Littoral Combat Ship - Freedom/Independence

[Jimmo952]

I guess it depends on how you define ‘harms way’ but freedoms were the only regular USN presence within the gulf and SoH area, countering Iranian attempts to interfere with shipping for months.
If that doesn’t count, then really no USN ship has gone in harm’s way since what? 2003 until 2016?

Aside from that at least one has been on MIO duty intercepting shipments of weapons and parts headed to

I’m not sure how many currently or when but I do believe there’s already more than 1 forward deployed.
I can double check with a buddy who is CO on an avenger how many are currently there.

That will be interesting to find out if more than one deployed to the Gulf this year.

It was a big deal when it happened because it was able to sail to the Gulf and back without breaking down.

The sad reality is LCS is not fit for the intended job. It was designed when boghammers or other small craft were the major threat.

As we see in Ukraine and the Red Sea, drones and antiship missiles have proliferated to the point where they are now a major threat to any vessel operating near a contested shore.

In the current threat environment, the LCS, like the Coast Guard Cutters, would have to be withdrawn quickly from any environment that turned hot.

 

[johnpjones1775]

That will be interesting to find out if more than one deployed to the Gulf this year.

It was a big deal when it happened because it was able to sail to the Gulf and back without breaking down.

The sad reality is LCS is not fit for the intended job. It was designed when boghammers or other small craft were the major threat.

As we see in Ukraine and the Red Sea, drones and antiship missiles have proliferated to the point where they are now a major threat to any vessel operating near a contested shore.

In the current threat environment, the LCS, like the Coast Guard Cutters, would have to be withdrawn quickly from any environment that turned hot.

Seababy style USVs and boghammers are dealt with in the same ways…
Small drones like quadcopters would be easily dealt with by LCSes, and with planned upgrades providing them to launch at least 16 ESSMs they’ll be capable of defending themselves against most missiles.

You say the LCSes would need to be withdrawn based on what’s happening in the Red Sea, yet they’ve been operating in and around the Red Sea…proving exactly the opposite.

The Chinese view them as enough of hassle they dedicate 3 FFGs to follow them around the SCS.

They’ve been operating just fine in the PG, SoH, GoO, and RS for the last year…

Any vessel armed with a mk110 helicopter, and SEARAM are plenty capable of defending against UAVs and USVs.
The legend class cutter may not be well suited to operating in a high threat area alone, but neither is a CVN, or an avenger.
We have a fleet and every ship does must do it’s job the navy to be successful, just like every rate must do their job for the ship to be successful.

I’m not really sure why it would be a big deal a freedom class made it to Bahrain without a breakdown.
Congress demanded cheaper ships, the navy swapped to a cheaper shitty combining gear, the problem was identified, a fix devised and implemented and nearly all ships built with said shitty gear, and new builds were built with the fix, and the fix was thoroughly tested…

The only people who would be surprised or make a big deal of such a trip are either not paying attention, or unable to change the way they think when confronted with new information.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Messaged my buddy for confirmation, so might 8-12 hours before I hear back due time differences and ya know him being busy.

But 1 was deployed to Bahrain in 2022

USS Sioux City Arrives in Bahrain during Historic Deployment

USS Sioux City (LCS 11) arrived to Bahrain for a scheduled port visit, June 25, marking the completion of a 10,000-mile journey while becoming the first littoral combat ship to operate in the Middle

www.cusnc.navy.mil

1 in 2023

USS Indianapolis Departs Naval Support Activity Bahrain

231022-N-LX270-1081 MANAMA, Bahrain (Oct. 22, 2023) The Freedom-class littoral combat ship USS Indianapolis (LCS 17) departs Naval Support Activity Bahrain, Oct. 22. Indianapolis is deployed to the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations to help ensure maritime security and stability in the Middle...

www.dvidshub.net

So I’ve been able to confirm 2 already there, with a total of 5 expected to be forward deployed by the end of 2025

Homie got back quick.
So none are currently forward deployed to Bahrain yet, but those 2 have obviously done normal deployments.

 

[Jimmo952]

Seababy style USVs and boghammers are dealt with in the same ways…
Small drones like quadcopters would be easily dealt with by LCSes, and with planned upgrades providing them to launch at least 16 ESSMs they’ll be capable of defending themselves against most missiles.

