a) Perform point self-defense against small fast surface and air targets.

b) Perform Maritime Interception Operations

c) Perform *limited* mine hunting/neutralization

d) Perform group shallow water/anti-diesel submarine operations

2.

a) Be able to perform limited area air defense

b) Be able to perform extensive mine hunting/neutralization

c) Be able to perform single ship anti-submarine operations

d) Be able to perform all missions in group 1 and 2 inherently (In other words, not require separate mission modules)

I think the mission module idea is a good one. And I'm not opposed to building the ships to commercial vice USN standards, but it requires a huge culture shift in the USN. "Don't give up the ship" may be words you see in a picture of an SM-3 shoot, but it is also a way of life in the USN. The examples of STARK, ROBERTS, PRINCETON, TRIPOLI, and COLE are used to reinforce this culture. Recruits going through USN boot camp go through a series of tests onboard a ship simulator that simulates many of the challenges faced on the COLE. The simulator itself resembles the COLE.(In fact, a co-worker of mine was a COLE survivor, when he went through the simulator he said he started to have flashbacks.) It is extremely difficult for the organization to all of a sudden decide to build a ship that is, essentially, disposable.

Well, to aid this discussion I would reccommend a thorough examination of the LCS Program site, link below:

 

link

I don't disagree, however I feel that the LCS (especially that I-version study) should probably be the high/mid-end for littorals and low-end for blue-water operations, a real OHP replacement so to speak.  As it is now, the LCS is to fill the (current & previous) roles of the OHP, Cyclone, Avengery, Osprey, and others (I would even say the old eagle-class patrol vessels/coastal anti-sub craft).  Frankly it is too large, to expensive, and not well suited for much of the "lower-end" missions in high quantity (mine-warfare especially).

 

As I mentioned in a related thread, I think what is needed is a smaller vessel as well, also with the modular as the low-end complement.  This is not new and I would point to the Danish Flyvefisken Class (Standard-Flex 300) Multi-Role Vessel a benchmark/starting point for design.  LCS-I could command, protect, and support this type of vessel (in greater numbers).  Even considering an enlarged USN design (along LM LCS-style lines) it would still hopefully be under 750-tons and be able to swap in the same capabilities as the current LCS (minus the aviation facilities).  To be clear, such a vessel would mostly work in concert with the LCS, not replace.