I've posted that exact statement several times in several posts over the last year, including just yesterday. Jgetti get's pretty pissy when i do.Originally Posted by BenRoethig
FACE/OFF : “Topgun” USN F-14 vs. USAF F-15
You've probably seen my comment at some point in the last year and it just stuck in your subconscious mind because it's actually a pretty good analogy. Like the Honda, the F18E/F is reliable, ergonomic, efficient, a good handler, has half-decent performance, and boasts low cost of ownership.
I typically equate the F-14 to an exotic sports car(typically my own, lol). Finicky, hard to work on, expensive to own, but when you floor it or lean into a corner, you KNOW what you've been paying for all along.
Actually this class of frigate has already been done. It's the ANZAC class in Australian and New Zealand service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anzac_class_frigate
What Ben proposes is like an enlarged version of the ANZAC, which would be perfect for many navies in the world who can't afford an Aegis ship but need something to patrol territorial waters and escort convoys.
Last edited by gunnut; 16 Oct 06, at 19:45.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
The whole point behind LCS is supposed to be numbers.
Well what good are numbers when they tie up the very ships they're supposed to be replacing by requiring an AAW escort?
It's stupidity.
Also, i have no idea what a 40kt sprint speed brings to the table other than a lot of shiit talking from LCS crews about how they're the fastest cans in the fleet and a GIGANTIC propulsion and fuel bill that the USN has to pay...
Now we can quibble about the exact number of Cells, but there is simply no way to ratioanlly debate that LCS would be a more offesnively/defensively capable 3D warship with VLS than it is with the mission modules.
OUR NUMBER ONE PRIORITY MUST BE TO PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE MEN THAT SERVE ON LCS.
The best way to do that is to make sure they have something to throw at the enemy besides rocks. RAM is a point defense system ONLY. It CAN NOT attack the attacker, only shoot at it's arrows. With only 21 ready-rounds, and the policy of 2 RAM per incoming missile, a simple 4 ship of any type of jet fighters capable of lofting and firing anti-tank missiles will EASILY overwhelm/run dry the single RAM launcher and put that fancy dan 400 million dollar LCS on the bottom of the ocean.
And that is a god-damned crime as far as im concerned.
400 million for a ship that couldnt even defend itself from a four-ship of ATGM toting Mig-21s or a circa 80s Pegasus PHM is NOT FUKKING ECONOMICAL, any way you slice it.
PRC Mainstay Pilot to mission commander: "Sir, there's a Yankee LCS down there that i just saw when we broke out of the clouds, what should i do?"
Commander: "Fly about 5km off it's starboard side at an altitude of 10k meters and begin feeding targeting data to Beijing."
Pilot: "But sir, isnt that dangerous?"
Commander: "No, they cant hit us at that range."
Same convo with a ESSM equipped LCS...
PRC Mainstay Pilot to mission commander: "Sir, there's a Yankee LCS down there that i just saw when we broke out of the clouds, what should i do?" Hey, what's that contrail heading up at us?!?!?!?
Commander: EVADE, EVADE, EVADE! Those ESSM have a 30 mile range, GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE! COMMS, SEND A DISTRESS SIGNAL! NOW!
-------
Yeah, what good would VLS and ESSM be?
RAM doesnt even have the range to interdict a helo launching short range Sea Skua type missiles at it...
Last edited by Bill; 16 Oct 06, at 20:05.
But the LCS aren't designed to be escorts. They are (from what I can understand the navy thinking) fast transports that can operate in shallow waters. Their greatest strength is being reconfigurable to operate ROVs, spec ops, marines, and some other things I have no idea of.
What type of threat will they likely meet? Who in the world can threaten an LCS? I bet we won't send LCSs configured as transports anywhere a sizable navy or air force can threaten them. They will be there with a full CBG.
Look around the world. Most of the blue water navies are our friends. Brits, French, Japanese, Dutch, Spanish, and Australian. We won't use LCS on them.
However, there are times when we really need to send some men into a hot spot, but we just can't spare an assault carrier or LPD. Or we need to conduct some special ops off the coast of a hot spot near the African coast line that a full MEF would attract too much attention.
I think you're too hung up on the "escort" type of fighting ship rather than looking at the LCS as a small LPD or a reinvented APD from WW2 carrying Marine raiders.
We have a lot of escorts. More than enough to deal with any 2 navies in the world at the same time, now that the Soviets are no longer the threat they once were.
We need utility ships that can deal with regional asymetrical threats.