You say the LCSes would need to be withdrawn based on what’s happening in the Red Sea, yet they’ve been operating in and around the Red Sea…proving exactly the opposite.

The Chinese view them as enough of hassle they dedicate 3 FFGs to follow them around the SCS.

They’ve been operating just fine in the PG, SoH, GoO, and RS for the last year…

Any vessel armed with a mk110 helicopter, and SEARAM are plenty capable of defending against UAVs and USVs.
The legend class cutter may not be well suited to operating in a high threat area alone, but neither is a CVN, or an avenger.
We have a fleet and every ship does must do it’s job the navy to be successful, just like every rate must do their job for the ship to be successful.

I have not heard of the plan to fit the LCS with ESSM. I know it was looked but I did not think it had been approved.

Can you point me to something to show that it's going to happen?

The Independence class has been more widely deployed.

If the Freedoms have been out there fighting in the Red Sea that is great. Something to show that is the case would be great to see.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I have not heard of the plan to fit the LCS with ESSM. I know it was looked but I did not think it had been approved.

Can you point me to something to show that it's going to happen?

The Independence class has been more widely deployed.

If the Freedoms have been out there fighting in the Red Sea that is great. Something to show that is the case would be great to see.

There is a survivability upgrade program underway, that would put VLS in the spaces where the 30mm guns go.
I’m not sure what length of VLS it is supposed to be but ESSM can be operated out of all lengths.

I don’t recall how many cells each space can fit if it’s 2 or 4, but if it’s 2 each, that’s 16 ESSMs.

US Navy Littoral Combat Ship Proves Combat Worth Supporting Red Sea Missile Launches - Warrior Maven

The controversial and long-criticized US Navy Littoral Combat Ship vessel appears to have proven its ability to add substantial tactical and maritime warfare support

warriormaven.com

 

[Jimmo952]

There is a survivability upgrade program underway, that would put VLS in the spaces where the 30mm guns go.
I’m not sure what length of VLS it is supposed to be but ESSM can be operated out of all lengths.

I don’t recall how many cells each space can fit if it’s 2 or 4, but if it’s 2 each, that’s 16 ESSMs.

US Navy Littoral Combat Ship Proves Combat Worth Supporting Red Sea Missile Launches - Warrior Maven

The controversial and long-criticized US Navy Littoral Combat Ship vessel appears to have proven its ability to add substantial tactical and maritime warfare support

warriormaven.com

I thought the upgrade was looked at and that part of it was rejected. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe not.

It's great to hear of an LCS participating in the Great Red Sea turkey shoot.

I read the article and it's not clear to me what it actually did there, but it was there and gets the participation trophy.

 

[that_person]

The LCS is likely to turn out to be the Fletcher of any near future major naval conflicts the USN becomes involved in.

What does this even mean?

 

[johnpjones1775]

clarified with my buddy.
No freedoms will be forward deployed, they’ll only rotate, but 4 Indys will be forward deployed to replace the avengers and cyclones.

The VLS upgrade is indeed still being tested and worked on.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I thought the upgrade was looked at and that part of it was rejected. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe not.

It's great to hear of an LCS participating in the Great Red Sea turkey shoot.

I read the article and it's not clear to me what it actually did there, but it was there and gets the participation trophy.

I don’t understand big navy’s thinking, but they seems to be intentionally keeping things the LCSes are doing hush hush without making things classified.

My buddy is the CO on an avenger currently, and former freedom DH, he keeps up with LCSes and the program.
Tells me what he can.

A lot of very impressive and good stuff has been happening with them over the last 5 years and the USN has not chosen to publicize it.

Anyway according to homie the LCS in the Red Sea was securing OPBOXes for the carrier, so it could safely operate closer to shore than they otherwise might, along with MIO missions.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I will put it this way.
1. I believe if a major peer/near peer naval war happened, both classes of LCS would end up being viewed the same way as the fletcher.
2. If I had to reenlist for some reason I would make sure it’s in my contract that I get posted to an LCS.

 

[johnpjones1775]

What does this even mean?

What do you think of when you think of the fletcher class DD?

 

[Jimmo952]

What do you think of when you think of the fletcher class DD?

I class that's currently at the bottom of the sea? Also in a few museums??

 

[johnpjones1775]

I class that's currently at the bottom of the sea? Also in a few museums??

That’s all you know or think about the fletchers?
That’s wild.

