Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

dtulsa said:

Somehow it just doesn't add up these are supposed to be "fighting" ship's with nothing to fight with?Can you tell me what their supposed to do when matched against a PLAN frig. or destroyer for instance and costs is irrelevant compareed to lives of the people who serve on them.

Click to expand...

They do have something to "fight" with, dt.

They are going to be fitted with eight long range ASMs.

They will have a 57mm, high rate of fire, dual purpose main gun.

The SeaRAM system is arguably one of the best CIWS systems available.

They will have two 30mm weapons systems. Apparently they are going to have two 25mm Mk 38 mod2 weapons too.

They can carry two Seahawk helicopters.

Those systems right there will give them the ability to defend themselves in the littorals and fight against OPFOR corvettes or FFGs if necessary.

They will also be able to hunt and prosecute SSKs or other submarines in the littorals.

With the addition of the VL Hellfires when needed, they will also be uniquely equipped to handle swarming FACs and speed boats if necessary.

This type of warfare iin the littorals is what they were designed for.

I believe probably a dozen of them will be semi-permanently (if not permanently) equipped for MMC.

As an ASW escort, they will also be effective in either CSGs or ARGs.

Now, it is true that it took some extra pressure and fighting to get those ASMs and some of the addityional sensors and combat fitting. But they are getting them and with that, they will be able vessels.

They are not meant to be DDGs...the US has the best and the largest DDG force in the world.

The LCS/FFs will allow that large force of DDGs to be focused on activities more in keeping with their capabilities. In addition, the DDG force will be available to augment and support these new frigates whenever necessary.

dtulsa said:

i.e. absence of mid range AAM and longer range sms

Click to expand...

The longer range ASMs are happening.

I would not give up on a potential in the future for a four cell VLS housing sixteen ESSMs. That would be very nice icing on the cake and a congress supported by a new US admin could easily make that happen in the future.

But even without it, with the SeaRAM and the other upgrades, these vessels are going to do fine now.

Brumby said:

Funding aside, if you read the latest CRS report (23/9/2015) on the LCS program ...

Click to expand...

... thanks Brumby, not yet; it's at

Brumby said:

...
Part 1

Click to expand...

says "$752 million in 2015 dollars adjusted for inflation" for "an updated version of the now retired Perry class multi mission frigate", while
in the CRS document (the link I put right above) I see, in Introducton, "an average of $479.0 million" for an LCS now (FY2016 budget); I think that's the price "minus Mission Module(s)", but anyway:
Anybody can ask himself (or herself a question if (s)he would've preferred two dozens of OHP-succession Frigates, or four dozens of LCS/FFs?

EDIT
could you explain to me what's meant by (the last sentence): "... it was believed that network connectivity could allow a smaller ship to be substituted with similar capability results"
?

Brumby said:

Part 2

Click to expand...

hah!
"To assume that LCS must be able to perform every mission that like-sized warships built by other nations perform demonstrates a very immature understanding of seapower."
that's exactly what I demonstrate LOL

in the CRS document (the link I put right above) I see, in Introducton, "an average of $479.0 million" for an LCS now (FY2016 budget); I think that's the price "minus Mission Module(s)",

Click to expand...

Yes without.

Does anybody think that we will see a mk56 launcher installed at sometime for essm block2 apparently they don't require a illuminator and also have a surface attack capability seems like a very good match to me range about 27 nautical miles so I guess it would qualify for the over the horizon sms capability also

And does anyone know if reloads are carried for the sea ram seems like 11 missiles are too few for extended deployments

Jura said:

EDIT
could you explain to me what's meant by (the last sentence): "... it was believed that network connectivity could allow a smaller ship to be substituted with similar capability results"
?

Click to expand...

I am simply speculating. For example, shooter and sensor can be independent when networked i.e. the LCS might launch an NSM or equivalent and the targeting is provided by a UAV, F-35 or an F-18. In that way, the LCS is not dependent on organic sensors and the cost associated with a high end system.

I have seen pictures of the mk56 on similar sized ship's so I don't think weight or size is a issue costs maybe