AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4529 times:
The U.S. Navy has launched the nation's first in a new class of advanced warships designed to bring a wide range of combat power directly to the shallow coastal waters of an enemy state, news reports say.
Towering over an assembly of dignitaries and well-wishers, the 367-foot, 2,500-ton U.S.S. Freedom, America's first Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), was christened and launched off the coast of Marinette, Wisconsin on September 24.
The LCS is a class of vessels intended for deployment in water as shallow as 20 feet at a speed of up to 40 knots. Each ship is equipped with guided missiles and a 57-mm gun and can accommodate aerial deployment of weapons and sensors aboard its helicopter and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's).
The design of each LCS makes maximum use of 21st Century technological enhancements, including electronic networking to ensure battlefield situational awareness, coordination, and command and control.
The U.S.S. Freedom, LCS-1, was built by a unit of Lockheed Martin and is the first of up to two flights, or sub-classes, of LCS ships currently authorized by Congress. In addition to the Freedom, a second LCS vessel, the U.S.S. Independence, is in production and a third LCS is under contract. General Dynamics is currently building the second ship and the third has been awarded to Lockheed Martin. The Freedom is the first of up to approximately 58 LCS vessels of various flights.
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3180 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4482 times:
You have to be top of the line sailors to get orders to these LCS. There probably will not be any E-3 or below in there crew. That is ok with me, I rather be on the big roomy carriers I am on any way.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4473 times:
The situation rooms in these ships must be really something. It would be nice to see one, but they're probably highly classified.
The second LCS, the one built by General Dynamics, will be of different a different design from the U.S.S. Freedom. According to one source, the U.S.S. Independence may be capable of speeds up to 50 knots. That's quite something for a ship weighing thousands of tons and capable of cruising in something as shallow as 20 feet of water.
Just imagine seeing one of these babies zip on by as you're relaxing somewhere on the beaches of San Diego.
Of course, they might not go quite that fast anywhere close to a highly populated U.S. coast, for environmental or safety reasons.
The deployment of UAV's intrigues me. There are to be several of them, and so the LCS would be a UAV-carrier of sorts, capable of launching and directing UAV's to attack inland targets.
The LCS is part of a "network-centric" philosophy of warfighting, where various elements are integrated by computerized remote command to attack specific targets. This philosophy is designed to use various aerial elements, for example, in a "swarm" technique such that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
In taking the fight directly to the enemy's shallow waters, the LCS is clearly part of the "wave" of the future, so to speak.
For some illustrations of the General Dynamics design for the LCS, please see:
Par13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5101 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4391 times:
I thought of the following, someone correct me if I'm wrong.
First, I thought this was an offshoot of the "stealth ship" the twin hull catamarran, seems I was wrong. The ship does seem high, goes against the Navy's new "mantra" of lower silhoulettes, even the new CVN's are to have lower "towers" to reduce radar detection range, kinda looks like a Burke head on from afar.
Second, being designed to operate close to shore does bring it into the range of a host of assorted "local weapons", short range SSM's, RPG's Arty, etc. I'm very interested in the weapons outfit, one 57mm gun can't be enough, based on it's size a couple of CWIS's may be good, except if they go off in close quarters in port collateral damage will be huge.
Third, assuming that SEALS, Marines or Rangers could be deployed for special missions, what type of fire support could this ship provide.
Will look around for more specifics for the weapons and defensive layout, this could be a very important combat unit for the Navy and could lead to more countries being interested. The ability for such a large vessel to enter shallow waters has applications beyond its military application, we could use a few of those here in our waters.
Usnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4890 posts, RR: 57 Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4390 times:
Quoting 747400sp (Reply 2): There probably will not be any E-3 or below in there crew.
Nah....there will be some. I'm sure the competition is fierce, but junior enlisted members make up a crew. Someone's gotta be on there learning this stuff from the start......more Indians, less Chiefs. (pun intended)
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11023 posts, RR: 53 Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4330 times:
The LCS ships will not go into the littorials alone. There will always be at least two LCSs operating together, backed up by a SSN (probibly a Virginia class SSN), who is not very far away. Of course you also will have the new DD(X) 25nm off shore. I suspect the reason for the Freedom class LCS and Independence class LCS is also to complment each other, not compete against each other (like the Tico class CGs and Burke class DDGs do).
TedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4211 times:
Quoting Par13del (Reply 4): First, I thought this was an offshoot of the "stealth ship" the twin hull catamarran, seems I was wrong. The ship does seem high, goes against the Navy's new "mantra" of lower silhoulettes, even the new CVN's are to have lower "towers" to reduce radar detection range, kinda looks like a Burke head on from afar.
If you notice the only thing that has an aparent 90 degree 'reflection' (from head on) is the 'spreaders'. While it's not totally stealth; it does have a greatly reduced radar cross section
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4189 times:
They look to me to be too big for litoral operations.
Most navies have small, nimble ships for that. Ships not dissimilar in size to the old PT boats of WW2.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4178 times:
Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9): They look to me to be too big for litoral operations.
Most navies have small, nimble ships for that. Ships not dissimilar in size to the old PT boats of WW2.
LCS ships are multimission-capable. That is, they can serve on the high seas as well as in littoral areas depending on how each ship is configured for a particular task.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 25 Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4177 times:
yes, that's the idea I know.