 

[Jimmo952]

clarified with my buddy.
No freedoms will be forward deployed, they’ll only rotate, but 4 Indys will be forward deployed to replace the avengers and cyclones.

The VLS upgrade is indeed still being tested and worked on.

Thanks. I appreciate it.

The Navy has not committed to installing VLS on the LCS.

If I remember right, the Saudis want it on their version of the ship so the engineering will be done.

I would not be surprised if it eventually happens but so far, the Navy has not committed to it.

 

[Jimmo952]

That’s all you know or think about the fletchers?
That’s wild.

I think that's the relevant part as it relates to LCS.

They were a great balance of cost and capability. They proved very useful.

I can't say I'd predict that for the LCS. I'd be happy to be wrong though.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I think that's the relevant part as it relates to LCS.

They were a great balance of cost and capability. They proved very useful.

I can't say I'd predict that for the LCS. I'd be happy to be wrong though.

Currently LCSes have the most offensive firepower of any ship in the USN ton for ton (until the Connies join the fleet)

They’re the cheapest ships we have in the fleet and will be for the foreseeable future, with solid capabilities now, and will have more in the near future.

In the event of a naval war they will be all over the place, launching attacks, and disappearing quickly.
They will be providing counter FAC escort, they will be clearing minefields, and once the VLS upgrade is completed, I’m sure they’ll end up getting used as AAW escorts.

People who dislike LCSes fall into at least 1 of the 3 following categories in my experience.(often into more than one.)
1. Mad they’re not FFGs(largely why they’re developing VLS for them)
2. Haven’t kept up with news on LCS in many years.
3. Conflate the horribly flawed development and acquisition program with the ships themselves.

 

[TomS]

Seababy style USVs and boghammers are dealt with in the same ways…
Small drones like quadcopters would be easily dealt with by LCSes, and with planned upgrades providing them to launch at least 16 ESSMs they’ll be capable of defending themselves against most missiles.

I think any VLS/ESSM upgrade for LCS has gone away. The full SSC frigate upgrade died when FFG(X) was initiated. Right now, the lethality and survivability upgrade adds SEWIP Block II ECM, Nullka decoys, gun fire control updates (including ALaMO), updated radar, NSM, and a few minor tweaks, but not VLS.

 

[Jimmo952]

Currently LCSes have the most offensive firepower of any ship in the USN ton for ton (until the Connies join the fleet)

They’re the cheapest ships we have in the fleet and will be for the foreseeable future, with solid capabilities now, and will have more in the near future.

In the event of a naval war they will be all over the place, launching attacks, and disappearing quickly.
They will be providing counter FAC escort, they will be clearing minefields, and once the VLS upgrade is completed, I’m sure they’ll end up getting used as AAW escorts.

People who dislike LCSes fall into at least 1 of the 3 following categories in my experience.(often into more than one.)
1. Mad they’re not FFGs(largely why they’re developing VLS for them)
2. Haven’t kept up with news on LCS in many years.
3. Conflate the horribly flawed development and acquisition program with the ships themselves.

The concept was bad. The execution was bad. The cost for what it is (including development costs) is beyond atrocious.

The offensive firepower, I assume with NSMs installed and integrated, is that of the missile boats that were popular in the past.

All that money and time could have been better spent.

It's a vertible textbook on how not to buy, design and build modern warships.

Other than that, they are great.

Hopefully the reliability is finally at a point where the Freedom Class in particular can be used for more than guarding a pier.

Sounds like that may be the case and I hope it's true. It's been a long and very expensive road to get there.

 

[Jimmo952]

I think any VLS/ESSM upgrade for LCS has gone away. The full SSC frigate upgrade died when FFG(X) was initiated. Right now, the lethality and survivability upgrade adds SEWIP Block II ECM, Nullka decoys, gun fire control updates (including ALaMO), updated radar, NSM, and a few minor tweaks, but not VLS.

That is my understanding. Development work probably continues though to support the Saudi contract.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I think any VLS/ESSM upgrade for LCS has gone away. The full SSC frigate upgrade died when FFG(X) was initiated. Right now, the lethality and survivability upgrade adds SEWIP Block II ECM, Nullka decoys, gun fire control updates (including ALaMO), updated radar, NSM, and a few minor tweaks, but not VLS.

