LCS Test Vs. Fast Attack Boats ‘Unfair’: Missile Missing, Navy Says

By on January 29, 2016 at 5:23 PM
USS Coronado

USS Coronado

PENTAGON: “Unfair!” That, in a word, is the Navy’s response to a Director of Operational Test & Evaluation report saying the controversial Littoral Combat Ship had trouble defending itself against Iranian-style swarms of fast attack boats.

Yes, a Navy official told me, in the test some “enemy” boats got dangerously close to the USS Coronado and inflicted simulated “damage.” But the LCS still repelled the attack — and without its full complement of weapons: The long-range Hellfire missile has yet to be installed.

That Navy hasn’t managed to equip the LCS with all its small-boat-killing weapons doesn’t exactly speak well of the program. The mine-clearing and anti-submarine packages are even further behind. (The Navy also wants to equip the ship with an “over the horizon” missile to sink big ships). But without the Hellfire’s 20-pound warhead and its its five mile range, the LCS would have to rely entirely on its 57 millimeter and 30 mm cannon to defeat incoming threats, radically reducing its reach and punch. Since the missile will go on LCS, leaving it out of the test is a big deal.

First and foremost, “the LCS defeated the adversary, right?” the Navy official said. “How nitpicking is that to criticize, ‘oh, some of them got too close.’ Oh, c’mon. I would call baloney on that.”

“Here’s the other thing: in the scenario, it didn’t have the missile package,” the official continued. “We did testing with the Longbow Hellfire” — a Navy test, not one run by DOT&E — and “in the same scenario, high speed maneuverable targets…it defeated seven of eight.”

“The one out of eight that it missed…. it wasn’t a missile failure,” the official said, without providing additional detail.

That one boat the missiles missed would presumably have been targeted by all the Littoral Combat Ship’s 57 and 30 mm quick-firing cannon. “In the existing scenario they all got shot to death just with the guns,” the official said, without the missiles as a first line of defense.

“It just seems to me it was an unfair treatment,” the Navy official concluded.

Comments

  • CharleyA

    Considering that the Hellfire was an afterthought, what was the Navy thinking WRT the original design?

    • Kp

      It’s hard to say what “original”is with the LCS, since it was first dreamed up to be a quick, cheap, deadly, and comparatively expendable warship, but costs ballooned as they do, and the budget saw some programs cut including the original OTH middle that was supposed to be on board LCS. Hellfire on the LCS is more of a stopgap than an afterthought.

    • Nikola Tasev

      The navy was thinking of a ship to take long range anti-pirate (Rigid inflatable boats with RPGs, not missile boats), anti-submarine, minesweeping, helicopter and drone carrier. The LCS can free much larger and much more expensive destroyer at these tasks. It is the most cost-effective ship at the navy for them. and it doesn’t need anything more than WRT for them.
      Why do people assume all Navy ships need to duke it out with large enemy fleets? You don’t need a 2 Billion dollar destroyer for routine non-strike missions.

  • 2IDSGT

    Once again the DOT&E has proven itself a self-licking ice cream cone out to justify its own funding and little else.

    • PolicyWonk

      Heh. The navy’s own inspector general has also authored scathing reports about LCS (both variants), as has the GAO. Our allies walked away from LCS, saying it was far too expensive for such small ROI. A Skjold-class missile boat would eat LCS alive at a fraction of the cost (as would any other naval opponent). According to Adm. Jonathan Greenert on this very site, LCS was “never designed to venture into the littorals to engage in combat”.

      Not ONE favorable report on LCS has yet to be authored, excepting of course the LCS program office. Defense Industry Daily more recently revealed that no variant of LCS will ever meet the navy’s lowest construction standard (level 1), when even fleet oilers are built to the level-2 standard. It is notable that eh LCS program office stated, as a justification for LCS skyrocketing costs, that they decided to upgrade the sea frames to the level-1 standard while they were still on the slipways.

      Obviously, this reasoning was known to be false at the time, and the taxpayers were deliberately defrauded.

      LCS, as implemented by the USN, is an appalling waste of taxpayer dollars. The Saudi version (recently negotiated) is a vast improvement with a superior price point, for a ship that can actually defend itself. This seems to indicate that our USN cannot negotiate worth a damn, or otherwise demonstrates a breathtaking lack of competence on the part of the LCS program office.

      The speedboat test is simply asinine and says little about LCS, except that thats a very expensive way to rid yourself of a handful of speedboats. A Cyclone-class PC would’ve easily had the same result at a far more effective price.

      • 2IDSGT

        Baseline LCS is better equipped to defend itself than any Perry-class FFG is or was (to say nothing of upcoming modifications).

        Copy-paste something for that troll.

        • Rocco

          Maybe ,the Perry class was just coming on line in my day & was and still is a cool & hansom looking ship.the LCS may be more modern with all the gadgets but its a mute point in itself as a surface combatatant .not to mention the reliability issues with its propulsion system. I agree that a cyclone class PC would be a better choice for the money.

          • 2IDSGT

            Thought I told you to scat.

          • Rocco

            Oh excuse me!!!! I can’t reply to you .you a shitfixr are an item!! So go scat your pants grouse pig!

          • 2IDSGT

            “grouse pig”? Is that like a wild hog with feathers and wings? Is that some kind of insult Chinese or Hangul?

          • Rocco

            Pick one jack wagon! & no Fungul! To you!

          • 2IDSGT

            go away

          • 2IDSGT

            Wow… google-translate is really kicking your a$$.

        • shipfixr

          Particularly since there was no real “G” in FFG after about 2001.

        • PolicyWonk

          Prove it.

          LCS is a loser – not even constructed to the lowest navy standard – and monstrously expensive. The only way LCS is better equipped to defend itself from anything, is simply by running away.

          I provided hard FACTS in my posting. You’re posting BRAVO SIERRA.

          • 2IDSGT

            You provided copy-paste troll.

  • Don Bacon

    The first Independence-class LCS was accepted six years ago, and it’s not properly equipped for operational tests yet, and won’t be for a loooong time. How can Navy justify that? It can’t.
    Check out the image–
    I like the two gunners in their deck chairs behind the TWG (teeny-weeny gun).
    http://lostcoastoutpost.com/media/cache/ff/cf/ffcf4a2de014863bcfaa76bd7105e9d1.jpg

    • Kenneth Vilhelmsen

      Perhaps they are having a rest – and your teeny-weeny argumentation just doesn’t ad up. To little bacon-man and to late. Stick with the F-35 and get your ass kicked there – landlubber.

      • shipfixr

        Interesting that the only thing you can reply to is the ‘TWG’ comment; what did he say that isn’t true?

      • Clarkward

        All the trouble they’ve had with this boondoggle and the best you have to defend it with is ad hominem? So tell me, squid-to-squid, what exactly makes this ship ready for prime time? Is it its long range, its plethora of mission modules that are fully ready, or its ability to complete a deployment without sitting for an extended period in a foreign port?

        • 10579

          All the real naval personel have either been retired ahead of there time or been fired by our Knower of all things POTUS Obama. Look who is a spokesman for the State Dept, R. Admiral (ret) John Kirbey.I would not let this yes man command a row boat.Did he ever have a command of a man o war vessel.I think the only thing he comanded was a desk.If he is the calander boy for our leaders in the Navy. God help us and our sailors.

          • Secundius

            @ 10579.

            AND Just Exactly, Which War did TRUMP fight in?

          • 10579

            @secundius, What does Trump have to do with anything.He is not in any position to do anything right now and exactly what war did Obama serve in and Clinton the draft dodger who had to be pardoned by Carter for his felony for avoiding the draft and trial.But I take solice in knowing that I am dealing with a liberal who thinks he knows every thing but in the end is a LOSER.

          • Secundius

            @ 10579.

            Guess What, SO WAS TRUMP. Explain how you can get Four Military Deferments, and a “MEDICAL” Exemption, AFTER BEING Deferred FOUR TIME. I’m Finding that “One A Little Hard To Swallow”…

          • Secundius

            @ 10570.

            I believe that Obama was Still studying Law during the First Gulf War, and Practicing Law during the Second Gulf War. Clinton, was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University and DIDN’T need A PARDON by then President Carter. Besides, if Carter was President the War In Vietnam was ALL READY over…

          • 10579

            He did to hold public office for which he had an arrest warrent issued and his felony was about the draft for which he dodged and lied to fed officials.Who the hell do you think taught Hillary how to lie with a straight face.

      • Rocco

        Thankyou!

    • Educating the Uneducated

      Your “Two Gunners” are two fire hoses on the bulkhead.

    • old guy

      Nice to see that HUNK-A-JUNK has a PUKE PORT in the bow. Talk about innovation!

  • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

    Initially, I have always been against the LCS. Kinda deploying a cowboy into inj*n territory armed only with a colt six shooter without the winchester. Now with additional firepower to be installed, let’s reserve judgement and see how it works.

    OTH missiles will definitely give the LCS a bigger and potent punch.

  • Dr. Ronald Cutburth

    I agree. that seems unfair. Accept how close did the one get? Close enough for a suicide bomb blast?Need to send the bill to the folks that didn’t get the missile available.

    • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

      You a real Dr. or just that educated stuff? I’m insane, need a penpal to tell me I am not and that I should not be giving Insane replies for all the Doc’s here?

      • Dr. Ronald Cutburth

        I don’t understand your reply

      • Dr. Ronald Cutburth

        Find my engineering sciences credentials on my web sight under the books in print topic. http://www.lovefromthesea.com

        • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

          I checked out your sight Dr. Cutburth. Tell you one thing on Knowledge. The Creator was here in 2005, and there is Reincarnation. Now may just be my and 1 others Creator, he did not say! Did not see, just felt the prescence and heard the voice, I even asked a question as how do you pray and the answer is ‘how you want and for what you want’!

  • Ctrot

    Is expending $100,000+ missiles really the best way to defend against bass boats?

    • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

      What did they do with the Igess system, as that 5,000 a minute bullet firing ship protector. I would think a few ragheads in a dingey would at least get a hole from that in the dingey, ragheads can’t swim once the rag gets wet can they?Ragheads carry fix a flat along with IED’s for the water?

    • Nikola Tasev

      No. The cannon with cheap shells is more than enough to take out these. The test was against Fast Attack Crafts armed with anti-ship missiles.

      • Ctrot

        No, it wasn’t. I saw the video, it was bass boats with simulated RPG’s.

        • Nikola Tasev

          There was an old video with bass boats with simulated RPG’s, when the LCS did very well. I haven’t seen a new video. Can you share it?

  • Supernova1987

    If the 57mm gun could carry guided rounds maybe there would be no need for the hellfires. For instance the ORCA round:
    http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/sea-air-space-2015/2612-bae-systems-unveils-the-orka-one-shot-one-kill-round-for-57mm-gun-at-sea-air-space-2015.html

    “The new round is designed to be shot from the 57mm MK110 fitted on both types of US Navy Littoral Combat Ships.”
    It could destroy one target every 10 seconds at 8000m. Removing the hellfires would make more room available for an ESSM launcher which the LCS desperately needs.

    • Secundius

      @ Supernova1987.

      17,000-meters, when using High-Explosive Fragmentation Rounds…

      • Supernova1987

        Yeah but those rounds would have to be guided because the enemy boats are moving fast. But there’s no reason apriori why they couldn’t be.

