

I whole-heartedly concur, with your closing statement.

The HII reps I talked with said it would mount the Sea-RAM and ESSM for AirDef. ASuW included either the 57mm OtOMelara or the new BAE Systems mount (pretty slick looking design - see the attached photo) and capable of firing the high-tech DART rounds, two 25mm Bushmasters and a compliment of harpoons. It would also be capable of supporting FireScout and ScanEagle UAVs along with embarking two MH-60 helos. The only drawback I see is the price. Its less than LCS, but to export it HII is going to have stiff competiotion with overseas builders that can crankout good platfroms, with a cheaper pricetag.

Here's the photo!

I whole-heartedly concur, with your closing statement.

The HII reps I talked with said it would mount the Sea-RAM and ESSM for AirDef. ASuW included either the 57mm OtOMelara or the new BAE Systems mount (pretty slick looking design - see the attached photo) and capable of firing the high-tech DART rounds, two 25mm Bushmasters and a compliment of harpoons. It would also be capable of supporting FireScout and ScanEagle UAVs along with embarking two MH-60 helos. The only drawback I see is the price. Its less than LCS, but to export it HII is going to have stiff competiotion with overseas builders that can crankout good platfroms, with a cheaper pricetag.

 

 

What kind of ASW suite were they considering?

Per HII: http://ir.huntingtoningalls.com/phoenix.zh...&highlight= it looks like its going to have a bow-mounted dome (likely a towed-array) and torpedo launchers. It will also probably mount the new BAE Systems replacement for the SLQ-32 EW suite. That little toy is really nice, as I got to talk with BAE Systems reps about it at SAS.