SECDEF is making some moves in conjunction with the Navy to move forward on the shipbuilding front… And it’s NOT LCS!!!

The RFI states that one of the FFG(X)’s two main purposes is to “relieve large surface combatants from stressing routine duties during operations other than war.” It goes on to say later that “this ship will reduce demand on high-end cruisers and destroyers that currently conduct [anti-submarine warfare], [surface warfare], and theater security cooperation missions, allowing for an increase of more capable assets to maintain a stabilizing presence in regions where tensions with nations that have highly capable naval forces may exist.”

Full article, HERE at USNI.

This is not a recapitulation of the requirements that generated LCS, but a follow on to FF(X)21, e.g. a ship that can actually defend itself, and still do ASW and surface missions, albeit in a smaller, shallower draft ship than the current DDG/Cruiser configuration.

If you’re really bored, HERE is the actual solicitation for information. This is literally a ‘sea change’ from the previous administration and the continuation of the Little Crappy Ship design, that should have died a quick death many years ago, after the first cost overrun and underperformance…

As a reminder, HERE is a link to the last ‘real’ Frigates the US Navy had, The Oliver Hazard Perry class. The ‘FIGS’ as they were known, were damn good ASW platforms, with tails and helo dets, they worked ahead of the battle groups, and also on independant ops with ‘other’ assets when required. At 29 kts, they were pretty quick, and they had no problem going ‘in harms way’ to get the job done.


Yea??? — 17 Comments

  1. It’s about flippin’ time! That 1944 destroyer I served on had the old, four-boiler/twin-screw design, could make 37 kts, drew only 18′, and could out-run & out-shoot all the newer tin cans in the squadron. What was so wrong with that, again?

  2. The current procurement practice mandates that everyone gets to put their ideas in the mix for any new project. Add this to the fact that congress critters will insist that as many districts as possible be involved in the production effort, regardless of cost or quality. The result is a bloated, expensive, and underperforming design that makes a camel look like a racehorse. All this before any steel or aluminum is rolled out of the mill. Examples include the LCS, F-35, “Zumwalt” Class DDG, etc.

  3. I learned something new and valuable. Glad this is in the works.

  4. Rev- Amen, and yes the old FRAMs could get up and GO!

    WSF- Slowly… sigh

    Randy- From what I’m hearing, yes.

    NRW- Don’t know on this one, they want a production start in 2020, with first delivery in 2022, so NOT a lot of time to ‘F’ it up… I hope…

    Fargo- You are not the only one, trust me!!!

  5. Maybe Trump can help streamline the process and avoid having all the extra trimmings hung onto the project?

    Heaven knows we need DC to learn what the rest of the country learned 15-20 years ago of doing more with less.

    Guess I have all kinds of fantasies…Sigh

  6. I had wondered at one time in my USN career what it would be like to be on one of the “Figs” with the helo crews. Well I was to find out much to my dismay when I got stuck on a 2250 class tin can with the I famous DASH program! Being the ONLY Airedale on the whole ship made for a lot of razing and ragging, but on the whole all those ‘black shoe’ Sailors were a really great bunch of folks.

    The one thing I did develop during that whole fiasco was a new appreciation of just what those guys from 10-15 years previous to me had to put up with. And these guys truly went in harms way when they deployed on these ships.

  7. That was supposed to read “INFAMOUS DASH PROGRAM”!

  8. Longbow Hellfire in the weapons mix, huh? That’s a YUGE punch with good follow-through for short-medium range.

    Make bluewater great again.

  9. When I retired in 1999(as a civie doing the radar upgrades on the FFGs they were still in active service with many of our overseas allies navies. I worked on Taiwanese, Japanese, Spanish, and Canadian FFGs; really sorry I never got to go “down under” and work on the Auzzie boats. They were pretty good little ships for what they were. As I understand it, the hulls just plain were wearing out as far as the US navy was concerned.