LCS

"Don't Tread On Me" The historical along with current aspects of the largest navy in the world.
Joined: 07 Oct 2009, 04:39

22 Jan 2018, 04:32 #2001

Every new ship has issues; not just the first of a design; it's not totally a design matter; it's a function of that particular construction being new and effectively unused.  Most complex manufactured things have issues when they are first put into service; cars for example.  And by comparison with a ship a car is almost laughably simple.  That's why there's both an INSURV to identify as many of the problems as possible and a warranty to fix them.

And, don't leave the sailor out of it.  I know of one where a fully trained and experienced but not in that ship class senior sailor threw a switch in a brand new ship.  It was the switch next to the one he should have thrown and the result was a trip back alongside to have a generator rebuilt.  There was an interlock but it had been installed back to front and because it was a low probability situation, and one we hadn't trialled as trialling all failure modes is generally impossible,  it wasn't picked up.  That was (if memory serves) about the fourth ship of that class.   Another where an officer ordered "stop" when he should have ordered "half ahead" and stripped about half the blades off a turbine.  It goes on.
Reply
Like

Joined: 21 Nov 2010, 00:24

22 Jan 2018, 12:28 #2002

ThePointblank wrote:
IcelofAngeln wrote: Teething issues?  The LCS has been in service for nine goddam years now.
I suggest you review the issues USS New York (LPD-21) had when she first commissioned, or the issues USS San Antonio had... Also, read the testing and evaluation reports a few years back on the San Antonio class LPD's which were NOT complimentary and highlighted a laundry list of deficiencies...
And San Antonio was considered a case study in shoddy construction and failure of contractor oversight, complicated by being shifted from one builder to another and then being hit by Hurricane Katrina.  Even so, within six years of commissioning (and two successful deployments), not only had her kinks been worked out but she won the Battle E.

Again, nine bloody years the Freedom class has been in service.  A plank-owning boot who reported aboard fresh from Great Lakes would be a PO1 by now. It hasn't been a "new design" for a long time.
"There are four types of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable, and praiseworthy."

--Ambrose Bierce
Reply
Like

Joined: 18 Oct 2014, 18:37

24 Jan 2018, 15:38 #2003

navyowl wrote:
OldNick wrote: General Dynamics Land Systems manufacture the 30mm Mk 46 mod 2 gun weapon system for the LCS under contract to Navy, presume they deliver to Northrop Grumman.
 
The Navy Recognition video SNA 2018 Day 2 posted by MattReloaded above re. the Northrop Grumman rep stated that they had delivered 8  Mk 48 30 mm ship sets and had orders for 3 more sets for delivery this year.
 
Ten LCS ships have been commissioned and another six have been launched to date.
 
So we have two different designations, Mk 46 & Mk 48 for the same 30 mm cannon ? and the numbers don't add up, 8 ship sets delivered, ten ships commissioned.
 
30+ mm naval cannon, as capability increases so does weight.
The Mk 46 has a low max. rate of fire ~200 rpm using ATK Mk44 Bushmaster II 30 mm chain gun 
The Oerlikon Contraves Millennium has a medium rate, ~1.000 rpm 35 mm KDG GDM-008 cannon
The Goalkeeper with high rate ~ 4,000 rpm using the GAU-8/A Avenger 30 mm Gatling gun
The Russian AK-630 M1-2 very high rate ~ 10,000 rpm

 
if you use (caliber^3)*rof  as indicator of firepower output (roughly corresponds to shrapnel) you'll find 57/220 is   worse than the millennium(35/1000) or rapid76/120. Mk46 (30/200) is a complete joke- it's a law enforcement sniper rifle while other guys are machine guns.
Using 'navyowl' formula for firepower, calculated with the LCS Mk 46 Mod 0 30mm as baseline of 1, very rough ROM as using quoted rof, but a guide for what's it's worth.
 
 
GD Mk 46 Mod 0  [ATK  Mk 44 Bushmaster II 30mm]                                      1    
BAE Bofors 40mm Mk 4                                                                                    3.6   
Raytheon Phalanx [M61 Vulcan 20mm]                                                            6.7   
BAE Bofors Mk 110 57mm                                                                                7.5      
BAE 5"/62 (12.7 cm) Mark 45 Mod 4                                                                7.6       
Oerlikon Contraves Millennium 35mm                                                              7.9
OTO 76/62 SUPER RAPID                                                                               9.8
OTO 127/64 LW VULCANO SYSTEM                                                            12.1
Thales Goalkeeper [GE GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm]                                          20
Russian AK-630 M1-2                                                                                      50  
Reply
Like

Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 07:40

27 Jan 2018, 11:41 #2004

The DOT&E FY2017 has arrived. Enjoy.

LCS @ DOT&E 2017

The Navy has not conducted any air warfare test events against ASCM surrogates planned as part of the Enterprise Air Warfare Ship Self-Defense TEMP or the LCS TEMP. The Navy’s Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems has halted all work to develop a Probability of Raid Annihilation (PRA) Modeling and Simulation (M&S) suite of the ships’ combat systems for FY18. Delaying these efforts postpones evaluation of LCS air warfare capabilities.
Both LCS seaframes have limited anti-ship missile self-defense capability. The Navy has not fully tested these combat systems and the Navy does not plan to conduct further air warfare operational testing of Freedom seaframes 1 through 15 in their current combat system configuration. The Navy has accepted the risk of continued operation with a combat system that is not operationally tested. 
Survivability testing and preliminary analyses on both LCS variants continue to demonstrate that neither LCS variant is survivable in high intensity combat. Although the ships incorporate capabilities to reduce their susceptibility to attack, testing of analogous capabilities in other ship classes demonstrated that such capabilities have limited effectiveness in high intensity combat. As designed, the LCS lacks redundancy and the vertical and longitudinal separation of vital equipment found in other combatants. These features are required to reduce the likelihood that a single hit will result in loss of propulsion, combat capability, and the ability to control damage and restore system operation.
"We need to get closer to that Dane mentality" - Rear Admiral Bryant Fuller, NAVSEA Chief Engineer, March 2015 ASNE Day.
Reply
Like

Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 07:40

08 Feb 2018, 01:07 #2005

From Jane's :

COBRA beach zone mine detection system achieves IOC
Richard Scott - Jane's International Defence Review
13 October 2017

The AN/DVS-1 Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis (COBRA) airborne mine detection system has achieved Initial Operational Capability (IOC), the US Navy (USN) has confirmed.

Developed by Arête Associates, COBRA is based on a multispectral electro-optical payload – carried on the MQ-8 Fire Scout unmanned aircraft system – designed to detect and localise minefields and obstacles in the beach zone in daytime conditions. 

Previously, such reconnaissance was only possible by putting sailors or marines onto the beach in advance of a landing, exposing them to potential casualties and revealing the intended landing zone

The COBRA Block I system is comprised of two airborne payloads, a post mission analysis station and the Tactical Control System (TCS) segment for the MQ-8B Fire Scout mission control system (MCS).

(147 of 419 words)
"We need to get closer to that Dane mentality" - Rear Admiral Bryant Fuller, NAVSEA Chief Engineer, March 2015 ASNE Day.
Reply
Like

Joined: 29 Nov 2004, 07:40

13 Feb 2018, 17:57 #2006

From Jane's :

Mine the gap: USN weighs options for countermine operations
Michael Fabey, Washington, DC - Jane's Navy International
13 February 2018

As the US Navy prepares to retire its Avenger-class mine-countermeasures ships the service finds itself in a countermine limbo while it resolves issues with future systems, writes Michael Fabey

With three of its 14 Avenger-class mine-countermeasures (MCM) vessels having been retired since 2013 and the rest fast approaching the end of their service lives, the US Navy (USN) is under the gun to develop a replacement force.

While the USN has settled on Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) MCM mission packages to take over the countermine operations carried out by the fibreglass-sheathed, wooden-hulled Avengers, delays in the LCS programme – and particularly with the MCM modules – mean the USN has had to stretch out the service lives of its old minesweepers, revamp its MCM procedures and search for ways to fill potential MCM gaps in the interim.

(137 of 1056 words)
"We need to get closer to that Dane mentality" - Rear Admiral Bryant Fuller, NAVSEA Chief Engineer, March 2015 ASNE Day.
Reply
Like