I don’t know how this slipped by me but here’s some stunning LCS news.
The Navy has officially abandoned the LCS ASW module!
Apparently related to this (in the Navy’s mind), in FY23,
… the Navy plans to decommission 9 Freedom-class Littoral Combat Ships,…
Explaining the LCS decommissionings, Navy deputy assistant secretary for budget Rear Adm. John Gumbleton cited the service’s decision to abandon the anti-submarine warfare mission package for the LCS class because the Constellation-class frigate will have that capability.
“And the ASW variant – mission module – huge challenges, not going to work.”[1]
There it is. The Navy is officially acknowledging that the ASW module is a failure.
How many times did ComNavOps and others describe the unsolvable problems associated with the LCS and ASW? Ignoring us – and reality - , how much time and money has the Navy wasted on this? Someone absolutely has to be court-martialed over this. This is far beyond a simple mistake. This is fraud, negligence, incompetence, and waste on a criminal scale. Navy officials lied about this program for years. Someone must pay.
If CNO Gilday had an ounce of integrity, he’d resign … but he doesn’t.
__________________________________
[1]USNI News website, “FY 23 Budget: Navy Wants to Shed 24 Ships for $3.6B in Savings Over Next Five Years”, Mallory Shelbourne, 28-Mar-2022,
Why the Freedom class, I thought they were slightly less of a complete disaster than the independence class,or have I got that wrong? Or are they going to try and flog them to the Saudi's? Also there will be 20 new frigates So will that be 20 LCS withdrawn?
ReplyDeleteThe Freedom class is the one struggling with the combining gear issue. I've got a post coming very shortly which will shed some light on that, as it relates to the retirements.
DeleteOnly word I got was Good and hope the Connies replace all of Freedom class and then some 50 wpuld be about right
DeleteIs the Constellation class good at ASW? My understanding was that there IS an ASW version of the FREMM but that Constellation is not it?
ReplyDeleteI don't know how good the Constellation will be at ASW because I don't know much about the internal details yet such as how much quieting did the Navy include in the design? The ship lacks VL-ASROC which seems like a noteworthy lack in an ASW ship.
DeleteThe ship's torpedoes are the lightweight versions. I'd prefer the heavier Mk48 to be in the mix.
So, I guess the jury's still out on ASW.
"Is the Constellation class good at ASW? My understanding was that there IS an ASW version of the FREMM but that Constellation is not it?"
DeleteThere is an ASW version of the FREMM and the Constellation definitely is not it. The Constellation converted the FREMM into an AEGIS AAW platform. Apparently the Constellations will be the much less capable numerical replacements for the Ticos.
LCS were designed under wrong assumption - fight nations without advanced navies near their coastal region. Assumptions were based on these nations have some moderate conventional powered sub in shallow waters. Now, further develop ASW for LCS becomes worthless.
ReplyDeleteRather than find some uses of these ships, my opinion is to retire them all but give some to Coast Guard (ones power system have no big problems).
This is just one failure. There are many others. Hypersonic weapons is another big one. Despite the nation started first, consume tons of money but we only see DF-17, not US product. Even if people want to accuse China steal US tech, they can simply answer - how can I steal from you something which you don't have?
Why wasn't a variation of the NSC or the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) used instead of the FREMM? I read somewhere that the Constellation-class will only be a few feet shorter than the Burke's. If so, couldn't they do a design change/modification to the Burke design? I would scratch my head but I have long scratched off all my hair.
ReplyDelete"Why wasn't a variation of the NSC ... used instead of the FREMM?"
DeleteHuntington Ingalls did submit and NSC derivation to the Navy's frigate competition. Unfortunately, they shared very little information about their design.
The NSC frigate did have some inherent problems. The basic hull/superstructure is not very stealthy by today's standards and the underwater body lines do not lend themselves to quiet acoustic signatures. The base NSC lacks shock hardening and acoustic suppression measures (rafting, P/M, etc.). The base ship is also fairly small and lacks the room to fit all the systems that Navy wanted.
Now, one can fairly ask whether the FREMM mini-Burke represented good value for the dollar or whether a smaller NSC would have been a better value for a frigate that one would have assumed should be significantly smaller than the near-cruiser size Burke. It was clear from the beginning, however, that the Navy wanted as close to a Burke as they could get. Being closer to a true frigate, the NSC offering likely never had a chance.
Thank you for the clarification.
DeleteIs there any feasible way to replace the LCS engineering plants with a simpler and more easily maintained plant, maybe Diesel, and turn them over to the Coast Guard as cutters?
ReplyDeleteThe 57mm popguns are probably enough in that role, and the helo facilities could be very useful.
" turn them over to the Coast Guard "
DeleteCome on, now. I keep shooting this down and it keeps coming up. The Coast Guard doesn't want the LCS. It's hideously expensive to operate, requires a dedicated shore maintenance system which the Coast Guard hasn't got and hasn't got the money to establish. The ship has inherent flaws beyond the propulsion system such as stability issues, zero or negative weight margins, steering problems in the Independence version, fire control problems that render the Mk110 nearly useless, and so on. Read the DOT&E reports.
The Coast Guard already has a better (for their requirements) open ocean cutter, the NSC Legend class. Why would they want a more expensive to operate, worse performing ship than the one they have?
The Coast Guard doesn't want these piles of LCS. What did the Coast Guard ever do to you? Stop trying to foist them on the Coast Guard!
Don't make me do a post on this.
It's my understanding that the asw module worked as advertised but was over weight. By trying to reduce weight the system gained new stability problems. I read a gilday quote that the original hardware already purchased will be used on the ffg.
ReplyDeleteYes, the module was overweight, as is the MCM module. No one knows whether the ASW module worked because it was never tested. As the module struggled with weight issues, the Navy kept changing the individual components so, again, they were never able to do system testing.
Delete