However I do agree with you about the unusual high speed and a pop gun for self defense. Those had me scratching my head.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
At the time no, but I do work for a NGO that does strategic and tactical Naval research today, including congressional research, for ASuW, ASW, and AAW for simulation and systems development.
You have already stated you choose to intentionally ignore researched sources on the subject matter, not only US Naval research but independent research that isn't apart of the industry establishment, and through this lack of research you have come to the unquestionable conclusion that your AAW VLS frigate is unquestionably superior to the LCS in any role without any researched evidence.
This would be an interesting debate, if I wasn't well informed regarding the role of the LCS and providing well established, freely available internet sources for the basis of my points, and if you provided anything other than an intentionally uninformed opinion as basis to all of your points.
Fast transports huh?
LOL....whatever you say fella.
Antiship missiles, and anyone can launch one of those.
Like oh, Iraq(Stark Anyone?), Argentina(how many RN ships did they sink?), or any other 3d world spithole.
How about LR anti-tank missiles like Maverick? Hmmm?
How about compact helo launched anti-ship missiles like Sea Skua? Hmmm?
LCS can not kill ANY of the platforms that launch those things, but can only shoot down the arrows...and only a few of those. With a 21 cell RAM LCS can- AT BEST- shoot down 11 incoming missiles. AT BEST.
That means a four ship of TOTALLY OBSOLETE Fighters, each with four anti-tank missiles, sends your lovely ship back to the repair yard for months without so much as suffering a single scratch in return.
How about all those AShM armed FACs all over the third world? LCS is, in reality, virtually DEFENSELESS against those.
The whole idea is that they be independently operated in the enemy littorals to free up our major combatants for the important things.
LCS does not do that, it does the opposite. It requires an AAW escort to go in harms way.
Chinese, DPRK, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Pakistan....all are quite capable of launching an AShM attack.
Ah, so you mean we need 40kt speed boats to send them, as opposed to say, a C-130 or C-17 full of Rangers?
PUKE!!!!
Here's an idea, send them in the MUST HAVE SSGNs. No? An SSN then. Still no? OK, a helo off the deck of a burke...or Tico...or CVN....or in the belly of a C130 or C17. How about the intercontinental Pave Low?
Tell ya what im hung up on cuz....a ship that can actually defend itself and is worth the money we're paying for it.
Clearly you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
We have a serious LACK of capable escorts....just ask Rick.
Bulllshiit Rummy Jr.
LCS could've easily STILL been LCS had they simply included an 8 cell VLS system and stretched the bow a tad...ALL that would've changed was that...it had an 8 cell VLS system, and was about 20 feet longer than currently, and was not quite so fast.
LCS is stupid.
Last edited by Bill; 17 Oct 06, at 01:05.
IOW, NO, you are NOT a naval expert that has served on ANY of the boards you named.
BTW, i know a couple think-tank types myself, and they all seem to think that LCS is a total circle-jerk.
The Maginot Line was based on research...
I bet if this was 1939 and we were in a Cafe' in france(spit), your ignorant tail would've shouted me down for arguing against the white papers that claimed the French "needed it" based on "the studies", wouldnt ya?
Some DICCKHEADS(you can read that 'experts') obviously also "Studied" the issue of guns in fighters and left them out of the Phantom "cause they were obsolete". That RIDICULOUS DECISION was based on "all the available Facts of the day".
Likewise, other DICCKHEADS in the Army thought it'd be a good idea to issue M-16s without cleaning kits in vietnam, and advertise it in the manual as "Self cleaning". We all know how that turned out.
The list of mis-steps over the years- just in the US alone- by 'experts' is endless.
Sometimes skip, it is best to look past the arguments of the eggheads, and apply a basic and likely scenario the gadget will be faced with.
Like the one where four Mig-21s with LR anti-tank missiles(along the lines of Maverick) blast your precious LCS to freaking pieces without even facing any manner of return fire except maybe from a single 57mm mount.
In constructing such a HIGHLY LIKELY scenario, it is ENTIRELY EVIDENT that LCS is inadequately armed.
PERIOD.
You have laid forth NO COMPELLING ARGUMENT as to the NEED for LCS as it is configured.
All I have done is point out that it is highly vulnerable to even the most basic of enemies(and how to correct that), and that it's 40kt sprint speed is utterly stupid, that because of it LCS is seriously lacking in endurance, and that it costs far too much for what it does. I have also pointed out(correctly), that the PAM 'ASuW module' is quite stupid, and would be readily overmatched by even an SM-1 armed(or equivelant) FAC..let alone one with honest to goodness AShMs aboard.
