Sorry Planeman, That is how the US Defence industry keeps those big defense bucks rolling in$$$$. They lobby the US congress for all sorts of projects day in and day out..year after year. They will let very little slip through. Very little will be outsourced. Is it a perfect system?? No. But it works for those involved. Sorry that you see it as hyporacy.
This is correct Popeye. The US lobby groups, reperesnting the Naval defense firms, knows how to work the US ppolitical system. They not only lobby the representatives (which is perfectly legal, and understandable given the nature of our free system), they also spend lots of advertising doallars, perfectly legally, to influence the public at large as well.
...and apparently they are very good at it.
BTW, getting back to the topic of the thread, after lots of discussion with various analysts, and naval architects, I am honing in on a more finalized design.
Here's the pic:
The AEGIS-lite is gone (too heavy and too expensive). These vessels would be capable of data linking and cooperative engagement with any AEGIS vessel, but would themselves have more traditional acquisition and targeting systems. Advanced? Yes...but not AEGIS.
Also, it is scaled back to aa 32 cell VLS and taking out the TLAM capability, saving lots of weight between the missiles and the systems associated with the TLAM.
In exchange, the larger helo deck and hangar from the LCS design are there, plus the large well-bay under the helo deck for the capability to provide specops and material to shore, the Anti-mine, and specialized remote controlled ASW mission pack type capability if desired.
With the ESSM, the SM3, the Harpoon III, the VLA, the RAM, the MK 32 torpedo launchers, the helos, the 4 Mk 38 Mod 2s and the Mk 110 57mm gun as standard fair, these will really be a light frigate displacement, armed like a frigate.
