Why not an updated FFG-7 design in place of LCS?

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: Why not an updated FFG-7 design in place of LCS?
thumper 2/13/2008 12:19:02 AM

I have been reading this forum for a long time without posting. The current discussion about VLS on carriers has been quite interesting. The thing that really caught my eye is the part about the USN being short on smaller ships and how the LCS is a failure. My question is why not use an updated version of the FFG-7 design. It seems to me it would fit the bill. Why not use the hull and machinery as is and update the armament and electronics.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

B.Smitty 2/16/2008 2:45:00 PM

2. Why do you think it's too light? If this ship doesn't have NGFS tasking, then a 57mm is fine. Takes up a lot less space than a 5" and provides useful anti-missile and anti-small boat capability.
Insignificant in AAW. Anti-smallboat you might have an argument for secondary gun, but auto cannon is better. No ship can consider itself out of the NGFS mission. If called upon a speedboat with a 60mm mortar will have to supply NGFS.

A 57mm round isn't much (if any) worse than a 60mm mortar, and the MK110 mount can fire them at 220 rounds per minute. Sure, it doesn't have great range, and its target set would be limited, but there is some NGFS capability there.

I think the 57mm was the right choice for the LCS. However if we had built a real frigate follow-on, I agree that a 5" would've been preferable.

3. There is talk of putting NLOS containers on Burkes, and LCS has space dedicated for them. They take up a lot less space and weight than PVLS/MK41 cells, and the missiles themselves should be a lot cheaper than ESSM in surface to surface mode.
TOO SHORT RANGED and wastes perimeter space better dedicated to primary naval missions Use the 5" instead.

Countering small boat threats is a primary naval mission. And you can't always count on helos to do it for you.

40km now, and 60km down the road is too short ranged? You can ripple fire PAMs against a group of small boats. You can't do that with a 5". And we've seen how hard and expensive it is to make a simple GPS guided long-ranged munition for it. PAM has a dual mode IR/SAL seeker with GPS/INS midcourse and a datalink for MITL. It can actually home in on moving targets on its own, or have a helo or Fire Scout designate for it. With the 5" ERM you have to hope you guess the right grid coordinate.

I would consider integrating PAMs into the deckhouse instead. They're light enough and the canisters are short enough that it shouldn't have a large impact on stability or deckhouse space.

Another nice thing about NLOS is that you could reload the canisters manually, at sea. You don't have to head back to a suitable port, like you do with Mk41/PVLS.

I don't think a primarily AAW/strike stealth frigate helps much in any of these areas.

A general purpose frigate though, does.

I think there are a number of possibilities here. One could pair an Amphibious ship carrying a large number of USV/UUV/UAV/helos with a smaller patrol boat, OPV or corvette. The larger ship would carry the bulk of the MIW/ASW package, and stand off at a safe distance while using them. The smaller craft would operate in the shallows and lillypad air assets from the Amphibious ship.

My thought is the larger ship would be something like the MHD 150 design. It has space for a 5" gun, 16 cell VLS, 9 helicopters and lots of space for USVs and UUVs. I can see an argument for basing this ship on the LPD-17, but I think it needs to have a greater focus on aviation.

A frigate is another possibility, though I would still press for a high degree of modularity, like the LCS.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Answers to various. 2/16/2008 3:29:14 PM

1. On the ESSM and the RAM.

ESSM.
The ESSM is what ASTER is supposed to be-a lobbed missile that can dive down an over the horizon inbound vampire with a good chance of killing it before you have to direct engage. For best use, you should have a helo or an aerostat up to extend the radar horizon out to give you your best track lead in a DATE cycle.
RAM.
The RAM is what the Crotale cannot do.It is a direct engage chase to kill all the way interceptor to the HORIZON, that can fire in local control if it has to do so. That means that the RAM is intended for leakers that get through the ESSM zone. An ESSM cell and RAM in combination with good countermeasures should be able to handle up to 10 inbound vampires with a fair to good chance of success. Expensive on a destroyer escort/frigate? How expensive is a convoy of freighters that was saved by a banzai frigate that became a missile sponge? SAMAR LESSON.
DE.
YC brings up the history lesson that the LCS is intended to be the DE. True but the idiots who wrote the mission statement tried to "modularize" the LCS. Plug and play means to me DECKHOUSE modules.that you can crane on and off and cable up with no muss and no fuss. General hull space workspace you build to handle semi-rigids, USVs, UUVs, and assorted aircraft. The mine warfare and anti-submarine work is going to be remote vehicle and over the side personnel in brown waters anyway.
Autocannon.
The suicide speed boat or the suicide swimmer needs to get within 1000 meters of a US warship to inflict damage. the 57/70 Bofors gun is useful for shooting out to the horizon but can it hit a jinking speedboat SWARM? Answer no.
Autocannon can. This is one time you have to match the gun to the game being hunted.
5" gun.
Suppose you are at the 5 meter shoal line and the Somali pirates you chase just holed up in their hideout 18,000 meters away. Which makes more sense? 30 seconds of NLOS at extreme range [40 rockets] or 3 hours of 5 inch shells [350+] deliberately aimed to inflict maximum harm as in FLATTEN the hide out? One is a spasm of anger, the other is deliberate calculated enduring punishment.

Rocket spasm means nothing to a Somali pirate. German veterans who fought both east front and west front still remember the Overlord destroyer naval bombardment [OMAHA BEACH LESSON] as the worst combat experience they'd ever suffered 63 years later.

Herald

Quote Reply

benellim4 2/16/2008 4:08:02 PM

the 57/70 Bofors gun is useful for shooting out to the horizon but can it hit a jinking speedboat SWARM? Answer no.

I disagree with your assessment.

Quote Reply

Herald12345 2/16/2008 4:26:16 PM

Bofors propaganda video 2002.

The weapon proofing exercise is a JOKE.

Bofors propaganda video for the USCG 2005.

Single static target in beam aspect? This is a trial?

Not proven against threat.

Herald

Quote Reply

benellim4 2/16/2008 4:39:58 PM

That test was done in Dahlgren VA, which lies on the Potomac River. You're not going to do testing vs "live" targets there. Unless you're willing to shell the good people of Maryland or Colonial Beach, VA. Testing vs "live" targets isn't really NSWC Dahlgren's mission.

That said, I stand by my assessment. If you'd like to know why, we can discuss this on SWDG's SIPR site.

Quote Reply

stinger 2/18/2008 2:17:20 PM

The Navy plans to spend $165 million — or $5.5 million per frigate — to make hull, mechanical and electrical improvements to frigates, from adding new diesel engines to implementing new defense systems.

Changes include:

¶ Adding the Mark 53 Nulka Decoy Launching System. The unit will shoot off radar-scrambling chaff to avert anti-ship missiles, Morrison said.

¶ Upgrading the Phalanx Close-In Weapons Systems with a more advanced version. The system is often nicknamed R2D2 because it resembles the robot character on the movie Stars Wars.

¶ Installing SeaRAM launchers, which can take out anti-ship missiles, on all frigates between 2007 and 2010.

¶ Replacing old reverse osmosis machines with more efficient units to provide clean drinking water.

¶ Adding new, electric davits to load and unload Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, or RHIBs.

Although guided-missile frigates will lose the Mark 13 launchers, the Navy will keep the ?FFG? designation. ?FFG? — pronounced ?fig? — is the Navy?s abbreviation for a guided-missile frigate.

Technically, the ships can still carry the title. Each frigate has two SH-60 helicopters, which can be armed with guided missiles.

Quote Reply

benellim4 2/18/2008 4:09:51 PM

The "G" designation in the USN refers to a specific capability when it comes to surface combatants. It denotes and area air defense capability. For instance, the DD-963s had Harpoons and Tomahawks, which are guided missiles, but they were not DDGs like the Kidd-class, which had SM-1/2 capability but didn't have a Tomahawk capability. The FFG-7 class no longer has an area air defense capability and should not be an FFG; however, it is probably too expensive to change all the documentation. So owing as much to bureaucratic inertia as anything as else, the designation stays.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9