The expensive (US$480,000,000) LCS warSHITS are again found out to be useless against new powerful advanced PLA Navy ships and weapons, and if war with China, would be whacked into sunken fragments and wreckages. US sailors will feed sharks and Chinese will eat more shark fins at their victory celebrating dinners. US navy wants new warships but does Pentagon have the $$MONEY$$? Borrow more Chinese debts to fight Chinese again? 
http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2017-07-17/doc-ifyiakwa4245931.shtml
美媒直言美濒海舰项目失败：没法跟中国护卫舰对抗
2017年07月17日 08:42 环球网
//d5.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/aa9c31e136a147cbb5bf47d39fff2772.jpg
//d4.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/10/602f43f596b74406b75c170f10f53546.jpg
//d6.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/f7633cfb35914948ad5a6f3a80d95dd2.jpg
新浪扶翼 行业专区
//d4.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/4279700918f343719c2c9d6c1f9f0162.jpg
[环球网军事7月17日报道]美国《大众机械》月刊网站7月11日发表题为《美国海军正在寻找一种新型护卫舰，以取代存在问题的濒海战斗舰》的报道称，美国海军已向业界征集一种新的护卫舰设计，这反映了对存在问题的、大小与护卫舰相当的濒海战斗舰的普遍不满。濒海战斗舰成了过大的技术野心和不断变化的地缘政治环境的受害者，这些舰艇在应对一个有着各种各样全球性威胁的世界方面能力很差、很不可靠并且过时。作为替代，海军想要一种能够发挥更大和更复杂作用的、更传统的导弹护卫舰。
海军7月10日发布了一份建议征询书。这份建议征询书让造船业知道海军对于暂时称作“快速导弹护卫舰”——代号为FFG（X）——的新型舰艇有什么要求。
建议征询书明确指出，这种快速导弹护卫舰应该与海军当前的濒海战斗舰有很大不同。濒海战斗舰的大小与护卫舰相当，最初的设计目的是通过多种可替换的“任务模块”实现多用途。铝质船体的濒海战斗舰希望配备尽可能少的船员（约70人），这些船员操作特定任务模块，完成反舰、反潜、反水雷和特种作战任务。这些舰艇尤其适用于濒海水域。
濒海战斗舰项目是一项令人沮丧的失败。事实证明，这种舰艇很不可靠，在海上出过几次引发关注的故障。受到吹捧的任务模块往往最终化为泡影，即使经过十多年的研发，实际部署到舰队的也少之又少。没有这些模块，这些舰艇的打击火力非常小，只有安装在舰艏的一门57毫米舰炮和一对30毫米轻型加农炮。多年来，海军一直承诺要以反舰导弹的形式增强濒海战斗舰的火力，但就连这项较为简单的工作都未能完成。此外，控制船员人数的要求令濒海战斗舰船员过度劳累。
濒海战斗舰也是不断改变的地缘政治时代的受害者。海军曾经想要一种在全球反恐战外围作战的舰艇，一种在沿海地区行动的有效的舰艇。但随着时间推移，事实证明，对这样一种舰艇的现实需求没有表面上那么大。这种舰艇及其任务模块研发耗时太久，以至于战略环境已经发生变化，濒海战斗舰成了华而不实的东西。
现实情况是，中国人民解放军海军规模不断壮大，而俄罗斯越来越好斗，并且在国外使用海军力量也越来越多。相对于中国和俄罗斯海军来说，濒海战斗舰的武器装备少得可怜，连可以瞄准敌人的反舰导弹都没有。更糟糕的是，海军最初提议要为这种舰艇装备的反水面导弹“狮鹫”和之后的“地狱火”威力太小且射程太近，不足以对抗中国护卫舰，更不用说驱逐舰了。濒海战斗舰还将速度的重要性置于航程之前（它们全速前进时的速度可以达到40节），但要在广阔的太平洋开展行动，这样的优先次序似乎颠倒了。
新型快速导弹护卫舰与濒海战斗舰概念有很大不同。这种新型护卫舰将作为舰队的耳目，与水面特遣队和航母打击群一同航行。快速导弹护卫舰将使用雷达、声呐和电子支持措施提供有关敌方的更多信息。它还通过更重型的反舰导弹为特遣队的反舰火力作出贡献。海军希望给这种新护卫舰配备一架直升机，它将在反舰和反潜战中发挥作用。
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...r-a-new-frigate-replace-littoral-combat-ship/
The Navy Is Looking for a New Frigate to Replace the Troubled Littoral Combat Ship
Navy releases requirements for new guided-missile frigate, effectively turning its back on the troubled, decade-long Littoral Combat Ship program.
