via Navy Recognition.
The UAE Navy's Baynunah Class corvettes were developed by French company CMN. The leadship was built in France by CMN shipyard while the 5 remaining ships of the class were built locally by Abu Dhabi Ship Building. While light in displacement (right below 1,000 tons) the Baynunah class are heavily armed for their class. Designed for coastal warfare, these corvettes may also conduct blue water operations.The US Navy should be reaching a point of humiliation. The LCS was once touted as the lynch pin to a strategy of doing "partnership" missions better because it wouldn't outclass foreign navy ships the way an Aegis Destroyer would.
Now the US Navy is faced with the issue of almost every nation in the world building under 3000 ton ships that far outstrip the LCS. Notice the anti-ship missiles on this ship? Notice the anti-air missiles? The carriage of a helicopter? Out the box this ship outperforms the LCS. We don't have a ship building problem. We have a concept issue.
Doesn't the General Dynamics Independence class have a small missile cell in the front?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't and the Missiles they were considering, the griffin, was canned by the US Military
Deleteyou are thinking of the NLOS missile. The griffin in in service with the Army now, since 2008. it has a 20km range and can be laser, Inertial, or GPS guided..
DeleteThe only thing the US Navy has is a Corvette Problem. They don't know how to build Corvettes and they seriously need to take a lesson from European, Middle eastern and Asian Navies on how to properly build a Corvette.
ReplyDeletethe Freedom class carries a Mk.49 RAM with 21 RIM-116 missiles. The Independence carries SeaRAM with 11 RIM-116 missiles. Both can be configured with Mk.41 VLS with either Strike length (Freedom) or Tactical length (Independence) ordinance.
ReplyDeleteLCSs major source of problems is high speed demand,higher speed generally means light weight and/or big engines and lots of fuel and you sacrifice much to gain what 10-15kn at the same time you lose much of the flexibility these German and French designs have. On a high speed planing hulls it very difficult to add equipment/weight without severe preformance penalties while a 25-30 knot design just ads or subtracts couple of feet to the hull of the design to tailor it to a specific weight. + In europe Swedes,Germans,French and Italians all produce great shipmouted weapons that can be had off the shelf while US lost much of it expertise an is reinventing the wheel much of the time in LCS.
ReplyDeleteWhich is why the US Navy has a Corvette problem and doesn't have any experience or knowledge in building a proper corvette. What the US Navy is trying to do is reinvent the Corvette ship in the form of the LCS. What they should have done, is hire expert Corvette builders from Europe,Middle east and Asia on how to build a proper ocean going corvette.
DeleteSo for the price of the two lead LCS vessels they could have 12 Baynunah? So for the cost of another 6 of the either LCS design they would have got 55 (well 60) hulls they were looking for in the first place? That would have saved what 47 LCS builds give or take? Wow that's a lot of money.
ReplyDeleteFor me the trouble with LCS is that it is the answer to a question that nobody is asking. Actually nobody is sure what the question is at all. Crewing costs aside using a design like Baynunah meant they could have had well in excess of hundred hulls and still save money. They could have flooded the Straits of Hormuz or any other choke point with warships. It would have been like a return to the olden days of small fast ship operating in squadrons. That would have been something.
Another thought. As I said LCS answers a question nobody is asking. Say the USN had purchased something like Baynunah for a similar price it would have freed budget for a diesel frigate that could have worked both with ARGs and CBGs as a maid of all work and operated as a flotilla leader to the Baynunah. The Danish diesel frigates would have been good starting point; they are cheaper than the LCS designs, bigger, better endurance, better gun platforms, better helicopter platforms. An Iver Huitfeldt / Absalon hybrid. The former's engine fit out with the latter's twin hangars and large flight deck. Simple weapon fit out, 5in gun, Bushmaster, Phalanx or RAM, Harpoon etc. etc.
Really it is a no brainer.
For price of the LCS, I could have gotten a squadron of Baynunah Class corvettes with left over money for an Iver Huitfeldt Frigate as a command and control for the Baynunah
DeleteI see what you are saying. I said the IH could be a flotilla leader. But you are suggesting that they are actually purchased deliberately in that way.That is for every 6 Baynunah buy 1 IH. Yes I was talking about two separate pools of ships that could be used together as long as with the fleet. But you are seeing it more as a holistic whole. Yes. Yes I like that idea. I am going to have a think. :)
DeleteI had bit more of think. If the Baynunah could be stretched by 100 tons or so so it fit just under the smallest Sigma-class to make it a bit more seaworthy and help with SeaHawk operation. Produce it in two versions. One aviation variant to operate and hangar one SeaHawk. And another version with 3in back aft (and perhaps another two autocannon) and so no hangar just and just a flight deck. Buy 2 gun versions to one aviation version. Basically this allows for 3 corvettes to have nearly all the capabilities of frigate just dispersed across three hulls.
DeleteIn the IH/Absalon based diesel frigate retain the AAW capability and operate 2 Sea Hawks.
We would then end up up with a flotilla of one diesel frigate flotilla leader, 2 aviation corvettes, and 4 gun corvettes.
Why the USN couldn't come up with something similar I don't know.
It's not just a question of other Navies having better ships, it's a question of institutional corruption in both how it acquires new ships and the lack of an ability to 'change course' to reverse bad decisions.
ReplyDeleteI do not use the term corruption lightly. There is a serious failure in defense acquisitions (it has been flawed for a long time) where leadership of the Navy keeps buying into the sunken cost fallacy i.e. that it is better to continue with a broken program than it is terminate it because so much money and prestige has been invested thus far. And as long as people play along they can continue to be promoted and/or receive cushy jobs at contractors after retiring, it will continue to waste taxpayer dollars on poorly designed/built ships and planes.
LCS is a failure. The USN Shipbuilding program is doomed. The continued investment in massive Ford-class carriers is too expensive and too vulnerable.
Yet nobody is held accountable and the promotions keep coming down the pike.
Our entire military would benefit if we'd simply eliminate 90% of the Flag Officer positions. They've got nice fat pensions and profitable jobs in think tanks or defense contractors so they'll land softly.
Then take a deep, hard look at the each program and decide if it is needed or its just some pet-project to be laid aside.
The LCS really showed the world the US Navy's Failure in building ships. It really showed the world that the US navy can't build ships and can't even build a decent corvette that is up to standard of most European, Middle eastern and Asian Pacific navies. The LCS is such a joke and a failure that those who run the program, should be put in orange jumpsuits and marched right into federal prison. This is why I think the US Navy should scrap the LCS and go with a Multi Role frigate. If the US navy still wants an LCS type ship, they should gone with an Ocean going Corvette.
ReplyDelete