The US Navy has finally decided to abandon the unworkable Littoral Combat Ship modular concept, and to turn the ships it has on order into dedicated, single-mission vessels. Both LCS variants are shown here. (USN photo)
Posted on 09/09/2016 5:32:33 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
The US Navy has finally decided to abandon the unworkable Littoral Combat Ship modular concept, and to turn the ships it has on order into dedicated, single-mission vessels. Both LCS variants are shown here. (USN photo)
How much money spent? How much time wasted? To discover a small, fast ship made of aluminum was bad idea for a surface combat vessel.
Actually, the LCS series was a complete success, transferring taxpayer funds to the districts of favored politices and businesses of their contributors, and thence back into the coffers of the politicians.
What? You didn’t think the bastards actually cared about creating an effective warship did you?
The important thing is that the right people made fortunes from another ill conceived boondoggle.
It failed because it dounds too much like a female body part. What’s next a Enis?
I worked on the program for 10 years. I’m not surprised it failed. It was incredibly complex due to the constantly changing requirements and long development time. It used modular payloads for each mission and they had to talk to the ship’s computers. Every time one of the systems was upgraded it required retesting.
The ship was designed to run very fast in shallow water, so every ounce of weight was critical. One of our engineers was responsible for paring down the tools that were kept on board. She concluded that they could use an adjustable wrench instead of a whole set of metric and standard wrenches. It was a concept the looked good to the bean counters on paper.
They kept very few spares on board and even fluids like oil and solvents were measured down to the number of ounces required for a mission.
The modular concept required dozens of different contractors and commanders coordinate specification changes to keep all the other contractors in the loop for software changes. I remember one change that moved a bulkhead hatch that wasn’t coordinated. They ended up putting the door where our payload was supposed to go. The door became unusable when the LCS was configured for our payload.
Whenever they proposed cutting some of the funding or needed more money, someone would come up with a new mission so they could get funding from another source.
The whole thing was a swiss army knife. A jack of all trades but not good at any one mission.
forgive me while I laugh.
Lockheed-Martin hosed up again and the Defense Dept. gets it in the #6.
So turn them over to the USCG.
Pretty expensive training ships. We used to use PCER’s on the Great Lakes.
VAW-116 aboard USS Coral Sea (CVA-43)
Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club 1968-69
The USS Perineum!
Uh oh! Bad news for Austal Shipbuilding in Mobile, AL; one of the largest employers in an area that doesn’t have very many large employers!
So...no USS Gabby Giffords?
To assess this properly, one would need to sit down with the people who assess the various regions of the world, project likely threats, and profile future missions. I've not done that. With that caveat, however, the LCS always struck me as (perhaps) a good idea. The burden of this story is that the Navy erred in asking the type to do too much. Mission creep spoiling the platform is an old story.
I've always thought of the LCS, correctly designed and configured, as probably a good platform in the Persian Gulf and pirate infested waters off Africa and in S.E. Asia. We're clearly concerned about the vulnerability of major blue water fleet assets to missile and swarm attacks in constricted waters. Something like the LCS -- much smaller, faster, maneuverable, much cheaper, and capable of outrunning and outgunning any other small craft in these areas -- would be a good thing to have. Adding too many missions is a fatal error.
Buy a flotilla equipped as fast patrol boats and exterminate the pirates off Somalia. I'd call that a successful test. Then move them to the Straits of Malacca.
Frigates have become good examples of mission creep. They were originally supposed to be fast, light, cheap, and expendable. They have been steadily evolving towards bigger, multi-purpose platforms, and getting much more expensive in the process. The LCS as originally conceived was essentially backfilling that mission. But in the case of the LCS, the Navy started growing the mission even before the first one was launched. A little procurement discipline is badly needed.
Dolores!
That, Sir, is an excellent idea!
That is exactly why it will never see the real world..........
Both were doomed to failure from inception.
Ping.
“She concluded that they could use an adjustable wrench instead of a whole set of metric and standard wrenches.”
I’m speechless. This thing has to weigh hundreds of tons...and it comes down to this...wow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.