Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Littoral Combat Ships

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

  • Originally posted by gunnut View Post
    Did I say "LCS-3?" I meant "LCS-2" the trimaran hull of the Independence. I thought it's a pretty cool concept and provides a huge flight deck for the tonnage to operate helos and UAVs from.
    I always preferred this one over the Lockheed Martin one too, but think I remember having read somewhere that the LCS-1 design was considered to be at an advantage by some because there were a greater number of shipyards that could handle the design. Still, IF the LCS continues, I would much rather see the LCS-2 design with that giant flight deck get the award.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by gunnut View Post
      Did I say "LCS-3?" I meant "LCS-2" the trimaran hull of the Independence. I thought it's a pretty cool concept and provides a huge flight deck for the tonnage to operate helos and UAVs from.

      You might also find interesting the MMC design variant (Multi-Mission combatant).
      (similar to but different than LCS variant, more missiles, different CIWS, etc.)
      http://www.gdlcs.com/sites/default/f...C-Brochure.pdf
      Last edited by JRT; 21 Oct 10,, 06:20.
      .
      .
      .

      Comment


      • Originally posted by HKDan View Post
        I always preferred this one over the Lockheed Martin one too, but think I remember having read somewhere that the LCS-1 design was considered to be at an advantage by some because there were a greater number of shipyards that could handle the design. Still, IF the LCS continues, I would much rather see the LCS-2 design with that giant flight deck get the award.
        Me, too; there are a lot of advantages to the design, including higher speed, higher stability in rough seas and, of course, that huge flight deck to the rear. And, as has already been mentioned, the LCS-1 hullform appears to suffer from insufficient bouyancy. I also believe the LCS-2 hullform is a more flexible design, and probably has more room for expansion than the LCS-1 hullform.
        "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


        • Found this article completely by acident:
          overworked sailors?
          Sounds like the crew is seriously undermaned. 4 hours of sleep?!

          And why exactly does the LCS need a 35-40knot speed? Planning on running over drug boats?...

          Suggestion to the USN: dump the LCS and have the shipyards buy construction rights for Meko-type light frigates. Cheap, proven and efective.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
            Found this article completely by acident:
            overworked sailors?
            Sounds like the crew is seriously undermaned. 4 hours of sleep?!

            And why exactly does the LCS need a 35-40knot speed? Planning on running over drug boats?...

            Suggestion to the USN: dump the LCS and have the shipyards buy construction rights for Meko-type light frigates. Cheap, proven and efective.
            *IMO, You have to remember they are still in their trial phase. 4 on 4 off is standard unless the individual is needed then its back to work. These individuals have a varying schedule since the USN is out to find out their endurance and capabilities. That may explain the numerous hours on watch they are noting in the article.

            The high speed is needed for getting in and getting out quickly and aids greatly in manuvering especially in confined waters such as Littorial suggests. If they ever intended to launch a torpedo or escape one or other weapons then their manuverability comes into play and their shallow draft or having to chase down or evade fast boats such as what Iran and other countries use. Frigates cannot manuver that quickly nor speed away that quickly. The USN prefers primarily to design and build their own ships and choose by trial and error instead of using someone elses design.
            Last edited by Dreadnought; 21 Oct 10,, 15:50.
            Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
              *IMO, You have to remember they are still in their trial phase. 4 on 4 off is standard. These individuals have a varying schedule since the USN is out to find out their endurance and capabilities. That may explain the numerous hours on watch.

              The high speed is needed for getting in and getting out quickly and aids greatly in manuvering especially in confined waters such as Littorial suggests. If they ever intended to launch a torpedo or escape one or other then their manuverability comes into play and their shallow draft or having to chase down fast boats such as what Iran and other countries use. Frigates cannot manuver that quickly nor speed away that quickly. The USN prefers primarily to design and build their own ships and choose by trial and error instead of using someone elese design.
              That's a very expensive "trial and error". I'd very much like to know what the USN knows that apparently no one else does. I can't find any modern general purpose warship that size built to go that fast. As for speed being that vital to get in and out, even the 1500-ton israeli Sa'ar 5s (US built...), who spend most (if not all?) of their time in costal waters, seem to have a top speed of only 33 knots. I'd assume that, for manuverability in shallow draft (and how shallow can a 3k ton vessel go...) the ability to perform tight turns (even maybe rotate) would be more important. For that, you need extra rudders and props (no, I'm not a sailor, but it stands to reason), not speed-boat speeds. And if you're running from missiles, no amount of speed is going to save you...

