You have to think of the frigate as being part of and contributing to a larger flotilla, not what it can do on its own.

Just like LUSV, MUSV the vision is of distributed, networked operations.

Yes, and in such a flotilla, not every ship needs every type of missile. So why obsess about cramming a handful of Tomahawks in a frigate that more urgently needs ASW and AAW missiles?
 
Yes, and in such a flotilla, not every ship needs every type of missile. So why obsess about cramming a handful of Tomahawks in a frigate that more urgently needs ASW and AAW missiles?

Loadout can very depend on the mission/scenario.

The Constellation will have the ability to house a variety of missiles. Which missiles and how many of each can vary depending on the mission.

This is inherently good.

I'm not sure why anyone is arguing over the loadout, other than it is fun.

I think a good argument could be made for more VLS cells but that's not going to happen before a Flight II.
 
Think Navy is very premature in opening competition for a second shipyard when as far as know Navy have as yet not completed the detail design of the frigate or completed the Congress imposed Land-Based Test Program for Engineering Plant of its propulsion system and related machinery control software system at the NSWC Philadelphia Navy Yard that might result in additional changes, so Navy would be unable to supply a full technical data package to other shipyards to price, also would have thought best the need for FMM to build a few ships to iron out production problems which inevitable and take a few years ?

No wonder the Navy weasel words at end of article - Despite the interest by PMS 515, the request for information submitted does not guarantee that a second shipyard will be selected to begin production of the Constellation-class. According to the RFI, “Respondents will not be notified of the results of this notice. The information obtained from submitted responses may be used in development of an acquisition strategy and a future solicitation.”
 
Think Navy is very premature in opening competition for a second shipyard when as far as know Navy have as yet not completed the detail design of the frigate or completed the Congress imposed Land-Based Test Program for Engineering Plant of its propulsion system and related machinery control software system at the NSWC Philadelphia Navy Yard that might result in additional changes, so Navy would be unable to supply a full technical data package to other shipyards to price, also would have thought best the need for FMM to build a few ships to iron out production problems which inevitable and take a few years ?

No wonder the Navy weasel words at end of article - Despite the interest by PMS 515, the request for information submitted does not guarantee that a second shipyard will be selected to begin production of the Constellation-class. According to the RFI, “Respondents will not be notified of the results of this notice. The information obtained from submitted responses may be used in development of an acquisition strategy and a future solicitation.”
I wonder if the FFG design is (now) at a stage where the lead time to get another yard running is on the near horizon.

Southern yards seem to have fewer people issues than Marinette and Bath. I wonder if the Navy feels like it isn’t going to get FFGs at an expected pace with just Marinette building them.

Online literature says that the Navy wants 20 FFGs. Temporarily ignoring the cost, I can think of reasons to build 150 FFGs. I feel like too many people think the Cold War isn’t back and worse than before, from a naval perspective. China has way more warships & logistics vessels, plenty of ice-free ports (both domestic and and among its friends), and shipyard potential that would make Soviet admirals (and everyone else) jealous.

150 FFGs = 30 + 72 + 48

10x ARGs = 30x FFGs (3x ARGs at sea = 9x FFGs) [I laugh every time I read about an ARG deploying without escorts - sending 2,200 Marines across the ocean virtually naked - what a slow fat target for Russian or Chinese subs or patrol planes, or long-range drones. 1x FFG per amphib, minimum, in case the amphibs have to split up (like they do all the time today).]

72x FFGs (24x at sea) to ASW/AAW escort all of the slow ships [Including merchants & tankers fleeing & supplying the hot battle area(s)].

48x FFGs (16x at sea) to ASuW & VBSS the far blockade [While the rest of the Navy is fighting the PLA/PLANPLAAF/SRF in the Philippine Sea, who is impounding Chinese container ships & tankers in the rest of the world’s oceans? What if those Chinese merchants are escorted…or armed? Where does everyone think we’re going to get our wartime merchant shipping from…MARAD? Nope, we have no choice but to pirate the Chinese merchant fleet.]

