The THEL laser system  would make the ship  extremely surviable against incoming missles

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/images/thel-image2.jpg">


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/images/4-3.jpg">


http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/images/thel-image5.jpg">

The question would be could DEWs stop large super sonic missles.

I would even have as ATACMS/MLRS family mission mudule, for fire support for Marines

All of this stuff is off the shelf!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATACMS

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/ca/ATACMS_missile_and_launcher.jpg/180px-ATACMS_missile_and_launcher.jpg">

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/mgm-140-family.jpg">

1. Stretching a ship hull to double its length is an engineering non-starter.
2. THEL is a nasty unstable chemical laser, that is probably a dead end technology. Wait for the solid state diode laser.
3. What you want is a MEKO 7500  FREMM or Type 45  modded to take a DEW  weapon.

That will be very doable. My own preference is the Type 45 at the moment with its SAMPSON radar, but any of the Euro-destroyers named make a good platform as they are large enough to field a good dual SAM system, a nice radar suite and have the powerplant electrical generating potential to operate a decent Mwatt MASER

Herald

Yes, you got it. Not exactly a major blue-water combattant, but a potent coastal air defense system. The Israeli navy, not quite satisfied with mortgaging our economic future on a billion Euros AIP submarines purchase, is considering the LCS hulls as a platform for the Baraq 8 system that is jointly being developed with India.
I think that the plentiful Spruance hulls that are rusting in US naval yards could be appropriate for this too, since the Mk41 launchers are already fitted, and they probably would have enough room topside, for some offensive systems as well. India is also involved in developing these things BTW.

I doubt very much, however, that our "little navy that couldn't" will have the sufficient leverage to obtain the immense funding necessary for such a comprehensive makeover. The LCS (or Spruance) hulls can be bought using US aid, but will have to compete on this with the procurement of the F-35, against the much stronger air force lobby, and in the same time frame.

I foresee the public debate on this matter to gather steam in Israel some time next year, and it will be interesting to follow up on it on these boards.
Keep tuned.
 

The but a towed barge of some kind behind the LCS loaded with mission modules andVLS.
the point is the next major surface ship should follow the LCS philosophy

1. Spruance hulls have too few useful operating hours left[metal fatigue].
2. Spruance powerplants aren't properly configured to generate the  100 MW electrical peak loads you need.
3. If you want Mk41 launchers and the capabilities to defend Israel against a TBM/IRBM and pack offensive firepower[BrahmosER, surfaced launched RATTLR or a sea-based Jericho III?] better think BIG as in an Arleigh Burke III.
4. Set aside $5billion equivalent in your budget for the two ships[new builds] that you want.
5. Forget THEL. RFNA and seawater don't mix well.

Are you sure you don't want to relook the FREMM or the MEKO 7500 options?

Herald

I couldn't google up anything on the Meko 7500, but the FREMM, while an interesting and most capable design, is probably what our navy will be up against in the next decade if the coming French presidential elections fail to prevent the advent of al-Ittihad al-Islami al-Eirobi.
Anyway, we can't use any of the US aid money for procurement from Euro suppliers, and this is why these frigates will probably not even be considered as options.
Also, I do not see any likelihood for the I-MOD to ever get to spend  5 billions bucks on the navy, and we would probably be able to get four fully -armed LCS variants for less than half that sum, i.e. two for air defense with some 48 VLS cells each, one for ASW/SAR with two helos and UAV's/UUV's, and one land-attack gunship with cruise and ballistic missiles + Netfires. 

Such a composition would make our navy a more credible inshore defense force with some sea lanes protection capabilities, but again I am not sure whether these that think we can do without a navy (i.e., coast-guard only with a submarine "quasi-strategic" component), will not win their case in the end.

EXPLAIN ISRAEL'S GEOGRAPHY.

The footprint of an ABM ship in the Mediterranean can overreach across Israel to provide terminal descent phase defense against Iranian, Syrian, Pakistani, and Egyptian TBM/IRBM threats. For the Saudis, the  need is for a ship in the Red Sea.

That is a LOT of electricity for the radar and the MASER and a big ship for either an advanced Red Arrow/Green Pine sea based setup or the AEGIS/SM 3.

You can't do that cheaply or small. The MEKO 7500  is also known as the MEKO  X. Blohm & Voss is the source build.

Get the Germans to build two for Israel in an ABM ship configuration as suggested. The EU is going to need ABM defense from Iran even more than Israel[CF  the Iran/Iraq War for why.] so the Germans have plenty of incentive.

Herald