US Combat Ship Decision Coming in 'Very Near Future'

[Harald]

Als je het allemaal zo leest, wordt het geen nieuw type/ontwerp, maar willen ze op het bestaande ontwerp van de LCS wijzigingen/aanpassingen doorvoeren zodat het meer naar een volwaardig fregat met bijbehorende capaciteiten, onder de noemer van Small Surface Combatant (SSC)

The littoral combat ship (LCS) is a class of relatively small surface vessels intended for operations in the littoral zone (close to shore)

Ze willen dus af van bruin en gaan dus meer richting blauw, dus van dicht bij de kust naar open water.

Extra info :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral_combat_ship#Small_Surface_Combatant_.28SSC.29

[Harald]

modify the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) to become a frigate

SAS 2015: Tight schedule for US frigate acquisition



The decision to modify the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) to become a frigate means that industry has a short timeframe in which to develop a design for the US Navy.

It is also expected that the new frigate will each cost about $100 million more than the LCS multi-buy unit, up from earlier industry estimates of $75 million. It is expected that the frigate will cost upwards of $600 million per unit in FY19 when construction is due to start.

Speaking at Sea-Air-Space 2015, Frigate programme manager, Capt Dan Brintzinghoffer said PMS 515 has been working with staff from the Chief of Naval Operations over the past two months to work out what the requirements differences are going to be between the first 32 LCS ships and the remaining 20 frigates.

He said that the timeframe to run a competition is very tight: 'You have to be ready with a technical data package and the request for proposal has to be detailed enough in the FY17 timeframe to be able to give to industry to come back with either modifications, changes, questions and then be able to proceed.'

In reality, Brintzinghoffer said that there is just 18-20 months to pick and choose what the designs are going to look like. The navy has to have very well defined requirements set and systems selection completed to allow the GD/Austal and LM/Marinette teams to do the detailed design and meet the FY19 construction timeline.

By introducing the frigate as an LCS flight upgrade rather than a new acquisition means that the process can be speeded up.

'This is not a new start because of the option that was chosen to make a modified LCS the solution for the remaining 20 ships we were able to go ahead and use the existing acquisition and requirements documentation in order to keep the process moving,' he said.

The reason for continuing with a modified LCS is to keep a hot production line that will reduce the costs of the frigate manufacture but also because Brintzinghoffer said that competition between the two industrial teams has brought LCS costs down – which is why they will run a competition for the frigate. However the acquisition strategy is not set so it is unclear if the 20 frigates will be sourced from one team or both.

To be classified as a frigate means the ship needs to have a multi-mission role and will therefore have permanently fitted anti-submarine (ASW) and surface warfare (SuW) systems, some taken from the existing LCS mission packages (MPs) other capabilities new – such as an over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile.

'We are working through the process right now of selecting what the requirements are for that missile and how we are going about procuring that missile,' Brintzinghoffer said.

'In order to meet the timeline to keep the hot production line moving, which is what makes the ships affordable, we can't go off and have a five-year development programme, so the intent is to take things that already at a very high technology readiness level and then do the integration of those onto a platform.

'So in reality a relatively small level of effort compared to doing a missile development programme – that is not the intent it is to lay out the requirements, see what is out there that meets those and make the selection,' he added.

There are set of design changes to go through as part of a detailed design of the frigate, the number of missiles are yet to be decided but Brintzinghoffer wants as many as possible that the weight of the ship will allow. Using Harpoon as a baseline he is confident that more the four missiles can be added.

Some modular capability will remain on the frigates. The Hellfire Longbow missile on the existing LCS SUW MP will be modular along with the variable depth sonar that is part of the existing ASW MP. It will be a capability that can be added to the frigate to increase its ASW capability and join the permanently fitted torpedo defence system and multifunction towed array sonar.

The navy wants to avoid major modifications as this will drive the cost up and cause timeline lags that will also increase the cost of the ship. But there will have to be changes to reduce the weight and allow the new systems to be fitted.

