Source: Global Security
On 27 May 2004, the Department of Defense announced that Lockheed Martin Corporation – Maritime Systems & Sensors, Moorestown, N.J. ($46,501,821) and General Dynamics – Bath Iron Works, Bath, Maine ($78,798,188) were each awarded contract options for final system design with options for detail design and construction of up to two Flight 0 Littoral Combat Ships (LCS).
One of the designs, the Lockheed design, is a high-speed semi-planing monohull. The other, the General Dynamics design, is a slender, stabilized monohull, more commonly known as a trimaran. Each of these meet the performance requirements of the top-level requirements documents and achieve objective levels in several key performance parameters.
Both designs achieve sprint speeds of over 40 knots as well as long-range transit distances of over 3,500 miles. The sea frames of each design can accommodate the equipment and crews of the focus mission packages and effectively launch and recover and control the vehicles for extended periods of time in required sea states. The methods by which they launch and recover both aircraft and waterborne craft are different in the two designs, and the treatment of re-configurable internal volume in the two ships are quite different.
The Navy has discussed up to 60 ships, roughly up to $12 billion. Flight 0 will consist of at least twelve or possibly thirteen ships. A Lockheed-Martin Industry Team and a General Dynamics Industry team were each to initially build two ships with follow-on deliveries pending final acquisition strategy for the LCS program. As of mid-2006 the Navy wanted to procure 7 DDG-1000s, 19 CG(X)s, and 55 LCSs.
According to the DOT&E, the accelerated acquisition timeline for LCS left very little time to apply any lessons learned from the construction/operational testing of Flight 0 ships to Flight 1 hull and mission package designs. The two Flight 0 hulls were different designs and their construction schedules overlap. Hull #1 was to be delivered approximately nine months prior to hull #2. The final design of hull #3, the first Flight 1 ship, was to start a few months after delivery of hull #1 and prior to the delivery of hull #2.
Upon completion of LCS 1 and 2, Navy intended to conduct an operational assessment based on a variety of critical factors. Incorporating lessons learned from the operational assessment, Navy would hold a full and open competition to select a single design for procurement in FY10. Future seaframes will include a government-furnished, open architecture combat system. The LCS Program Office will be given the resources to provide intense oversight of these construction contracts, providing rapid and detailed visibility at every step.
The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is a small specialised variant of the DD(X) family of future surface combat ships. LCS complements, but does not replace, the capabilities of DD(X) and CG(X). The Littoral Combat Ship will take advantage of the newest generation hull form and will have modularity and scalability built in. It focuses on mission capabilities, affordability, and life cycle costs.
The LCS is an entirely new breed of U.S. Navy warship. A fast, agile, and networked surface combatant, LCS’s modular, focused-mission design will provide Combatant Commanders the required warfighting capabilities and operational flexibility to ensure maritime dominance and access for the joint force. LCS will operate with focused-mission packages that deploy manned and unmanned vehicles to execute missions as assigned by Combatant Commanders.
LCS will also perform Special Operations Forces (SOF) support, high-speed transit, Maritime Interdiction Operations (MIO), Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), and Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP). While complementing capabilities of the Navy’s larger multi-mission surface combatants, LCS will also be networked to share tactical information with other Navy aircraft, ships, submarines, and joint units.
Secretary of the Navy Gordon England described this new ship as “a small, fast, maneuverable, and relatively inexpensive member of the DD(X) family of ships, which began construction in FY 2005. The goal is to develop a platform that can be fielded in relatively large numbers to support a wide range of joint missions, with reconfigurable mission modules to assure access to the littorals for our Navy forces in the face of threats from surface craft, submarines, and mines.”
LCS will transform naval operations in the littorals: The littoral battlespace requires focused capabilities in greater numbers to assure access against asymmetrical threats. The LCS is envisioned to be a networked, agile, stealthy surface combatant capable of defeating anti-access and asymmetric threats in the littorals. This relatively small, high-speed combatant will complement the U.S. Navy’s Aegis Fleet, DD(X) and CG(X) by operating in environments where it is less desirable to employ larger, multi-mission ships. It will have the capability to deploy independently to overseas littoral regions, remain on station for extended periods of time either with a battle group or through a forward-basing arrangement and will be capable of underway replenishment. It will operate with Carrier Strike Groups, Surface Action Groups, in groups of other similar ships, or independently for diplomatic and presence missions. Additionally, it will have the capability to operate cooperatively with the U.S. Coast Guard and Allies.
LCS will be a “Network-Centric,” Advanced Technology Ship: The LCS will rely heavily on manned and unmanned vehicles to execute assigned missions and operate as part of a netted, distributed force. In order to conduct successful combat operations in an adverse littoral environment, it will employ technologically advanced weapons, sensors, data fusion, C4ISR, hullform, propulsion, optimal manning concepts, smart control systems and self-defense systems.
LCS will be a Modular Ship. The platform will support mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface boat modules. The LCS concept is presently being defined and is envisioned to be an advanced hullform employing open systems architecture modules to undertake a number of missions and to reconfigure in response to changes in mission, threat, and technology.
Primary missions are those that ensure and enhance friendly force access to littoral areas. Access-focused missions include the following primary missions:
Anti-surface warfare (ASuW) against hostile small boats
Mine Counter Measures (MCM)
Littoral Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), and may include the following secondary missions
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR)
Homeland Defense / Maritime Intercept
Special Operation Forces support
Logistic support for movement of personnel and supplies.
The mission packages are not included in the basic LCS ship cost, but are paid for separately. The ships were projected in early 2007 to cost between $300 million and $400 million.
There was initially some interest in LCS as a possible candidate for future U.S. Coast Guard applications as part of the service’s Integrated Deepwater System, as well as potential export opportunities. LCS will be a “small, fast, affordable ship”: Speed and agility will be critical for efficient and effective conduct of the littoral missions. The LCS must be capable of operating at low speeds for littoral mission operations, transit at economical speeds, and high-speed sprints, which may be necessary to avoid/prosecute a small boat or submarine threat, conduct intercept operations over the horizon, or for insertion or extraction missions.
The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is being designed to achieve a different naval warfare mission than the Coast Guard multi-mission Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC). The LCS is designed as a sprinter. It will have high speed and a short range, and will be designed to take on various naval warfare mission modules. The concept of operations for the OPC is different. It isn’t a sprinter. The Deepwater system delivers speed with its off-board vehicles (armed helo, VUAVs, LRI, and SRP). The OPC needs the ability to remain on station for extended periods of time and have a greater range than the LCS. Deepwater has partnered with the Navy in regards to the LCS to share useful information, identify risk mitigations to new technology, and to ensure commonality where it is practicable and cost effective.
One of the primary, focused missions of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) will be littoral ASW. The LCS will be capable of carrying unmanned air, surface and undersea vehicles and other sensors that complement the substantial ASW capabilities planned for DD(X) and the follow on Advanced Cruiser (CG(X)). Revolutionary advances in propulsion, materials, and hull forms are being incorporated into transformational design concepts for the LCS. It will have superior speed, maneuverability, sea keeping, signature reduction and payload modularity to perform focused or special missions in the littorals.
A 2003 analysis by David D. Rudko noted that the Navy has stated the Littoral Combat Ship must incorporate endurance, speed, payload capacity, sea-keeping, shallow-draft and mission reconfigurability into a small ship design. However, constraints in current ship design technology make this desired combination of design characteristics in small ships difficult to realize at any cost. Speed, displacement, and significant wave height all result in considerable increases in fuel consumption, and as a result, severely limit Littoral Combat Ship endurance. When operating in a significant wave height of six feet, regardless of the amount of fuel carried, the maximum endurance achieved for a wave-piercing catamaran Littoral Combat Ship outfitted with all modular mission packages is less than seven days. Especially noteworthy is that when restricted to a fuel reserve of 50% and a fuel carrying capacity of Day tanks, the maximum achieved endurance is only 4.8 hours when operating at a maximum speed of 48 knots. The Littoral Combat Ship can achieve high speeds; however, this can only be accomplished at the expense of range and payload capacity. The requirement for the Littoral Combat Ship to go fast (forty-eight knots) requires a seaframe with heavy propulsion systems. The weight of the seaframe, required shipboard systems (weapons, sensors, command and control, and self-defense) and modular mission packages accounts for 84% of the full displacement, and as a result, substantially limits total fuel carrying capacity. Since initial mission profiles required the high-speed capability at most five percent of the time, the end result is a Littoral Combat Ship that has very little endurance and a high-speed capability it will rarely use. Refueling, and potentially rearming, will require the Littoral Combat Ship to leave littoral waters and transit to Combat Logistics Force ships operating outside the littorals for replenishment. Given the low endurance of the Littoral Combat Ship, its time on station is seriously compromised.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcs.htm
Related posts:
- Nation’s First Littoral Combat Ship Departs for Maiden Deployment
- Landing of gas turbine engines is latest milestone for nation’s third littoral combat ship
- 2nd U.S. Navy LCS Delivered
- Aegis Weapon System Tested During International Multiple Ship Demonstration
- U.S Navy’s future linked to flexible weapons: chief
