The most serious problem is in the USS Independence, a radical trimaran design. It seems that a "dissimilar metals" situation arose when salt water, the aluminum hull and some other metals got into close proximity with each other, and extensive corrosion resulted. 

====================================================================================

It isn't like this problem wasn't known, and it isn't like multi-hulled designs are unknown.  The design reviews were clearly inadequate. 

The design reviews were clearly inadequate.

Correction:  The design reviewers were clearly inadequate.

has anyone ever thought about using off the shelf tech to improve the LCS lethality?

 here are some I deas I had

 

1. A Mission module with a MLRS/ATACMS launching capability. This would give the options of havng the 190 Mile ATACMs stand off capability, or the Guided or unguided MLRS. Both the Shore bombardment, small fast attack boat defence and stand off missiosn coudl be solved easily.

 

2. A Side mounted TLAM/harpoon canister. Even if you only had 4 this would turn the ship into a fast moving missile boat.

 

3. Side Mount sea rams in alot more places around the ship. Why not use the searam for both offence and defence? The missiles would shred fast boats.

 

In a time when the navy should exercise fiscal restraint. Its odd that the USn  wont use more avialable tech.

1. A Mission module with a MLRS/ATACMS launching capability. This would give the options of having the 190 Mile ATACMs stand off capability, or the Guided or unguided MLRS. Both the Shore bombardment, small fast attack boat defense and stand off mission could be solved easily.

 

And the targeting information comes from where?  Plus is LCS' job to deliver long-range fire?

 

2. A Side mounted TLAM/harpoon canister. Even if you only had 4 this would turn the ship into a fast moving missile boat.

 

Requires an upgrade, I'd imagine, to the combat system.  Harpoon targeting requires a dedicated C4I system, as Harpoon is rather long-ranged.

 

3. Side Mount sea rams in a lot more places around the ship. Why not use the searam for both offense and defense? The missiles would shred fast boats.

 

SeaRam, comes at a weight penalty, stability penalty, and RAM is targeted via RF reception, what will RAM home in on in a Boghammar?

I don't think the USN needs more Harpoon launchers - LCS will be carrying the Griffin in a set of VLS boxes which is good enough for Boghammers etc. No sense in putting TLAM on the thing, it's not part of the mission set.

 

I suspect that the LCS will end up with the 25mm bushmaster mounts from the ASUW modules permanently mounted - they're useful and cheap.

 

The thing I do not understand is that LCS was meant to replace three hulls with one, and now they've got two hulls, and of course, as it was never intended to run them alongside another, there's now a major spares and training overhead as the two ships have different CIC's and different CMS plus radar fit.

 

 

no the F35 will melt the LCS :P (With its exhaust) And for gods sake dont say that out loud someone may try it, if they can get an admiral to think it is a good idea. :P