Some may laugh at the proposed numbers. Ask yourself: When WW2 began, what were we short on? Answer: VF squadrons, Tankers, and ESCORTS.

What are we short on today? Answer: Attack subs, logistics ships of all kinds, and…escorts (FFGs).

Once the PLAN finds an SSN design they like, in very short order you’ll be able to walk from San Diego to Shanghai on periscopes without getting wet. Without huge numbers of FFGs to seize merchants and then escort them, we’ll be knocked out of the war in 2 weeks.

To achieve 150 FFGs in 35 years (hoped-for life of an FFG), the US Navy would need to commission 4.3 FFGs/year. My hope is that the Navy is being realistic as to what Marinette can do with its staffing issues, and seeking a second (or third?) yard to permit building at the rate we’re going to need.
 
I wonder if the FFG design is (now) at a stage where the lead time to get another yard running is on the near horizon.
Not until the Constellation is in the water and in commission, past acceptance sea trials and the post-commissioning shakedown and working with the design a while.


Online literature says that the Navy wants 20 FFGs. Temporarily ignoring the cost, I can think of reasons to build 150 FFGs. I feel like too many people think the Cold War isn’t back and worse than before, from a naval perspective. China has way more warships & logistics vessels, plenty of ice-free ports (both domestic and and among its friends), and shipyard potential that would make Soviet admirals (and everyone else) jealous.

150 FFGs = 30 + 72 + 48

10x ARGs = 30x FFGs (3x ARGs at sea = 9x FFGs) [I laugh every time I read about an ARG deploying without escorts - sending 2,200 Marines across the ocean virtually naked - what a slow fat target for Russian or Chinese subs or patrol planes, or long-range drones. 1x FFG per amphib, minimum, in case the amphibs have to split up (like they do all the time today).]

72x FFGs (24x at sea) to ASW/AAW escort all of the slow ships [Including merchants & tankers fleeing & supplying the hot battle area(s)].

48x FFGs (16x at sea) to ASuW & VBSS the far blockade [While the rest of the Navy is fighting the PLA/PLANPLAAF/SRF in the Philippine Sea, who is impounding Chinese container ships & tankers in the rest of the world’s oceans? What if those Chinese merchants are escorted…or armed? Where does everyone think we’re going to get our wartime merchant shipping from…MARAD? Nope, we have no choice but to pirate the Chinese merchant fleet.]

Some may laugh at the proposed numbers. Ask yourself: When WW2 began, what were we short on? Answer: VF squadrons, Tankers, and ESCORTS.
Modern cargo ships aren't all that slow. The "slow boat from China" is a 4 week delivery time. 1 week to load your cargo container onto a ship, 2 weeks crossing 6000+nmi, and 1 week to unload that cargo container and get your package into the US system. That's averaging 18 knots speed of advance.

Which basically means that submariners are going to hate chasing big merchies. Can't hear a damn thing at 20 knots, and just getting ahead of someone doing 18 knots means you gotta do at least 25 knots for a while. Gain contact, get a rough course estimate, go deep and fast for most of a day, pop back up and hope you guessed right on their course.
 
Modern cargo ships aren't all that slow. The "slow boat from China" is a 4 week delivery time. 1 week to load your cargo container onto a ship, 2 weeks crossing 6000+nmi, and 1 week to unload that cargo container and get your package into the US system. That's averaging 18 knots speed of advance.
Oh its worse then that my bubbleheaded friend. If you only knew how much Submariners are going to hate life once the gloves come off.

A modern Container ship only spends a few days at dock, the companies generally try for a 48 hour turnaround at the Slow 3rd rate ports, the big ones can do 24 hours.

Most containers chug along at 24 26 knots, some like the Mearsk B class can hit 34 fully loaded.

Shit move FAST these days.

Albeit thats container haulers, bulk and tankers, generally do 15 ish.


Also for ordering over 100 FFGs one question.

How to crew them? We barely have enough for the ships we got now.
 
Oh its worse then that my bubbleheaded friend. If you only knew how much Submariners are going to hate life once the gloves come off.

