asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
The design for the port and star board side 16 VLS cells is a good addition
Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Yes, for the Freedom class, it is.
For the Independence class, the trimaren, there are already provisions for a Mk-41 built into the design forward of the bridge, between it and the 57mm main gun.
Jura The idiot
General
just found on the NAVAIR Facebook profile:
"Photo of the day: An MQ-8B Fire Scout sits on the flight deck of USS Freedom (LCS 1) earlier today off the coast of San Diego, Calif. Sailors from Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron (HSM) 35 are conducting the first combined operations between the unmanned Fire Scout and the manned H-60 helicopter aboard the littoral combat ship over the next few weeks."
"Photo of the day: An MQ-8B Fire Scout sits on the flight deck of USS Freedom (LCS 1) earlier today off the coast of San Diego, Calif. Sailors from Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron (HSM) 35 are conducting the first combined operations between the unmanned Fire Scout and the manned H-60 helicopter aboard the littoral combat ship over the next few weeks."
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
See these rotor blade scouts are really good especially for FFG who have singe hanger to carry one helo
Because when the helo comes to land to refuel or re arm for the time you loose your ASW platform in such a situation that's where you can get air borne a rotor blade scout to fill the gap
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
the downside of one that size is it's to small to carry the really good sensors and weapons.
Jura The idiot
General
TE, as if NAVAIR heard you
and put: on Facebook today, said "Fire Scouts team up: Two MQ-8 Fire Scouts sit in the Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) facility at NAS Patuxent River, Md., May 1. The MQ-8B, left, recently equipped with a maritime search radar, and the new, larger MQ-8C, right, will both undergo testing to evaluate the unmanned helicopters' capability with other shipboard systems."
As stated, the larger helo in that picture is the MQ-8C Fire Scout.
It is basically a Bell 407 helicopter (which is a derivative of the Bell 206L-4 Long Ranger, which I have ridden in on several occasions) that has been turned into a VUAV.
It is big enough and capable enough to perform ASW missions on its own. It will be able to have the radars, dipping sonars, sonobuoys, and at least one torpedo if necessary once it is fully developed.
This will add significant capability to US LCS, FFG, and DDG platforms.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The really interesting stuff regarding unmanned helicopters IMHO is the manned optional work recently tested on Boeing H6, Kmax and Sikorsky S76. Fire scout is cool and all but it gives up the manned options and carrage. Its also eating up space for conventional choppers but with manned optional the same Seahawk becomes a Uav
Jura The idiot
General
On the USN LCS:
Posted on InsideDefense.com: May 9, 2014
The House Armed Services Committee last week approved a measure to limit or withhold funding for Littoral Combat Ship mission modules until the Navy submits milestone B goals and until the Pentagon's top weapons tester certifies the need for additional modules.
"None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2015 for the procurement of additional mission modules for the Littoral Combat Ship program may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees each of the following: ( 1) The Milestone B program goals for cost, schedule, and performance for each increment. (2) Certification by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation with respect to the total number for each module type that is required to perform all necessary operational testing," the amendment, introduced by Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), reads.
Another amendment from Speier "makes funding for additional LCS ships contingent upon DOT&E certification of operational effectiveness and operational suitability for the seaframes and mission modules and an assessment of the survivability of the LCS."
DOT&E historically has been critical of the LCS program in its reports. In the most recent report released in January, the Pentagon's chief weapons tester said that its analysis "continued to identify deficiencies in the LCS seaframes and essential mission systems" and found "performance, reliability, and operator training deficiencies associated with LCS mission packages."
The committee approved Speier's amendments May 7, as part of an en bloc set of amendments from the seapower and projection forces subcommittee. The committee approved the full mark, as amended, early on May 8.
Beyond the mission module limitation included in the amendment, the full mark also cuts the Navy's LCS procurement request for FY-15 by one ship, from three to two, at a cost of $450 million. The Navy's budget request included three LCS ships, a cut from what the service initially planned for FY-15 when it sent Congress its FY-14 budget. Still, the House committee bill includes procurement funding for two ships and $100 million in advance procurement funding for two others.