The VLS upgrade is still actively being worked on.
Confirmed with my buddy.
The LCS survivability upgrades are a completely separate program from the MMSC and the FFG variants offered for the FFGX program. Both of those have significantly more VLS than the LCS upgrade.

Older article but you can see the VLS upgrade in the picture.

NAVSEA Issues RFP for LCS Lethality and Survivability Upgrade, LUSV Combat System - Naval News

The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Program Executive Office (PEO) Integrated Warfare System (PEO IWS) has issued a request for proposal (RFP) for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) lethality and survivability upgrades and the Large Unmanned Surface Vehicle (LUSV) combat system.

www.navalnews.com

(MMSC actually apparently only has 8 VLS, but the LCS variant FFG proposals for the Connie competition met the USN’s requirements for 24 VLS minimum.)

 

[johnpjones1775]

The concept was bad. The execution was bad. The cost for what it is (including development costs) is beyond atrocious.

The offensive firepower, I assume with NSMs installed and integrated, is that of the missile boats that were popular in the past.

All that money and time could have been better spent.

It's a vertible textbook on how not to buy, design and build modern warships.

Other than that, they are great.

Hopefully the reliability is finally at a point where the Freedom Class in particular can be used for more than guarding a pier.

Sounds like that may be the case and I hope it's true. It's been a long and very expensive road to get there.

The concept was just fine, there were already other ships utilizing the same basic concept.
Going all in on the ships before there were any completed modules was a mistake, but that’s not the fault of the ships themselves.

8 NSMs, and 16 hellfires.
Missile boats are great and all, but not what we need, and LCSes are significantly more capable than a missile boat.

Edit
As for the concept, ships that had the same basic concept that existed long before LCS.

Absalon-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

StanFlex - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'm not sure I'd want to give up the two 30mm mounts on the LCS for missiles, but that also depends on the local threat environment. If it's more "small drones like the Black Sea" and less "Great Turkey Shoot Over Jordan," I'd want to keep the 30mm guns.

But if we're playing "Great Turkey Shoot Over Jordan" I want 16x VLS, all quadpacked with ESSMs!

 

[johnpjones1775]

I'm not sure I'd want to give up the two 30mm mounts on the LCS for missiles, but that also depends on the local threat environment. If it's more "small drones like the Black Sea" and less "Great Turkey Shoot Over Jordan," I'd want to keep the 30mm guns.

But if we're playing "Great Turkey Shoot Over Jordan" I want 16x VLS, all quadpacked with ESSMs!

I mean the more options to deal with a specific threat the better sure, but the hellfires and Mk110 are perfectly capable of dealing with a fairly large number of small boats, 10 should be no problem at all, 24 should still be more than doable

 

[Jimmo952]

I mean the more options to deal with a specific threat the better sure, but the hellfires and Mk110 are perfectly capable of dealing with a fairly large number of small boats, 10 should be no problem at all, 24 should still be more than doable

If they can get the fire control sorted out for the 57mm. For some years there the LCS could not accurately shoot on the move. The anchor had to be dropped before engaging.

Who thought that was a good idea?

In the original implementation, the gun was optically sighted and was found not very effective in tests against moving targets.

The original concept had LCS dashing back and forth changing mission modules rapidly to handle changing situations.

It was a dumb idea as was the speed requirement.

A ship that size, with the mandated shallow draft, speed and aviation requirements meant compromises in other areas had to be achieved.

The original crew size was equally unrealistic.

Perhaps now, LCS can take on the role of a slightly upgunned coast guard cutter but it's been a long, torturous and expensive road.

There are not many LCS apologist left. I am surprised when I run into one.

 

[johnpjones1775]

If they can get the fire control sorted out for the 57mm. For some years there the LCS could not accurately shoot on the move. The anchor had to be dropped before engaging.

Who thought that was a good idea?

In the original implementation, the gun was optically sighted and was found not very effective in tests against moving targets.

The original concept had LCS dashing back and forth changing mission modules rapidly to handle changing situations.

It was a dumb idea as was the speed requirement.

A ship that size, with the mandated shallow draft, speed and aviation requirements meant compromises in other areas had to be achieved.

The original crew size was equally unrealistic.

Perhaps now, LCS can take on the role of a slightly upgunned coast guard cutter but it's been a long, torturous and expensive road.

There are not many LCS apologist left. I am surprised when I run into one.

Where did you hear that bit about the gun from exactly?

Sea giraffe radar is air/surface search and works as a FC radar as well…

 

[Jimmo952]

This has been going on a long time. It's pretty well documented.

Do some research.

You just might be the last of the true believers.

 

[apparition13]

I mean the more options to deal with a specific threat the better sure, but the hellfires and Mk110 are perfectly capable of dealing with a fairly large number of small boats, 10 should be no problem at all, 24 should still be more than doable

Depends on what the boats are carrying. And the boats are carrying increasingly long ranged payloads. Doable 15 years ago may not be doable now and won't be doable in the future. "Deal with Iranian speedboats" is not a conops to base half your ships on.

If we're talking stanflex, Absalons (with a couple of mk41s flanking the B turret) would have been better anyway. The 127 and 76 guns could fire vulcano and dart, and the terminally guided vulcano would have been perfect for speedboats at ranges much greater than 57mm or hellfire.

LAM fired from NLOS-LS would also be useful, and depending on how much space is needed to work on the launcher modules, as many as 6 could fit in a stanflex module, depending on the weight limits of a loaded stanflex module. Cramped, but possible. Four might be better from an ergonomics standpoint. Lengthen the cells a bit and ADATS or Barak 1 would fit, lengthen them by about a meter and CAMM would fit. Too bad the army gave up on it and the navy didn't continue on its own.

 

[johnpjones1775]

This has been going on a long time. It's pretty well documented.

Do some research.

You just might be the last of the true believers.

I really am not.
I’ve been googling it for several minutes now. I have not seen anything remotely close to what you’re talking about.

I agree the original crew size and maintenance plans were absolutely stupid. Both issues have been rectified.

As for speed the speed is absolutely an amazing capability allowing them to respond to crises or developing situations faster than any ship in the navy.
Speed is an extremely valuable resource when countering small fast boats, particularly suicide boats like seababy drones.

Edit
Do some research in my experience is what people who can’t provide sources say.
If it’s so well documented it should be easy for you to provide this documentation.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Depends on what the boats are carrying. And the boats are carrying increasingly long ranged payloads. Doable 15 years ago may not be doable now and won't be doable in the future. "Deal with Iranian speedboats" is not a conops to base half your ships on.

If the 57mm and hellfires don’t have the range then the 30mm guns are even more irrelevant, and then ESSM is even more important as they can be launched against and track surface targets.

That being said, it really seems that 99% of people who talk about Iranian speedboats have no clue what sort of weapons they mount and seem to just think the heaviest weapons any of them have is a 23mm gun.

Most Iranian boats even a decade ago sported either a 107mm MLRS, torpedoes, or missiles, which has had me criticizing the navy for only arming Burkes with MK38s for dedicated small boat defense as a mk38 gunner I realized an attacking speed boat would likely never get within range let alone effective range of my guns.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Here you can see most of the boat classes operated by the IRGC have weapons with a range of 5 miles or more.

 

[Jimmo952]

Depends on what the boats are carrying. And the boats are carrying increasingly long ranged payloads. Doable 15 years ago may not be doable now and won't be doable in the future. "Deal with Iranian speedboats" is not a conops to base half your ships on.

The gestation period for these ships, particularly the Freedom Class that the threats changed before the ship became reliable enough to be useful.

 

[Jimmo952]

If the 57mm and hellfires don’t have the range then the 30mm guns are even more irrelevant, and then ESSM is even more important as they can be launched against and track surface targets.

Let me know when the ESSM equipped LCSs start being deployed.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Let me know when the ESSM equipped LCSs start being deployed.

I’m still waiting for a source on your mk110 claims.
Best I can find is a vague statement in an article that’s already a decade old and itself says an increment II upgrade was already underway and proving to be capable…so it seems at best youre angry at a ship for problems that were already solved a decade ago.

 

[Jimmo952]

I’m still waiting for a source on your mk110 claims.
Best I can find is a vague statement in an article that’s already a decade old and itself says an increment II upgrade was already underway and proving to be capable…so it seems at best youre angry at a ship for problems that were already solved a decade ago.

It's not that I'm angry. It's that the ship has been a dog and not able to do much.

There have been steps to increase the ships reliability and survivability. I agree with that.

It's been a very long, twisted and expensive road to get something of modest capability.

 

[johnpjones1775]

It's not that I'm angry. It's that the ship has been a dog and not able to do much.

