Avatar feed
Responses: 4
PO1 Logistics Specialist
2
2
0
The issue with the LCS is that it was designed as a short-range littoral ship- meaning close to shore, meaning it should belong to the coast guard. But wait! The LCS did not outperform the coastguard cutters in the littoral theater, so it's being branded the new frigate. Without long range capabilities, and heavily reliant on other ships/aircraft for defense. What purpose does a vessel that hides well from radar serve if it has short range(thus not being viable for long range scouting) and requires other ships to be near it for protection? It looks an awful lot like none, unfortunately. This project should have been scrapped after initial tests, but someone in DC loves their pet project. Hopefully the Navy can find a use for them at some point.
(2)
Comment
(0)
SP5 Mark Kuzinski
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Self Employed
2
2
0
16bd201d
The USN saves money since it has a smaller crew than the older,traditional, ships. Since these ships are not like the F-35 project nor the Avengers flying Aircraft Carrier, I am hopeful they are not 160 billion dollars over budget and 7 years behind schedule.
(2)
Comment
(0)
LT Cyber Battle Captain
LT (Join to see)
8 y
They have good concepts but were not designed with room for growth. Also not able to do prolonged operations without frequent replenishment. IMHO not a good replacement for OHP Frigate. We should have just updated the sensors and weapons systems on same class hulls.
(3)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Operations Specialist
1
1
0
These ships are literally the Frankenstein of the Fleet
(1)
Comment
(0)
SP5 Mark Kuzinski
SP5 Mark Kuzinski
4 y
Amen to that.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close