| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Home Front: WoT | ||
| LCSs Sail Through Trials, Tackle Challenges | ||
| 2011-08-13 | ||
| ||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #13 The other problem is that there is a ship, but very, very few modules. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2011-08-13 23:56 |
| #12 This will be a great platform for U.S. sailors to accomplish their mission. Its advantages are that it is fast, flexible, with good endurance, yet has a small draft. Its disadvantages are that it has light organic weapons; although, the mission module can support many wicked things if needed. Remember that these ships are not the thing that fights. The sailors aboard these ships do the fighting. They will do fine with these things. Come a serious fight, some will be lost. It is always that way. What is important is to be there firstest with the mostest, and these things can do that if we build a bunch. Having a fleet of all capital ships (i.e. carriers and battleships/cruisers) means that there are not enough to go around and they are never where you need them. |
| Posted by: rammer 2011-08-13 22:39 |
| #11 LCS, with it's 50 knot speed and helicopters, could make a great antisub ship. Too bad it couldn't go toe to toe with anything more threatening than a Coast Guard patrol boat. |
| Posted by: Eohippus Phater7165 2011-08-13 21:21 |
| #10 It's the surface navy's version of NAVAIR's 'one size fits most' Lawn Dart Yep. If you look at the construction, the crewing, and the maintenance, it's an F-18 with a hull. A compromise between the gee-whiz crowd, the let's-be-thrifty-on-defense crew, and the blue-water traditionalists. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2011-08-13 17:04 |
| #9 It's the surface navy's version of NAVAIR's 'one size fits most' Lawn Dart; it can do a lot of things OK, but none exceptional. |
| Posted by: USN,Ret. 2011-08-13 16:49 |
| #8 but the bottom line is "how many congressional districts will receive money in the building of them?" if the answer is above 270 then this thing will never see the axe no matter how poorly it performs or how illdesigned it is for the mission. if the answer ever fall below 260, the project will suddenly end and be replaced with a bigger more expensive boondoggle that does in fact bring money to the requisite number of congressional districts. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2011-08-13 13:50 |
| #7 More billion dollar boondoggles. |
| Posted by: newc 2011-08-13 12:44 |
| #6 I think that S is right this time. The big problem is that the developers believed in a fictional development model. They wanted a small multipurpose patrol boat with swappable mission modules, kinda like some the Danes built. They've built little fast ones like missile patrol boats, they built big frigate sized ones they named the "Absalom" class. The navy wound up building something with the size of the frigate type vessel, the speed of the little patrol boat, armament less than either, and a frigate price tag. And like it or not it's going to be sent on missions where a heavier-armed ship would be more appropriate, and it's ability to sprint for a couple hours isn't going to help very much. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2011-08-13 11:55 |
| #5 Much of the argument is as old as the Republic. There is some similarity with Jeffersonian gunboats, altho relatively speaking Jefferson's gunboats were significantly better armed against the threats of the day and at least they were cheap. The LCS altho poorly armed and armored, is far, far, from inexpensive. 1 57mm gun 1 go pack of short range SAMs In it's favor it has a nice networking capability, which means Facebook will be the first to know if one has been engaged, by engaged, mean cut in half, by an 3 inch, Italian designed, optically ranged naval gun, deployed everywhere, since 1970. |
| Posted by: S 2011-08-13 11:18 |
| #4 There's extensive discussion of the LCS program at this site, the "Commander Salamander" blog. He agrees with S and then some. For contrast, consider that the USS South Dakota kept floating and fighting after taking 27 hits of all calibers at point blank range in the second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, pdf analysis here. We won that battle. Just my non-mil two cents. |
| Posted by: Matt 2011-08-13 10:59 |
| #3 ...Being a Wing Wiper Of Very Little Brain, I'm not fully equipped to make a call on how useful the LCS are going to be. However, I have two online friends who have pretty strong feelings on the ship. One is a retired USN Chief (who came up through the USN's Vietnam riverine forces) who feels that this is a smart, capable design that the Navy needs to have. The other is a warship designer, who is pretty sure that the next US Navy ship to be sunk in combat will be one of these, and likely before it even comes close to getting a shot off. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2011-08-13 10:23 |
| #2 S, unlike your actual experience in matters nautical, I have only gotten as far as the Wikipedia article in the subject. I'm thinking in terms of light cavalry, but admittedly I don't really know what I'm talking about. ;-) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2011-08-13 08:49 |
| #1 TW, I hope they may in due time become useful mine-sweepers, perhaps school ships, if a classroom module can be designed, perhaps even a dispatch ship. But you don't want these poor things anywhere booms or bullets are likely. Little Coffin Ships |
| Posted by: S 2011-08-13 08:20 |