Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Re: Littoral Combat Ships (LCS); Which is best?
The Anti-Submarine packagewill allow the LCS to conduct multi-sensor ASW detection, classification, localization, tracking and engagement of submarines throughout the water column in the littoral operating environment. The LCS will have the capability to embark ASW/multi-mission helicopters and unmanned vehicles, and will utilize Undersea Surveillance Systems. This includes Sea TALON (Tactical Littoral Ocean Network). Sea TALON is a unique undersea surveillance system that uses a Remote Towed Active Source (RTAS), a multi-band transducer networked with a Remote Towed Array (RTA), to provide search, detection and localization of quiet submarines in the littorals. Each array is towed by an unmanned, semi-autonomous, semi-submersible Remote Multi-Mission Vehicle (RMV), an ASW-variant of Lockheed Martin’s AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting System.
The Anti-surface package will consist of components including electro-optical/infrared sensors mounted on a vertical take off unmanned air vehicle to provide over-the-horizon detection; two or more 30mm guns to kill close-in targets; some form of VLS for anti-surface missiles (it was to be the NLOS-LS, but with its cancellation last year, it will end up being some other VLS missile, perhaps Vertical Luanch Harpoon); and the MH-60R armed helicopter for surveillance and attack missions.
The Mine Countermeasures Mission package will include four MCM systems—the Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV), Unmanned Sweep System (USS), Organic Airborne and Surface Influence Sweep (OASIS), and Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) to locate and clear mines, particularly in the litoral environment, but also at sea.
Not true. Both LCS classes have very significant ASW and AsuW capabilities with their mission module packs for those operations. They are meant to take less than a day to switch between Mission Modules. What you see in the RAM and main gun are just the common weapons for all mission packs which include Anti-sub, Anti-surface, Mine warfare, and Special Operations.
The Anti-Submarine packagewill allow the LCS to conduct multi-sensor ASW detection, classification, localization, tracking and engagement of submarines throughout the water column in the littoral operating environment. The LCS will have the capability to embark ASW/multi-mission helicopters and unmanned vehicles, and will utilize Undersea Surveillance Systems. This includes Sea TALON (Tactical Littoral Ocean Network). Sea TALON is a unique undersea surveillance system that uses a Remote Towed Active Source (RTAS), a multi-band transducer networked with a Remote Towed Array (RTA), to provide search, detection and localization of quiet submarines in the littorals. Each array is towed by an unmanned, semi-autonomous, semi-submersible Remote Multi-Mission Vehicle (RMV), an ASW-variant of Lockheed Martin’s AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting System.
The Anti-surface package will consist of components including electro-optical/infrared sensors mounted on a vertical take off unmanned air vehicle to provide over-the-horizon detection; two or more 30mm guns to kill close-in targets; some form of VLS for anti-surface missiles (it was to be the NLOS-LS, but with its cancellation last year, it will end up being some other VLS missile, perhaps Vertical Luanch Harpoon); and the MH-60R armed helicopter for surveillance and attack missions.
The Mine Countermeasures Mission package will include four MCM systems—the Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV), Unmanned Sweep System (USS), Organic Airborne and Surface Influence Sweep (OASIS), and Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) to locate and clear mines, particularly in the litoral environment, but also at sea.
Ambivalent
Junior Member
Re: Littoral Combat Ships (LCS); Which is best?
For anti-surface I think it will ultimately end up with LOGIR, which is essentially an ancient Hydra 70 rocket fitted with a very trick inertial and imaging infrared seeker. The Bofors 57 is no small potatoes either.
Harpoon cannot be fitted into any VLS, and the container launchers are bulky, heavy and far from stealthy. You won't see Harpoon.
For anti-surface I think it will ultimately end up with LOGIR, which is essentially an ancient Hydra 70 rocket fitted with a very trick inertial and imaging infrared seeker. The Bofors 57 is no small potatoes either.
Harpoon cannot be fitted into any VLS, and the container launchers are bulky, heavy and far from stealthy. You won't see Harpoon.
Ingalls Shipbuilding said:
The National Security Cutter for the US Coast Guard (3 of 8 have been completed and delivered, 4th building, 5th awarded)
The US Navy Patrol FFG 4921 proposal
The US Navy Patrol FFG 4921 line art
Hopefully the US Navy will accept this and build a couple of dozen of them to replace the Oliver Hazard Perry FFGs.
Re: US Navy Patrol Frigate Design shown at DIMDEX by Ingalls
It's a really nice design and there surely is a place for it in the international merket. Wich seems were Ingalls is aiming this. But for the USN, I'm not so sure.
While I think it's a good thing to have a proper frigate for sea lane patrolling and maybe some escorting, I wonder if that program will have a chance to get through.
Isn't the navy somehow trying to convince congress & so on that the LCS can also take on at least some of the roles of the OHP to justify buying the LCS in those numbers? Now coming back with a real FFG replacement might trigger some questions what the LCS is for then, after all.
And while I can see some merit here, I wonder if in the current situation it's enough for lawmakers to justify the extra funding, or if it's even opportune for the navy to ask for that right now.
It's a really nice design and there surely is a place for it in the international merket. Wich seems were Ingalls is aiming this. But for the USN, I'm not so sure.
While I think it's a good thing to have a proper frigate for sea lane patrolling and maybe some escorting, I wonder if that program will have a chance to get through.
Isn't the navy somehow trying to convince congress & so on that the LCS can also take on at least some of the roles of the OHP to justify buying the LCS in those numbers? Now coming back with a real FFG replacement might trigger some questions what the LCS is for then, after all.
And while I can see some merit here, I wonder if in the current situation it's enough for lawmakers to justify the extra funding, or if it's even opportune for the navy to ask for that right now.
Re: US Navy Patrol Frigate Design shown at DIMDEX by Ingalls
I feel like the USN should build a few dozen of them to replace older frigates and use them for closer to home, low danger patrols. And these ships have a clearly defined mission as well, compared to the LCS mess.
Having an almost completely burke surface combatant fleet imho is overkill and almost unsustainable. You don't need those 9000 ton behemoths for low tension patrols. LCS would've been a step in the right direction if not for the massive delays and cost issues, desire for a jack of all trades (and thus master of none some would argue) ship, and formidable top speed but makes you wonder just how important that is.
I feel like the USN should build a few dozen of them to replace older frigates and use them for closer to home, low danger patrols. And these ships have a clearly defined mission as well, compared to the LCS mess.
Having an almost completely burke surface combatant fleet imho is overkill and almost unsustainable. You don't need those 9000 ton behemoths for low tension patrols. LCS would've been a step in the right direction if not for the massive delays and cost issues, desire for a jack of all trades (and thus master of none some would argue) ship, and formidable top speed but makes you wonder just how important that is.
Re: US Navy Patrol Frigate Design shown at DIMDEX by Ingalls
1) Keep up with the carrier and not slow it down
2) Provide very good ASW screening for the carrier.
3) Serve as anti-air pickets while doing their ASW role so that they have a good short to mid-range self-defense and picket capability along the threat axis.
4) Be able to have a decent ASuW role as an all round combatant when they are escorting other vessels and showing the flag.
I believe the LCS can fulfill great roles in the lotroals, and may be able to fulfill a couple of those roles for escort duties when outfitted with the appropriate mission pack. But they really need to be more all round functional IMHOP for the carrier escort role.
Perhaps building some of the class as all-round fighters in a multi-function role would do the trick...or use these types of vessels to do the same. They are based on a known and existing design already in use with the USCG and that will help with costs.
Of course, so would a multi-role LCS that becomes a FFG. Both LCS designs have alternate designs for multi-mission.
Anyhow, the OHPs in their day had that capability and were good vessels. Then, rather than upgrade them like the Spanish, the Australians, and the ROC did, we simply took their launchers off and took away their anti-air and anti-surface capabilities. They could still be very good ASW escorts...but are being relegated more towards drug interdiction and other such missions.
Oh well, I fellow can have his goody bag wish I suppose.
The problem with the LCS for general escort duties is that they are constrained by their mission packs. A good escort frigate needs to do several things:
1) Keep up with the carrier and not slow it down
2) Provide very good ASW screening for the carrier.
3) Serve as anti-air pickets while doing their ASW role so that they have a good short to mid-range self-defense and picket capability along the threat axis.
4) Be able to have a decent ASuW role as an all round combatant when they are escorting other vessels and showing the flag.
I believe the LCS can fulfill great roles in the lotroals, and may be able to fulfill a couple of those roles for escort duties when outfitted with the appropriate mission pack. But they really need to be more all round functional IMHOP for the carrier escort role.
Perhaps building some of the class as all-round fighters in a multi-function role would do the trick...or use these types of vessels to do the same. They are based on a known and existing design already in use with the USCG and that will help with costs.
Of course, so would a multi-role LCS that becomes a FFG. Both LCS designs have alternate designs for multi-mission.
Anyhow, the OHPs in their day had that capability and were good vessels. Then, rather than upgrade them like the Spanish, the Australians, and the ROC did, we simply took their launchers off and took away their anti-air and anti-surface capabilities. They could still be very good ASW escorts...but are being relegated more towards drug interdiction and other such missions.
I agree that under this admin it will definitely not, but under other admins who are interested in building the US Navy back up and giving our shipbuilding industry a boost, something like this, either this type thing, a alternate batch of LCS, or even taking twenty OHPs and updating/upgrading them might happen. I believe we still need things like FFGs, a replacement for the S-3s, a V-22 AEW and ASW variant, more Zumwalts, a replacement for the F-14, a replacement for the AIM-54 like the ALRAAM, etc., etc.BD Popeye said:
Oh well, I fellow can have his goody bag wish I suppose.
Re: US Navy Patrol Frigate Design shown at DIMDEX by Ingalls
Yeah, I agree that the LCS is insufficient as a full up escort. They'd be most usefull as independent, forward deployed assets clearing choke points a CSG has to pass of assymetric threats (mines, small boat swarm raiders).
A new, affordable FFG could allow to put more assets in a CSG / SAG to form a tighter ASW screen. Or do some anti piracy patrolling, freeing up high end Burkes from that duty.
I do see use for these ships, just don't think it's realistic right now, as they would have a rather low priority in a contrained budget.
Maybe some day one the the LCS designs will evolve into a FFG, wich would mean it would have to get bigger, though.
Yeah, I agree that the LCS is insufficient as a full up escort. They'd be most usefull as independent, forward deployed assets clearing choke points a CSG has to pass of assymetric threats (mines, small boat swarm raiders).
A new, affordable FFG could allow to put more assets in a CSG / SAG to form a tighter ASW screen. Or do some anti piracy patrolling, freeing up high end Burkes from that duty.
I do see use for these ships, just don't think it's realistic right now, as they would have a rather low priority in a contrained budget.
Maybe some day one the the LCS designs will evolve into a FFG, wich would mean it would have to get bigger, though.