Quote:
Originally Posted by mweber24
If by requirements met you mean a very fast combattant with heavy anti-surface warfare firepower, a case can be made. But other nations could be seen as having this requirement much more than the U.S., yet none of them bought the PHMs. Other nations built smaller equivalents (Italy and Japan), but I don't think either still operates them. I am saying that the really fast, single mission combatant that has poor operational sustainment and is really expensive is a bad design, period. Hey, sounds like LCS, another ship on my list! I think to be considered successful, the ship has to have been successfully used by someone, not just look cool.  |
The FAC as a species is inherently flawed. That doesn't necessarily make individual craft or classes of craft within that species
bad designs. As for the FFG7's, they were not designed for growth - it was just added anyway. They managed to survive it for the most part but the results could hardly be considered ideal.
Standard is irrelevant to how the FFG7's are now employed, which is as Patrol Frigates. The Navy has a surplus of far more capable area air defense platforms. Getting rid of Standard on these ships allowed the Navy to dispose of two obsolescent systems along with associated parts, training, logistical support, etc. The alternative was an expensive upgrade and procurement of additional weapons that were not even needed. Overall that is a pretty good thing. Remember, the reason that launcher was there in the first place was to counter Soviet submarine launched anti-ship missiles - not exactly relevant to how the FFG7's are now employed. RAM would be far more useful.
When I talked earlier about corners being cut I was referring to things like having only a 37-ton lifetime growth margin (1% instead of the more typical 8%), no 3D radar like SPS-52 or -48, SQS-56 instead of SQQ-23, etc, etc, etc... But these cuts did allow them to be built in numbers not otherwise possible, even if the end result horrified many in the Navy at the time. Remember the FFG-7 program effectively replaced the plans to build the AAW capable DXG (Spruance) which was projected in less than half the numbers of FFG-7 eventually built.