But I can't help wondering if that decision won't come back to haunt them when they're going to have to REALLY operate in the littorals against an enemy employing swarms of what are essentially missile armed PT boats.
Incapable of hiding due to their size, incapable of running because the missile boats are as fast or faster than they (modern ones can reach 45-50 knots), incapable of defending themselves (the project description says explicitly that the ships will be only lightly armed), they might be sitting ducks.
For the coastal zone, the zone where the destroyers and frigates are not comfortable because of their size and neither are the missile boats for the same reason, these look like extremely capable ships.
But for true littoral waters, I doubt it.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4170 times:
Quoting Jwenting (Reply 11): For the coastal zone, the zone where the destroyers and frigates are not comfortable because of their size and neither are the missile boats for the same reason, these look like extremely capable ships.
But for true littoral waters, I doubt it.
Interesting points. I'll have to think about them.
I wonder how heavily the LCS ships are armored. If they are well-armored with steel plating, the threat might be considerably less than one might think.
Usnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4890 posts, RR: 57 Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4170 times:
Quoting Jwenting (Reply 9): Most navies have small, nimble ships for that. Ships not dissimilar in size to the old PT boats of WW2.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4161 times:
Here's some information from a manufacturer about armor for the LCS.
(Excerpt)
Quote: -11 April 2006 -
AGY glass used in ship armour
THE US NAVY'S first Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) will have HJ1 composite armour made with S-2 Glass® roving from AGY. The USS Freedom is already under construction at Marinette Marine in Marinette, Wisconsin.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12357 posts, RR: 83 Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3946 times:
Aerospace Fan, you mentioned an issue with RN taking part in a Korean blockade, I mentioned in my reply the issue of a hi/lo warship mix, the latter for general patrol etc, rather than escort work.
The LCS is a possible template for the 'lo' mix, VT over here have done trials of a tri-hulled ship, have experience in patrol craft and corvettes-a UK LCS might be an idea.
However, not if it cost new escort hulls. Which it probably would.
Sprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1674 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3942 times:
Quoting 747400sp (Reply 2): There probably will not be any E-3 or below in there crew.
Need someone to chip paint, be a mess crank, clean sh!tters. dont think a PO-3 would do that(well they do actually, at least I had to when I got to my ship but that was a few years ago)
Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 5): more Indians, less Chiefs. (pun intended)
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3912 times:
Quoting GDB (Reply 16): The LCS is a possible template for the 'lo' mix, VT over here have done trials of a tri-hulled ship, have experience in patrol craft and corvettes-a UK LCS might be an idea.
Interesting comments! I hope the RN buys a few LCS's. That would be good for business.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (5 years 7 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3730 times:
Here is a nice video of the christening of the U.S.S. Freedom, courtesy of the Wikipedia. It's rather brief, but effective, and I thought that the way that the video was framed in the segment where the champagne hit the hull was very well-done.
There is also a side view of the ship that emphasizes its sleek profile.
She's a fine-looking vessel, and looks to be worthy of its name.
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3180 posts, RR: 3 Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3668 times:
DEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 3560 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter): a second LCS vessel, the U.S.S. Independence, is in production and a third LCS is under contract. General Dynamics is currently building the second ship
Incidentally, the project site is also the general area where Northrop/EADS proposes to build the KC-330 tanker.
Quote:
"April 4/06: Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter has named LCS 2, the first Flight 0 ship of the General Dynamics/Austal trimaran design. She will be the USS Independence. This Navy release notes the backgrounds of other ships who have borne that name. It's all part of a speech on the future of Navy shipbuuilding that DID covered extensively.
Jan 19/06: GD/Austal Lays Keel for LCS 2. Austal USA hosts a traditional US Navy keel-laying ceremony to signify the start of construction on the first Flight 0 General Dynamics/Austal LCS trimaran. The keel laying follows on the heels of the official November 17, 2005 opening of Austal USA's ship construction facility in Mobile, AL. See also General Dynamics team lead press release.
Oct 7/05: LCS 2, the 1st GD-Austal Flight 0 Ship, is ordered. General Dynamics Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME received a $223.3 million cost-plus-award-fee/ incentive-fee modification to exercise an option under contract N00024-03-C-2310 for detail design and construction of one Flight 0 Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). Work will be performed in Mobile, AL (50%) - note that this represents Austal's component, and is the company's largest-ever individual contract. Work will also be performed in Pittsfield, MA (33%); Bath, ME (15%); and Baltimore, MD (2%), and is expected to be complete by October 2007. This award is one of the potential options described in the May 27, 2004 contract award."
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5073 posts, RR: 51 Reply 22, posted (5 years 7 months 19 hours ago) and read 3551 times:
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 21): Austal USA hosts a traditional US Navy keel-laying ceremony to signify the start of construction on the first Flight 0 General Dynamics/Austal LCS trimaran.
While it is great thet the USN is building ships incorporating some good Australian technology. It would be great to see the RAN here getting something similar as well instead of spending megabucks on only 2 24,000tonne Amphip Landing ships. IMHO a number of LCS would be whole not more useful in our environment.
I guess the big ship decision was a given after we were suckered into buying a whole bunch of 2nd hand Abrahms tanks. (suckered by the ambitions of some ADF brass in Canberra, no one else)
Cheers
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 5101 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4103 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12357 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5073 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
){kind=link}