Most Popular
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Christopher Frost.
By Kyle Mizokami
Jul 11, 2017
The U.S. Navy has solicited industry for a new frigate design, reflecting widespread dissatisfaction with the troubled, frigate-sized Littoral Combat Ships. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) fell victim to a combination of technological overreach and a changing geopolitical environment that made the ships minimally capable, unreliable, and obsolete in a world of variable global threats. In its place, the Navy wants a more traditional guided-missile frigate design capable of tackling larger, more complex roles.
The Navy released a Request for Information (RFI) on July 10. The RFI lets the shipbuilding industry know what the Navy is looking for in the new ship, tentatively called FFG(X), or Fast Frigate, Guided (Experimental). The FFG(X) would fill the Small Surface Combatant category in the Navy's force structure.
Littoral Combat Ship USS Coronado.
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Deven Leigh Ellis.
The RFI makes it clear the FFG(X) should be very different from the Navy's current Littoral Combat Ship, a frigate-sized ship that was originally designed to fulfill multiple missions with a variety of swappable "mission modules." The aluminum-hulled Littoral Combat Ships are designed to have minimal crews, around 70 sailors, that can operate specialized mission modules to fulfill anti-ship, anti-submarine, anti-mine, and and special operations missions. The ships were designed to be especially relevant in littoral waterways, meaning near coastal areas. The first LCS, Freedom, was commissioned to the fleet in 2008. Nine Littoral Combat Ships have been constructed with a total of 40 planned. The LCS was originally set to total 52 ships but was cut by Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter in 2015.
The Littoral Combat Ship program has been a disappointing failure. The ships have proven unreliable, with several high profile breakdowns at sea. The vaunted mission modules often turned out to be vaporware, and even after more than ten years of development, few if any actually deployed to the fleet. Without modules, the ships were very lightly armed, with only a single 57-millimeter bow-mounted gun and a pair of 30-millimeter light cannons. For years the ships have been promised heavier firepower in the form of anti-ship missiles, but the Navy has failed to fulfill even this relatively simple task. In addition, demands to hold ship crew size down resulted in overworked LCS crews.
Danish combat support ship Abasalon.
U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist America A. Henry.
The Littoral Combat Ship was also a victim of changing geopolitical times. The Navy wanted a ship that would operate on the periphery of the Global War on Terror, providing a relevant, effective ship where the land meets the sea. But as time went on, demands for such a ship proved more apparent than real. The ship and its mission modules have been under development for so long that the strategic environment changed and the LCS has become a white elephant.
What has been very real, however, is the growing size of the People's Liberation Army Navy, or the Chinese Navy, and Russia's increasing aggressiveness and use of naval forces abroad.Against the Chinese and Russian navies the LCS is pathetically under-armed, lacking a single anti-ship missile to target enemies. Even worse, the anti-surface missiles the Navy initially proposed to arm the ships with, Griffin and then Hellfire missiles, were much too small and too short of range to take on 4,000-ton Chinese frigates, let alone destroyers. Littoral Combat Ships also prioritized speed—they could do 40 knots in sprints—over range, a reversal of priorities for operating in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean.
Danish frigate HrMs De Zeven Provincien.
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
The new FFG(X) is a big break from the LCS concept. FFG(X) would operate as the eyes and ears of the fleet, sailing with surface task forces and carrier strike groups. The new type of frigate would use its radar, sonar, and electronic support measures to form a better picture of the enemy. FFG(X) would also contribute to the task force's anti-ship firepower with heavier anti-ship missiles, while being able to defend itself and the rest of a group with Evolved Sea Sparrow and SM-2 surface-to-air missiles. The Navy wants the FFG(X) to have a single helicopter, which will be useful in the anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare roles.
