It seems, as I read the press releases, that our very own Government is sinking our beloved Navy – our first line of defense – right here at home in the shipyards.
Oh, it isn’t all the Government’s fault. The contractors won’t even attempt to keep cost down to a reasonable level, and the American public never lays down the law when it comes to graft in Congress or wasteful spending.
However, the major blame falls squarely on the Government and the idiots that we have running he show – in both political parties!
Let’s talk about the freshly killed Littoral Combat Ship Program, flight ‘0′. Over a billion, (yes, BILLION), dollars spent and what do we, the tax payers, have to show for it? We’ve got two hulls. One, (a mono-hull design), is named ‘Freedom’ and she has a steel hull with an aluminum superstructure. The second is a trimaran hull design named ‘Independence’ and is made entirely out of aluminum, from the keel up.
A fire damaging the ‘Freedom’ during outfitting of the vessel. The Freedom, which was about 80% completed, sustained significant damage. She’s damaged goods and has yet to be completely outfitted or assigned.
‘Independence’ is still not even that far along.
Meanwhile, the ‘Powers-That-Be’ in the Pentagon have tinkered and changed the plans so much and so often that the contractors are left scratching their heads and hitting buttons on the pricing calculators. As of 1 November 2007 ‘Stop Work’ orders are issued on LCS-3 and the planned LCS-4.
Well, we’ve got two. But two what?
The LCS program was flawed from the start. These ships will, if ever completed, be able to turn a fair speed and travel into extremely shallow water – but only to run and hide. They certainly will not be able to fight! Heck, the US Navy brass themselves say that the Littoral Combat Ships compare unfavorably to many similarly sized vessels of countries such as Sweden’s ultra-stealthy Visby Class, the new Franco-Italian FREMM Class, Israel’s Sa’ar 5 Eilat Class, or even Britain’s much older Type 23/Duke Class.
Quoting from the Defense Department Daily:
LCS ships will carry a very light armament set for a major naval vessel: one 57-mm Mk 110 naval gun system; RIM-116 SeaRAM short range defensive missiles; up to 4×15-missile launchers for light short-range NETFIRES missiles, each with striking power equal to a 155mm shell; 30mm cannons that would replace NetFires launchers 1-for-1 if installed; 12.7mm machine guns; plus any missiles or 70mm rockets carried by its accompanying helicopters (up to 2 H-60 slots or up to 4 MQ-8B Fire Scout UAV slots). Present LCS designs don’t even carry torpedo tubes, or vertical-launch systems (VLS) that could accommodate present and future attack and/or defensive missiles.
Even the corvette-sized Danish Flyvefisken Class, whose swappable modules helped pave the way for the LCS idea, has a Mk 48 vertical launch system and can carry Harpoon anti-ship missiles and/or longer-range air defense missiles.
Frigates, huh? With no torpedos? 
All that can really be said for these things is that they can deliver two SH-60 helicopters each rather quickly – provided they actually have the helicopters!
So, these ‘do nothing well’ ships are costing us around $450,000,000.00 each. Add $80,000,000.00 times three for each ship to cover the multi-mission modules, plus the cost of two choppers each. And they are only ‘good’ in shallow water and big river fights – supposedly.
What will that do to future surface Navy plans for upgraded destroyers, (DD (X)), and the much-needed cruisers, (CG (X))?
The hell if The Bull knows! Here is what Vice-Admiral Mustin (ret.) and Vice-Admiral Katz (ret.) said in a 2003 USNI Proceedings article:
“Because the Navy has invested heavily in land-attack capabilities such as the Advanced Gun System and land-attack missiles in DD (X), there is no requirement for [the Littoral Combat Ship] to have this capability. Similarly, LCS does not require an antiair capability beyond self-defense because DD (X) and CG (X) will provide area air defense. Thus, if either DD (X) or CG (X) does not occur in the numbers required and on time, the Navy will face two options: leave LCS as is, and accept the risk inherent in employment of this ship in a threat environment beyond what it can handle (which is what it did with the FFG-7); or “grow” LCS to give it the necessary capabilities that originally were intended to reside off board in DD (X) and CG (X). Neither option is acceptable.”
I don’t know about you, Dear Reader, but it sounds to me like we need some new minds in that funny-shaped building up there because they apparently have their collective heads too far up their collective asses to see the light any more.
Meanwhile the Chinese continue to build their navy and will soon eclipse ours. Then there goes the Pacific. Let’s not forget ol’ Putin over in Russia either! The Atlantic could again become contested waters at the drop of a hat.
Then where will we be? Think about it.
Bull, out.
