FFG(X)

[bring_it_on]

Congress can continue to trim funds and then cry about how we don't have enough ships a few years later. We're kind of back to square one..with no real viable plan to field more surface combatants in the next 10-15 year time horizon (setting aside the political rhetoric)... Congress is an equal partner on that blame. If they were remotely interested in expanding the surface combatant fleet they should be accelerating the Frigate investments to complete design and open production up for other yards so that we can build this think at the LCS rate of 4 per year at a minimum. Right now, unless the Navy is allowed to (there too I think Congress has trimmed investments) go big on unmanned it is destined to shrink or be forced to operate old and outdated ships.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Depends on how much of their magazine depth they've devoted to anti-ship missiles, vs Mk 48 and land-attack Tomahawk. More than one additional attack may be pushing it.

I was honestly assuming Tomahawk Block 5s from the US boats, so they're dual-purpose. But yes, boats would have to decide how much of their torpedo room to allocate to cruise missiles versus torpedoes. I would not expect anything less than 8 torpedoes carried. (looking at SSBN torpedo capacity)

Idk, not if we end up getting an escort that’s actually affordable and can do the job without having overkill for capability.

When a bunch of rebels supplied by Iran of all places can create the Red Sea Turkey Shoot, you'd better design in one hell of a baseline capability.

 

[H_K]

This probably has 0 impact on the program, as Fincantieri and the Navy are so behind with the first 6 hulls that there’s no way they could start construction on a seventh hull next year.

Congress is just saying why pay now when we can wait till FY26 for some evidence of progress before funding the next hulls.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Congress is planning savage cuts to Constellation budget to the end of FY25 by reducing Continuing Resolution from $1.17 billion to $100 million, reflecting their disgust with the Navy over their handling of the program.
Ship was ordered April 2020, nearly two and a half years later August 2022 build was authorized with Adm Morton falsely claiming 80% detail design complete but when the GAO reported May 2024, twenty one months later not in one of the 30 odd Grand Modules of the build had the detail design been 100% completed, Navy has not revealed the current state of play and if they have completed design of any of the Grand Modules.
Now the program is running three years late, overweight and over cost (appearing mainly to impact Fincantieri Marinette Marinetti as they signed a fixed price contract !), no wonder the Far Eastern Shipyards insist amongst other things 100% design is complete before commencing build.

https://news.usni.org/2025/03/10/continuing-resolution-proposal-boosts-destroyers-by-1-5b-trims-funds-for-frigate-carriers

What? We finally got a fixed rate contract for a ship? That should have been standard imho

 

[johnpjones1775]

Congress can continue to trim funds and then cry about how we don't have enough ships a few years later. We're kind of back to square one..with no real viable plan to field more surface combatants in the next 10-15 year time horizon (setting aside the political rhetoric)... Congress is an equal partner on that blame. If they were remotely interested in expanding the surface combatant fleet they should be accelerating the Frigate investments to complete design and open production up for other yards so that we can build this think at the LCS rate of 4 per year at a minimum. Right now, unless the Navy is allowed to (there too I think Congress has trimmed investments) go big on unmanned it is destined to shrink or be forced to operate old and outdated ships.

Tbh I dont think the Connie’s really got that many more to us. Even if they go with the full order of 20, that’s only 6 or 7 available to deploy at a time, god forbid a ship get hung up in a prolonged yard period, or receive some major accidental damage and need an unscheduled yard period.

We need a class of ship that we can afford at least 60 of.

The more we fuck things up, the more I think we need to just go with MMSCs with an upgraded radar. If it’s notably cheaper than the SPY ‘lite’ arrays we’re putting on the Connies then maybe the UK’s Sampson radar would work. The ships themselves would have fairly low VLS count, but I’d use them as the C&C ship for LUSVs and MUSVs with ADLs if not full on VLS. 16 per hull, have an MMSC controlling 3, and we have our convoy escorts.

 

[SK2]

If I understand correctly, all these ROCN ships carry up to to 64 inclined TC-2N, as every position is fully modular.
Exceeding 16 is more pointless/expensive rather than impossible.

ROCN version is capable of 16-cell VLS, however due to budget concern they fit 8 only.
The version suggested to the Aussies got 32-cell VLS, with the expense of removing the main gun

 

[kqcke for you]

ROCN version is capable of 16-cell VLS, however due to budget concern they fit 8 only.
The version suggested to the Aussies got 32-cell VLS, with the expense of removing the main gun

That said they maybe could fit a 76mm soveraponte at the very front. If you want one

 

[SK2]

I can hear the curse of maintenance personnel...lol

 

[kqcke for you]

I can hear the curse of maintenance personnel...lol

Yeah and reloading that thing would also be quite fun as you only got like less than 80 shots