Despite some cuts and limitations, Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-AL), whose district includes the Austal facility where the Independence-class variant of the LCS is built, hailed the passage of the bill as a win for the LCS program.
"This vote is a victory for the Littoral Combat Ship and for Southwest Alabama jobs. In an era of tight budgets and decreasing defense spending, I am proud our coalition in support of the LCS was able to make an effective case to the committee on the cost-effective and versatile nature this ship," Byrne said in a statement. "As we move forward with consideration of this measure before the full House of Representatives, I will continue working with my colleagues and with the Navy to educate members on the importance of this ship to our future fleet."
In the seapower and projection forces subcommittee's portion of the bill, passed April 30, Byrne also added an amendment to soften the mark's criticism of the LCS, removing language associated with a critical report from the Government Accountability Office and adding language supporting future procurement options for the program.
In his statement last week, Byrne also highlighted that the full committee defeated another critical amendment from Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) in panel's markup.
Duckworth's amendment would have prevented the Navy from spending money on the LCS program until a report on the need for the ship and other alternatives, requested by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, is submitted to Congress.
"Although imperative to our global security strategy and imperative to our pivot to Asia, the LCS has long had troubles with its original acquisition strategy, the sea frame development, different mission modules, manning requirements and its survivability," Duckworth told fellow lawmakers last week.
A Navy small surface combatant task force, set up to develop proposals for an alternative to the LCS, is currently in the process of soliciting market information from industry to gauge the possibilities for a vessel that will meet the Pentagon and Navy capability requirements.
The task force, which the Navy set up in March, is supposed to present its findings to service acquisition chief Sean Stackley and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert no later than July 31. The task force is a response to a February directive from Hagel outlining his "considerable reservations" about the program and halting LCS contract negotiations at 32 ships, instead of a planned 52.
Duckworth argued last week that this question mark on the LCS program is concerning and that the Navy should not move forward with procurement until this new Navy analysis is concluded.
"I am not looking to cut the ships. Rather, I am looking to fulfill my oversight duties and that of the Congress', by asking the Navy to lay out a strategy before we authorize close to a billion dollars for these ships," she said.
"If the Navy needs this ship so badly, they will happily draw up a plan that will outline their needs," she told lawmakers. But despite her push and support from Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), ranking member of the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee, Duckworth's amendment didn't make it past House authorizers.
"Critics of the amendment argued it could have placed a devastating chokehold on the program if the report came late or incomplete for any reason," Byrne's office said in a statement, adding that the amendment was defeated on a bipartisan basis.
Posted on InsideDefense.com: May 9, 2014
The House Armed Services Committee last week approved a measure to limit or withhold funding for Littoral Combat Ship mission modules until the Navy submits milestone B goals and until the Pentagon's top weapons tester certifies the need for additional modules.
"None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this Act or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2015 for the procurement of additional mission modules for the Littoral Combat Ship program may be obligated or expended until the Secretary of the Navy submits to the congressional defense committees each of the following: ( 1) The Milestone B program goals for cost, schedule, and performance for each increment. (2) Certification by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation with respect to the total number for each module type that is required to perform all necessary operational testing," the amendment, introduced by Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA), reads.
Another amendment from Speier "makes funding for additional LCS ships contingent upon DOT&E certification of operational effectiveness and operational suitability for the seaframes and mission modules and an assessment of the survivability of the LCS."
DOT&E historically has been critical of the LCS program in its reports. In the most recent report released in January, the Pentagon's chief weapons tester said that its analysis "continued to identify deficiencies in the LCS seaframes and essential mission systems" and found "performance, reliability, and operator training deficiencies associated with LCS mission packages."
The committee approved Speier's amendments May 7, as part of an en bloc set of amendments from the seapower and projection forces subcommittee. The committee approved the full mark, as amended, early on May 8.
Beyond the mission module limitation included in the amendment, the full mark also cuts the Navy's LCS procurement request for FY-15 by one ship, from three to two, at a cost of $450 million. The Navy's budget request included three LCS ships, a cut from what the service initially planned for FY-15 when it sent Congress its FY-14 budget. Still, the House committee bill includes procurement funding for two ships and $100 million in advance procurement funding for two others.
Despite some cuts and limitations, Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-AL), whose district includes the Austal facility where the Independence-class variant of the LCS is built, hailed the passage of the bill as a win for the LCS program.
"This vote is a victory for the Littoral Combat Ship and for Southwest Alabama jobs. In an era of tight budgets and decreasing defense spending, I am proud our coalition in support of the LCS was able to make an effective case to the committee on the cost-effective and versatile nature this ship," Byrne said in a statement. "As we move forward with consideration of this measure before the full House of Representatives, I will continue working with my colleagues and with the Navy to educate members on the importance of this ship to our future fleet."
In the seapower and projection forces subcommittee's portion of the bill, passed April 30, Byrne also added an amendment to soften the mark's criticism of the LCS, removing language associated with a critical report from the Government Accountability Office and adding language supporting future procurement options for the program.
In his statement last week, Byrne also highlighted that the full committee defeated another critical amendment from Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) in panel's markup.
Duckworth's amendment would have prevented the Navy from spending money on the LCS program until a report on the need for the ship and other alternatives, requested by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, is submitted to Congress.
"Although imperative to our global security strategy and imperative to our pivot to Asia, the LCS has long had troubles with its original acquisition strategy, the sea frame development, different mission modules, manning requirements and its survivability," Duckworth told fellow lawmakers last week.
A Navy small surface combatant task force, set up to develop proposals for an alternative to the LCS, is currently in the process of soliciting market information from industry to gauge the possibilities for a vessel that will meet the Pentagon and Navy capability requirements.
The task force, which the Navy set up in March, is supposed to present its findings to service acquisition chief Sean Stackley and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert no later than July 31. The task force is a response to a February directive from Hagel outlining his "considerable reservations" about the program and halting LCS contract negotiations at 32 ships, instead of a planned 52.
Duckworth argued last week that this question mark on the LCS program is concerning and that the Navy should not move forward with procurement until this new Navy analysis is concluded.
"I am not looking to cut the ships. Rather, I am looking to fulfill my oversight duties and that of the Congress', by asking the Navy to lay out a strategy before we authorize close to a billion dollars for these ships," she said.
"If the Navy needs this ship so badly, they will happily draw up a plan that will outline their needs," she told lawmakers. But despite her push and support from Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), ranking member of the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee, Duckworth's amendment didn't make it past House authorizers.
"Critics of the amendment argued it could have placed a devastating chokehold on the program if the report came late or incomplete for any reason," Byrne's office said in a statement, adding that the amendment was defeated on a bipartisan basis.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Age old issue of the Congress vs the USN, one is saying they want more flexibility like VLS other I saying it's not for VLS
At the end of the day I think you need to have diversity in a fleet you can't just add VLS to every freggin ship which is commissioned I mean it's good but it's not like USN lacks VLS capability
LCS can do good mine clearing and under searches which are advantageous in many areas of the world where mines are a issue
Also LCS is really good at stopping multi axis attacks from fast boats like pirates it's actually part of the commissioning process to engage multiple targets from different directions LCS is not commissioned until it has proven it can do this
At the end of the day I think you need to have diversity in a fleet you can't just add VLS to every freggin ship which is commissioned I mean it's good but it's not like USN lacks VLS capability
LCS can do good mine clearing and under searches which are advantageous in many areas of the world where mines are a issue
Also LCS is really good at stopping multi axis attacks from fast boats like pirates it's actually part of the commissioning process to engage multiple targets from different directions LCS is not commissioned until it has proven it can do this