Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Littoral Combat Ships

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

  • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
    The Griffin has 13 pound warhead. Other than against a speedboat, what would that be good for?
    Shooting at anything pretty much of civilian origin, barring oil tankers and the like.

    Comment


    • I wasn't even thinking about warhead size, but missile range. With that size, it can't be that much, which means that the LCS risks firing pretty much at the same time as an opponent...

      Comment


      • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
        I wasn't even thinking about warhead size, but missile range. With that size, it can't be that much, which means that the LCS risks firing pretty much at the same time as an opponent...
        While I haven't been able to come up with anything reliable yet on the range, it is clear that this weapon is intended for use on targets small in size. Against say, an Iranian boghammer, this might be just the ticket. LCS are not the ships that are going to be taking on Chinese destroyers. When you look at a scenario like Persian Gulf, Niger River Delta, Somali Coast, then you start to see the role this missile might fill.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by HKDan View Post
          LCS are not the ships that are going to be taking on Chinese destroyers.
          I think the best option for the LCS if it runs into a superior naval force is to use it's superior speed to get the heck outta Dodge; it wouldn't last long against a decent destroyer.
          "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

          Comment


          • One source has the range of the Griffin at about 8,000 meters.

            Comment


            • The concept of a littoral combat ships is fine. That concept should not necessarily be equated exclusively with asymetric warfare though. It could just as easily involve high end conflict which LCS would then be completely incapable of handling. I'd rather have two more DDG-1000's than 20 LCS. Even in asymetric conflicts, third parties can and do often supply high-end weapons to the participants. I can just imagine the wreck of LCS-2 lying off the Somali coast after it was hit by several Russian/Chinese made anti-tank missiles when it got a little too close to the shoreline.

              Comment


              • If the gun crews aboard and the SH-60's could not keep them away, a few RPG's would turn an LCS into a melted mess before the small crew could do anything to put the fire out. They would flee to deeper water and abandon ship, and hope that friendly's would get there before the pirates got there. Hopefully, they would have some M-14's to keep the pirates at a distance!

                Comment


                • LCS is perfect for Obama's world view. It is designed for international 'Police' actions, no doubt acting on instructions from the UN and 'humanitarian relief operations'. Peasant, drug smugglers and Pirates with light weapons in open boats are its chosen adversary - anything more than that and LCS is toast! This is not a tool for expeditionary warfare or international deterrence.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Xtvpry View Post
                    LCS is perfect for Obama's world view. It is designed for international 'Police' actions, no doubt acting on instructions from the UN and 'humanitarian relief operations'. Peasant, drug smugglers and Pirates with light weapons in open boats are its chosen adversary - anything more than that and LCS is toast! This is not a tool for expeditionary warfare or international deterrence.
                    Wow.
                    You realize that the program predates Obama, right? And that the program was started under Bush II and if there was anyone likely to be involved in the Secret UN control of the US, it would be the son of the man that made the phrase 'New World Order' popular.

                    This isn't something that Obama wants, it's something that the Navy says they need.
                    /adjust tinfoil hat to shield better from the reptillian mind control rays
                    Last edited by ZekeJones; 17 Jan 11,, 00:23. Reason: Added some stuff

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
                      The Griffin has a 13 pound warhead. Other than against a speedboat, what would that be good for?
                      Whats a 155mm HE round good for?

                      Or what is a 105mm HE round good for?
                      Last edited by Gun Grape; 17 Jan 11,, 01:32.

                      Comment


                      • Peasant, drug smugglers and Pirates with light weapons in open boats are its chosen adversary - anything more than that and LCS is toast! This is not a tool for expeditionary warfare or international deterrence.
                        The LCS will be the biggest, baddest ship in the shallows, and they will outfit them to suite the threat, guns, missiles or landing parties. I think the threat is more likely to be toast than the LCS. If there are bigger ships involved, we will have bigger ships there too - they aren't expected to be used without any support. The LCS gives a smaller response option, something less than a destroyer or frigate -which will eventually cost less than the larger ship - once development is done.
                        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
                          I'd rather have two more DDG-1000's than 20 LCS. Even in asymetric conflicts, third parties can and do often supply high-end weapons to the participants. I can just imagine the wreck of LCS-2 lying off the Somali coast after it was hit by several Russian/Chinese made anti-tank missiles when it got a little too close to the shoreline.
                          Why would you rather have more DDG-1000s? So that Navy can have even more high end combatants than it needs and more VLS tubes that it doesn't have the missiles to fill? LCS is all about being able to be in several places at once and take on the low end threats that we are seeing a lot of, but that the current fleet is absurd overkill for. Also, I don't imagine that a few anti-tank missiles would be able to do enough damage to a ship the size of LCS to sink it. While the LCS detractors who moan about a crew to small to do damage control have their point, the threat that they are talking about is more akin to the Hezbollah anti-ship missile capability than ATGMs. Furthermore, it would be some pretty bold pirates to try and take on a LCS packing a 57mm Mk110 firing 200 rounds a minute, 2x30mm cannons, SEARAM, Griffin missiles, 4x.50cal, and the possibility of MH-60R helicopters overhead. My money would be on the ship.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                            Whats a 155mm HE round good for?

                            Or what is a 105mm HE round good for?
                            A whole heck of lot more than 13 pounds of HE in a Griffin, not to mention range.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by surfgun View Post
                              A whole heck of lot more than 13 pounds of HE in a Griffin, not to mention range.
                              Might want to check your facts.

                              A 105mm HE round M-1 has 4.8lbs of TNT if you include the supplementary charge.

                              A 155mm, M-107 HE round has 14.88. Thats not "A whole heck of a lot more"


                              ( hint- When a retired artilleryman ask a question like that, you might want to reconsider your position. He isn't trying to make his self look bad ;) )

                              Whats the range of the Griffin? Being a laser guided projectile/missile it is guaranteed first round hit. What range that a M-107 HE round can shoot that can be guaranteed first round accuracy?

                              How many non guided rounds would you have to store and fire to equal one Griffin missile?
                              Last edited by Gun Grape; 17 Jan 11,, 02:35.

                              Comment


                              • The 155mm round has a lot of heavy shrapnel to throw and would carry much more kinetic energy. What kind of shrapnel is a Griffin going to throw? For range of the Griffin, see my earlier post #335. I am not debating that the Griffin is not a "smart" weapon, but debating it's terminal effectiveness and range against an actual naval weapon. I suppose the Griffin's saving grace is that it has charge is much larger than the LCS's 57mm gun.
                                Last edited by surfgun; 17 Jan 11,, 03:04.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X