If it was just "rowboats with RPGs", then either cannon would have been enough to deal with the problem. The mini-AShM is supposed to be for use against ships that can launch ATGM, STS, Large Rockets, AShM, etc BEFORE they get into range. A 3Km weapon is not going to do that.
Their decision to defang the LCS of its longest range integral weapon (NETFIRES) and replace it with a missile that only has a what…. 3-5km range, is absurd. They have a “plan” to extend the range, but you are still left with a weapon that only has a ~10lb warhead. Then there is development costs to add to the problem.
They should have just bought Israel’s SPIKE NLOS system as it has a range of 25km a much bigger warhead, command guidance capability (fiber optic), etc, etc.
The weponization of LCS has become more embarrassing as of late and for those interested, here is a quick fix.
LCS will never engage massing surface threat (swarming boat attack by itself) all by herself. I seriously doubt the navy would ever allow LCS to operate alone in hostile water. The debate over the adequacy of her organic firepower is meaningless. LCS is supposed to be a multi mission platform for counter mine and ASW missions. During her entire deployment she will be heavily protected from the air.
what you're talking about is an ASW frigate. the LCS is suppose to be much more than that or the Navy would have simply built a replacement Perry.
sorry.
but this is a seriously flawed concept and the fact that the Navy itself is talking about the LCS fighting swarming boats tells us that its part of the design concept.
well i don't know if its called rust or whatever but the GD version has serious oxidation issues that have kept it in port for an extremely LOOOOOOONG time.
True, they do have coatings that seal up the aluminum to prevent corroding. If they made them with a steel mono hull that would fix the problem for good. LCS sucks anyways, they should just cancel it and find a new ship. Unless Lockheed makes a bigger and better version of the Freedom class. That's if its affordable.
Which is why I have often said that if the LCS is not replacing the perry's then they are in reality replacing the Cyclone class PC. What the US Navy should have done was buy a European frigate design or build an Aegis-less burke based on the designs of the Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate and the Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate. If were stuck with the LCS, then the LCS should stay with the PC and MCM fleet.
little crappy missiles from a little crappy ship - all to shoot some Muslim rowboats armed with RPGS.
ReplyDeleteWow........
If it was just "rowboats with RPGs", then either cannon would have been enough to deal with the problem. The mini-AShM is supposed to be for use against ships that can launch ATGM, STS, Large Rockets, AShM, etc BEFORE they get into range. A 3Km weapon is not going to do that.
Deleteawesome analysis. well done!
ReplyDeleteHow sad….
ReplyDeleteTheir decision to defang the LCS of its longest range integral weapon (NETFIRES) and replace it with a missile that only has a what…. 3-5km range, is absurd. They have a “plan” to extend the range, but you are still left with a weapon that only has a ~10lb warhead. Then there is development costs to add to the problem.
They should have just bought Israel’s SPIKE NLOS system as it has a range of 25km a much bigger warhead, command guidance capability (fiber optic), etc, etc.
The weponization of LCS has become more embarrassing as of late and for those interested, here is a quick fix.
LCS will never engage massing surface threat (swarming boat attack by itself) all by herself. I seriously doubt the navy would ever allow LCS to operate alone in hostile water. The debate over the adequacy of her organic firepower is meaningless. LCS is supposed to be a multi mission platform for counter mine and ASW missions. During her entire deployment she will be heavily protected from the air.
ReplyDeletewhat you're talking about is an ASW frigate. the LCS is suppose to be much more than that or the Navy would have simply built a replacement Perry.
Deletesorry.
but this is a seriously flawed concept and the fact that the Navy itself is talking about the LCS fighting swarming boats tells us that its part of the design concept.
Lockheed LCS is junk. At least General Dynamics LCS can fire Harpoon missiles.
ReplyDeleteWhat?
DeleteThe GD version rusts the moment it hits water. It is also 100% aluminium.
Lockheed has LCS versions with 76mm guns, and mk 41 vls cells for export.
Aluminum does not rust so you wont have that problem. I've yet to see any mk41 vls systems on Freedom class so good luck with your research.
Deletewell i don't know if its called rust or whatever but the GD version has serious oxidation issues that have kept it in port for an extremely LOOOOOOONG time.
DeleteTrue, they do have coatings that seal up the aluminum to prevent corroding. If they made them with a steel mono hull that would fix the problem for good. LCS sucks anyways, they should just cancel it and find a new ship. Unless Lockheed makes a bigger and better version of the Freedom class. That's if its affordable.
Deleteseriously. pink station lights?
ReplyDeleteWhich is why I have often said that if the LCS is not replacing the perry's then they are in reality replacing the Cyclone class PC. What the US Navy should have done was buy a European frigate design or build an Aegis-less burke based on the designs of the Álvaro de Bazán-class frigate and the Fridtjof Nansen-class frigate. If were stuck with the LCS, then the LCS should stay with the PC and MCM fleet.
ReplyDelete