The U.S. Navy Re-Invents The Littoral Combat Ship Program

US NAVY/Reuters

Bill Sweetman, Daily Beast: The Navy Just Sank Its High-Speed Future

The ship was supposed to zoom over the ocean top, 50 percent faster than its competitors. Then things changed.

The future of the Navy was supposed to be speedy, thanks to its new Littoral Combat Ships. The Navy has built two versions of the LCS, a conventional-looking single-hull ship from Lockheed Martin and a trimaran—a ship with a slender hull and two outriggers—developed by General Dynamics. Tiny by U.S. warship standards, at 3,000-plus tons, the LCS is distinguished by its 45-knot-plus top speed—50 percent faster than most warships. But now the Navy wants to rebrand the LCS as a frigate—that is to say, a real warship, capable of fighting in any circumstances alongside the rest of the fleet or performing long oceanic patrols, with revamped armament and mission equipment. The future version may sacrifice the original ships’ speed, according to Vice Admiral Thomas Rowden, commander of naval surface forces.

WNU Editor: Years ago one of my favorite blogs was New Wars. He has not updated his blog for years, but when he was active he was warning (6 to 7 years ago) that the LCS program was a lemon that was going to be "re-invented" in the future .... and in turn he was condemned and criticized by everyone in any official capacity. Sighhhh .... Mike you are not around anymore .... but you have now been proven "officially" right.

The U.S. Navy's Littoral Combat Ship Is A 'Turkey'

USS Independence (LCS 2) of the General Dynamics Independence Class (front right) and USS Freedom (LCS 1) of the Lockheed Martin Freedom Class littoral combat ships. Naval-Technology.com

It’s Time To Sink The Littoral Combat Ship -- William D. Hartung and Jacob Marx, Defense One

It is more important than ever that the Department of Defense spend taxpayer money wisely as the United States economy struggles and the Pentagon budget comes down from its post-World War II peak. This is particularly true for the Navy, which many strategists see assuming an expanded role in protecting U.S. global economic and security interests. Though the optimal scope of the Navy’s mission is up for debate, it’s clear that U.S. leaders envision diverse objectives requiring diverse maritime capabilities. What should be equally clear is that there is no need for the littoral combat ship.

On paper, the Littoral Combat Ship, or LCS, is the high tech, multipurpose answer to the Navy’s 21st Century needs. It is supposed to be fast, maneuverable and able to operate in shallow water. And it is built to adapt to different tasks through a system of exchangeable weapons and equipment, known as “mission packages.” The Navy asserts that an LCS should be able to sail into port and head back to sea in 96 hours, refitted with a completely new payload. This would have allowed the LCS to replace a slew of small and medium warships, 56 at last count. Most importantly, at a projected price tag of $450 million for one sea frame and three mission packages, it appeared to offer three ships for the price of one.

Read more ....

My Comment: The U.S. Air Force has it's turkey (albeit a bigger one) in the form of the F-35 .... and the U.S. Navy has it's Littoral Combat Ship. I have never been a fan of this program .... and now the worst aspects of it are becoming known as summarized by William D. Hartung and Jacob Marx in the above post. My prediction .... the Littoral Combat Ship program will be terminated when additional Pentagon budget cuts become mandated.