        The 76mm canon would have a range of 40km range with extended range rounds:

        If they were equipped with the 76mm several LCS ships could probably help each other against swarming small boats.

        • Secundius

          @ Supernova1987.

          SAME Ballistics Apply, though. Keep in Mind though, even though the 57mm is rated at 220rpm, peak. Actual over a “SH|T” Storm is 155rpm to keep the Barrel from getting to HOT. Same with 76mm’s 120rpm, sustained is only 85rpm…

          • Supernova1987

            The main advantage I guess of the 76mm is that they can reach targets higher for anti-air and further for anti-surface targets. Another advantage is that a guided round costs quite a lot so it’s better to have a significant punch with it. A 76mm round hit might destroy a small boat with a close miss more easily than a 57mm. And getting a laser guided round to have a direct hit might not be easy if the fast boat is jumping on the waves at high speed.

          • Secundius

            @ Supernova1987.

            The Object is NOT to Destroy the Target “Outright”. It’s to put a Wall of Lead between You and the Attacker, That the Attacker has to Go Through to Get To You. WW2 History Lesson, in Dealing with “KAMIKAZE’S”…

    • Secundius

      @ Supernova1987.

      Most likely reason is, before December 2015. The BAE Mk 295 Mod 0 ORKA 57mm Naval Guided-Projectile Round, DIDN’T exist in Physical Form. It was STILL a Concept…

      • Supernova1987

        I’d make a hybrid between the 57mm gun and a ESSM launcher. Add 2 ESSMs on each side of the turret, the missiles pointing 45 degreed up..

  • john wedow

    We have been hornswaggeled , overpriced arms that cant hold a fight . So this is what its like to watch my country get rotted from within . ZOG

  • James Hicks

    Another way to look at this is that attacking an LCS in fast attack boats is a 100% loss suicide mission, and it’s hard not to see that as a good result for LCS, especially considering there is another weapon system still to be added specifically designed to deal with that threat.

    That said, a patrol boat with a 30mm typhoon and a 50 cal or two would be expected to produce the same result, and costs a fraction of what this thing does, so defeating this kind of attack doesn’t justify LCS, it just proves it can handle itself against it.

    Thinking as the red team, this just means I don’t throw fast attack boats at an LCS. What I can do is stay outside the range of its guns and throw missiles at it until one gets through, with no risk to my own ships.

    If the LCS were equipped with NSMs or Harpoons, that would discourage me from doing that. Suddenly a no-risk scenario becomes a risky one. It’s not worth sending a big surface ship against it – I could lose a big ship taking out a small one, and sending a single missile boat at it means I’m likely to lose, as LCS has some missile defenses.

    I probably don’t want to send a submarine at it either. Even if I’m reasonably confident of winning the exchange, LCS carries one or two helicopters – it might cost me my whole submarine to sink this one annoying little ship.

    So I send air units against it. It can see them coming and track them (with the Sea Giraffe, the best named radar ever) and can defend itself against their missiles, but it can’t reply if my aircraft stay out of range. Sooner or later I’ll sink the LCS, and I can expect to take no losses. So the ultimate upgrade for LCS is some kind of long range anti aircraft missile. Even if it can only carry one or two, it changes the red team’s calculus.

    A weapon is a device for changing your opponent’s mind, and defenses alone won’t do the job. LCS on “presence” missions are going to be a more effective deterrent if there is no risk-free way to sink them – if they are a threat to anything you can throw at them. Without that, however, they’re going to be little more effective than a patrol boat, as their vulnerability will be common knowledge and exploited.

    Western forces found out in Afghanistan and Iraq, to our cost, that if you outfit your troops with only short range 5.56 weapons, the enemy will choose to engage from outside that envelope with impunity. It’s hard to imagine an enemy that wouldn’t exploit the same kind of tactical vulnerability with LCS.

    • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

      Aw, for crying out loud. The reason I seldom comment on the trash spewed by my fellow Americans. Serve and be educated!

      • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

        They don’t educate most of the Cannon Fodder do they? It’s the machine gun is there, you are here, now run across this open field and see if you can take it out? And your response is ” Can’t you get the Dam Air Force to do that”?

      • James Hicks

        Thanks for the somewhat cryptic reply… what’d I miss?

        Rizal Park?

        • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

          Oh you’ve missed the geographical location I deliberately placed? Rizal Park? Read it but never been there? You want me to be to your tourist guide? What’s your agenda, kiddo?

          • James Hicks

            No agenda, you’re wearing it so I thought I’d look it up. That’s it.

      • shipfixr

        And your counter to his position is?

        • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

          Depends on what you have mind. Do you have?

          • shipfixr

            I think you’re a troll…and a just a semi-literate one at that. The guy posted a long, concise comment on the subject, perhaps I don’t agree with it all but he made his point….what did you do? No response is required….please!

          • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

            Right, am a USN troll and I did have a comment on the LCS prior to the one I have commented for the ignoramus like you. I am so semi-illiterate that I was posted to a very sensitive position to recommend our naval strategy in a very sensitive area. I love to troll and you enlisted is welcome to it too.

          • shipfixr

            I saw your previous comment and really had nothing against it, it’s your ridiculous comment in response to Hicks that I was referring to. As for you being posted to a ‘very sensitive position to recommend our naval strategy in a very sensitive area’ BS pure and simple. Finally; would you care to elucidate upon “….and you enlisted is welcome to it too” Is we?

          • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

            Agreed, it’s BS pure and simple. Am goimg to sleep now, is it OK with you?

          • shipfixr

            You mean you’ve been awake? You don’t have to come back to me tomorrow if you run away today.

          • Frank 14°35’N/120°59’E

            Anyway, before I sleep, give it all. I’l comeback to you tomorrow.

    • Supernova1987

      Without BVR SAMs the enemy aircraft can engage the LCS and its helicopters at will. If the helicopters are supposed to be used to destroy the small fast boats from a significant distance, there’s a serious problem here.

      • Secundius

        @ Supernova1987.

        Can it though? A ScanEagle UAV at 8,000-feet Altitude, has a 102.81nmi Radius Field of View. From 20nmi. out, Virtually Impossible to See. Also he BVR, has a “Blind Spot”. ANYTHING less than 40mm in Diameter, is INVISIBLE to the BVR Fire Control System…

        • shipfixr

          Yes, and it only gets gradually better as the diameter increases.

          • Secundius

            @ shipfixr.

            Fuselage of the ScanEagle, is less than 40mm in diameter…

        • Supernova1987

          Any enemy with half a brain knows that the LCS would try to use its helicopters to counter an attack of small fast boats. They are likely to send aircraft to shoot them down.
          Maybe the LCS should carry ScanEagle UAVs capable of designating targets. Those would be harder to shoot down. And the LCS could carry several in reserve.

          • Secundius

            @ Supernova1987.

            The ScanEagle replacement, called the RQ-21 Blackjack. Has a Designator in the Scanning Turret, couple with the 10-kilowatt LWS Fiber-Laser developed by Boeing. Weigh’s just 650-pounds and could be carried on a Sikorsky MH-60R has a range of 22-kilometers. The Missile launched from a BVR, couldn’t Travel Fast Enough to get Out of the Way of a Pulse Laser traveling at the Speed-of-Light (299,792,458m/s)…

          • Supernova1987

            Now you’re talking about something much more complex and expensive. The H-60 would have to have a distributed aperture system to detect incoming missiles and a system to cue the laser. Might work though.
            The RQ-21 could just guide LG rounds coming from the ship. It should be made stealthy. Stealth is more important that range in a high threat scenario.

          • Secundius

            @ Supernova1987.

            A Designator, can Relay GPS Coordinates to a Laser, just as Easy, as it can to a Missile…

          • Supernova1987

            You’d need a staring sensor to see the missile come. The RQ-21 doesn’t have that AFAIK. It’s like the F-35 would use its DAS to detect incoming missiles, not the EOTS.

          • Secundius

            @ Supernova1987.

            An added accessorize feature to the ” Romeo”…

          • Supernova1987

            Maybe the wingtip sensors mounted on the apache E could work for that. Don’t remeber its name.

          • Secundius

            @ Supernova1987.

            Guardian, I believe. Grey Thunder program got cancelled. Longbow Radar, can be Mast Mounted to the MH-60R.

            Successor to the Hellfire, is called the AGM-176C-ER? Griffin, which will also be mount on the Cyclone class PG’s.

            Water-Jets, are to be replaced by BAE 22MW Axial-Flow Water-Jets Mk.I, rated at ~500,000gpm on ALL LCS classes…

          • Supernova1987

            It’s called the Ground Fire Acquisition System. It can probably be mounted somewhere. Don’t know if it could be accurate to cue a laser though.
            The Navy has chosen the hellfire. There is no plan for to replace it apparently.

          • old guy

            I have been warning against SWARM TACTICS for years. It beat us in Tripoli, with dhows and, unless we can get the social brass to acknowledge it, I see doom for our HUNK-A-JUNKs. Iran has Komars, Osas, ribs,(see what”captured” our intruder.) We won’t acknowledge them just as we rejected the idea of KAMIKAZE, even after the Japs started using it.

          • Secundius

            @ old guy.

            Everyone WANT’S to “Dance To A Different Tune”, when it comes to the LCS/FF classes. It’s there like the “Guy In the Wheelchair” Syndrome! STAY AWAY FROM ME!! For the Foreseeable Future, or Longer. Their Going To Be SECOND’S too the Arleigh Burke’s in the US. Navy. G’D’M-IT, DEAL WITH ALREADY…

          • old guy

            I’m not sure I understand your response. New threats require new tactics and equipment. I have developed two EFFECTIVE anti-swarm techniques, neither of which are we equipped to handle.

          • Secundius

            @ old guy.

            Wishing the Ship’s to Just Go Away, ISN’T GOING TO HAPPEN. There ALREADY calling for Funds to Increase the Size of the Freedom class. And a Frigate version of the Independence class are being “Drawn-Up”, as We Speak (“type”). And anything like a Ambassador class, ISN’T in the Foreseeable Future. Is saw a “Tumblehome” type that mounted NO LESS than SIX 6.1-inch Guns. But I suspect IT’S NEVER GOING TO BE BUILT…

          • old guy

            With all due respect, the Navy’s thinking is still stuck in the mud. Maybe, if a kook, like Trump gets in, the 36 lobbying firms representing the yards will be emasculated, the “SOCIAL” flags will be retired and a REAL thinking CNO, like ZUMWALT, will be put in charge.

          • Curtis Conway

            When dealing with targeting . . . risk of failure success goes up, and probability of success goes down, with greater complexity introduced into the targeting and delivery system. We are trying to keep cost down, particularly over time, so what should we do ? . . spend a little up front so we can support as high an engagement Probability of Kill (PK) as we can on the back end at less cost. Having the launching platform and the target both bobbing around in a six-direction of freedom of motion equation is NOT my formula for success, unless the round is internally guided, instead of illumination on a stabilized platform. The round finding the target itself is much preferred over illuminating from a moving (stabilized platform) that could suffer damage and lose stabilization. Since the US Navy no longer cares a whit about ‘compartmentalization’ and ‘watertight integrity’ in the ‘survivability’ equation, just like Close Air Support has nothing to do with proximity to the target (redefine the terms, and win the argument to the detriment of the practitioners?), the probability of the LCS taking damage is high, and the weapons systems should be as smart and independent as we can make them. the current design treats the platform like a disposable element and the sailors are disposable assets.

            The trend coming out of Washington DC for several decades has migrated in its central belief system, even to the point of basic principles are violated due to expediency, or someone paid for the change. Its like Lock Out Tag Out in OSHA. You can now use a combination lock?! Obviously the sponsor of this change NEVER worked in this manufacturing environment with the workers we have today, thinking just like Washington DC! Remember, these laws, rules and regulations must operate in all environments across the board in every state, with every culture, regardless of the system in which it is employed. The individual has the power (functioning hands and a will) so they will just unto that combo and turn that switch ‘ON’ just because they can, and kill the person who did not use a combination lock, and put the key (safety insurance policy) in their pocket during maintenance. Americans can NO LONGER count of his/her fellow workers functioning/believing/conducting themselves like a law abiding responsible citizen in These United States who believes in the core values and principles exemplified in what once was our Judeo-Christian Ethic governed society. In fact Foreign Policy over the last 7+ years has made about as much sense as using a combo lock in LOTO. We need principled people in charge.

            The LCS is a perfect example of the mindset of our current leadership, and exemplifies what is wrong with America today. If they have thought it through, they are not going to tell you, because you wouldn’t understand it, or disagree with it and reduce it probability of coming to fruition.

          • old guy

            You are talking kilo to megawatts, which could kill cockroaches, if needed. BUT you need TERRAWATTS, at least, to do any real damage. Not only that but you also need a BIG power source. Look up the work done on the Navy’s DIRECTED ENERGY program of the ’80s.

        • Uniform223

          “ANYTHING less than 40mm in Diameter, is INVISIBLE to the BVR Fire Control System…”

          there are ways around that. It has been demonstrated operationally…

          http://www.jber.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/110302-F-KX404-070.JPG

          though obviously not invisible they are incredibly hard to detect for BVR fire control systems…

          http://www.acc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123041725

          “The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy,” said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, F-15 exchange pilot in the 65th AS. “It’s the most frustrated I’ve ever been.”

      • Prince Edward

        Without BVR SAMs and only a ‘last chance’ RIM system, any old guided missile with more than a 6 mile range – which Iran certainly has in quantity, and which China and Russia have in abundance – will sink these things. These aren’t AAM platforms, they would struggle to shoot down a handful of 50s/60s era Exocets or Styx missiles, much less aircraft launching guided missiles from 10+ miles away.

        • Supernova1987

          The enemy planes could also just drop cheap LGBs from medium altitude, the RIMs wouldn’t be able to engage them. They just have to drop more than 11 bombs quickly. If each aircraft carries 4 500lbs LGBs, 3 aircraift would be enough. Imagine how easy it would be. Even only one plane could carry a designation pod,and could laser designate bombs dropped from other planes.

          • Michael Rich

            What the hell is it with you and your obsession with using PGM’s for anti-ship warfare?

          • Rocco

            He reads lots of comic books! Lol. & a vivid imagination.

          • Supernova1987

            Lol and what the hell is it with them and their obesession to use a hellfire for anti-ship warfare?

          • Michael Rich

            Because it isn’t anti-ship warfare in the essence of large surface combatants, it is dealing with smaller ships the LCS was designed to combat.

          • Supernova1987

            Hahahah ok!!

          • Michael Rich

            I don’t know what you find so funny, because it’s the truth.

          • Supernova1987

            I was just responding to Prince Edward who said that even a simple missile could destroy the LCS. My point was that even basic LGBs would get the same effect.
            Using unguided munitions would also probably do the trick but it would be harder because the aircraft has to drop its bombs from relatively far and the LCS would be moving at 40 knots.
            As for using the 57mm and the 30mm guns, they would work well without guidance at relatively short range, but at relatively long range it would be better to have a guided projectile. That’s why they want to use the hellfire.

          • Michael Rich

            Obviously, the whole point is to be able to take out the threat at long range if possible, if it gets closer they can fire RPG’s and whatever else they have.

          • Supernova1987

            Where did I say that using PGMs from around 6 miles would be the only way of destroying the LCS? I never said thet either.
            As for using guided 57mm rounds, they would fill the same role as the hellfire at long range, so its use would be perfectly justified.

    • shipfixr

      I pretty much agree but you can only have so many Harpoons and it amounts to killing ants with a hammer. I think swarms of small attack craft would be the greatest threat to the LCS….”fair” or not.

      • Daniel Baird

        I believe that the LCS would use its “long range hellfires” against small attack craft, which are much smaller and would be able to carry more on the LCS. The harpoons would be used only against bigger threats it runs into.

        • Secundius

          @ Naiel Baird.

          The British Brimstone, would be a BETTER Option. Brimstone I, has a Range of 10nmi. And Brimstone II, 25nmi. The problem with the Longbow Hellfire, is, without the Longbow Radar. ALL you have is a “Point-&-Shoot” Hellfire. and a 5nmi. range…

          • Uniform223

            You’re comparing apples to oranges at this point… incredibly moot and superficial. There are surface to surface versions of the Hellfire missile so the AGM-114 can operate with out the longbow radar FCS commonly found on the AH-64. Also understand that compared to the Brimstone, the Hellfire is a smaller missile.

            http://news.usni.org/2014/04/09/navy-axes-griffin-missile-favor-longbow-hellfire-lcs

            Why should the USN pay more for another system when the AGM-114 is essentially free for them and it still fulfills the intended goals and capabilities? If people are constantly complaining about the cost for the LCS Program, having a domestic and readily available weapon platform (already in inventory) is a smarter decision.

        • 10579

          If the LCS are mission capable why not have them have a contingent of fast attack craft on board to suppliment its sting.It is more than capable of handling the task.Slight mods and it could be a go but I can hear the nay sayers now.OW, my ears.

          • Secundius

            @ 10579.

            Freedom, has a Single Vehicle Deck and Independence Two Vehicle Decks. That’s what they were Design for Originally…

    • Rocco

      Well put as usual!

    • Prince Edward

      Right on. A YJ-82 launched from an aircraft well beyond the 5.5 Mile SeaRAM (which AFAIK is not even installed yet) range yet would be fine, and not terribly expensive.
      .

  • fuzzball

    Are they actually thinking of sending a LCS to invade a foreign country all by itself??? A few A-10 loitering in the background could take care of a swarm of speed boats and then go back loitering, an attack helicopter. launched from its own deck could do the same thing.

    • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

      Sailors expendable also could be around the LCS to protect it if they can afford fishing boats with weapons after buidling the LCS or at least maybe we can give them some bags to blow air in then pop to warn the LCS trouble on the water!

    • shipfixr

      No, but they have to be able to operate inshore in enemy waters (Hence the term ‘littoral’) and if some third world country’s ‘littoral combat BOATS’ can pose a major threat to them, the project needs looking at. While A-10’s would sure be handy, they’re a land launched aircraft and may not always be available, nor may any other air support. As for the attack helicopter, where was it during the tests? I think the LCS proponents crying “No fair!” is probably the biggest indictment of all….”No fair!”?????

      • Secundius

        @ shipfixr.

        Actually, a Navalized version of the A-10 Warthog ALREADY Exists! The Lockheed US-3C Viking, can bo outfitted with TWO or More Wing Mounted Cargo Pods. With a Storage Capacity of ~4,250-pounds each. Mount Two Boeing/Rheinmetall GmbH 1.063-inch/70-Caliber (27x145mmR) Impulse Revolver Cannons in each pod including Ammunition. And UTILIZE the Internal Cargo Area of the Fuselage with a Rotary Pallet Launcher Ordnance Package. Flight Characteristics ARE Virtually the Same of the A-10 Warthog…

        • shipfixr

          Problem is, the Viking left fleet service almost seven years ago and, although I think you have a good point, I doubt it would be feasible. As I said “…..nor may any other air support….” it really wouldn’t matter if you could fly A-10’s off a carrier deck if there were no carrier decks available.

          • Secundius

            @ shipfitr.

            As far as I know, there in a “Boneyard” in the Arizona Desert Somewhere. And a Few Operational Ones at Edwards AFB and Patuxent River NAS.

            Also, the British what to buy up all the Remaining C-2A Greyhounds. And Convert them into Gunships…

          • shipfixr

            “COD” gunships…..that would be interesting…..also, the thought of a carrier borne “Puff” is kind of intriguing

          • Secundius

            @ shipfixr.

            The Bell V-280 Valor, is Basically a V-22 Osprey Gunship. You could also probably convert the Agusta/Westland 609’s into V/STOL COIN’s…

          • Rocco

            You would !

          • shipfixr

            One liners are the specialty of a troll…..

          • Rocco

            You agreeing with the idiot above puts you in his class which I thought you were one step above which doesn’t say much! So what ever sarcastic remarks you make now put’s you below the idiot above! The choice is yours shitfixr! Lol!!

          • shipfixr

            ‘Secudius’ could be the stupidest person on the face of the earth…..that still puts him about 12 steps above a one-line troll such as yourself. All I see from you are comments, most of them derogatory and one-liners, about others….yet to see an actual opinion……additionally, you’re a certified azzhole…

          • Rocco

            Really look in the mirror!! Anybody on here that says something legitimate you call a troll! Let me tell you something you want to go toe to toe with me go right ahead dude! You are rude & crude! And have no class! And as for my opinions on anything I won’t comment on anything if I have no knowledge on the subject or experience, I don’t fake shit like you and others on here just so sound like you know what your talking about .your a search & paste troll! Have a nice day troll A………Whole! As apposed to just a hole.

          • shipfixr

            Well Rollo, I think you’re a troll but you can’t find anyplace I’ve called anyone…..even you…..who stated something valid that. Your problem is, you rarely state anything valid and, even when you do, you have to call whoever you’re talking to some kind of a name. Add to that the fact that the majority of your replies are, as I said, one line and derogatory. I don’t think your comments on the S-3, while not totally wrong, show that you are a great authority on them, Show me one thing that’s legitimate that I’ve called you a troll on……the fact is, you’re nothing more than a blow-gut. Period!

          • Rocco

            You called frank a troll in this very blog are you senile or a liar?? I saythe latter shitfixrshitfixr! Besides other people in other blog topics. And I call them as I see it.if something unrealistic & and stupid I’m gonna let you or anyone know about it if its stated. Yes everyone has opinions & entitled to them. In not the only one that has here including yourself. You’re just an arrogant…. !!!!!….!!!!

          • shipfixr

            I called him a troll, yes, what’s your point bug-wit? You’ve shown over and over that reading comprehension is one of your weak points so let me run it by you AGAIN. “….you can’t find anyplace I’ve called anyone…..even you…..who stated something valid that” The operative word being ‘something valid’….get it stupid?

          • Rocco

            Whatever I don’t give a shit what you think all I know is that you lied !!! Even after you denied it .who would you call??? For what!? You want an operative word!! Go Fuck your self. You’re a liar and people that do have no accountability for their actions. Your lower than whale shit! Get it stupid!

          • shipfixr

            I just showed you that there was no lie but, point of fact, you are too stupid to understand…even when it’s right before your eyes. You are ignorant, foul mouthed, and a troll….you also appear to be, at best, semi-literate. Moron!

          • Rocco

            Yeah after the fact that you denied it,like pulling teeth. Besides all the other arrogant personal attacks you’ve said to others at various times. You can call me anything you want it don’t matter. You just prove how much of a stupid arrogant, no class fool you are.you make your parents proud!! Now don’t bother me or east my time!

          • shipfixr

            I don’t know if it’s your poor grammar or what but very little of what you say makes any sense. The point of any subject seems to pass over your head so fast you HAVE to have some form of windburn. But you, on the other hand have a LOT of ‘class’, shame it’s all LOW. Your parents would be proud of you also…shame you have no idea who they are. “……east my time!”? You make my point.

          • Rocco

            No it made all the sense, you just can’t accept the truth! & your in denial! Maybe you should seek therapy!

          • shipfixr

            Yes, I know it does, problem is, it only makes sense to you, I’m sorry if I’m “easting your time….” ROTFLMAO!! You’re a very stupid person Rocco…..all the more so because you see yourself as being a genius. Actually, talking to you is a form of ‘therapy’, it makes me realize how lucky I am to have a functioning mind.

          • Rocco

            Very good, dude but I don’t free treatment’s you are now beyond normal sessions here & I recommend you turn your self in before the coo coo birds come for you.

          • shipfixr

            Just read comments between you and 2IDSGT….he seems to have your number also. As for the ‘coo coo birds’…are you going to let them out of the coop on your roof??

          • Rocco

            Yeah right hear in this blog heckel & jeckel ! Meaning you & your boy!

          • shipfixr

            “…right hear…” huh? Stupid.

          • Rocco

            Yeah what part of that didn’t you understand!!! Or do you need me to repeat it? Boy this is fun huh! Stupid!

          • shipfixr

            I just realized…..,you have no idea that your spelling is 5th grade level. I guess you’re not stupid after all, just ignorant and poorly educated.

          • Rocco

            There’s nothing wrong with my spelling! You have no better way come back so you think you can try to belittle me by pointing my grammar!! What grade are you in! Because your on this blog 24/7 you have no life or job & are probably spunging up taxpayers money on unemployment just so you could dumb on this blog!

          • shipfixr

            Well Rocco, I’m not usually a spelling nazi but let’s be real here: spunging = sponging; right hear = right here; your = you’re; east my time + waste my time; I could go on and on with the spelling and never touch the grammar. As for your other asinine comment, I spent 25 years as an engineer in the USN, enlisted and officer, followed by another 20 years in the marine industry….I’ll match my credentials against yours any time you want to put them up (make sure you’re able to spell them though)

          • Rocco

            That’s because it leaves no arguments for JO’s like you!

          • shipfixr

            Wow, another one liner from the super troll. You tell’em gearbox….you’ve been shifted. Whatta jerk.

          • Rocco

            Really is that all you got! That’s all your really worth. No wait I retract that .I’m so out classed by you that you continue to rise to the occasion of arrogance!! The editorial staff must be enjoying this. Lol. Get a life idiot.

          • shipfixr

            If you mean laughing their tails off at your attempts…..you’re probably right. “I’m so out classed by you that you continue to rise to the occasion of arrogance!!” the foregoing being an excellent example of your literary talent.

          • Rocco

            You basically repeated what I said to you, which shows your comeback was weak.if you think their laughing at me well the why don’t you ask them, it seems like you don’t have more important things to do than to dig your hole deeper in this blog. Mr no life.

          • shipfixr

            As I said, no reading comprehension. If I’m digging my hole deeper in this blog….what is it YOU’RE doing?

          • Rocco

            Helping you stupid! Heh heh!

          • shipfixr

            Well, YOUR ‘stupid’ certainly doesn’t need any help.

          • Rocco

            Can’t fix stupid as the old saying goes!

          • shipfixr

            In your case it seems to go back to your childhood so I guess the warranty on it is long expired. Listen, I’m talking to an uneducated lout who doesn’t even realize what stupidity he’s spouting….and there’s no debating with someone like that, particularly since you have do idea what’s being said. I’ll leave you alone, you can go back to your room and sit in your tire.

          • Rocco

            If I’m such as you say you’re just as simple! Because you don’t know when to stop your bitching! So you go on doing what you do best dude! Just to put things in perspective .this is a military blog & every one here is either a vet or & enthusiast or both! Whether someone here has more information or knowledge than the next there’s no reason that you or anyone else needs to feel more Superior than the other to the point of no return on this blog. Or is this a challenge game of mockery! ………there’s no winners in war! If this is your deal shipfixr the pleasure is all yours!!

          • shipfixr

            Interesting that it’s you who seem to keep this going, but ok, this is the last response you’ll get from me. As for me feeling more superior….I’d suggest you trace back and see how this all started; I agree I could have just let you get away with it but I didn’t. Yes, this is a military blog & everyone here is either a vet or an enthusiast….what’s your point? BTW, there are a LOT of people who post on this blog with spelling and/or grammar as bad or worse than yours….does the fact I’ve never said a word about it to them mean ANYTHING to you?

          • Rocco

            No it doesn’t & I can’t recall how this started, probably a disagreement with you or another blogger! Yes there are complete idiots on here not to mention I’m new to this as I was intrigued by it.some things I’m not as affluent as you are.so I’m learning. I have to for a reason I can’t disclose at this time. You actually don’t seem stupid. Even though I don’t agree on all your opinions. So why don’t we call are little war a draw & move on.maybe we can learn from each other. Lol. Is that cool with you?

          • shipfixr

            Good enough.

          • Rocco

            Cool!

          • Rocco

            What crack are you smoking??????!!!!!!

        • Rocco

          Now of course you deliberately state the S-3C Viking as US-3C !!!! Not to mention it’s been retired 10 yrs now & no it doesn’t have the same flight characteristics as the A-10!!!! The only thing in common is the jet engines! & either I’m out of the loop I never herd of gun pods you mentioned????? Did you get that out of a comic book again!!!!

          • Secundius

            @ Rocco.

            The “C” Model had a Wider Fuselage for Cargo Application, the the “B” Model. And “US” was at the Time the Designation of Utility Transport version of the S-3. There was even a AEW&C version of the Model at he time. Never got Built, though…

          • Rocco

            Neither was the cargo version!! The correct answer is you got caught making up versions of the S-3 that never been built & you dream up an A -10 version of it!!!! .you insult me & everyone on this blog for being serious about it.

          • shipfixr

            Sorry, but as I said before, I don’t know of any C version of the S-3 and ‘US’ was the utility transport or COD but that was only the US-3A.

          • shipfixr

            I’ve never heard of an ‘S-3C’…..as far as I know they stopped with the ‘B’ model and they were ALL retired, at least from carrier service, by 2009. The US-3A’s converted for COD use were gone by or before 2000. All the S-3’s had wing pods that could carry a pretty heavy load. they carried the tanker pods and, I’d guess, they COULD carry some sort of gun pod. I know you see yourself as the great hoo-da here but what WOULD be wrong with the concept of a carrier borne close support plane like the A-10…..I don’t know if it would be the S-3 but something.

          • Rocco

            Yes in my day the S-3 doubled as a tanker & search & rescue besides asw! In its last heyday it served as a admeral personal limo & at pax river for testing perposes not that this is the topic matter here.

    • old guy

      Ah, but that be true. SWARM means SWARM. Dozens, or even, hundreds with bombs, explosives, Stingrers, automatic weapons, etc. They beat us in Tripoli and could do it again 200 years later here. We must have a NEW concept on how to defeat them.

  • styopa

    $750 zodiac defeated by $100,000 missile.
    Hm, which one will run out first?

    • Secundius

      @ styopa.

      Consider the Cost of Ammunition used in WW2, to shoot down ONE Kamikaze. SHIP cost’s more than Ammunition Used…

  • StealthFlyer

    The 11-shot SeaRAM system should have the software upgraded so it can hit surface targets. Yes, it is generally overkill against speedboats, but if the future Hellfire missile system happens to be down for maintenance during an attack or one of the guns fails it is good to have a backup in addition to the four crew-served .50 caliber mounts.

    • Secundius

      @ StealthFlyer.

      Both RAM and SeaRAM are Programmable, and are NOT Limited to Air-Targets. They can ALSO be employed as Direct/Indirect Artillery Support Missiles…

    • Supernova1987

      They should also have man portable weapons like javelin missiles. It might even be possible to get accurate shots with the XM-25. Its 25mm rounds can detect it passes next to a target to explode.

  • Reginald Bronner

    Without the appropriate weapons the LCS is just a target. The test is premature on its face. A low-cost over the horizon rapid rail or other weapon may help. So, where is it?

  • Cynical175

    Are they going to renaming the US Navy to McHale’s Navy?

    • Secundius

      @ Cynical175.

      I don’t think you could get “RUSH”, to play the part of McHale…

  • Clausewitz

    I would be concerned if speedboats getting into the so-called keep-out zone were in fact suicide vessels loaded with enough Comp C to blow a Nevada-sized hole in an LCS. Most of the ships we’re talking about here are probably Boghammar and CPC-class popgunners so the LCS should really be performing at an outstanding level. I’m not sure what to make of the equipment failures but the electronic interference stuff is probably a realistic scenario. Overall, a positive outcome, though the fact that a Navy official called the test unfair is unsettling.

    • Secundius

      @ Clausewitz.

      Just like USS. Cole, and she was FAR BETTER ARMED. WASN’T SHE…

      • Clausewitz

        Yeah, that incident springs to mind. It only takes one, right…

      • ycplum

        Geek Alert!

        No matter how powerful the Vorpal blade, It gets a zero damage roll while sheathed.

    • ycplum

      You can probably tear up a fiberglass (or semi-rigid inflatable) with a .50 cal nicely, but a 57mm does have more range and I think that was the point. I wonder if they can squeeze in another 30 mm. They can alway have pintel mounts for .50 M2 along the sides of the ship for suicide bombers.

  • Nicholas Trueblood

    that’s the point, missiles wouldnt be missing from fast attack boats. LCS is a money pit that doesnt work.

  • Dr. Ronald Cutburth

    I like the overall ship design. The forward and aft guns are fast. Score them on existing equipment. Dr. Ronald Cutburth, Ph.D. Management of engineering science operations, engineering scientist, intelligence expert. Find my credentials on my web site under the title line of Books In Print at http://www.lovefromthesea.com

  • Sam Damiano

    To the unnamed Navy “official” who is crying that the test was “unfair”. The ship was tested as it is currently deployed. There is nothing “fair” about winning a fight. You win or lose with what you have on hand, not the weapons still on the drawing board. I would think any SWO would understand this concept.

  • Tony

    You want fair? How about completing ANY of the three mission packages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The first ship entered service 8 YEARS AGO!

    • Curtis Conway

      the whole program is not about capability, its about money.

  • Lazarus

    Just more proof that DOT&E is unable (or unwilling) to support testing of a modular weapon system!

  • Liars N. Fools

    I’m glad a LCS would probably fend off fast small craft……unless it suffers an “engine casualty” as the Fort Worth did.

  • Lazarus

    The test results of every ship program from the early 1970’s onward are riddled with such comments and complaints. If one reads mid 1980’s test results of the AEGIS system one would think the Navy should never have fielded such a complex, costly and unreliable system!