Jump to content


Photo

Littoral Combat Ship News

...or follies

  • Please log in to reply
222 replies to this topic

#201 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    Now is the winter of our discontent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 09 May 2013 - 1101 AM

Still not getting a warm fuzzy. This sounds a lot like the tune we heard with the Perry class, this time New And Improved! and with Shoal Draft!!



#202 Lionel Mandrake

Lionel Mandrake

    Proud Asshole

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where the sapphics with thick fingers roam upon the fruited plains.
  • Interests:This n' that. Well, mainly that...

Posted 09 May 2013 - 1245 PM

Still not getting a warm fuzzy. This sounds a lot like the tune we heard with the Perry class, this time New And Improved! and with Shoal Draft!!

 

Improved?

 

Hardly...

 

The Perry Class at least had Standard, a 76mm, and could take a beating (USS Stark) and still float.

 

This nautical abortion probably couldn't take more than a few HE hits from a 84mm Carl Gustav or RPG-29 etc., etc. much less any kit likely to be found in the coastal defense arsenals of any countries this side of the Seychelles.



#203 Jeff

Jeff

    Drum beating laughing boy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,959 posts

Posted 09 May 2013 - 2124 PM

That's a CVN amount of bullshit for a Little Crappy Ship. I hope RADM Perez isn't planning on going any further in his career. These three and four star douchebags don't like being told their star players aren't worth shit.



#204 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    Now is the winter of our discontent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 10 May 2013 - 1750 PM

The thing that gets me is that the surreal price tag guarantees that LCS in any quantity will eat away at funding for the DDGs, SSNs, and CVBGs backing them up, not to mention pricing the USCG completely out of the game. Its almost as if the USN has done its best to create an auto-canceling program, so they can get back to being a blue-water navy.



#205 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,316 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 10 May 2013 - 1847 PM

How silly. The correct answer is they failed to pay Neptune's Ransom of a dozen virgins. They could only find 3 in the navy.



#206 Lionel Mandrake

Lionel Mandrake

    Proud Asshole

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where the sapphics with thick fingers roam upon the fruited plains.
  • Interests:This n' that. Well, mainly that...

Posted 11 May 2013 - 0616 AM

How silly. The correct answer is they failed to pay Neptune's Ransom of a dozen virgins. They could only find 3 in the navy.

 

So what now? Will the USN now have to wage a merciless campaign against Neptune returning to Rome Washington with coffers full of booty seashells from the deep?


Edited by Lionel Mandrake, 11 May 2013 - 0619 AM.


#207 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,316 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 11 May 2013 - 0646 AM

Booty from the deep would require far more wimminz in the sub force.



#208 CaptLuke

CaptLuke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco, CA, USA

Posted 11 May 2013 - 0842 AM

That's a CVN amount of bullshit for a Little Crappy Ship. I hope RADM Perez isn't planning on going any further in his career. These three and four star douchebags don't like being told their star players aren't worth shit.

 

It's another way that the LCS parallels the F-35: 

  1. Deny problems exist when massive problems are plentiful
  2. Say problems are well known and criticism is outdated when new problems are cropping up constantly and underlying criticisms have never been addressed
  3. Tout long delayed and costly progress as proof that the program is 'on the right track' and 'progressing well now' while papering over management and planning blunders


#209 Max H

Max H

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,656 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dorset

Posted 11 May 2013 - 1108 AM

Booty from the deep would require far more wimminz in the sub force.

 

Not now that DADT is gone...



#210 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,978 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 11 May 2013 - 1136 AM

I can accept that the F35 is having issues. a V/STOL aircraft with stealth and really complicated systems, I expect issues. 

An in shore patrol/combat/utility vessel that was supposed to thump smaller craft and do other inshore work? We've been building things to do that in various forms since sailing ships. They didn't invent a really NEW set of technologies for this. IT's all systemology and management and puzzle pieces. 



#211 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    Now is the winter of our discontent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 11 May 2013 - 1215 PM

I can accept that the F35 is having issues. a V/STOL aircraft with stealth and really complicated systems, I expect issues. 