Apparently, according to gun nut, LCS is "A fast transport"(LOLOLOLOL).
And according to you LCS is a 40kt minesweeper/small boat killer (LOL even more).
Regardless, i do not seek your approval wrt MY opinion. This is a DISCUSSION board, and i am DISCUSSING why i think LCS- despite your lovely research and white papers- is highly vulnerable, founded on fantasy, and overall, QUITE STUPID.
Your argument is based on the the eggheads statistical analysis, mine on simple, good old fashioned reality.
The reality: The enemy is out there- everywhere- and he wants to kill us. He doesnt give a **** that you didnt think about bothering to defend your little 400 million dollar speedboat from a few fighters with anti-tank missiles that can outrange RAM. In fact, he will likely chuckle about the stupidity of your design after he's done blowing big fuccking holes in it for you.(like US tankers do when they kill a T-72 and watch the turret flying up in the air)
The problem with eggheads(and you), are that you see the roles you want to fill, and pretend that the rest of the world is just going to cooperate with your designs. Then, when you design something that may have looked good on paper, but is a total operational disaster, you scream about how the end user is 'misusing' your toy.
Your Eggheads that created LCS are broken....you need new ones. LCS isnt even in service yet, and it's already broken.
What we "NEED" to do is fight wars. Small ones, big ones, easy ones, hard ones....no one can tell in advance, and they usually sneak up on you largely unannounced. A VLS armed LCS would be MUCH BETTER at the general business of warfighting, and unlike the "transformational LCS(pulke, puke), a VLS armed FFG would be based on sound principles, rather than someone's crystal ball interpretation of why a major US warship doesnt need any means of AAW capability. Or ASROC. Or TLAM. Or a useful gun that can actually be used for more than shooting at 'small boats' and in desperation at aircraft because it lacks the means to defend itself any other way.
It's as simple as that.
VLS is the most versatialle weapons system(and a potential UAV deployment system) in the USN. Excluding it is a huge mistake.
Last edited by Bill; 16 Oct 06, at 22:51.
Well, I'm just telling you how I perceive the LCS to be and the value I see in them. Maybe it'll work. Maybe it won't. I hope the concept works because we spent a lot of money on them.
With regard to threats from NK, China, Venezuala, Russia, Iran...etc., those will be dealt with our current CBGs. What I'm saying is if we need to operate near Somalia, Liberia, or some other 3rd world coast line, then LCSs would be adequate.
I do agree with you, LCS is inadequately armed in its current form. We all want to see 3" gun with 32 ESSM for self defense. Maybe one of the mission modules will address this problem.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
LCS is supposed to operate independently- or at least, that was the claim all along. Remember the justiifcation for LCS(and before it streetfighter) to begin with... "We need LCS so we dont have to risk major combatants close to shore."
Sounds an awful lot like "We need stryker to air deploy cause legacy systems are too heavy".
Turned out to be a total BS bill of goods, as i suspect, the 'justifications' for LCS will as well.
Regardless, yes, i am sure LCS will be all the rage when it comes to killing sampans full of Somali pirates(just dont ask it to tackle a missile armed FAC such as those that seemingly grow on trees in the third world)....
I happen to agree with Rick's oft-stated sentiment that the shortage of escorts is critical. But again, i ask, what is it that LCS can escort if it can't even escort itself? And if LCS isn't supposed to be an escort as Galhran seems to impy...then im REALLY confused, cause we need escorts a whole fukkin' lot more than we need "transformational" 40kt 4000ton speedboats designed to kill Somali Sampans.
The cost/complexity/additional mass/bulk of the 40kt sprint speed of LCS is most likely pretty much what the USN spent the money/space that should've been used for a proper armaments fit instead.
Now they have a 40kt knot ship with virtually ZERO offensive or defensive capability whatsoever(unless the enemy is kind enough to attack us with Boghammers)....and at 400 million+(incl MM) lord knows that if the LCS was supposed to be 'cheap', it has UTTERLY FAILED in that promise.
300 million dollars for a ship(sans MM) with the most basic of sensors and point defenses is an utter rip off.
Oh, wait.....nevermind....i forgot, it does 40 kts.(you can bet your ass getting it to achieve that little feat was anything but cheap, even if for all practical purposes it is a truly meaningless capability).
LCS is an example of EVERYTHING wrong with Rumnamara's DoD and his delusional fantasies of "transformation."
