Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)

Re: US military news thread

I don't understand why they can put Harpoons on the LCS. The math works. I can see why you can't put the opposing Mk. 141 canisters on the dual quad racks but you can certainly mount a couple of them.

One of the scenarios that article mentions is "engaging multiple incoming high-speed boat targets at a range of six kilometers". Are you sure it would be optimal to use RGM-84 Harpoons for this?
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
Re: US military news thread

One of the scenarios that article mentions is "engaging multiple incoming high-speed boat targets at a range of six kilometers". Are you sure it would be optimal to use RGM-84 Harpoons for this?

No, but my response on that was to Jeff which was about also equipping the LCS with longer range weaponry. For high speed boats etc a Phalanx can be just as effective as a short range missile.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: US military news thread

One of the scenarios that article mentions is "engaging multiple incoming high-speed boat targets at a range of six kilometers". Are you sure it would be optimal to use RGM-84 Harpoons for this?
The LCS has to fight in the littorals. In the littorals it may face numoerus threats:

1) Small, perhaps swarming, fast boats mounted with machine guns and RPGs.
2) Corvettes and light frigates mounted with anti-shipping missiles.
3) Conventional diesle/electric or nuclear submarines.
4) Mines.
5) Aircraft.

The LCS is supposed to be designed to fight in this environment.

It does need a light, small missile, like the Longbow, and other weapons like the 30mm autocannons it mounts, and the 57mm naval gun, to fight the small craft. A 6-12 mile range for combating these threats is adequate.

For the larger vessles however, it needs a longer range weapon. It needs its own anti-shipping missile. The Harpoon would be great for this. One, four missile cannister would work and would be relativly easy to mount. So would a vertically launched LRASM...but that would require a VLS and then take up space in the VLS. If the corvettes get within range, it can also use its 57mm gun for this. But the smaller missiles and 30mm autocannons lack the effective range to combat these types of vessels .

The point is, for the role the LCS is meant for, it needs both capabilities. A 6-12 mile missile capability for "swarming" small vessels, and a 40-60 mile missile capability for larger corvettes and light frigates.

As to the submarines, with the capability to carry two medium ASW helicopters (SH-60s) and the capability in an ASW module to have various sonars, it should be able to handle that mission.

As to mine warfare, with a Mine Warfare module that allows for remote hunting devices, its own weapons, and the ability to carry a MH-53 Sea Draogn anti-mine helo, it should be able to handle that mission as well.

As to aircraft, its Rolling Air Fram missiles (RAM) are meant to protect it from that threat, but they too are short ranged. It would be good to equip these vessels with a 8 cell Mk-41 VLS and quad pack them with ESSM and then they would also have a very decent medium rangfe anti-air capability.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Pentagon Cuts LCS Buy to 32 Ships
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
So, they will go probably with 16 of each.

Interesting. I wonder what frigate design they will choose as a follow on?

Seriously though, 32 ships is a large build just the same. IMHO, they should use the space available on the ship to make them multi-mission capable. They could do this ny:

  • Install the 8 cell Mk-41 VLS both vessels were designed to carry. Put four LRASMs into four cells, and then put 4 quad packed ESSMs in the other four. This would allow for a decent long range anti-shipping capability against corvettes or light frigates they may encounter, and really help the anti-air defenses. 16 ESSMs plus the RAM system they already have.
  • Give the vessels a decent towed array.
  • Depending on the threat environment, either embark a MH-53 for anti-mine warfare or two SH0-60s for ASW and normal operations.
  • Install the necessary means to carry 32 Longbow or other short range anti-surface missiles to defeat fast small craft the vessels may encounter.
  • Keep the 57mm gun and the two 30mm autrocannons on the vessels.
If the vessels could be armed like this at all times, they would be fairly decent true combat ships. It would leave them with the following capabilities:

21 x RAM short range anti-air missiles (11 on Independence class)
16 x ESSM medium range anti-air missiles
01 x 57mm DP naval gun
02 x 30mm autocannons
04 x LRASM weapons for anti-shipping.
02 x SH-60 ASW helicopters (or one MH-53 Sea Dragon for Mine Warfare)

That would be a decent loadout, and I believe they could carry all of that on the hull as designed withut the need to switch anything except the type of helicopter when hunting mines.
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
So, they will go probably with 16 of each.

Interesting. I wonder what frigate design they will choose as a follow on?

Seriously though, 32 ships is a large build just the same. IMHO, they should use the space available on the ship to make them multi-mission capable. They could do this ny:

  • Install the 8 cell Mk-41 VLS both vessels were designed to carry. Put four LRASMs into four cells, and then put 4 quad packed ESSMs in the other four. This would allow for a decent long range anti-shipping capability against corvettes or light frigates they may encounter, and really help the anti-air defenses. 16 ESSMs plus the RAM system they already have.
  • Give the vessels a decent towed array.
  • Depending on the threat environment, either embark a MH-53 for anti-mine warfare or two SH0-60s for ASW and normal operations.
  • Install the necessary means to carry 32 Longbow or other short range anti-surface missiles to defeat fast small craft the vessels may encounter.
  • Keep the 57mm gun and the two 30mm autrocannons on the vessels.
If the vessels could be armed like this at all times, they would be fairly decent true combat ships. It would leave them with the following capabilities:

21 x RAM short range anti-air missiles (11 on Independence class)
16 x ESSM medium range anti-air missiles
01 x 57mm DP naval gun
02 x 30mm autocannons
04 x LRASM weapons for anti-shipping.
02 x SH-60 ASW helicopters (or one MH-53 Sea Dragon for Mine Warfare)

That would be a decent loadout, and I believe they could carry all of that on the hull as designed withut the need to switch anything except the type of helicopter when hunting mines.

Very good idea one "real" Frigate suitable for high intensity combat.
With one max speed less fast about 30 kn as LCS but more great.

LCS has one autonomy at cruise speed ( 18 kn ) of 3500 or 4300 mi depend variants more important for Freedom ( more big ) but with one speed of 30+ kn i think max about 2000 mi, short especially for the Pacific, Perry 4500/20 kn.
 
Re: US military news thread

The LCS has to fight in the littorals. In the littorals it may face numoerus threats:

...

Jeff, thanks for summarizing this. There's one thing I'd like to ask about the LCS. As far as I noticed :) there has been a strong tendency in the US to standardize (and not just in the Navy!) but I'm aware about the Freedom and Independence classes of the LCS; I know they are pretty different so I'd think the LCS will be standardized, by simply building just the ships of one class, but this hasn't happened, has it? I understand this even less considering all those budgetary cutbacks ... What's your take on this?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Re: US military news thread

I understand this even less considering all those budgetary cutbacks ... What's your take on this?
There were a few of reasons that the decision was taken to buy both desings of the LCS in my opinion.

1) The nature of the contract called for each finalist to build at least one in order to reach a final decision. In the course of doing so, they were each allowed to build two.

2) Once two had been built, it was obvious that both vessels would be able to accomplish what they wanted done with the LCS from the program's perspwective, but both designs also had some unique characteristics which the Navy wanted to exploit. So, they extended the build to 10 more each, which would be a total of 12 each or 24 total vessels which is what both companies are working towards now.

3) By allowing both vessels to be built, the Navy ensured that both shipbuilders had work and so the Navy was also able to "sell" the deal to congress because now more Americans would be involved in the shipbuilding industry. (This was probably as big a reason as the others for the Navy to get approval)

4) Also having two different ship yards build the two different designs allows the Navy to get more vessels out per year. Ultimately, both shipyards indicate they will able to produce up to two vessels per year, or a total of four per year.

When these decisions were made, the plan was still for a total of 54 or 55 vessels total, so the go forward plan called for 27 vessels each and many years of work for both shipyards.

Now with the decision to cap it at 32 vessels, that time frame is shorter. I still believe they will stick with both vessels and you will see a total of 16 each. But they could also go with just one of them after the 24 are completed and this would mean twelve of one class and twenty of the other. But for my money, I believe at this point they will now go ahead and build equal numbers of both ships.

The critical question for me now is...What Firgate design will the US Navy settle upon for a build of 25 or so multi-mission frigates?

As I said, I like the Navalized, full firgate version of the new Legend Class Coast Guard Cutters that are being built. They could be armed with a very decent multi-mission package that would allow them to be good littoral fighters, and strong blue water firgates for escort and ASW duties.
 

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Re: US military news thread

Hope nobody minds me jumping in on this question.
Opinion mode On.
its obvious the USN needs a replacement for the Perry Class, Lockheed martin has shown at a concept variant of the Freedom class with upgraded sensors.
I believe that the future of these two ships is not one or the other but both with each becoming more specialized.
Freedom optimized for Frigate and escort duties. Independence for true Lateral Combat operations.
 
Top