An in shore patrol/combat/utility vessel that was supposed to thump smaller craft and do other inshore work? We've been building things to do that in various forms since sailing ships. They didn't invent a really NEW set of technologies for this. IT's all systemology and management and puzzle pieces. 

 

Ah, yes, but with a double scoop of "Better, Faster, Cheaper". At the design end, they're trying to cram 10 pounds of taters into an 8 pound sack. In the systems engineering dept, they're doing the "develop as we go" thing (i.e. concurrent engineering). And at the fab end, they're training new shipwrights and welders as they go*.

 

Recall the painful development process of the C-17. Similar development problems. But the USAF had to have it, because the C-141 fleet was getting grounded one by one due to cracks. Hell, the USN thought it could do without the Cyclones, until the WOT went global. The one thing that will ensure the LCS makes it to the fleet is if the USN cancels it and the Army then orders some Aso-class patrol boats from Japan.

 

* Here in the Hampton Roads metroplex, the yards are crying for certified welders who can pass a piss test and background check, and whose welds can pass an Xray inspection.



#212 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 11 May 2013 - 2118 PM

Maybe the US could latch onto the Malaysian LCS buy :)

 

 

http://www.malaysian...nce.com/?p=3274



#213 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,316 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 11 May 2013 - 2211 PM

You mean guided missile frigate buy. It can do NONE of the silly singing and dancing of LCS.

In any case I am opposed to having anything French. Each and every French project has turned out to be a dog.

Go buy a Sigma with Signaal stuff. It's all good despite being Frenchy owned.

Better still, get it with STANFLEX.



#214 Gunguy

Gunguy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,326 posts
  • Interests:Guns and military

Posted 12 May 2013 - 1005 AM

I notice one major problem in the article which has the Admirals getting shivers up their legs. They are actually planning on the surface module to attack boats that cost at most $20,000 with a ship costing 400 million. I do realize that this is discounting the anti sub/mine work but come on. They even go so far as to act like the miniture missile will actually have an effect on real surface ships. blowing a 10 inch surface hole in a real ship will not even have an effect unless by sheer luck, you hit a fuel or hydraulic line running along the hull of the ship topside, way above the water line where the mini-missile will hit. You would have to hit a real ship with about 30 missiles to do enough damage to take it out of action. That is a HUGE load of missiles to one target.

 

I would not want to be on the recieving end of a small missile attack but if you only take 5 hits, it would be scary but not all that lethal. We should have a missile that has the Hellfire blast/frag anti bunker warhead on it. That would have really given the LCS some serious punch and the missiles are not all that big, even if you added length for extended range naval use. 



#215 Max H

Max H

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,656 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dorset

Posted 12 May 2013 - 1019 AM

Navalised spike?



#216 Olof Larsson

Olof Larsson

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,251 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 12 May 2013 - 1047 AM

I notice one major problem in the article which has the Admirals getting shivers up their legs. They are actually planning on the surface module to attack boats that cost at most $20,000 with a ship costing 400 million. I do realize that this is discounting the anti sub/mine work but come on. They even go so far as to act like the miniture missile will actually have an effect on real surface ships. blowing a 10 inch surface hole in a real ship will not even have an effect unless by sheer luck, you hit a fuel or hydraulic line running along the hull of the ship topside, way above the water line where the mini-missile will hit. You would have to hit a real ship with about 30 missiles to do enough damage to take it out of action. That is a HUGE load of missiles to one target.

 

I'm willing to bet that a missile hitting the bridge or a missile canister

(because thats the kind of accuracy that could be expected from a laser guided missile)

of a ship would make quite a bit of damage.

But yes, Hellfire L/N or Spike NLOS or Spike ER would make more sence.

As a complement to Harpoon, ESSM, RAM HAS and the 57mm that is.