A modern Container ship only spends a few days at dock, the companies generally try for a 48 hour turnaround at the Slow 3rd rate ports, the big ones can do 24 hours.

Most containers chug along at 24 26 knots, some like the Mearsk B class can hit 34 fully loaded.

Shit move FAST these days.

Albeit thats container haulers, bulk and tankers, generally do 15 ish.


Also for ordering over 100 FFGs one question.

How to crew them? We barely have enough for the ships we got now.
So, if SSNs are suboptimal for merchant interdiction (makes sense), then we need frigates, right? Especially if we want to seize merchants, versus sink them, no?

Crewing all those frigates…could a solution to ‘need more sailors‘ be found in hoped-for updates to our immigration laws (or enforcement of laws we already have)?

And yes, construction, arming, crewing, & fueling would cost a lot more than we have today. Some of that cash, and maybe some of the recruits could lift from a couple Army divisions we need less than we need ships and aircraft…?
 
Think Navy is very premature in opening competition for a second shipyard when as far as know Navy have as yet not completed the detail design of the frigate
This is literally just a "Sources Sought" RFI seeking to identify shipyards that might be interested/capable of being a second production facility. That's a far cry from "opening a competition."
 
So, if SSNs are suboptimal for merchant interdiction (makes sense), then we need frigates, right? Especially if we want to seize merchants, versus sink them, no?
Like, if SSN will struggle to intercept a merchant, modern frigates usually won't even get a chance. Only a few of them are even 3x capable nowadays.
Either there is an airbase in radius(and it wasn't suppressed or taken by the opponent), or your frigate can get into heli range, or, well, bye.
 
Unescorted civilian traffic is not a challenging target so long as you are not hung up on any single ship. Simply wait for the next one to blunder into you. Mines are ann easy option.
 
Oh its worse then that my bubbleheaded friend. If you only knew how much Submariners are going to hate life once the gloves come off.

A modern Container ship only spends a few days at dock, the companies generally try for a 48 hour turnaround at the Slow 3rd rate ports, the big ones can do 24 hours.

Most containers chug along at 24 26 knots, some like the Mearsk B class can hit 34 fully loaded.

Shit move FAST these days.

Albeit thats container haulers, bulk and tankers, generally do 15 ish.
Yeah, container haulers and car haulers, well, haul.

Only effective way to intercept those is to know their usual routes and set up where they will have to pass through.

Bulk and tankers are still not pleasant to chase down but are actually able to be chased down.


Also for ordering over 100 FFGs one question.

How to crew them? We barely have enough for the ships we got now.
It's "only" 8-10k more sailors... Plus 100 sets of officers.
 
The House and Senate over the weekend unveiled a deal for the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, applicable to Constellation.

"As for the Constellation-class frigate, the FY 2025 NDAA would fence funding for the program until the Secretary of Defense ensures “that 95 percent of functional design drawings have been approved by the designated technical authority,” according to the joint explanatory statement. The bill authorizes $50 million for the program, slashing most of the $1.17 billion the Navy sought in the budget submission.

“The provision would also require the Comptroller General of the United States to assess the Secretary of Defense’s compliance with the requirements and evaluate the completeness of functional design,” the statement reads.

The move comes after the Navy earlier this year announced that the lead ship in the Constellation-class program could be up to three years late. Service officials at the time cited design maturation issues and workforce challenges as reasons for the potential delay."


USN authorized production start back in August, 2022 and yet here we are two years theee months later and the design is still not even 95% complete - the Far East shipyards will not commence ship build till the design is 100% complete, the last few percent of the design is often the most difficult, so find it not surprising Constellation will be three years late, if not more.

 
USNI Dec. 13th

Navy assistant secretary for research, development and acquisition Nickolas Guertin saying design should be mature enough (he is not saying 100%) for the shipbuilder to enter continuous production by May, which clears the way for the Navy to tap a second yard to build more hulls before Connie delivers.

