Littoral Combat Ships

[jlvfr]

A mine sweeper working suspected waters in front of a fleet doing a break out from a harbor?

.............it's just a thought.

No ship would sweep mines at that speed. And if you're thinking of avoiding fire, with modern weapons, that speed won't save him. ECM, decoys, SAMs and CIWS will be far more important than those extra 10 knots.

[Stitch]

No ship would sweep mines at that speed.

What's that line from The Hunt For Red October? "Well, they're moving at almost forty knots. At that speed, they could run right over my daughter's stereo and not hear it."

[gf0012-aust]

the maritime minesweeping issue was triggered by events a while back in the MEAO
the USN discovered that they only had one available MS and had to piggy back one in, plus it meant seeking MS support from allies in the MEAO

Like all militaries there was an aversion to building ships with dedicated capabilities under a tight budget, so all the dev that was being worked on for MS at the vessel sweep level was looked at as a portable development where modules could be shipped or airlifted in and then retrofitted. in LCS case, it just happened that it was the next best fleet wide modular friendly platform able to be considered

its got nothing to do with running high speed MS.

it all stems from getting caught with their capability pants down 15 years ago.

the same impact was also felt on the other black art ASW - the collapse of the soviets unfort saw a decline in core skills such as MS and ASW. Nobody was willing to spend money on dedicated capability, so all the mnodular stuff being worked on was conceptualised to be able to be broadly delivered onto suitable fleet wide platforms to get the capability in without busting the bank..

this was reinforced with the collapse of the 600 ship navy and 1000 ship coalition fleet. everyone was going through similar ructions

[jlvfr]

What's that line from The Hunt For Red October? "Well, they're moving at almost forty knots. At that speed, they could run right over my daughter's stereo and not hear it."

Yeah!


The Abdiel did 40knots because, at that time, the tactic worked: dash in during the night, dump mines, dash out. No radars or night vision to detect it. Yay.

[JRT]

Below are a couple of recent NAVSEA press releases on the topic.

LCS 2 Tests 57 mm Gun in Preparation for RIMPAC

Story Number: NNS140529-12
Release Date: 5/29/2014 3:12:00 PM
From Naval Sea Systems Command

SAN DIEGO (NNS) -- USS Independence (LCS 2) successfully completed a test event with the ship's Mk 110 57 millimeter gun May 20.

Held at Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, Point Mugu Range, the test demonstrated Independence's surface warfare capabilities by engaging a stationary target using the ship's core combat system.

As part of the test plan, Independence crew members tracked a surface balloon, also known as a Killer Tomato, with SAFIRE, the ship's electro-optical/infrared camera, and the Sea Giraffe radar prior to engaging the target with the 57 mm gun.

"I'm pleased with the outcome of this test on a number of levels. Not only did we validate the current combat system software and the procedures for safely firing the core weapon system, but the crew also received valuable training time, improving their proficiency with the ship's sensors and weapons," said Capt. Tom Anderson, LCS program manager.

Independence, the lead ship of the Independence variant of littoral combat ships, will operate off the coast of Hawaii as part of Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC), the world's largest international maritime warfare exercise, in July. USS Freedom (LCS 1), the lead ship of the Freedom variant, participated in RIMPAC in 2010.

PEO LCS is responsible for delivering and sustaining credible littoral mission capabilities to the fleet and is working with industry to achieve steady production to increase efficiencies and leverage cost-savings. Delivering high-quality warfighting assets while balancing affordability and capability is key to supporting the nation's maritime strategy.

For more news from Naval Sea Systems Command, visit www.navy.mil/local/navsea/.

Test Firing of Surface Warfare Gun Module on USS Coronado Successful

Story Number: NNS140516-11
Release Date: 5/16/2014 10:04:00 AM
By Naval Sea Systems Command

SAN DIEGO (NNS) -- The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Mission Modules (MM) program successfully completed the first Structural Test Firing (STF) of the 30mm gun mission module aboard USS Coronado (LCS 4) off the coast of Southern California, Apr. 30.

The purpose of the STF is to challenge the ship in the most severe blast conditions of the weapon's fire. STF is a total ship test involving live weapons fire and is required for each ship class or variant.

"Tested and proven on the LCS Freedom variant, this structural test firing marks the first critical step in demonstrating the surface warfare mission package capability on the LCS Independence variant," said Rear Admiral John Ailes, LCS Mission Modules program manager.

The test began by embarking two 30mm guns, mission package software, and associated test equipment and by loading live ammunition. The STF consisted of three live firing scenarios: gun operations, worst case blast loading, and sustained fire. Upon completion of the STF, the surface warfare mission package accomplished multiple tracking exercises May 1, using high speed maneuvering surface targets to simulate both single boat and swarm attacks.

"The STF and initial tracking exercises prepare the ship and train the crews for more complex surface warfare tracking and live fire exercises scheduled to begin summer 2014, which will culminate in initial operational test and evaluation in 2015," said Ailes.

The 30mm gun mission module and a visit boarding search and seizure module are two components of the surface warfare mission package (SUW MP) developed to support the LCS modular concept.

While this was the first 30mm gun firing on an LCS Independence variant, the SUW MP completed deployment to the Western Pacific aboard USS Freedom (LCS 1) in December 2013 and Initial Operational Test and Evaluation aboard USS Fort Worth (LCS 3) in April 2014. The lessons learned and processes developed from the testing aboard Freedom and Fort Worth were critical to the effective and efficient embark, STF, and tracking events aboard Coronado, the second ship of the LCS Independence variant.

PEO LCS is affiliated with the Naval Sea Systems Command and provides a single program executive responsible for acquiring and sustaining mission capabilities of the littoral combat ship class, from procurement through fleet employment and sustainment. The combined capability of the LCS ships and LCS mission systems is designed to dominate the littoral battle space and provide U.S. forces with assured access to coastal areas.

For more news from Naval Sea Systems Command, visit www.navy.mil/local/navsea/.

Below is an older video that shows some interesting aspects about the ship, the total ship computing environment and shared common workstations, bridge, combat information centers 1 & 2, mission bay, hangar, flight deck, control tower...

[surfgun]

Re: the 57mm gun exercise, wow, a stationary ship and target. Most unimpressive!

[kato]

it all stems from getting caught with their capability pants down 15 years ago.

Germany had a similar event, namely having to piggy back MCMV for Southern Flank over 20 years ago. Pretty much since then they've been looking for transocean MCM capability, first planned as self-deploying sloop-sized vessels (France effectively went forward and built a mine diver support vessel in that style for overseas operations), then trying to tap a planned multi-role auxiliary class for it, and now pitching it as a module in our 5,000-ton version of the LCS.

[DonBelt]

Like all militaries there was an aversion to building ships with dedicated capabilities under a tight budget, so all the dev that was being worked on for MS at the vessel sweep level was looked at as a portable development where modules could be shipped or airlifted in and then retrofitted. in LCS case, it just happened that it was the next best fleet wide modular friendly platform able to be considered

If the MCM will be portable and modular, why put them in a ship at all which has to be in the midst of the mines? There are systems that are used with the MH-53E and now the MH-60S, let them sweep the areas and keep ships away unless you need to get them in to neutralize the mines. I know the Navy can't afford it, but it really seems a mission for a specialized hull.

[kato]

High operating costs and high attack vulnerability vs comparably low effectiveness due to lack of minehunting capability (and AMNS won't really change that much) and lack of night-time operations (with MH-53E at least).

[gf0012-aust]

If the MCM will be portable and modular, why put them in a ship at all which has to be in the midst of the mines? There are systems that are used with the MH-53E and now the MH-60S, let them sweep the areas and keep ships away unless you need to get them in to neutralize the mines. I know the Navy can't afford it, but it really seems a mission for a specialized hull.

CREF Kato

mh-53's are not a panacea for the USN minesweeping "ills" - they're also the reason why the USN had to review their overall MS capability

the US isn't the only one who went through this MS conops grief - so did most of NATO/5i's

at the end of the cold war there was this universal kumbayah moment where everyone in the western alliances went into tele-tubbie mode and started turning swords into ploughshares

the critical arts of ASW. INT, minesweeping and broad army capability went into the "ambivalence" box for a number of govts - and were the easiest way to save money. a side effect has been the aggressive use of SF to do tasks that would generally be done by core military non-SF units. "Big army" got relatively gutted and had to play catch up whereas SF had maintained and grown due to non state actor conflicts

[kato]

Disagree a bit regarding MIW for European Navies.

[gf0012-aust]

Disagree a bit regarding MIW for European Navies.

i was broad brushing - but in broad NATO terms everyone got excited over the post cold war peace dividend and took the sword to what were seen as state on state warfighting capbilities (peripherals)

just to add further context

in the MEAO there was a long period where the USN didn't have any MW vessels in theatre as they only had one available - and it was in CONUS
none of the euro partners had available vessels (in storage or deep maint) - and so the minewarfare role was being addressed by rotors and clearance divers - and a fair number of clearance divers were being provided by allies

i had some peripheral involvement with people on RAMICs - and programs like that also paid the price in the quest to save money

[JRT]

SAAB's Sea Giraffe radar in use on LCS-2,-4,-6... has been designated AN/SPS-77 (V)1.

Sea Giraffe Radar now AN/SPS-77(V)1 in U.S.
Jan. 15, 2014 | PRNewswire

EAST SYRACUSE, N.Y. -- Saab Defense and Security USA (SDAS) announced today that Saab's Sea Giraffe AMB Radar recently received its official designation from the U.S. Navy. The Sea Giraffe AMB Radar system's official U.S. Navy nomenclature is now the AN/SPS-77 (V)1.

Partnering with General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works and Austal, SDAS is responsible for integrating the AN/SPS-77 radar into the USS Independence and other ships of the U.S. Navy's Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Independence variant program.

The AN/SPS-77 is multi-role medium-range 3D surveillance radar system for naval applications. It provides medium range, simultaneous air and surface surveillance and can be employed in a weapon designation role. The SPS-77 is suitable for demanding naval environments from the littorals to blue-water operations.

The radar system is being adapted for U.S. operations by the Sensor Systems division of SDAS. The division, located in Syracuse, New York, is also responsible for the integration, installation, and testing of the AN/SPS 77 systems as well as for providing in-service sustainment and repair services.

Mr. Erik Smith, Vice President of Sensor Systems Division within SDAS, sees the new designation of the radar as a key milestone in Saab's growing support of the U.S. Navy and the LCS program. "The AN/SPS 77 has proven to be the most capable and adaptable medium range multi-mission radar asset available to the LCS program and future U.S. maritime security platforms. The radar system is able to efficiently incorporate new capabilities through Saab's modular architecture and Rapid Technology Insertion process."

"Receiving this U.S. Navy system designation means that Sea Giraffe is now formally acknowledged by the U.S. Navy as part of the U.S. Navy standard inventory. Saab is very proud to deliver this new and highly-advanced surveillance capability to the U.S. Navy," said Smith.

To date, the AN/SPS 77 has been installed on LCS 2 (USS Independence), LCS 4 (USS Coronado), and LCS 6 (USS Jackson). Five additional AN/SPS-77 radar systems are in various stages of manufacturing and test to meet LCS construction schedules with four more systems under contract to complete the current deliveries under the LCS Block Buy contract.

SEA GIRAFFE AMB

Sea GIRAFFE AMB Multi-Role 3D Surveillance Naval Radar


Features
The AMB functionality, with a wide transmitting lobe in elevation and multiple simultaneous receivers in parallel, is the key to the fast detection over the entire search volume. The advanced signal processing makes it possible to detect very small targets such as sea skimmers, anti-radiation missiles, mortars and RIBs within tactically relevant ranges.


Technical specificationGeneral Parameters
Frequency band: 5.4 – 5.9 GHz
Transmission Power: 25 KW or LPI

Antenna
Type: 3D Phased Array
Beam width: 2.1o
Average sidelobe level: < -50 dB
Weight (including Turn Table): 660 kg

Radar Modes and Instrumented Coverage
Instrumented ranges: 40/100/180km
Antenna rotation rate: 30/60 rpm
Full elevation coverage: > 70o
Altitude detection ceiling: > 20,000 m

IFF/SSR
Modes: 1,2,3/A,S,4/NS
Potential: 5

Target Tracking
Automatically initiated and tracked
Air targets: 200
Surface targets: 400
Jammer targets: 50

[Monash]

What I have never understood about the LCS program is that if mine warfare was one of the US Navy's main concerns (and certainly the MW module seems to be the one that most effort has gone into) why not just adapt the JHSV program instead of spending all that money on a new 'war fighting' type for a Navy 'filled' with war fighting AB Destroyers? You get a shallow water mine sweeping vessel and high speed transport in one package. When not doing MW work they can be sent all over the world helping with anti-piracy work, humanitarian relief programs as well as logistics. They would be hardworking boats but no-one would have to pretend they were stand alone 'frigates' and no-one would try to spend billions turning them into one.

[gf0012-aust]

What I have never understood about the LCS program is that if mine warfare was one of the US Navy's main concerns (and certainly the MW module seems to be the one that most effort has gone into) why not just adapt the JHSV program instead of spending all that money on a new 'war fighting' type for a Navy 'filled' with war fighting AB Destroyers? You get a shallow water mine sweeping vessel and high speed transport in one package. When not doing MW work they can be sent all over the world helping with anti-piracy work, humanitarian relief programs as well as logistics. They would be hardworking boats but no-one would have to pretend they were stand alone 'frigates' and no-one would try to spend billions turning them into one.

the US has used the big cats for a variety of roles when evaluating - including mine warfare and SF insertion - but the big hulled cars (JHSV and TSV) are not a jack of all trades hull - for MW I would think that they're much too big

I've worked with both Incat and Austal (mainly on either the high speed green water barges bit also have had some peripheral on the 98m + sized vessels)

they're not the same class of vessel by any margin - and the JHSV/TSV have even less flexibility from my perspective. Granted the US can afford to separate and specialize, but the universal trend has been for everyone to move away from specialist roles and get as much multi as poss due to tight defence budgets

if you're doing brown/green MW then it tends to be clearance diver country, blue water still requires endurance and as the US found to their chagrine - transoceanic.

they don't need multiple multi-role vessels close to class, they want a broad multi-role vessel within class