Brintzinghoffer said there are already some weight allowances because the frigate will not have the Mine Countermeasures (MCM) equipment such as the RMMV and supporting equipment such as cranes, which will save 25t already.

'There are a lot of those opportunities there are reduceability things that we can do. We can modify the way the hull is laid out in terms of where structure is set so we can remove weight and make it cheaper to produce because it requires less man hours, so we are taking advantages of all of those,' he added.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/imps-news/sas-2015-tight-schedule-us-frigate-acquisition/

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Ik denk niet dat een Burke schaalbaar is. Daarbij vraag ik me af of je dat moet willen, de eerste werd ook 30 jaar geleden getekend, en nu zal er flink aan verbeterd zijn, maar vraag me af of het niet toch een verouderd ontwerp blijft.

Daarbij, die tijd hebben ze wel. En dat LCS is misschien ook wel aan te passen. LM kwam in ieder geval met wat plaatjes van vergrote uitvoeringen voor het Saudische fregatten programma.  Het kan veel kanten op, maar met alle financiële beperkingen, en belangen, is het te hopen dat het ook gebeurd. Meer survivable maken klinkt leuk, maar heb begrepen dat juist dat vaak lastig achteraf te integreren is.

Tijd wordt wel een issue gezien het alsmaar afnemende aantal eenheden van de USN versus zeer snelle uitbreiding van o.a. de Chinese marine. Met een mini Burke bedoel ik eigenlijk een volledig nieuw schip met stevig fregat capaciteiten zeg maar een Amerikaans M fregat en een echte opvolger van de Oliver Hazard Perry klasse.

Of de vergrote LM versie van het LCS afdoende zijn? Geen idee.

[dudge]

Ze kunnen m.i. beter een "mini" Burke klasse ontwikkelen of een volledig nieuw specifiek FF ontwerp al kost dat ongetwijfeld kostbare tijd in een steeds meer (onverantwoord) krimpende USN.

Ik denk niet dat een Burke schaalbaar is. Daarbij vraag ik me af of je dat moet willen, de eerste werd ook 30 jaar geleden getekend, en nu zal er flink aan verbeterd zijn, maar vraag me af of het niet toch een verouderd ontwerp blijft.

Daarbij, die tijd hebben ze wel. En dat LCS is misschien ook wel aan te passen. LM kwam in ieder geval met wat plaatjes van vergrote uitvoeringen voor het Saudische fregatten programma.  Het kan veel kanten op, maar met alle financiële beperkingen, en belangen, is het te hopen dat het ook gebeurd. Meer survivable maken klinkt leuk, maar heb begrepen dat juist dat vaak lastig achteraf te integreren is.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Schuiven ook weer wat meer af van die LCS flauwekul richting een fregat.
Maar moet nog maar zien of het echt wat gaat worden.

Ze kunnen m.i. beter een "mini" Burke klasse ontwikkelen of een volledig nieuw specifiek FF ontwerp al kost dat ongetwijfeld kostbare tijd in een steeds meer (onverantwoord) krimpende USN.

[dudge]

De Amerikanen zijn duidelijk ook hulp plannen/ideeën aan het bijstellen voor hun "Future Frigate" programma

Schuiven ook weer wat meer af van die LCS flauwekul richting een fregat.
Maar moet nog maar zien of het echt wat gaat worden.

[Harald]

De Amerikanen zijn duidelijk ook hun plannen/ideeën aan het bijstellen voor hun "Future Frigate" programma

Navy's Future Frigate Will Be Optimized For Lethality, Survivability; Will Not Retain LCS's Speed

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Whereas a high sprint speed was a driving factor in designing the Littoral Combat Ship, the follow-on frigate will instead be optimized for lethality and survivability, the Navy's frigate program manager said Thursday.

As the LCS program transitions to a multimission frigate, the 40-knot sprint speed requirement will go away to allow for more armor, more weapons, an over-the-horizon missile and full-time anti-torpedo protection, Capt. Dan Brintzinghoffer said at an American Society for Naval Engineers event.

This change, he said, is a recognition of simple physics.

"If we don't change anything [in the hull design] and add a lot of weight, they're not going to go as fast as they do today," he said, noting that a total redesign to maintain the high speed is out of the question.
"It's acknowledging the reality of physics: it's heavier, it's not going to go as fast, and it's no longer a requirement they have to design to."

Instead, he said the frigate will be more lethal, more survivable, and will be able to conduct surface warfare and ant-submarine warfare simultaneously, whereas the LCS had to choose only one mission package to work with at any given time.

The frigate will take the basic LCS designs – likely keeping both hull variants – and add extra armor. It will have a torpedo decoy, variable depth sonar and multi-function towed array permanently onboard, rather than included in a part-time mission package for LCS; will deploy two 7-meter rigid-hull inflatable boats rather than the 11-meter RHIBs on the LCS surface warfare package; and will retain the Mk 50 30mm guns rather converting to the more common 25mm gun. The ship will be upgunned with a SeaRAM anti-ship missile system, a ship-launched Hellfire missile system and an over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile system that will be competitively contracted. A common combat system, the Lockheed Martin Combat Management System Component Based Total Ship System – 21st Century (COMBATSS-21), will manage those weapons.

Among the challenges of turning the LCS – which performs either surface warfare, mine countermeasures or anti-submarine warfare at a time through single-mission packages of equipment – into a multimission ship is command and control. Brintzinghoffer said the combat information center will need more and possibly different consoles to accommodate hunting a submarine and firing a missile at a surface target at the same time, for example.

Brintzinghoffer said he was also given the challenge of reducing lifecycle costs, in addition to creating a multimission ships with greater survivability and lethality.

"One of the ways you do that is by inserting commonality, so where we can ... we're going to make [the two frigate variants] the same, and we're in the process of going through trade studies to figure out what exactly that means system by system, box by box."

As a result, Brintzinghoffer said he expects much more government-furnished equipment on the frigates compared to the LCS, where prime contractors Lockheed Martin and Austal USA were given leeway to outfit the ship as they saw fit so long as the final ship design met certain mission-based requirements.

The captain noted, though, that commonality could come in many forms. The two frigate designs may be common with each other to reduce costs for the program, but there are also lifecycle savings opportunities by creating commonality between the LCS and the frigate, or the frigate and other classes of surface combatants.

"The key for us is to strike the balance between the performance of the system, the cost of the system – in some cases we're going to change to something that's more expensive, or make a change that costs money in order to save in the long-run – and this is our opportunity to do that."

Brintzinghoffer told USNI News after his presentation that for each change his office looks to make – whether it is intended to increase capability, create commonality or save money through efficiencies – the program conducts "a cost-based analysis that will tell you if you implement a change and it costs $5, how quickly will you get a return on your investment. And that's what we're balancing against, added capability versus when will you get a return on your investment."

One idea is to use LED lighting instead of fluorescent light bulbs, which Brintzinghoffer said will cost a little more upfront but begin to save money quickly – the Navy won't have to buy replacement bulbs or store them on ships, and there won't be any manpower costs associated with changing burnt-out bulbs.

For ideas that change the overall capability of the ship, Brintzinghoffer said he has to get approval from the resource sponsor, the surface warfare directorate on the chief of naval operations' staff (OPNAV N96). For changes that do not affect warfighting capability, such as the LED lighting, Brintzinghoffer gets the final say in the cost-benefit analysis.

After the program office completes these studies and finalizes its preliminary design, Brintzinghoffer said during his presentation that he expects to release a request for proposals for ship construction in late calendar year 2017, and the contracts will be awarded in fiscal year 2019. Contracts for the over-the-horizon missile and other pieces of GFE will be handled separately, and he said the Navy does not yet have a timeline for those acquisition projects.

http://news.usni.org/2015/10/15/navys-future-frigate-will-be-optimized-for-lethality-survivability-will-not-retain-lcss-speed

[Harald]

Capacity for modular weapons key for USN's future surface combatant

Key Points
•Future surface combatant will glean lessons from LCS and Zumwalt destroyer programmes
•Weapons capacity and system modularity likely to drive requirements

As the US Navy (USN) assesses how best to recapitalise its fleet of Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers (CGs) and eventually Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers (DDGs), the naval staff's surface warfare head told IHS Jane's on 7 January that he is seeking modular weapons and radar systems to provide long-range offensive punch, as well as multilayered defensive capability.

Rear Admiral Peter J Fanta, director of surface warfare (N96), said that the USN's future surface combatant effort must glean lessons from ongoing warship programmes, and build upon new concepts and technologies being introduced on the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and Zumwalt-class (DDG 1000) destroyer.

http://www.janes.com/article/57088/capacity-for-modular-weapons-key-for-usn-s-future-surface-combatant

[Ace1]

[Harald]

Integration focus for US frigate development

The US Navy will focus on integrating new weapon and survivability systems on the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) to turn it into the new future frigate.

Speaking at Sea-Air-Space 2015, RAdm Brian Antonio from PEO LCS, said that PMS 515 had been created in January within his procurement division at Naval Sea Systems Command to look at the integration effort required.

The new frigate programme was originally envisaged as a modified LCS because it will be based on the two existing LCS platforms: Freedom and Independence.

Antonio said that since its creation in late January 2015 the new PMS 515 has been working on the integration required to facilitate the transition from the LCS to a modified LCS (now frigate).

'We are in the process now of systems selection, engineering work, space configurations, and acquisition strategy,' Antonio said. 'We owe the Secretary of Defense a framework for that acquisition strategy in the next several weeks,' he added.

'The frigate is not a new design,' Antonio stressed, 'the new design from scratch was one of the options that the Secretary of Defense asked the navy to look at.'

But the requirement is to start building the ships no later than 2019 and the design phase is for the transition will start in the next couple of years.

'This is not a development initiative, it is an integration effort,' Antonio said. 'From a tactical perspective we are looking for weight reduction ideas, a high capability impact, low cost, least disruptive ideas. From a strategic perspective we are looking for additional warfighting capability.'

The new frigate will be expected to have additional survivability capabilities including: improved 3D Air Surveillance Radar; improved decoy systems; an upgrade to SeaRAM; SEWIP light EW package; a multifunction towed array sonar; torpedo defence; armour protection around the magazine; and a 25mm gun.

The lethality capabilities are expected to comprise: an over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile; anti-submarine warfare (ASW)/surface warfare (ASuW) helicopter weapons such as Hellfire, MK 54 torpedo, and 50 cal guns; a multifunction towed array sonar for ASW and a 57mm gun.

In its ASuW configuration the frigate can be expected to have 30mm guns; 11m RHIBs and a ship-launched Hellfire missile capability. In its ASW configuration it will have a variable depth sonar.

Antonio said that the key to introducing these systems to the LCS platform is weight reduction and that the navy's LCS industrial partners (Lockheed Martin and Marinette Marine for the Freedom-class and General Dynamics and Austal for the Independence-class) are being brought in early to help find a solution.

The other key is to find more commonality between the two variants of LCS. These activities will continue from FY15 through to the beginning of FY19 when a frigate contract is expected later that year. Technical Data Packages and an RfP for Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) for combat management systems, warfare system integration and vulnerability improvements are expected earlier during FY17-18 with an award in FY19 alongside the frigate award.

Only four LCS have been delivered so far, but some early integration of systems will be attempted on later variants of the LCS from FY16-18 (hulls 9-16) as opportunity platforms for the weight reduction work during post-shakedown availability to de-risk the frigate project.

In 2014 the US Secretary for Defense asked the Secretary for the Navy to look at LCS capabilities due to concern that with 52 LCS due to be delivered that one-sixth of the USN fleet would comprise LCS and wanted to look at what could be done to mitigate this.

Following months of study the USN submitted a recommendation that was accepted by the Secretary of Defense at the end of 2014 to design, develop and procure a multi-mission modified LCS with the systems described above focussing on ASW and SuW.

Therefore instead of 52 LCS there will be 32 (16 of each variant) and then a move to 20 frigates (modified LCS).
'The initial frigates are just the start, we are going to continue to look for weight reduction ideas and ways to bring that capability to the fleet. Flexibility is still key to enable the ships to be relevant with a 25 year service life it will take the ships out to 2050,' Antonio concluded.

http://www.shephardmedia.com/news/imps-news/sas-2015-integration-focus-us-frigate-development/

[Ace1]

Als ik het goed begrijp worden er compacte wapensystemen ontwikkeld of gebruikt voor de LCS, wellicht dat er modules zijn die dan bruikbaar zijn voor de OPV's van de Holland Klasse?

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

A closer look at the "Modified LCS"

Christopher P. Cavas / dec-12

http://intercepts.defensenews.com/2014/12/a-closer-look-at-the-modified-lcs/

[Harald]

Dec 11/14: Little Choice Stated

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel appears to have shied away from making any drastic dedision with the future of the LCS, by choosing to base 20 future Small Surface Combatants... based on "modified LCS hull designs." The use of the plural form implies that there is no down-select to just one of the 2 LCS designs. By omission, mine warfare seems out, since modular requirements are maintained solely for capabilities against surface ships and submarines.

Predictably the SSCs will have to be both more survivable and better armed, since these points are among the weaknesses most often pointed out by LCS detractors. The list of goodies to achieve that:

◾ over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missiles
◾ air defense sensor and weapon upgrades
◾ 1 advanced electronic warfare system
◾ advanced decoys
◾ 1 towed array system for submarine detection and torpedo defense
◾ 2 25mm guns
◾ 1 armed helicopter equipped with Hellfire missiles and MK-54 torpedoes
◾ 1 unmanned FireScout helicopter for surveillance, reconnaissance, and targeting

The armed helicopter and rotorcraft are not new, and 25mm guns are not going to make much of a difference except against the smallest threats. The rest is getting SSCs closer to how LCS has been pitched to export prospects, and to what even smaller ships pack in foreign fleets. Beyond that, the Navy still has to pin down many specifics, discuss crew size, or explain how they will contain costs.

Sources: US Navy Moving Forward With LCS external link | USNI News external link.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-new-littoral-combat-ships-updated-01343/

Navy Moving Forward With LCS
http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=84849

[Harald]

Hagel: New Ship To Be Based on LCS

US Navy Will Not Choose Single Design, Source Says

WASHINGTON — The decision is in, and the decision is — to be decided.

US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has accepted the Navy's recommendation that the design of the small surface combatant (SSC), a more powerful ship to follow the littoral combat ship, will be based on existing LCSs, Pentagon sources said Thursday.

The decision rules out several choices that included new designs or a version of the Huntington Ingalls patrol frigate.

But Hagel — contrary to widespread expectations — did not decide whether the SSC ....


http://www.defensenews.com/article/20141211/DEFREG02/312110041/Hagel-New-Ship-Based-LCS?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|World News|p

[Harald]

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/

Future Surface Ships

■The CSBA think tank published a plan external link [PDF] to reinvigorate US Navy surface warfare. The US Navy is going to be both overstretched, and technically challenged to maintain sea control against modern navies. CSBA lays out a solution that would change the roles of many ships, reconfigure air defense to a whole different model, emphasize offensive long-range surface strike and anti-air weapons

Hieronder via de link is het rapport te lezen :

http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A-Plan-To-Reinvigorate-US-Navy-Surface-Warfare.pdf

Wel een interessant rapport, mede voor de NL vervanging van de M-fregatten.