There have been steps to increase the ships reliability and survivability. I agree with that.

It's been a very long, twisted and expensive road to get something of modest capability.

Nearly all of your complaints are program complaints and not complaints about the actual ships.

Again, the swappable modules concept was a very good one inspired by a successful program in the danish navy for nearly 20 years by the time the first LCS hit the water. We as Americans simply failed to do it ourselves.
The speed is very important.

The ships as we have them today, are extremely important to the fleet, for no other reason than the avengers are about to fall apart and they desperately need to be replaced, they’ve been delaying decomming them for a decade or more now.
Beyond that they’re the only true small combatant the navy has, and will have for the foreseeable future.
If and when they are able to be armed with 8 VLS cells they will become even more important.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Btw, I’m still waiting for any evidence to support your claims about the gun…even assuming you were being extremely sarcastic about how bad the issue was…

Also what exactly is your background.

 

[Maskoki]

https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2015/navy/2015lcs.pdf?ver=2019-08-22-105642-770

This is the DoTE summary from FY-2015, 7 years after LCS-1 & 5 years after LCS-2 commissioned. Search the internet to read the others. Atrocious program, probably caused by an atrocious set of ship requirements.

On LCS-1, neither Mk.110 nor 30mm could hit. No radar control, only EO/IR.

LCS-2 had so many problems that the navy couldn’t even test mission package gear, then when they were finally able to test mission gear, they found out that the RMV for towing MCM gear failed every time it launched, TBEC (boat crane) couldn’t launch or capture boats/usv’s efficiently (& broke often), and original Raytheon towed array couldn’t be controlled and could detect anything in the wake of the water jets.

Speed and lean crew requirements doomed these ships. Speed requirement prevents ’fixing’ most problems - can’t correct weight/buoyancy issues, can’t add needed hull volume, especially at the bow of either class for VLS, can’t replace aluminum with steel, can’t place large/heavy systems at the bow, can’t place heavy systems in deckhouse stations (center of moment issues stemming from weight/buoyancy problems)….and so on.

The LCS-1 combining gear was bad, but fixable. The design decisions forced by the stupid speed requirement just aren’t correctable.

 

[Jimmo952]

I mean....now we have these ships. They are finally at the point where most of them can get underway and then return to port without being towed.

It's good that uses are being found for them, even if that use is painting a big bullseye on them and having them race back and forth in front of a carrier.

But it's not been a successful design and project by any stretch.

It's a money-pit that floats.

 

[DWG]

As for the concept, ships that had the same basic concept that existed long before LCS.

Absalon-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

StanFlex - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Iver Huitfelft is twice the size, Absalom a third larger, you do get Stanflex ships going smaller, the Flyvisken class, but none of these are designed for the speed of the LCS, and that's a huge ask on a ship the size of Freedom or Independence. The UK looked at it for the Type 19 Frigate for gunboat hunting and backed right off.

Absalom and the Flyviskens are the only classes that remotely approximate the multi-role nature of the LCS and they did it without being compromised by a hull and engine built to push 50kts. The various StanFlex frigates just settled on one configuration at commissioning and stayed that way. Even then the Flyviskens were individually optimised for a single role, and the Absalons mostly used their flexibility for a slow increase in capability. No one has tried rapid multi-role switches post commissioning in the way the LCS was supposed to.

 

[Jimmo952]

Iver Huitfelft is twice the size, Absalom a third larger, you do get Stanflex ships going smaller, the Flyvisken class, but none of these are designed for the speed of the LCS, and that's a huge ask on a ship the size of Freedom or Independence. The UK looked at it for the Type 19 Frigate for gunboat hunting and backed right off.

Absalom and the Flyviskens are the only classes that remotely approximate the multi-role nature of the LCS and they did it without being compromised by a hull and engine built to push 50kts. The various StanFlex frigates just settled on one configuration at commissioning and stayed that way. Even then the Flyviskens were individually optimised for a single role, and the Absalons mostly used their flexibility for a slow increase in capability. No one has tried rapid multi-role switches post commissioning in the way the LCS was supposed to.

High speed, low manning, aviation, shallow draft and low cost.

A tough ask.

The Danes, being a practical people, took a more conservative approach with Absalom.

 

[that_person]

The LCS design requirements were insane.
14-foot draft, trans-oceanic range, 200+ tons of payload, and the ability to make 40+ knots.