# End of the Littoral Combat Ship?



## AWP (Jul 11, 2017)

For anyone who hasn't followed the LCS program, the Navy has fielded two vessel designs ostensibly for the same mission, and neither of them work. This isn't to be confused with the Zumwalt, Ford, or F-35 programs though the latter two will bear fruit at some point. Hopefully the new ships won't be named for someone whose soul contribution to life was taking some lead to the brain bucket and surviving.

Navy Releases Details of New FFG(X) Guided-Missile Frigate Program in Request to Industry

The Navy Is Looking for a New Frigate to Replace the Troubled Littoral Combat Ship



> In many ways, this FFG(X) design goes beyond what today’s LCS can do, particularly as it relates to surface warfare. The RFI states the frigate should be able to conduct independent operations in a contested environment or contribute to a larger strike group, depending on combatant commander needs.



RFI: FFG(X) - US Navy Guided Missile Frigate Replacement Program - Federal Business Opportunities: Opportunities


----------



## Gunz (Jul 12, 2017)

I've been following the LCS saga from the time the two original vessels were launched. 

NatGeo produced a two-hour documentary on the LCS shakedowns some 9-10 years ago and it was two hours of watching the air hiss out of a tire.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jul 12, 2017)

..... why not just build something bigger, that can detect and engage anything of interest within the littoral zone, vs minidraft horribads with hugely combat incapable minimum manning philosophy at its core?

I guess I just think a Mk3 say Cleveland/New Orleans class cruiser, with more missiles, CWIS and railguns than you can shake a stick at... with a manning complement that can sustain combat operations after taking a casualty hit like the turret pop on tge Iowa, Cole bombing, or in comparison to LCS, the recent collision.... because if you have one mishap on a LCS that takes out say 5 people, that thing is now combat ineffective as well as having systems so complex they cant really even be juryrigged for functionality if damaged underway.

But my real experience on the water personally consists of shit you rowed half the time, so I just offer up the idea for clay pigeon status amongst the naval experts we might have here.


----------



## Devildoc (Jul 12, 2017)

AWP said:


> For anyone who hasn't followed the LCS program, the Navy has fielded two vessel designs ostensibly for the same mission, and neither of them work. This isn't to be confused with the Zumwalt, Ford, or F-35 programs though the latter two will bear fruit at some point. Hopefully the new ships won't be named for someone whose soul contribution to life was taking some lead to the brain bucket and surviving.
> 
> Navy Releases Details of New FFG(X) Guided-Missile Frigate Program in Request to Industry
> 
> ...



The only ship program that is successful right now is the sub program.  The LCS is a boondoggle of epic proportions.  As for the Ford, it's just too big to fail at this point.

Once upon a time the US ruled the seas.  Now we can't put half our fleet to sea.


----------



## Blizzard (Jul 12, 2017)

Devildoc said:


> Once upon a time the US ruled the seas.  Now we can't put half our fleet to sea.


There's a theme here.  Our development and procurement programs/processes need a serious overhaul.  The lifecycle for virtually any new DoD system is just way too long and way too costly with too little to show for it.  With so many hands in the cookie jar, I'm not sure how this gets fixed.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jul 12, 2017)

[Q


----------



## ThunderHorse (Jul 12, 2017)

The best part about this whole program was Congress going for two ship builders to build two different ships...wtf.

I like the tri-hull design.  The first concepts years ago before DDX got well under way and CGX got cancelled was three Tri-Hull designs for all three of programs for LCS, DDX and CGX back in Pop Mechanics circa 1999. Popular Mechanics

Currently the US Navy is at 276 Deployable battle force ships: The U.S. Navy

If you do the math, 102 are either forward deployed or on deployment. Of the non-deployed portion of the fleet roughly 1/3 are undergoing refit/drydock, and the rest are getting ready to deploy.  Our life cycle dry-dock for Nuclear ships is utterly idiotic with the duration it takes, ridiculous.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jul 12, 2017)

So the boat is not so good?:-/


----------