At the same time, FFG(X) should be capable of taking on less dangerous missions, such as humanitarian assistance/disaster relief, showing the flag in times of regional tensions, and chasing pirates. By taking on these roles as well, the FFG(X) could free up larger and more capable ships to square off against new, high-end threats.
The FFG(X) should be a much more heavily armed and capable ship than the Littoral Combat Ship. Unlike the LCS, FFG(X) could patrol off the coast of North Korea and not only shoot down an incoming KN-09 anti-ship missile, but also return fire and sink the attacking ship. The odds that a LCS could survive such a scenario are low, restricting the ship from operating in the littoral regions of countries with even the most basic anti-ship missiles. The attack on a UAE-operated high speed catamaran by Houthi rebels in 2016, which heavily damaged the ship, was a wakeup call that the LCS was poorly equipped to operate against even guerillas armed with missiles.
What could the future FFG(X) look like? It actually may look like the existing Littoral Combat Ships, lengthened and modified to take Mk. 41 missile silos. Saudi Arabia is buying four such ships under the huge $110 billion defense deal announced during President Trump's recent visit.
Shipbuilding company Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) has two designs for a new frigate based on the National Security Cutter it builds for the U.S. Coast Guard. The FF4923 Enhanced Patrol Frigate fulfills many of the requirements and features 16 Mk.41 missile silos for Evolved Sea Sparrow surface-to-air missiles, anti-ship and land attack Joint Strike Missiles, SM-2 missiles, and ASROC anti-submarine torpedo rockets.
Here's a video from HII featuring all of the various Patrol Frigate variants, with the FF4923 starting at the 3:38 mark:
A number of foreign designs could end up being dark horse candidates in the FFG(X) competition as well. The Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates are well-rounded, well-regarded ships, as well as the Danish Absalon-class support ships (really, frigate-class ships). Likewise, the Dutch De Zeven Provinciën-class frigates are held in high esteem. Norway's Fritjof Nansen-class frigates manage to pack in the Aegis Combat System, complete with a version of the same phased array radar that equips the U.S. Navy's existing Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
According to U.S. Naval Institute News, the Navy wants to start awarding construction contracts for one ship a year starting in 2020, leading to two ships a year down the road.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$???????????????????????
http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/china/2017-07-17/doc-ifyiakwa4245931.shtml
美媒直言美濒海舰项目失败：没法跟中国护卫舰对抗
2017年07月17日 08:42 环球网
//d5.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/aa9c31e136a147cbb5bf47d39fff2772.jpg
//d4.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/10/602f43f596b74406b75c170f10f53546.jpg
//d6.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/f7633cfb35914948ad5a6f3a80d95dd2.jpg
新浪扶翼 行业专区
//d4.sina.com.cn/pfpghc2/201707/05/4279700918f343719c2c9d6c1f9f0162.jpg
