Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Littoral Combat Ships

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

  • Originally posted by kato View Post
    The smaller 7m RHIB launched through the port-side bay is the designated lifeboat / rescue boat of a LCS. Without it by regulations the ship cannot go to sea
    I did not know this, US Navy regulations? Needed a dedicated lifeboat just because the mission bay may be tied up with other mission - making the boats there unaccessable?


    Originally posted by kato View Post
    The Independence class LCS have them too, in their case the bay is close to the stern end of the port side next to the mission bay (but not connected to it). On the starboard side of an Independence opposite it is the side access for loading the mission bay, same as on a Freedom class LCS.
    Yes, but at least on the Independence-class the lifeboat is right next to the boat bay.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JA Boomer View Post
      I did not know this, US Navy regulations? Needed a dedicated lifeboat just because the mission bay may be tied up with other mission - making the boats there unaccessable?



      Yes, but at least on the Independence-class the lifeboat is right next to the boat bay.
      Yes, by Navy Regulations all US Navy vessels must carry life raft for every crew member plus10%. Almost all is handled by inflatable life rafts. The rigid hull inflatable is used as a general purpose boat for the vessel...board & search, life saving operations, moving personnel ship to ship. The captain's gig per say is mostly a thing of the past and there is not enough room on modern ships for nice to have things.
      “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
      Mark Twain

      Comment


      • Also acts as the Ready Life Boat during Flight Ops

        Comment


        • https://news.usni.org/2022/03/09/last-minute-fy-22-728-5b-defense-bill-funds-13-navy-ships-12-f-a-18s-saves-3-lcs-from-decommissioning

          "House ... omnibus appropriations bill ... defunds Navy efforts to decommission three Freedom-class Littoral Combat Ships USS Fort Worth (LCS-3), USS Detroit (LCS-7) and USS Little Rock (LCS-9)..."


          .
          .
          .

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Politico_Pro

            Navy seeks to decommission up to 10 Freedom-class LCS warships in upcoming FY23 budget request

            by Lee Hudson, Paul McCleary, Connor O'Brien
            17 March 2022

            The Navy will ask for permission to scrap eight to ten Freedom-class littoral combat ships in the Pentagon’s upcoming fiscal 2023 budget request, despite some of the vessels being almost brand new, according to three people with knowledge of the proposal.

            Why so early: The Freedom-class ships have suffered a series of mechanical issues, including faulty engines. Some in the Navy have argued against continuing to invest in those problem plagued ships, said one of the people.

            Spokespeople for the DoD and Navy would not confirm the LCS proposal because the fiscal 2023 budget has not been released. The federal budget request is expected be released in late March or early April.

            .

            ...
            Last edited by JRT; 19 Mar 22,, 16:51.
            .
            .
            .

            Comment


            • It's too bad the Perrys were retired without any effective replacement, regardless of their capabilities. I expect the ones transferred to other countries to serve for decades to come.
              https://news.usni.org/2022/03/22/pen...rvivable-fleet
              There are too many conflicting priorities.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by thebard View Post
                It's too bad the Perrys were retired without any effective replacement, regardless of their capabilities. I expect the ones transferred to other countries to serve for decades to come.
                https://news.usni.org/2022/03/22/pen...rvivable-fleet
                There are too many conflicting priorities.
                While I liked the OHPs the ability of their One Armed Bandit to only handle SM-1s really made them obsolete. I am not sure if their ASW capabilities were enough to justify the expense of keeping them in service.

                I just wish the Navy had gone with the Constellation-class frigates a lot earlier.
                “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                Mark Twain

                Comment


                • Originally posted by thebard View Post
                  I expect the ones transferred to other countries to serve for decades to come.
                  Outside of Taiwan as the default dumping ground for the USN and Bahrain and Chile that bought two each in the last couple years not much chance of that. All of the other user countries currently have replacement programmes for them due to obsolescence.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by thebard View Post
                    It's too bad the Perrys were retired without any effective replacement, regardless of their capabilities. I expect the ones transferred to other countries to serve for decades to come.
                    https://news.usni.org/2022/03/22/pen...rvivable-fleet
                    There are too many conflicting priorities.
                    Australia managed to upgrade its Perrys and put in an 8 cell launcher and added harpoons to the armory but I think that was about as far as the the armament could be boosted. At least no-one else I know of tried.
                    If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                    Comment


                    • Taiwan fited new SSMs and a 40mm gun, and there are rumours the SM-1 maybe be replaced by a local SAM. Turkey is also carrying out considerable upgrades.

                      Comment


                      • https://news.usni.org/2022/03/29/all...early-disposal
                        Not soon enough in a way, but way too soon to sideline them with no replacement in the pipeline.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by thebard View Post
                          https://news.usni.org/2022/03/29/all...early-disposal
                          Not soon enough in a way, but way too soon to sideline them with no replacement in the pipeline.
                          If all they are doing is wasting money & manpower, might as well. It's not like they can do any proper job, without modification/modules, other than drug enforcement...

                          Comment


                          • Could the LCS fleet be getting a new mission?
                            The Navy’s littoral combat ship fleet could see a new permanent mission as part of the fiscal 2023 defense bill that President Biden signed into law Friday.

                            According to an explanatory statement accompanying the bill, Congress is tasking U.S. Southern Command with studying the feasibility of permanently assigning four to six LCSs to the combatant command.

                            To date, LCSs have been assigned to SOUTHCOM and its Navy component, U.S. 4th Fleet, under the Defense Department’s Global Force Management process, which allocates ships to different combatant commands worldwide.

                            But the study will explore whether SOUTHCOM should get its own fleet of LCSs for the first time.


                            Such ships are regularly deployed to SOUTHCOM to conduct drug interdiction missions in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, while also working with partner nations.

                            The bill directs SOUTHCOM to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by April 1 on the potential benefits of assigning LCSs to the combatant command.

                            That report will include a description of the missions LCSs would conduct under SOUTHCOM to further the National Defense Strategy, how accomplishment of those missions would improve with the permanent assignment of LCSs to the command, a “notional concept of operations” for those LCSs, as well as any command and control considerations.

                            The report will also include a recommendation from SOUTHCOM’s leader, Army Gen. Laura Richardson, regarding whether LCSs should be assigned to the combatant command.

                            SOUTHCOM’s area of responsibility includes the Latin American landmass south of Mexico, waters adjacent to Central and South America and the Caribbean.

                            If approved, permanently providing SOUTHCOM with some of its own LCSs could provide a future for the oft-troubled ship class.

                            The ships were billed as agile, efficient vessels that could take on all sorts of missions in a world where the United States was the lone superpower setting the global table.

                            But the much-hyped LCS mission modules never materialized, and concerns have emerged about the ships’ survivability in a conventional war with China or Russia.

                            Navy leaders have highlighted the ships’ utility when it comes to drug busts in SOUTHCOM waters or presence patrols in the western Pacific waters of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.

                            Congress has also halted Navy plans to retire several of the ships early to save money.

                            Permanently assigning LCSs to SOUTHCOM could be a reasonable move, “given that the 4th Fleet mission is unlikely to disappear and nobody else is agitating for LCS,” Bradley Martin, a retired surface warfare officer and current director of the Rand National Security Supply Chain Institute, told Navy Times in an email.

                            “This kind of mission exclusively isn’t what LCS was originally intended to do, but this mission seems like a reasonable way to use what’s available,” Martin said.
                            ________

                            Not a bad idea...the Perry's and even the non-VLS Tico's were used in SOUTHCOM waters for things like drug interdiction, as I recall.
                            “They’re coming and we can’t stop them from breaching" ~ Capitol Police radio transmission January 6th 2020

                            Comment


                            • Tells you a lot about the program (and the billions spent on it) that brand new navy hulls almost strait out of the yard are being assigned narco an/or anti piracy patrols, because no-one in the Navy wants them for any other mission.
                              If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Monash View Post
                                Tells you a lot about the program (and the billions spent on it) that brand new navy hulls almost strait out of the yard are being assigned narco an/or anti piracy patrols, because no-one in the Navy wants them for any other mission.
                                Seems like a good set of missions for a fast coastal patrol corvette with a stern boat ramp and a helicopter flight deck and hangar, and with a relatively small crew augmented with an embarked VBSS team, visit, board, search, and seizure. ...No?

                                That frees up the Arleigh Burke DDGs for blue water missions better suited to the larger and more capable warships.

                                What is the better alternative, if constrained to realistic practicable choices, from among ships currently in commission?
                                Last edited by JRT; 30 Dec 22,, 02:56.
                                .
                                .
                                .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X