Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

unhappycamper

(60,364 posts)
Wed May 8, 2013, 09:11 AM May 2013

Navy Ship (LCS) Can’t Meet Mission, Internal U.S. Report Finds

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-07/navy-ship-can-t-meet-mission-internal-u-s-report-finds.html



A hull section of a U.S. Navy Littoral Combat Ship sits in a paint booth during a facility tour at Marinette Marine Corp., in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Navy Ship Can’t Meet Mission, Internal U.S. Report Finds
By Tony Capaccio - 2013-05-07T20:08:42Z

U.S. Navy leaders were warned last year that a $37 billion program to build Littoral Combat Ships can’t meet its promised mission because the vessels are too lightly manned and armed, according to a confidential report.

“This review highlights the gap between ship capabilities and the missions the Navy will need LCS to execute,” said the report prepared last year for the Navy by Rear Admiral Samuel Perez. “Failure to adequately address LCS requirements and capabilities will result in a large number of ships that are ill-suited to execute” regional commanders’ warfighting needs.

The 36-page report obtained by Bloomberg News is at odds with assurances from Navy leaders that their project is on course to deliver a small, speedy and adaptable ship intended to patrol waters close to shore.

The review, requested by Admiral Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, echoes findings by critics inside the Pentagon who deride the vessel. The report, stamped “confidential draft,” found that the plans to swap equipment needed for different missions are impractical, the vessel’s width may prevent it from docking in some ports, and the decision to proceed with two versions complicates logistics and maintenance.



unhappycamper comment: The LCS has has been a loser sink they hit the water.

The super-dooper NLOS missile system was cancelled because it could not hit shit. No mission modules are available. The main armament is a five inch pop gun on the front deck.

Littoral Combat Ships were first defined the the Navy's Bluewater project for costing $200 million dollars a pop. LCS #1 cost $584 million dollars delivered sans people, aircraft and mission modules. LCS #2 was delivered for $704 million dollars sans people, aircraft and mission modules.

Since the first two craft produced were somewhere between 200 ~ 300 percent over budget Congress, in it's infinite wisdom, decided to purchase 10 more of them.



2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Navy Ship (LCS) Can’t Meet Mission, Internal U.S. Report Finds (Original Post) unhappycamper May 2013 OP
These things are death traps to their crew in combat against any organized naval foe. leveymg May 2013 #1
I read a book called "Sea Fighter", by James H. Cobb... krispos42 May 2013 #2

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
1. These things are death traps to their crew in combat against any organized naval foe.
Wed May 8, 2013, 09:19 AM
May 2013

One anti-ship missile hit and this thing is an expensive wreck on the bottom.

A Fabrege Egg of a warship.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
2. I read a book called "Sea Fighter", by James H. Cobb...
Wed May 8, 2013, 09:28 AM
May 2013

It was about littoral warfare by the Navy against a dictator on Africa's West Coast.

The vessel used was an armed and armored air cushion vehicle, a souped-up version of the LCAC. It was armed with tried-and-true weapons, could make turns for 65 knots, and could go on anything flat, including the shallows and the beach.

If memory served, it was armed with manually-driven .50-cal machine guns and Mk 19 grenade launchers, two twin-arm launchers that could accept either laser-guided Hellfire missiles or 2¾" rocket launchers from rotary magazines, and you could put 2 or 4 Harpoon launchers in the cargo area. Or a mission-extending fuel bladder. Or a squad of Marines with a Zodiac.

Seems to me that a few of these operating from an existing amphibious-assault ship would as effective and a lot cheaper than building a littoral combat ship.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Veterans»Navy Ship (LCS) Can’t Mee...