[环球网军事7月17日报道]美国《大众机械》月刊网站7月11日发表题为《美国海军正在寻找一种新型护卫舰，以取代存在问题的濒海战斗舰》的报道称，美国海军已向业界征集一种新的护卫舰设计，这反映了对存在问题的、大小与护卫舰相当的濒海战斗舰的普遍不满。濒海战斗舰成了过大的技术野心和不断变化的地缘政治环境的受害者，这些舰艇在应对一个有着各种各样全球性威胁的世界方面能力很差、很不可靠并且过时。作为替代，海军想要一种能够发挥更大和更复杂作用的、更传统的导弹护卫舰。
海军7月10日发布了一份建议征询书。这份建议征询书让造船业知道海军对于暂时称作“快速导弹护卫舰”——代号为FFG（X）——的新型舰艇有什么要求。
建议征询书明确指出，这种快速导弹护卫舰应该与海军当前的濒海战斗舰有很大不同。濒海战斗舰的大小与护卫舰相当，最初的设计目的是通过多种可替换的“任务模块”实现多用途。铝质船体的濒海战斗舰希望配备尽可能少的船员（约70人），这些船员操作特定任务模块，完成反舰、反潜、反水雷和特种作战任务。这些舰艇尤其适用于濒海水域。
濒海战斗舰项目是一项令人沮丧的失败。事实证明，这种舰艇很不可靠，在海上出过几次引发关注的故障。受到吹捧的任务模块往往最终化为泡影，即使经过十多年的研发，实际部署到舰队的也少之又少。没有这些模块，这些舰艇的打击火力非常小，只有安装在舰艏的一门57毫米舰炮和一对30毫米轻型加农炮。多年来，海军一直承诺要以反舰导弹的形式增强濒海战斗舰的火力，但就连这项较为简单的工作都未能完成。此外，控制船员人数的要求令濒海战斗舰船员过度劳累。
濒海战斗舰也是不断改变的地缘政治时代的受害者。海军曾经想要一种在全球反恐战外围作战的舰艇，一种在沿海地区行动的有效的舰艇。但随着时间推移，事实证明，对这样一种舰艇的现实需求没有表面上那么大。这种舰艇及其任务模块研发耗时太久，以至于战略环境已经发生变化，濒海战斗舰成了华而不实的东西。
现实情况是，中国人民解放军海军规模不断壮大，而俄罗斯越来越好斗，并且在国外使用海军力量也越来越多。相对于中国和俄罗斯海军来说，濒海战斗舰的武器装备少得可怜，连可以瞄准敌人的反舰导弹都没有。更糟糕的是，海军最初提议要为这种舰艇装备的反水面导弹“狮鹫”和之后的“地狱火”威力太小且射程太近，不足以对抗中国护卫舰，更不用说驱逐舰了。濒海战斗舰还将速度的重要性置于航程之前（它们全速前进时的速度可以达到40节），但要在广阔的太平洋开展行动，这样的优先次序似乎颠倒了。
新型快速导弹护卫舰与濒海战斗舰概念有很大不同。这种新型护卫舰将作为舰队的耳目，与水面特遣队和航母打击群一同航行。快速导弹护卫舰将使用雷达、声呐和电子支持措施提供有关敌方的更多信息。它还通过更重型的反舰导弹为特遣队的反舰火力作出贡献。海军希望给这种新护卫舰配备一架直升机，它将在反舰和反潜战中发挥作用。
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...r-a-new-frigate-replace-littoral-combat-ship/
The Navy Is Looking for a New Frigate to Replace the Troubled Littoral Combat Ship
Navy releases requirements for new guided-missile frigate, effectively turning its back on the troubled, decade-long Littoral Combat Ship program.
Most Popular
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Christopher Frost.
By Kyle Mizokami
Jul 11, 2017
The U.S. Navy has solicited industry for a new frigate design, reflecting widespread dissatisfaction with the troubled, frigate-sized Littoral Combat Ships. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) fell victim to a combination of technological overreach and a changing geopolitical environment that made the ships minimally capable, unreliable, and obsolete in a world of variable global threats. In its place, the Navy wants a more traditional guided-missile frigate design capable of tackling larger, more complex roles.
The Navy released a Request for Information (RFI) on July 10. The RFI lets the shipbuilding industry know what the Navy is looking for in the new ship, tentatively called FFG(X), or Fast Frigate, Guided (Experimental). The FFG(X) would fill the Small Surface Combatant category in the Navy's force structure.
Littoral Combat Ship USS Coronado.
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Deven Leigh Ellis.
The RFI makes it clear the FFG(X) should be very different from the Navy's current Littoral Combat Ship, a frigate-sized ship that was originally designed to fulfill multiple missions with a variety of swappable "mission modules." The aluminum-hulled Littoral Combat Ships are designed to have minimal crews, around 70 sailors, that can operate specialized mission modules to fulfill anti-ship, anti-submarine, anti-mine, and and special operations missions. The ships were designed to be especially relevant in littoral waterways, meaning near coastal areas. The first LCS, Freedom, was commissioned to the fleet in 2008. Nine Littoral Combat Ships have been constructed with a total of 40 planned. The LCS was originally set to total 52 ships but was cut by Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter in 2015.
The Littoral Combat Ship program has been a disappointing failure. The ships have proven unreliable, with several high profile breakdowns at sea. The vaunted mission modules often turned out to be vaporware, and even after more than ten years of development, few if any actually deployed to the fleet. Without modules, the ships were very lightly armed, with only a single 57-millimeter bow-mounted gun and a pair of 30-millimeter light cannons. For years the ships have been promised heavier firepower in the form of anti-ship missiles, but the Navy has failed to fulfill even this relatively simple task. In addition, demands to hold ship crew size down resulted in overworked LCS crews.
Danish combat support ship Abasalon.
U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist America A. Henry.
The Littoral Combat Ship was also a victim of changing geopolitical times. The Navy wanted a ship that would operate on the periphery of the Global War on Terror, providing a relevant, effective ship where the land meets the sea. But as time went on, demands for such a ship proved more apparent than real. The ship and its mission modules have been under development for so long that the strategic environment changed and the LCS has become a white elephant.
What has been very real, however, is the growing size of the People's Liberation Army Navy, or the Chinese Navy, and Russia's increasing aggressiveness and use of naval forces abroad.Against the Chinese and Russian navies the LCS is pathetically under-armed, lacking a single anti-ship missile to target enemies. Even worse, the anti-surface missiles the Navy initially proposed to arm the ships with, Griffin and then Hellfire missiles, were much too small and too short of range to take on 4,000-ton Chinese frigates, let alone destroyers. Littoral Combat Ships also prioritized speed—they could do 40 knots in sprints—over range, a reversal of priorities for operating in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean.
Danish frigate HrMs De Zeven Provincien.
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
The new FFG(X) is a big break from the LCS concept. FFG(X) would operate as the eyes and ears of the fleet, sailing with surface task forces and carrier strike groups. The new type of frigate would use its radar, sonar, and electronic support measures to form a better picture of the enemy. FFG(X) would also contribute to the task force's anti-ship firepower with heavier anti-ship missiles, while being able to defend itself and the rest of a group with Evolved Sea Sparrow and SM-2 surface-to-air missiles. The Navy wants the FFG(X) to have a single helicopter, which will be useful in the anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare roles.
At the same time, FFG(X) should be capable of taking on less dangerous missions, such as humanitarian assistance/disaster relief, showing the flag in times of regional tensions, and chasing pirates. By taking on these roles as well, the FFG(X) could free up larger and more capable ships to square off against new, high-end threats.
The FFG(X) should be a much more heavily armed and capable ship than the Littoral Combat Ship. Unlike the LCS, FFG(X) could patrol off the coast of North Korea and not only shoot down an incoming KN-09 anti-ship missile, but also return fire and sink the attacking ship. The odds that a LCS could survive such a scenario are low, restricting the ship from operating in the littoral regions of countries with even the most basic anti-ship missiles. The attack on a UAE-operated high speed catamaran by Houthi rebels in 2016, which heavily damaged the ship, was a wakeup call that the LCS was poorly equipped to operate against even guerillas armed with missiles.
What could the future FFG(X) look like? It actually may look like the existing Littoral Combat Ships, lengthened and modified to take Mk. 41 missile silos. Saudi Arabia is buying four such ships under the huge $110 billion defense deal announced during President Trump's recent visit.
Shipbuilding company Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) has two designs for a new frigate based on the National Security Cutter it builds for the U.S. Coast Guard. The FF4923 Enhanced Patrol Frigate fulfills many of the requirements and features 16 Mk.41 missile silos for Evolved Sea Sparrow surface-to-air missiles, anti-ship and land attack Joint Strike Missiles, SM-2 missiles, and ASROC anti-submarine torpedo rockets.
Here's a video from HII featuring all of the various Patrol Frigate variants, with the FF4923 starting at the 3:38 mark:
A number of foreign designs could end up being dark horse candidates in the FFG(X) competition as well. The Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates are well-rounded, well-regarded ships, as well as the Danish Absalon-class support ships (really, frigate-class ships). Likewise, the Dutch De Zeven Provinciën-class frigates are held in high esteem. Norway's Fritjof Nansen-class frigates manage to pack in the Aegis Combat System, complete with a version of the same phased array radar that equips the U.S. Navy's existing Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.
According to U.S. Naval Institute News, the Navy wants to start awarding construction contracts for one ship a year starting in 2020, leading to two ships a year down the road.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$???????????????????????
Last edited:
