Pegasus-class: The 1970s LCS

8 Harpoons, a 76mm gun, and a top speed of 48 knots. Faster and better armed than the LCS, launched in '75, decommissioned in '91.  Video shows off the Pegasus, and provides an overview of hydrofoil technology.

Video Credit: Jeff Quitney

Analysis of Alternatives: The Littoral Combat Ship

     Back in 2012 I ran a post that called for the cancellation of the Littoral Combat Ship on the grounds that none of it's required modules have become operational, and the fact that the LCS is underarmed. Here are what I belive are solid alternatives to the LCS.

1. Visby-class corvette.

     The Visby-class was developed in Sweden for ASuW and ASW. The Visby-class runs about 184 million dollars each. Specs:

Displacement:	640 tonnes
Length:	72.7 m
Beam:	10.4 m
Draught:	2.4 m
Propulsion:	CODOG 2 × 125SII Kamewa Waterjets 4 × Vericor TF50A gas turbines, total rating 16 MW 2 × MTU Friedrichshafen 16 V 2000 N90 diesel engines, total rating 2.6 MW 3 x generators of 270kW each
Speed:	35+ knots
Range:	2500nm @ 15 knots
Complement:	43
Sensors and processing systems:	Ericsson Sea_GIRAFFE AMB 3D surveillance radar Ceros 200 fire control radar system Condor CS-3701 tactical radar surveillance system GDC Hull-mounted sonar Hydroscience Technologies towed array sonar system GDC variable depth sonar
Electronic warfare & decoys:	Rheinmetall TKWA/MASS (Multi Ammunition Softkill System)
Armament:	1 × Bofors 57 mm Mk3 8 × RBS15 Mk2 AShM 4 × 400 mm torpedo launchers for Type 45 torpedoes Mines and depth charges Provision for but not fitted with 2 × 6 127 mm ALECTO anti-submarine rocket launchers (cancelled) 8 × Umkhonto SAM(cancelled)
Aviation facilities:	Helicopter pad

Modify the Visby-class to carry a RIM-116 in lieu of Umkhonto SAMs, Mk48s or Mk50s in lieu of Type 45 torpedoes (along with 324mm or 533mm torpedo tubes as needed). Exchange the RBS15 for two quad Harpoon launchers, and the Bofors 57mm gun for an OTO Melera 76mm gun. Exchange the electronics and propulsion for U.S. equipment where possible and affordable. Then we have a lightweight, fast ship built specifically for combat in the littorals at a lower cost than the LCS.

2. Saar 5 corvette

The Saar 5-class corvette was designed by the Israeli Navy, as the latest in the Saar series which traces it roots back to Germany's WWII E-Boats. The mission of the Saar 5-class is ASuW, with a touch of AAW.  The price of a Saar 5 corvette is 260 million dollars. Specs:

Class & type:	Corvette
Displacement:	1,227 tonnes (full load) 1,075 tonnes (standard)
Length:	85.64 m (280.97 ft)
Beam:	11.88 m (38.98 ft)
Draft:	3.17 m (10.40 ft)
Propulsion:	Combined Diesel or Gas 2 MTU V12 1163 TB82 diesel engines General Electric LM2500 gas turbine
Speed:	20 knots (37 km/h) (diesel engines) 33 knots (61 km/h) (gas turbine)
Range:	3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km)
Complement:	64 officers and crewmen 10 aircrew
Sensors and processing systems:	Elta EL/M-2218S air search radar Elta EL/M-2221 fire-control radar EDO Type 796 sonar Rafael towed sonar array
Electronic warfare & decoys:	Argon ST AN/SLQ-25 Nixie decoy Elbit chaff rocket launchers Rafael RF corner reflector Elisra NS-9003A/9005 RWR
Armament:	8 RGM-84 Harpoon anti-ship missiles 64 Barak 1 surface-to-air missiles Phalanx CIWS 6 Mark 32 torpedo tubes (Mark 46 torpedoes)
Armor:	Steel and aluminum
Aircraft carried:	Eurocopter Panther, unmanned helicopter[1]
Aviation facilities:	Helipad and helicopter hangar

      Global Security lists the ship as being armed with a Phalanx 20mm CIWS (as shown in the picture above). Changes to the design would be to replace Israeli electronics with American where possible and affordable, and possibly the addition of a 76mm gun. 

3. New build Perry-class frigates

     The Perry-class is a strudy design that can take a beating and keeping on moving (see the USS Samuel B. Roberts). Designed to escort amphibs and merchant convoys in a WWIII scenario they had an emphasis on AAW, but still highly capable in the area of ASuW. The last Perry-class frigate, the USS Ingraham, cost about 785 million dollars when adjusted for inflation (cost comes from the 1983-84 issue of Jane's Fighting Ships). Specs for the Ingraham:

Displacement:	4,100 tons (4,165 t) full load
Length:	453 ft (138.1 m), overall
Beam:	45 ft (13.7 m)
Draft:	27 ft (6.7 m)
Propulsion:	2 × General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines generating 41,000 shp (31 MW) through a single shaft andcontrollable-pitch propeller
Speed:	29+ knots (54+ km/h)
Range:	5,000 nm (9,300 km) at 18 knots (33 km/h)
Complement:	15 officers and 190 enlisted, plus SH-60 LAMPS detachment of roughly six officer pilots and 15 enlisted men
Armament:	1 × OTO Melara Mk 75 76 mm/62 caliber naval gun 2 × Mk 32 triple-tube (324 mm) launchers for Mark 46 torpedoes 1 × Vulcan Phalanx CIWS 4 × .50-cal (12.7 mm) machine guns.
Aircraft carried:	2 × SH-60 LAMPS III helicopters

      The only change to the design would be to add a Mk 41 VLS in lieu of the Mk 13 launcher that was deleted from later Perrys.
      Each of the ships discussed above could be built under license in U.S. shipyards, in fact only the Visby-class has not been built in a U.S. shipyard. In the mid-90s the Israelis had Ingalls buld the Saar 5-class. Each of these classes, barring the Perrys, are cheaper than the LCS which costs 680.7 million dollars. Each of these classes has a greater combat capability than the LCS, and greater survivability in combat. Each of these classes is better than the LCS and offers a solid alternative.

Flashback Friday 6/29: Landing Craft Support, Large

     This week's Flashback Friday looks at the first LCS, the Landing Craft Support, Large. The LCS(L) was developed soon after the Battle of Tarawa, when shortcomings were found in the Navy's ability for close fire support for amphibious landings.  

     The LCS(L) carried an armament of  a 1 3"/50 gun and twin 40mm cannon on the bow and a twin 40mm cannon on the stern. Along with 4 20mm cannons and 4 12.7mm machine guns scattered thoughout the ship.  The LCS(L)s were a small ship with a displacement of 250 tons, a length of a 48.5m, a beam of 7m, and a draft of 2m. While they were small, the LCS(L)s were large enough to cross the open ocean on their own, albiet slowly with a top speed of 16.5 knots with a range of 8000km. 

    The LCS(L)s fought in the liberation of the Philippines, at Iwo Jima, Okinawa, and Borneo among others. The photo above shows LCS(L)(3)-8 off the coast of Corregidor in 1945, Later as the war progressed, after amphibious landing, the LCS(L)s were pressed into service as radar picket ships used to spot incoming air raids. LCS(L)s were also used on "skunk patrols" to watch for Japanese suicide boats attempting to attack landing areas. After WWII the surviving LCS(L)s were transferred to navies of France, Japan, Thailand, and Greece among others.  

     As of 2012, out of 130 LCS(L)s only one has survived, LCS(L)-102, which at the end of WWII was transferred to Japan who later transferred it to Thailand. In Thai service she was renamed HTMS Nakha, and served a patrol boat from 1966 to 2007 when she was given back to the U.S. to be used a museum ship.

    The LCS(L) was an example of a type of ship that was meant to fill a gap, and was cheap, expendable, and could be mass produced. The LCS(L) had her origins in several makeshift solutions for close in fire support in the South Pacific, including the modification of Higgins boats to carry several machine guns, among others. Later on Navy brass took notice and built on that concept, and produced the LCS(L). The LCS(L) packed a large punch into a small hull, and was easy to maintain and operate. Today the LCS designation has been assigned to the Littoral Combat Ship which has a number of shortcomings, and is a poor successor to the LCS(L).  Either way one looks at the LCS(L) it was a excellent ship, and performed it's mission well, and was an excellent patrol craft after the war. They were truly, to quote the men who served on them, the "Mighty Midgets".

For a more in-depth profile I highly recommend a post done on the same subject by XBRADTC over at Bring the heat, Bring the stupid.

Photo Credit: U.S. Navy and NavSource Photo Archives

    

Yet Another Example Of Media Hype Over Nothing

     Fox news reports:

PEARL HARBOR, Hawaii –  The commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet said Monday the Navy will be sending its most advanced vessels and aircraft to the Asia-Pacific region as it builds up its presence by assigning most of its fleet there.

Adm. Cecil Haney said a policy recently outlined by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to deploy 60 percent of the Navy's ships fleet to the Pacific by 2020 is about capabilities as well as quantity.

"It's not just numbers -- it's also what those platforms, what those units, bring to the table," Haney told The Associated Press in an interview at his headquarters in Pearl Harbor.

Haney cited as an example the Littoral Combat Ship which can operate in shallower waters than other vessels. The U.S. plans to begin deploying one of the ships to Singapore next year.

The EA-18G plane -- which can jam enemy air defenses and fly faster than the speed of sound -- is another. Haney said squadrons of these aircraft would be coming through the region.

There's also the Navy's most advanced submarine -- the Virginia-class. Several of these subs are based at Pearl Harbor.

"Yes, it's about having numbers in that 60-40 split, but also about having the right capability," he said.

The policy offers further details to the Obama administration's announcement earlier this year of a new defense strategy that places greater emphasis on a U.S. military presence in the region in response to Asia's growing economic importance and China's rise as a military power.

The Navy now has about 285 ships about evenly divided among the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The total number of ships will decline in coming years as some vessels are retired and not replaced.

It has 11 aircraft carriers. A majority -- six -- are already assigned to the Pacific.

The policy is an extension of a 2006 Bush Administration-era policy that had the Navy base 60 percent of its submarines in the Pacific.

The service had for years split its submarines evenly between the Atlantic and Pacific. During the Cold War, the Navy kept 60 percent of its subs in the Atlantic as a deterrent to the Soviet Union.

     This article is making a big deal over the fact that Navy is moving most of it's ships to the Pacific, when that has been underway for the last 6-7 years. The other areas this article blows things up are when the writer mentions the LCS, and the E/A-18G. 

Haney cited as an example the Littoral Combat Ship which can operate in shallower waters than other vessels. The U.S. plans to begin deploying one of the ships to Singapore next year.

The ability to operate in shallow water does not make a ship advanced. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyers can operate in waters as shallow as 9.5m, and the Perry-class frigates can operate in water up to 7m deep. Just because the LCS can operate in a swimming pool does not make it advanced (both classes have a draft of about 4.5m). The LCS may have an advanced electronics suite, but it's only weapon is it's wake and sheer speed. Until the LCS can carry a real anti-ship missile, it is under-armed and is little more than a large patrol boat.

The EA-18G plane -- which can jam enemy air defenses and fly faster than the speed of sound -- is another. Haney said squadrons of these aircraft would be coming through the region.

     Yes, the E/A-18G Growler is an advanced aircraft, and arguably the best ECM aircraft in the world. However, if the best selling point the Navy can come up with is the fact that it's supersonic, they might want to spend a little more time thinking about what they want to say, before talking to the press.

     Basically, much ado about nothing. 

Photo Credit: US Navy

A Strategy For The 21st Century, Part 7: The Navy

     The Navy. This service among all 5 is probably the most important not only from a war fighting point of view, but in terms of foreign policy. However, the Navy has made a number of grave errors in recent history which must be fixed.

     1. Cancel the Littoral Combat Ship. Between 2004 and 2011, the Navy ran a contest between General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin for a contract to develop the Littoral Combat Ship. Basically, the LCS is meant to get in the shallows and chase down pirates and other hostiles, hunt mines, and hunt subs. In 2011 the Navy asked Congress purchase both designs, this has since been approved. The price for a single LCS is about 450 million dollars. The LCS also uses "modules" for specialized tasks like ASW, whcih can switched out for other modules to handle other tasks. However, as of 2011 not one of the "modules" supposed to be used in the LCS has become operational. At the same time the missile meant to be used by the LCS, the XM501 has been canceled, which takes away a good deal of the LCS's firepower. At the same time Huntington Ingalls has produced a frigate design based of the Coast Guard's National Security Cutter, called  "Patrol Frigate 4921". This design offers several advantages over the LCS, better handling in heavy seas, longer range, slightly heavier armor (armor does matter in the littorals), greater firepower. All that is required is upgrading the radar and electronics to Naval standards, upgunning the 57mm cannon to a 76.2mm or a 127mm gun, adding several 25mm chain guns for close in fighting, and the addition of a towed sonar array.                                       

     2. Cancel the Zumwalts. Another Navy boondoggle is the Zumwalt-class of destroyers. The Zumwalt-class have an emphasis on land attack, while at the same time handling the duties of a regular destroyer. Originally, there were supposed to be 32 Zumwalts, as of 2012 there will only be 3 Zumwalts built. On top of this the Navy has stated that they no longer want the Zumwalts, and they would rather have more Arleigh Burkes. Also, in this instance quantity over quality should be the mantra, because destroyers are exponentially more valuable. Thus, the loss of one not as capable destroyer of which there are many, would not be felt as much as the loss of an extremely capable destroyer of which there are few. The cost of a single Zumwalt is 3 billion dollars, at the same time 5 Arleigh Burkes can be purchased for the same amount. There are also concerns that even though the Zumwalt is equipped for the land attack role, it will be unable to fufill it's duties as it pertains to naval fire support. In this instance the solution would be simply to purchase more Arleigh Burkes rather than the Zumwalt-class.

     4. During the Cold War the U.S. was the best in the world at anti-submarine warfare (ASW), and had the best sub force in the world. However, since the  so-called "Peace Dividend"  sub force hgas dropped from 93 SSNs and 33 SSBNs, to 53 SSNs, and 14 SSBNs in 2011 (this does not include 4 SSBNs converted to SSGNs.). Some of these cuts are understandable, as the collapse of the Soviet Union there was not as great a need for a large sub fleet. However, with the rise of the PRC there is need for more subs, as carriers and surface warships might not be able to get close to Asia because of ASBM and cruise missile threats. Same goes for the Navy's ASW capability, at the end of the Cold War, American ASW crews were the best, however the skills which were honed by hunting Soviet subs in the North Atlantic have deteriorated with a lack of emphasis on the sub threat. 

     This is just a beginning on the road to rebuilding the Navy, there need to changes in the way the Navy selects it flag officers and makes promotions, naval aviation, women on subs and carriers, and the SEALs. But what is stated above, is an excellent start to rebuilding the Navy.