April 10, 200620 yr The "little crappy ship" is so 'crappy' the Israelis want to study it ... hmmm From DefenseNews The U.S. Navy has awarded Lockheed Martin a $5.2 million contract to study adapting the company’s Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) design for the Israeli Navy. During the nine-month feasibility study, Lockheed Martin will examine its LCS for hull, mechanical and electrical system compatibility with the Israeli Navy’s combat systems and other requirements, according to a company press release. The study could lead to contracts to design and build one or two ships for the Israeli Navy, the company said. The Lockheed single-hull design is one of two LCS versions being built for the U.S. Navy. The design will be compared to General Dynamics’ trimaran hull. The LCS is a new type of combat ship that will use “mission modules” composed of vehicles, weapons and equipment tailored to specific missions such as mine warfare, anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare. The modules can be loaded or unloaded depending on mission requirements. The cost of the ships is estimated to be at least $220 million without mission modules. Lockheed said that if Israel decides to buy the ships, they will be built at the shipyards of Lockheed’s partners in the LCS program: Marinette Marine, Marinette, Wis.; and Bollinger Shipyards, Lockport, La. The U.S. Navy is seeking partner nations in the LCS concept. Besides Israel, at least four other nations are thought to be seriously considering acquiring the ship. “We would like as many allies as possible to participate in the LCS program,” said Navy spokesman Capt. Tom Van Leunen. “It’s the kind of ship that should fit naturally into many navies, and more participants will help keep costs down.”
April 12, 200620 yr Author Detractors from the LCS design like to point to "shortcomings" like the 57mm gun and say it shoulda been 76mm. They should do a little research. The 57mm is a proven weapon system, fairly widely used now, with a high rate of fire, attractive ammunition choices and the capability of ... what ! ... more range than the 76mm. Who woulda thunk it ?
Create an account or sign in to comment