"Speaking at the Naval Institute’s Defense Forum Washington event, Fincantieri Marinette Marine CEO Mark Vandroff said the Navy and the shipyard underestimated the complexity of altering the design.
“With the frigate what you have is the contractor responsible for the functional design but the government has to approve every artifact,” he said.
“Then we wondered, after we set that up, why it took way longer than originally estimated. Because industry didn’t have the capability that we thought we had to do the design. But then on the Navy, they were bottlenecked in bandwidth [to make approvals]."

"Meanwhile, a Government Accountability Report released in May found that the Navy’s design choices have caused “unplanned weight growth” meaning the frigate might not have the margin for necessary modernization over the course of its planned service life."

The GAO report also said Navy disclosed in April 2024 that its considering a reduction in the frigate’s speed requirement as one potential way, among others, to resolve the 10% weight growth affecting the ship’s design and with this the article the first time have seen mention as a 6,700t ship - the original RFP only called for 5% Service Life Allowance for growth.

To be noted the Captain overseeing the Gerald R Ford was fired in 2020 due to delays, whilst PEO Captain Kevin Smith overseeing Constellation with its 3 year delay was promoted to Rear Adm. and now leads the program executive office for unmanned and small combatants and now is disclosing there is a distinction between the functional design and the detail design and saying that 85% functionally is still the same as the nominal parent FREMM but as was previously reported the detail commonality of design dropped from 85% to less than 15% the same.


 

Attachments

  • FFG_62_Design_Changess_to_italian_FREMM.png
    FFG_62_Design_Changess_to_italian_FREMM.png
    156.1 KB · Views: 56
The PLAN recently launched its first 054B frigate. They built 054A at a rate of over 3 per year between 2008 and 2019 (and more when production restarted after COVID). They currently operate 40 054A frigates, and I expect they will build at least as many 054B frigates. The PLA tends to build more of of a defense item as the design matures and approaches the cutting edge, and the 054B is certainly there, with 32 VLS cells and a suite of electronics.

By the time the PLAN has 80 054A and 054B frigates, the USN might hopefully have 20 Constellation frigates in service.

But sure, we are still a super power.

 
Loadout can very depend on the mission/scenario.

The Constellation will have the ability to house a variety of missiles. Which missiles and how many of each can vary depending on the mission.

This is inherently good.

I'm not sure why anyone is arguing over the loadout, other than it is fun.

I think a good argument could be made for more VLS cells but that's not going to happen before a Flight II.
Might be able to fit some angled deck launchers to the ship, maybe at the cost of NSM canisters, but in a pinch SM6 can do the ASM role.
 
What are the chances as still at relatively early stages and with the sorry state the program in currently think it a high chance the program will be cancelled by the Navy on the alter of finding some of the $50 billion p.a. for Trump's Golden Dome, or am i reading the tea leaves wrong, what other big ticket items would the Admirals offer up for cancellation?
 
What are the chances as still at relatively early stages and with the sorry state the program in currently think it a high chance the program will be cancelled by the Navy on the alter of finding some of the $50 billion p.a. for Trump's Golden Dome, or am i reading the tea leaves wrong, what other big ticket items would the Admirals offer up for cancellation?

I think zero. You are not going to get more hulls faster by starting over and I do not think there are major complaints about the design, just about the process and amount of time that produced it. And there seems to be wide agreement by everyone involved that recapitalizing the USN and ship building industry is a priority.
 
What are the chances as still at relatively early stages and with the sorry state the program in currently think it a high chance the program will be cancelled by the Navy on the alter of finding some of the $50 billion p.a. for Trump's Golden Dome, or am i reading the tea leaves wrong, what other big ticket items would the Admirals offer up for cancellation?
Near zero.

LCS can't do the job, and the USN needs ships NOW. You do not get ships sooner by stopping the production of what you have before designing their replacement!
 
What are the chances as still at relatively early stages and with the sorry state the program in currently think it a high chance the program will be cancelled by the Navy on the alter of finding some of the $50 billion p.a. for Trump's Golden Dome, or am i reading the tea leaves wrong, what other big ticket items would the Admirals offer up for cancellation?
Yeah…probably not going to be completely cancelled, but the class may be truncated, like the LCSes and zumwalts were.
 
Yeah…probably not going to be completely cancelled, but the class may be truncated, like the LCSes and zumwalts were.

IMO fantasticly unlikely unless there is some fundamental flaw. Design and yard prep is the heavy lifting; once it’s into production, why stop?

I can see mild design changes for the second batch.
 
IMO fantasticly unlikely unless there is some fundamental flaw. Design and yard prep is the heavy lifting; once it’s into production, why stop?

I can see mild design changes for the second batch.
But given their record, I can see the USN pushing for major design changes…
 
Any further design changes will be after launching and trials unless something MAJOR* comes up.

Which is a common part of the processes for navy ships, the first few are always... Off before everything gets hammer out.

The current issues stem largely from the Damcon Standards differences between Euro Navies and USN. And the last time the USN try to skimp on those well...

Just Look in the LCS threads.


*Which is largely limited to finding a major design flaw on the Parent FREMS, unlikely, or a game breaking tech becoming a thing, Like a Compact fusion system that can cheaply replace the engines.
 
Not for the first batch. And quite honestly, outside some more VLS, what complaints are there?
I was referring to your comment on the second batch.

As for what complaints there could be, perhaps some USN bods are hankering for offboard effectors? Unlikely, I know - but given past records…
 
IMO fantasticly unlikely unless there is some fundamental flaw. Design and yard prep is the heavy lifting; once it’s into production, why stop?

I can see mild design changes for the second batch.
Every new design the USN has built in the last 30 years has been truncated after years of cost overruns, delays, bad press, and design issues.
The Connie is what? 3 years late already so far?
Pretty sure they’ve gone significantly over budget.
Bad press.
Design issues.

A truncated order is the logical next step in the pattern.

Edit
Not quite a truncation of the class but already alterations to the order and delivery schedule have already occurred.

With the potential of the ships having to sacrifice speed to maintain weight for future growth could be a huge factor in truncating the order since the USN and fanbois are obsessed with escorts having to be capable of 30+ knots.

$1.2B was procured for the 7th ship. At that point why not just buy and build more FII or IIA Burkes? My ship was $1.2b

 
Last edited:
Not for the first batch. And quite honestly, outside some more VLS, what complaints are there?

No hull-mounted sonar for one, an odd compromise for a ship with ASW as its primary mission.

VLS cells per dollar and per ton, for another. At 50% the cost of a Flt III Burke (hopefully) and 2/3rds the displacement, the current design has 1/3rd the VLS. Someone in Congress will surely point out that Flt III Burkes provide more VLS per dollar. I'll buy you a beer if they don't try to add 12 more cells to the 11th ship.
 
No hull-mounted sonar for one, an odd compromise for a ship with ASW as its primary mission.

VLS cells per dollar and per ton, for another. At 50% the cost of a Flt III Burke (hopefully) and 2/3rds the displacement, the current design has 1/3rd the VLS. Someone in Congress will surely point out that Flt III Burkes provide more VLS per dollar. I'll buy you a beer if they don't try to add 12 more cells to the 11th ship.

There was a lot of talk and a push from some members of Congress to add more cells to the initial run of FFG(X).

Given the delays, design issues and cost overruns with the initial run, it's probably good the Navy resisted the call to add more cells.

Additional cells for subsequent flights is very likely.
 
No hull-mounted sonar for one, an odd compromise for a ship with ASW as its primary mission.

VLS cells per dollar and per ton, for another. At 50% the cost of a Flt III Burke (hopefully) and 2/3rds the displacement, the current design has 1/3rd the VLS. Someone in Congress will surely point out that Flt III Burkes provide more VLS per dollar. I'll buy you a beer if they don't try to add 12 more cells to the 11th ship.
90-100% the cost of a burke. $1.2b was appropriated for the 7th ship I have the link in my previous post.
 
No hull-mounted sonar for one, an odd compromise for a ship with ASW as its primary mission.

VLS cells per dollar and per ton, for another. At 50% the cost of a Flt III Burke (hopefully) and 2/3rds the displacement, the current design has 1/3rd the VLS. Someone in Congress will surely point out that Flt III Burkes provide more VLS per dollar. I'll buy you a beer if they don't try to add 12 more cells to the 11th ship.
There are 16 cainsters NSMs, so still 1/2. With much better capability for small-medium targets in congested environments.
Constellation class isn't built as a "Miniburke". It isn't US answer to 052D, it's a frigate.
And the moment it'll turn into miniburke, it'll start threatening proper ones; it was very visibly something USN tried to avoid, separating two classes as much as possible.

Out of all things, last thing USN lacks is number of VLS. Point of concern is reloads - interceptors are much harder to produce than boxes.

Finally, while boxcount is less - given significantly lesser capability of sensor suit and probably larger emphasis on non-fleet action (again, frigate!) - just fit more ESSM.
 
Last edited:
One of the things the US Navy was trying to achieve is a ship with the ability for independent action as well a performing as part of the battlegroup for a cost 50% of a Burke.

The Navy made the case that the sensor and weapons fit of the FFGX was the minimum for being able to achieve those goals.

People may disagree with that but that is what the Navy was trying to do.
 
Every new design the USN has built in the last 30 years has been truncated after years of cost overruns, delays, bad press, and design issues
And this is a bold face lie. Most of the Ships design in the last 30 years, or rather after the Burkes, have had their Run their design run completed or EXTEND.

The San Antonias, Design in the late ninties and was expect to have 12 ships. Is now up to 13 with 11 more on the way for a total of 24.

The Virginia, was to be a 20 ship class, 24 in the water with money for 10 earmark for them and a plan 32 more above that for 66.

The Fords, plan for 10 with 2 in the water and 2 with steel in the dock. That class has the worse press on this list and it still going on strong.

The Expeditionary Transfer Docks was originally to have 4 hulls, and there now plan for 8 with 7 already in the water.

The America class LHAs are to have 11 hulls, with 2 in the water and 2 in the dock. And Im pretty sure it was originally to be 10 hulls with the 11th getting added after the Bonhomme fire.

The Lewis and Clark Dry cargo ships got all plan 14 commissioned.

While the John Lewis oiler has 5 of the 20 in the water, with 3 on the ways.

Those are the class off the type of my head. Even if you cut out the two Replenishment ship classes that still 5 very successful post Burke classes of combat ready ships. With 3 likely 4 of those getting their lines extended.

The LCS and Zumwalt Snafus are on much Congress penny pinching causing issues, LCS modules are all on them, as it was on the Navy not knowing what it needed and failing to predict the future. As is only one of those classes can be called worthless, and that the Freedoms due to their gearing issues laming them which is totally on the shipbuilder there. The Independence been carving out a niche for itself in being a general go getter for second line duties. While the Zumwalts been mostly love by their crews with the biggest issue been their Maintenace set up, need to call up a contractor for simple crew level fixes*, and even lamed as they are they are still a match for the Burkes.


*Also the fact that you have less then 150 bodies to do the work of 300 plus on a ship bout 40 percent LARGER then a Burke or Tico which are already know to need more bodies. Basically you have 100 manhours of Maintenace work per day but only 5 bodies to do it with instead of 10. Before adding the 8 hours of training the navy need and the of paperwork leaving all the crew having no time to even sleep.

Edit: Oh Forgot the Spearhead Class with been chugging along to it planned 19 just fine, with 14 in the water 2 in the docks. And they are looking to add several modified as Hosptial ships to replace the two converted tankers. Albeit that did start out as an Army Program to replace their LSVs and like...
 
Last edited:
How much do you think Burkes are going for these days? Sure ain't $1.2b, closer to $2.5b.
A FIII may be more, but a II or IIA is $1.2b, maybe a bit more accounting for inflation.

Regardless, $1b+ for a ship class that’s supposed to be affordable is unsustainable.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom