Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Littoral Combat Ships

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
    101 missiles, 4 5" guns and 2 helis?... Me thinks you designed a heavy cruiser, not an LCS...
    Not helis, VTUAV's.

    492ft overall length, 50ft beam, 22ft draft. Should come in just around 5.5k tons and do 28kts.
    Last edited by Hoss; 22 Dec 10,, 22:21.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Hoss View Post
      Not helis, VTUAV's.

      492ft overall length, 50ft beam, 22ft draught. Should come in just around 5.5k tons and do 28kts.
      A man after my own heart, nice ship :banana:

      I'd like to see a 6.1" aboard her, but otherwise shes fine just the way she is if you didn't want that
      sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
      If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

      Comment


      • I'll admit that I'm no ship designer, but aren't you coming up a bit short? You have 100 missiles (and yes, many are small, but...) four 5" guns (with associated magazines) a 3500ml range and a 28knot speed... in a 5.5kt hull? The 5"/54 Mark 45 Mod 4 alone comes at almost 29tons per gun.

        And why so many 5" guns? If you want fire support, 1 or 2 would be enough. Considering their litoral role, you'd do better in puting in a couple of close-quarter work twin mounts in the 30-40mm range.

        Also, where are the SSMs? Wasn't the lack of a proper anti-ship capacity one of the criticisms?


        Edit: forgot. isn't the LCS supposed to support special opps? Can't transport those with VTUAVs. You need to, if not carry, at least have room for helis...
        Last edited by jlvfr; 22 Dec 10,, 16:59.

        Comment


        • This design (with 4 x 5" guns), has many shortcomings.

          4 x 5" guns is far too much for such a small ship. It is too much for naval gunfire support. I can't see anything like the assault on Normandy happening again any time soon. Firing broadsides would attract attention from shore batteries and other assets.

          The ship would nevertheless be 'outgunned' by any small corvette with dedicated longrange anti-ship missiles.

          There is no adequate defense against speedboard swarm attacks.

          A steady gun platform is called for which means a deep draft and littoral warfare calls for a shallow draft.

          The design is bigger and would be more costly than the current LCS design.

          With a top speed (if you are lucky!) of 28 kts, the design is not fast enough.

          VTUAV's like Firescout cannot replace Helo's for ASW.

          The design is not stealthy - even less than the present LCS.

          What is you provision for mine countermeasures? Or did you not think about that one?
          Last edited by Xtvpry; 22 Dec 10,, 18:44.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
            I'll admit that I'm no ship designer, but aren't you coming up a bit short? You have 100 missiles (and yes, many are small, but...) four 5" guns (with associated magazines) a 3500ml range and a 28knot speed... in a 5.5kt hull? The 5"/54 Mark 45 Mod 4 alone comes at almost 29tons per gun.

            And why so many 5" guns? If you want fire support, 1 or 2 would be enough. Considering their litoral role, you'd do better in puting in a couple of close-quarter work twin mounts in the 30-40mm range.

            Also, where are the SSMs? Wasn't the lack of a proper anti-ship capacity one of the criticisms?


            Edit: forgot. isn't the LCS supposed to support special opps? Can't transport those with VTUAVs. You need to, if not carry, at least have room for helis...
            One thing about four tubes, you could put twice as many rounds on target in the same time. It also provides redundacy in case of battle damage. I agree some CIWS would be a good thing, given the light weight, one would probably be enough, if you wanted more two would be the upper end on a hull this size. Its hard to do everything on one hull, I'd leave out aviation and specialize, with a different version, one ended with aviation aft.
            Last edited by USSWisconsin; 22 Dec 10,, 18:13.
            sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
            If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

            Comment


            • Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
              One thing about four tubes, you could put twice as many rounds on target in the same time. It also provides redundacy in case of battle damage. I agree some CIWS would be a good thing, given the light weight, one would probably be enough, if you wanted more two would be the upper end on a hull this size. Its hard to do everything on one hull, I'd leave out aviation and specialize, with a different version, one ended with aviation aft.
              A target that needs multiple salvos of 4 5" guns, each firing more that 16 rounds per minute? I think it's time to call up the air force... or a cruise missile.

              And I wasn't refering to CIWS, that's what the Goalkeeper is for. I was thinking of multiple fast boats, foot troops on shore too close to friendlies, light aircraft, etc. Oto Melara's Fast Forty, or Britan's twin 30mm Rardens (or many others) are far better for this, and more modern versions can also do CIWS duty, to back the Goalkeeper. Notice that pretty much anyone who has ships with duties close inshore carry such weapons, despite (quite usually) having a 76 or 127mm gun.

              And you can't leave aviation out, it's apparently part of the core of the LCS. And one of the problems, imho: it's trying to be jack of all trades and master of all...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                I'll admit that I'm no ship designer, but aren't you coming up a bit short? You have 100 missiles (and yes, many are small, but...) four 5" guns (with associated magazines) a 3500ml range and a 28knot speed... in a 5.5kt hull? The 5"/54 Mark 45 Mod 4 alone comes at almost 29tons per gun.

                Even at 50tons per, that's still only a fraction of her total tonnage.

                And why so many 5" guns? If you want fire support, 1 or 2 would be enough. Considering their litoral role, you'd do better in puting in a couple of close-quarter work twin mounts in the 30-40mm range.

                4 5" guns give her redundency, allows for longer tube life, and allows for one ship to do the work of 4 other ordinary ships with only a single mount. And what exactly would a 40mm twin mount be used for exactly? This is a large frigate with a 22ft draft, your not going to be supporting any groundpounders with a 40mm in a direct fire mode. 40mm is too small to do much against anything but personell out in the open, to which an air-burst 5" would be much more effective.

                Also, where are the SSMs? Wasn't the lack of a proper anti-ship capacity one of the criticisms?

                SM-2 could be utilized in the SSM mode, were it needed. After that, the 5" batteries would address any shortcomings.

                Edit: forgot. isn't the LCS supposed to support special opps? Can't transport those with VTUAVs. You need to, if not carry, at least have room for helis...

                I for one, consider the design requirements of the LCS program to be rediculous for one ship to perform. If they want true troop support for Special Forces, than they need to acquire additional Cyclone class ships and Mark V SOC. I see my ship design operating with the Gator Navy mostly or in the tighter areas, such as the Gulf.
                See my answers in bold.
                Last edited by Hoss; 22 Dec 10,, 22:21.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                  A target that needs multiple salvos of 4 5" guns, each firing more that 16 rounds per minute? I think it's time to call up the air force... or a cruise missile.

                  And I wasn't referring to CIWS, that's what the Goalkeeper is for. I was thinking of multiple fast boats, foot troops on shore too close to friendlies, light aircraft, etc. Oto Melara's Fast Forty, or Britan's twin 30mm Rardens (or many others) are far better for this, and more modern versions can also do CIWS duty, to back the Goalkeeper. Notice that pretty much anyone who has ships with duties close inshore carry such weapons, despite (quite usually) having a 76 or 127mm gun.

                  And you can't leave aviation out, it's apparently part of the core of the LCS. And one of the problems, imho: it's trying to be jack of all trades and master of all...
                  The goal keeper could do the same job as 40's and 30's. Why would the US want to use these non-standard weapons? The four tubes is gives redundancy and a cheaper alternative to a cruise missile or airstrike. and 5" can take out fast boats too, particularly with the four mounts all training on different threats. Aviation could be handled by a specialized version as I stated.
                  sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                  If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Xtvpry View Post
                    This design (with 4 x 5" guns), has many shortcomings.

                    4 x 5" guns is far too much for such a small ship. It is too much for naval gunfire support. I can't see anything like the assault on Normandy happening again any time soon. Firing broadsides would attract attention from shore batteries and other assets.

                    When it comes to NGFS, there is no such thing as "too much"....at least in my not so humble opinion. If Korea kicks off again, what do you thinks going to happen? Attracting attention is a risk the ship takes when supporting troops on the ground. It's up the ships defences to take out any anti-ship missiles launched at it, or to counter-battery any guns that are fired at it. Barring that, aircraft can eliminate any other threats.

                    The ship would nevertheless be 'outgunned' by any small corvette with dedicated longrange anti-ship missiles.

                    That corvette is still limited to the range of it's sensors and even if it's recieving guidance from a 3rd party, a corvette typically isn't going to carry more than 4 SSMs, for which my ship has 101 of it's own missiles to down the SSMs with, as well as it's CIWS....

                    There is no adequate defense against speedboard swarm attacks.

                    You don't consider 4 5" guns and a 30mm CIWS adequate against speedboats? OK....

                    A steady gun platform is called for which means a deep draft and littoral warfare calls for a shallow draft.

                    The design is bigger and would be more costly than the current LCS design.

                    With a top speed (if you are lucky!) of 28 kts, the design is not fast enough.

                    I would think a combined total of 50,000 shp would get this ship up to 28+ knots. The Sachsen class FFG makes 29 knots on less, with a similar sized hull.

                    VTUAV's like Firescout cannot replace Helo's for ASW.

                    All I really need is a sonar system that allows me to avoid mines and that can assist a ship that's designed to properly peform the ASW role. This one ain't it!

                    The design is not stealthy - even less than the present LCS.

                    What is you provision for mine countermeasures? Or did you not think about that one?

                    See my previous statement.
                    See my bold answers in your quote.

                    Comment


                    • A ship like that;

                      would weigh in at 6,000 + tonnes.

                      would cost upwards of $1B

                      would look like a throwback to an earlier age

                      would not address the requirement for mine hunting

                      would not be suited to ASW

                      would have too deep a draft for littoral operations

                      would not be stealthy

                      would not be suitable for asymetric warfare - how often in Afghanistan do would our troops need a sustained bombardment of 4 5" guns? Never.

                      would not be fast enough

                      Hello. Earth to planet World Affairs, is there any intelligent life here?
                      Last edited by Xtvpry; 22 Dec 10,, 22:29.

                      Comment


                      • Well, if you insist that it has to weigh 6,000 tonnes, I'm fine with that. I'm also fine with the cost and don't really care if it appears to be a "throwback to an earlier age". With the proper sonar set, it'll do good enough against mines....what the hell are actual mine-hunter ships going to be doing anyway? What exactly is either of the proposed LCS designs going to do with their shallower drafts and much smaller and more limited armaments? And I'm not quite sure what the currently proposed LCS ships are going to do for our troops in Afghanistan...or even an Iowa Class BB for that matter. You got me there!

                        Fast enough for what? What the hell do we need to do with 35+ knots....am I going to outrun missiles, aircraft or ordinance? Only thing your sure do at that speed is get torpedoed or hit a mine. YMMV
                        Last edited by Hoss; 22 Dec 10,, 22:38.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                          The goal keeper could do the same job as 40's and 30's. Why would the US want to use these non-standard weapons?
                          Err... the goalkeeper is not used by the USN... and neither is the 57mmm now adopted by the LCS...

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                            Err... the goalkeeper is not used by the USN... and neither is the 57mmm now adopted by the LCS...
                            The 57mm is in use on the Bertholf Class cutter in the USCG.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Xtvpry View Post
                              A ship like that;

                              Hello. Earth to planet World Affairs, is there any intelligent life here?
                              Clearly not on your planet buster - why don't you go troll elsewhere
                              sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                              If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                                A man after my own heart, nice ship :banana:

                                I'd like to see a 6.1" aboard her, but otherwise shes fine just the way she is if you didn't want that
                                Pick your poison!



                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X