The only thing LCS will transform is our tax money into MASSIVELY BLOATED corporate profits.
Frankly, someone should be executed over this fiasco.
PS: From past discussions at HPCA, i seem to recall that a VLS mission module is not feasible, as it would make the ship too top heavy. So that means some sort of lightweight(and light= MONEY) alternate VLS system restricted to fewer lightweight munitions would probably have to be designed. And unless it also has illuminators, it would also have to use an adapted ESSM or AMRAAM(which would have much shorter range without a booster), and all of that would obviously cost lots of money to design/develop.
Last edited by Bill; 17 Oct 06, at 01:12.
That doesn't mean it can protect itself.
That's the military way of saying "we can afford to lose one of these guys over a Burke."
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
LOL
"Venezuelan SU-27 " operating overwater?!?!?!?
LOL
Sorry Sniper your getting as bad as the Russians.
Targeting is everything and the problem with "Venezuelan SU-27 " (besides the fact that you will never see them oprerated over water) and Sunburn anti-ship missiles is that they cant be effectively targeted.
IF they are so efficacious why does the USSR continue to decommission very, very young Sovremmenny class DDG's? Why isnt everyone flying the much "vaunted SU-27".
KMA
But then you probably agree with the Russians that the Kunetsov is a better warship than the Nimitz class and that a Kirov class cruiser is also a better warship.
LOL
Of course to a man the Russians claim that the Udaloy class anti-submarine destroyers all carry Sunburn(only one Udaloy II, the only one built) and have a better AAW system than the USN's Ticoderoga class cruisers and Burke class destroyers.
Ill tell you what Sniper.
Ill give you(or anyone else stupid enough) the entire rest of the worlds navys and Ill take only the USN's Pacific fleet or the Atlantic fleet (your pick) and I will win in less than 24 hours.
Hands down. No argument. No prisoners.
Why do you think war has evovled into terrorist tactics?
Why do you think that even though there has been much fear-mongering about hostile nations or terrorists bring war to the sea or even ports.
There has been none.
The Cole incident was six years ago. Nothing since.
Sniper IMHO you should spend your time bringing the Army into the 21st century.
And come up with an answer for IED's.
But then bashing the USN is much easier. Aint it?
KMA
The USN does its job and then some.
In spite of the constant attacks of the US army, USAF and their supporters.
Ill remind you yet again:
That the US constitution specifically states maintaining a navy.
Not the army or air force.
And for good reason.
LCS may not meet your requirements.
And it certainly isnt perfect.
And as for this:
"missile armed FAC such as those that seemingly grow on trees in the third world)"
They are meat to LCS.
Not to mention the fact they no longer grow on trees.
And in fact their main task now is patrol/surv/recon and they suck at it.
But the nations that employ them can barely even afford them or they are used for extraordinarily specific taskings for which they are actually not only over-kill but unlikely ever to see that specific tasking ever to matrerialize..
Their missiles are useless once again because of the inability to target them effectively under even the best of conditions.
Nor do thay have the ability to adapt, change or evolve.
The LCS is actually about all three of the above.
But then again you have no idea what your talking about nor does anyone who agrees with you.
For crying out loud the USN was beat up for 25 years by people about the OHP's and now most of those same people point to it as a success.
LOL
BTW I still have my concerns about LCS but the program is in no way, shape or form a boondoggle.
Because its not REALLY about the platform itself.
Its far more basic and fundamental than that.
But of course YOU dont understand it beacause YOU dont want to.
Sorry but thats not good enough.
If the Sovremmnny is so bad then why is it so prized by the PLAN? They believe the anti-ship missiles within them are the answer to our CBG, which I find laughable. But still, they seem to have high regards for these boats.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
I think M-21 is channeling Mike Sparks again.
Here we have a ship that replaces at least 3 classes of ships outright. The Cyclone, Avenger and HSV. It will conduct Shallow water ASW, something
our DDs arn't designed to do. And will engage the exact vunerability that Snip
was condemming the Navy for a while back. The small boat swarm that Gen Van Riper used so effectivly in MC 02.
Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?
Repeat after me....fucck you.
I have never "channeled" mike sparks, though i very much suspect, you DO channel your 'buddy' Shipwreck.
So now we replace light SEAL patrol craft and minesweepers with 400 million dollar FOUR THOUSAND TON speedboats huh?
Well, they go along nicely with your 125 million dollar each Ospreys.
If you dont break us first you will have quite the collection of highly questionable weapons systems at your disposal.
You my "friend" are the ULTIMATE company man. If Rummy likes it, then GG likes it(i had to LOL at you claiming to not support rummy in the Crusader thread. You are practically a mouthpiece for him. Rummy got pictures of you effing a sailor in the asss or something?). Conversely, if Rummy says it's bad, GG says it's bad.
Crusader? BAH! Baaaaaaaaaad.
LOL...
Better hope there are no coastal AShM batteries or enemy observers with a radio on the beach...
BTW geniuses, here's a novel concept....conduct coastal ASW ops with HELICOPTERS.
Much faster, much more responsive, much quicker getting out of a hot zone, and if you lose one you only lose 4 guys instead of dozens(or hundreds).
According to Stuart Slade(another think tank type), that whole exercize that Van Ripper pulled was a total nonsense ploy to get himself attention, and according to Stuart, it accomplished nothing but ruining a carefully planned out exercize at great expense to the US Navy.
At any rate, even a single Phalanx Mk15B1B can easily defeat huge numbers of swarm attacking gunboats, let alone having deck side 25mm guns as well(as most USN ships have).
And regardless, LCS cannot operated independently forward of the fleet cause it cannot defend itself. That means your coastal ASW ops are a fantasy if there is any hint of enemy coastal AShM batteries, enemy air(helo or fixed), or enemy surface combatants.
Last edited by Bill; 17 Oct 06, at 05:28.
The Argies did it quite well....
Ahem, ********. A shadowing aircraft can provide exact targetting coordinates to any OTH enemy platform to whack an LCS cause the LCS simply CAN NOT make the enemy shadowing aircraft go away. It lacks the offensive means to do so.
Um, skip, when did i bring up the Sovermneys? But ok, ill bite....
Because Russia is BROKE.
And you know Ricky, there are a LOT of SU-27 operaters in the world today. Or hadn't you noticed?(not that it would take Su-27s to even whack an LCS, even helos firing compact AShMs could easily do the same) KMA
Umm, no.
Relevance?
Im not talking about the carrier fleets hot rod, im talking about LCS, which operates INDEPENDENT of the CVBGs.
It hasn't.
Because it's an easy target for a 3d world country or group to hit for very little investment on their own part.
And um, besides the Cole you mean?
Just a matter of opportunity. Give it time.
You MAY have noticed that they've moved on to bigger and better things since? Or maybe you havn't noticed.
One can never tell with you my schizophrenic friend.
The army would be better off if they left it alone and stopped tinkering with it, quite frankly.
I have a couple highly effective answers for IEDS.
Neither is very politically correct though.(at all)
Awww, is widdle wicky upset because his alma matter is a disjointed and directionless service and that because of THEIR OWN ACTIONS they are a VERY easy target for critics?
So does the army, and against MUCH stiffer competiton, i might add.
Yep rick, that's right...it's the sailors against the world.
Nice bunker mentality you got there dude.
Relevance?
Gee, REALLY?
And as for this:
LAUGH OUT LOUD RICK.
LCS cant even get into range to shoot back at an enemy FAC if it's getting OTH targetting data from an enemy air platform that it ALSO cannot shoot at.
LCS is MEAT to the ENEMY.
Oh? The FAC tree die did it?
They sure didnt seem to suck at it when they nailed the Stark(Tanker War). Or when they managed to close to gun range with a Tico CG(during Praying mantis) Or almost stuck a couple AShMs in the Missouri(ODS). Or when they found the cole bobbing peacefully on one sunny morning...
In fact, they didnt seem to suck when they nailed that Israeli corvette a mere few months ago either.
Underestimate the enemy at your own peril sailor.
Employ them what? FACs you mean?
Normally you'd have a point.
Except....that...LCS...cannot....break...contact.. ..with....shadowing...enemy....aircraft.
A patently ridiculous claim.(Just ask the Jews, or our troops in Iraq or A-stan)
All three what?
Right rick, but you have it all figured out, right?
I never said a bad word about the OHPs. For what they needed them for, they were quite good ships, well suited to their role. They also gave decades of good service too.
I say it is. That is my OPINION. I've laid out why. Apparently some agree with me. Whether you like it or not.
I say it is.
Whoooo........such a cryptic statement....
Well you're the "expert"....lay it out for us. Make we the simpletons of the world understand rick. cause apparently, there are quite a few of us here at WAB.
What isn't good enough? Your medication?
I could've told you that a couple years ago...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: