Finmeccanica Proposes 76mm Gun for LCS

DoD Buzz ^ | April 7th, 2014 | Kris Osborn

[sukhoi-30mki]

Finmeccanica is proposing that the OTO Melara 76mm gun be configured onto the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship as part of an effort to improve the lethality and survivability of the shallow-water , multi-mission vessel.

The naval artillery piece would replace the existing 57mm weapon now on board the LCS, per the existing proposal, said Eric Lindenbaum, vice president of Navy and Maritime programs for DRS Technologies. OTO Melara and DRS Technologies are both subsidiaries for the Italian defense company, Finmeccanica SpA.

Amidst an ongoing effort to develop alternative proposals for a new small surface combatant, Navy officials are busy exploring ways to make the LCS a more survivable and lethal platform. A task force has been stood up to study requirements and technologies aimed at modifying the LCS or coming up with a new ship design.

Per direction from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who decreased the LCS ship contracted buy from 52 down to 32 ships, the Navy is looking to find new solutions to make the LCS more survivable.

The OTO Melara 76mm weapon is currently on many Navy frigates. It is not surprising that a weapon used on a frigate would be proposed for the LCS because Hagel suggested that the alternative proposals for a new or modified LCS be modeled after a frigate.

The weapon would bring much greater range and lethality to the LCS compared to the existing weapons system, Lindenbaum added. In particular, the OTO Melara 76mm weapon, called a three-inch gun, can reach ranges out to 22 nautical miles, whereas the existing 57mm gun has a range of eight to ten miles.

“Fifty-six different navies have a 76mm weapon. The U.S. is one of those 56, however what this means is that 55 other navies can outgun the LCS,” Lindenbaum said.

In addition, the OTO Melara has a water-cooled barrel which allows the weapon to stay cool and keep firing for longer periods of time compared to the 57mm weapon. Without a water cooled barrel, a weapon is likely to overheat after shooting a certain amount of rounds and need to therefore stop firing.

“This is a tactical advantage. The heat is dissipated through the water cooling system. The OTO Melara 76mm gun can shoot thousands of rounds during a sustained engagement,” Lindenbaum said.

The OTO Melara can shoot a variety of different ammunition from point-detonate to delayed fuses and proximity fuses, he added.

[sukhoi-30mki]

[G Larry]

I hear Clive Bundy is willing to conduct some test firing out at his place.

[DeaconBenjamin]

LCS — I thought you meant they were suggesting a 76 mm gun for the Local Coin Store.

[2harddrive]

That is a BUNCH more TNT on target! BUY IT!

[DesertRhino]

Currently, the retarded LCS is less powerful than a single light tank. A total joke. A light 57mm gun and a high angle missile system that is basically the equivalent of an 81 mortar.

It is exempted from historic USN damage control standards.
A WWII Fletcher class destroyer is immensely more deadly. An LCS would be utterly helpless. The Fletcher has a shallower draft.

An LCS cant even operate in shallow water. A single tank on the beach could easily destroy it. All it is good for is the careers of procurement and surface warfare officers by giving them a ship without all the worries of using it to fight.

[edpc]

Just replace the gun with one of Obama’s famous “strongly worded messages.” Then, we’ll have a Literal Combat Ship.

[BenLurkin]

Nice!

[ryan71]

Switching to a 76mm is good. Getting rid of LCS is better. Build more Arleigh Burkes.

[ryan71]

“An LCS cant even operate in shallow water. A single tank on the beach could easily destroy it. All it is good for is the careers of procurement and surface warfare officers by giving them a ship without all the worries of using it to fight.”

It’s true. If LCS ever has to go into harms way we’re going to see the Navy pull this thing back from the littoral environment they built it for. It cannot defend itself. It’s fast, so maybe they can use it to ferry flag officers around the the carrier group?

[MasterGunner01]

Official Navy documents refer to the LCS as a “sub-optimal” warship = expendable. Maybe that is why the Navy has refused to get serious about giving it any kind of adequate weapons to defend the LCS in the dangerous waters of the littorals. The LCS design was centered around only one concern — high speed above everything else. No one at NavSea registered that an LCS doing over 45+ knots still cannot out run an anti-ship cruise missile going Mach 0.8 plus. Armament is an after thought and the crew size makes effective damage control well nigh impossible. In short, the multi-billion dollar LCS is a throw away ship with a throw away crew in a throw away Navy.

[chiefqc]

Do they have one that shoots red lines like mac daddy has?

[KingLudd]

“Then, we’ll have a Literal Combat Ship”

Pffffft!

[Smokin' Joe]

Why not just go back to a PT boat?

[Jimmy Valentine]

Questions: what is the rate of fire on that thing? Also why a three inch? The USS DeMoines had automatic eight inch guns in multiple turrets

[Yorlik803]

I thought the LCS was Dead.
Don’t know much about navel issues but this thing sounds like a floating coffin.

[MasterGunner01]

Pound for pound, the WW2 PT Boat, at 50 tons, was the most heavily armed warship in the world at the time. The 1945 PT-596 carried the following armament: 1) four .50 machine guns; 2) one M9 37mm auto cannon; 3) one 20mm Oerlikon gun; 4) one 40mm Bofors gun; 5) two Mk 50 5-inch bombardment rocket launchers; 6) four Mk 13 torpedoes; 7) two Mk 6 depth charges.

Compare this to the “well armed” LCS of 4,000+ tons: 1) one Mk 110 57mm Bofors gun; 2) two 30mm Mk 46 Mod 1 guns; 3)one Mk 49 Mod 0 RIM-116 RAM launcher (21 rounds) or SeaRAM (11 rounds); 4) six .50 machine guns; 5) no AGM-114L Hellfire missiles fitted yet, on a ship as big as a WW2 Gearing class destroyer? THIS is survivable? All I see is a fat, juicy, hapless missile magnet.