#217 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    Now is the winter of our discontent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 13 May 2013 - 1424 PM

I notice one major problem in the article which has the Admirals getting shivers up their legs. They are actually planning on the surface module to attack boats that cost at most $20,000 with a ship costing 400 million. I do realize that this is discounting the anti sub/mine work but come on. They even go so far as to act like the miniture missile will actually have an effect on real surface ships. blowing a 10 inch surface hole in a real ship will not even have an effect unless by sheer luck, you hit a fuel or hydraulic line running along the hull of the ship topside, way above the water line where the mini-missile will hit. You would have to hit a real ship with about 30 missiles to do enough damage to take it out of action. That is a HUGE load of missiles to one target.
 
I would not want to be on the recieving end of a small missile attack but if you only take 5 hits, it would be scary but not all that lethal. We should have a missile that has the Hellfire blast/frag anti bunker warhead on it. That would have really given the LCS some serious punch and the missiles are not all that big, even if you added length for extended range naval use.

Well, again, its all about the assumptions baked into the LCS concept. By definition, the LCS won't be taking on real naval vessels, they just won't. Ever. The blue-water USN has to have done that before the LCSes leave their home port. And apparently, naval air has substantially softened up shore defenses so that ground-launched ASMs and field artillery are not critical threats.

#218 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 13 May 2013 - 1513 PM

Until the threat of a sea skimming missile and a very active AD causes all that to go away and the LCS goes in anyways....



#219 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,939 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 18 October 2017 - 1047 AM

to all you naysayers:
 

$300 Million Navy Vessel Christened with Cheapo Bottle of Barefoot Wine
 
The choice was actually very scientific.
 

Mike Pomranz
July 07, 2017


A lot of taxpayer money has gone into the United States Navy’s latest warship, the USS Billings – somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 million. But though the ship may have come with a heck of a price tag, at least they didn’t blow a lot of money on the wine used for christening it. For the traditional launching ceremony, Lockheed Martin settled on breaking an $8 bottle of Barefoot Bubbly Moscato on the bow.
Though a cheapo sweet sparkler might seem like an odd choice for such an important vessel, the bottle of Barefoot made sense for reasons far beyond its price. And Lockheed Martin actually put a lot of thought into it – which we guess we should have expected from a company who builds things like missiles and spacecraft. “We settled on using the Barefoot sparkling wine after doing a study using various Champagne brands and bottle types,” Lockheed Martin’s John Torrisi told Wine Spectator. “In the end, we chose the one that broke most consistently when scored. For whatever reason, the Barefoot bottle breaks in all climates from 10 degrees below to 100 degrees F and always produces a consistent splash for photography/videography.”
 

 
Yes, leave it up to a defense contractor to spend what sounds like thousands of dollars on testing just to end up choosing the cheapest bottle of wine. Speaking of which, isn’t it common sense that cheap bottles will break more easily than expensive bottles? Though we don’t have a PhD in physics to back up that claim.
However, the folks at ChefSteps in their instructions on how to sabre your Champagne open with a sword explain that sparkling wines typically have thicker glass, which can be troublesome if you're trying to intentionally break the bottle.



"A bottle of Champagne is under about 90 pounds of pressure per square inch. The diameter of the opening is less than 3/4-of-an-inch wide, so there is a force of roughly 35 pounds pushing on the cork at all times. In the early years of Champagne-making, thinner glass bottles would regularly burst in the cellar, as secondary fermentation released carbon dioxide into the bottle and increased the pressure. Among other mitigating techniques, Champagne houses added wire cages to hold in the corks, and thickened the glass to more effectively contain pressure."



 
Regardless, if you want to see just how consistent a splash can appear for videography when you put an $80 billion aerospace and defense company on the case, the footage is on YouTube. Oh, and if you're ever looking to do some bubbly splashing of your own, maybe consider buying a bottle of Barefoot yourself. It seems like Lockheed Martin’s got this one figured out.

 
budget conscious to save money and producing a better, more consistent splash :excl:  What is not to like? :D
 
http://www.foodandwi...e-barefoot-wine



#220 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,161 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted 23 October 2017 - 0449 AM

People making the practical research on the bottle characteristics sure had the most interesting evenings.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users