              Comment


              • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                That's a very expensive "trial and error". I'd very much like to know what the USN knows that apparently no one else does. I can't find any modern general purpose warship that size built to go that fast. As for speed being that vital to get in and out, even the 1500-ton israeli Sa'ar 5s (US built...), who spend most (if not all?) of their time in costal waters, seem to have a top speed of only 33 knots. I'd assume that, for manuverability in shallow draft (and how shallow can a 3k ton vessel go...) the ability to perform tight turns (even maybe rotate) would be more important. For that, you need extra rudders and props (no, I'm not a sailor, but it stands to reason), not speed-boat speeds. And if you're running from missiles, no amount of speed is going to save you...
                *Most newely designed ships are expensive to operate and test just like the newest aircraft. The USN has done this with the majority of their ships if not all. They have to prove they are worth the cost and like most after acceptance they become cheaper to build in numbers. Modifications cost money as well. They have to know what it can do and with how many crew it needs to carry out its job. Its high speed as you mentioned is faster then many if not most its size. Like all ships, the faster you are moving the more agile the ship is and it must do this according to design. No extra props or rudders necessary. They have to depend on the ship and what it was designed for. They should still be able to control rudder movement in manual in case damage or breakage in the main steering. Redundancy, and still carry out its job. Speed, decoys and manuverability will indeed aid you in evading a missle strike including the shipboard systyems and defenses. No missile strike is certain, no missle is perfect. All missle systems ours and theirs have failed at one point or another in testing and thats why they are tested so often, to try and cut that percentage down to an acceptable number or ratio and justify the expenditure of manufacture. The USN wanted a faster platform then others posess and they now have one in testing. Lighter, faster and more manuverable are key outside their defensive and offensive capabilities.
                Last edited by Dreadnought; 21 Oct 10,, 16:28.
                Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                  The USN wanted a faster platform then others posess and they now have one in testing. Lighter, faster and more manuverable are key outside their defensive and offensive capabilities.
                  Lighter as compared to what? The impression one get's is that the USN is trying to build a light, cheap, fast jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-all. The USN seems to be trying to cram an assult ship, heli carrier and frigate, all into a corvete hull. What you have is a ship that's overweight and expensive as heck, and poorly armed, unless it moves around constantly fited for combat, which pretty much defeats a basic concept of the ship: modular ability.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                    Lighter as compared to what? The impression one get's is that the USN is trying to build a light, cheap, fast jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-all. The USN seems to be trying to cram an assult ship, heli carrier and frigate, all into a corvete hull. What you have is a ship that's overweight and expensive as heck, and poorly armed, unless it moves around constantly fited for combat, which pretty much defeats a basic concept of the ship: modular ability.
                    *Lighter and faster as compared to other countries platforms. Not jack of all trades but flexible in many roles. Nobody really knows what kind of final fit out weapons wise she will posess in final nor the extent her modulars will posses. Fast attack boats are key to many countries navy's who dont posses blue water capability and cannot afford it. The future changes and the USN has to change along with it. This is only the beginning IMO, and a testbed for future navy ships. As far as overweight, if you consider that a WWII destroyer weighed in about 2,200 tons and was much slower, less manuverable and less flexible then we can hardly state that she is overweight and limited in her performance. These are very young ships, still in testing and trials. The navy hasnt even decided yet what their full purpose will be. We will just have to watch and see as they develop.

                    If you think these are fast they you should see their previous test bed the Sea Fighter (FSF-1), meaning "Fast Sea Frame". An aluminum hulled wave piercing catamaran. It can do 59 knots.

                    Fact files on the LCS program and testbeds. (FSF-1) http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_di...&tid=1200&ct=4
                    Last edited by Dreadnought; 21 Oct 10,, 18:35.
                    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                      That's a very expensive "trial and error". I'd very much like to know what the USN knows that apparently no one else does. I can't find any modern general purpose warship that size built to go that fast.
                      Gotta give it a shot to see if the theory works in the real world. If it does, we'll be the only nation in the world with this capability. If it doesn't, we go back to slower boats.

                      Originally posted by jlvfr View Post
                      As for speed being that vital to get in and out, even the 1500-ton israeli Sa'ar 5s (US built...), who spend most (if not all?) of their time in costal waters, seem to have a top speed of only 33 knots. I'd assume that, for manuverability in shallow draft (and how shallow can a 3k ton vessel go...) the ability to perform tight turns (even maybe rotate) would be more important. For that, you need extra rudders and props (no, I'm not a sailor, but it stands to reason), not speed-boat speeds. And if you're running from missiles, no amount of speed is going to save you...
                      Sa'ar 5s are built for the coastal waters of Israel, and at most venture in the Med. Sea. USN's footprint is global and a 1500t corvette just won't do.
                      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                      Comment


                      • I wonder what you could do with all the extra space if one downrated the LCS-2's speed so it just simply went at 25 to 30 knots top?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Skywatcher View Post
                          I wonder what you could do with all the extra space if one downrated the LCS-2's speed so it just simply went at 25 to 30 knots top?
                          Endurance.
                          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                            Endurance.
                            Or make it smaller, thus saving much $$$

                            Comment


                            • 60 knots When does the Navy team's racing version come out?
                              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 jlvfr View Post
                                Or make it smaller, thus saving much $$$
                                Then it's of very little use to the USN. Remember, USN is a global force. All the combatants need to have good endurance and seakeeping ability. A small boat with limited range and endurance is nearly worthless to the USN. In fact, a small boat with little endurnace hinders the main fleet. They have to be replenished more often. Vessels are unavailable for combat during replenishment.
                                "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X