What-If LCS Flight II: Littoral Combat Ship Improvement

[carr]

..

[carr]

..

[Busto963]

Excellent post! It certainly leads to a good equipment set for a small to medium sized NSFS platform.

I cannot find anything on the AN/PQS 47. Is that the right designation?

No, AN/TPQ-47 Firefinder radar is corrrsct.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Busto963]

If you want to go the gun route then busto has laid out a great approach although the control aspect of that (linking four ships) would be more of a challenge though not from a WIF model point of view.

I do not think that this would a significant challenge.

[navydavesof]

It seems like instead of a plused up LCS, a plused up Gearing-class DD would be best to accomplish the gun trike/NSFS/counter battery mission. At 390' long and 41' wide and drawing only 14' of water, it is remarkably small for carrying 3 weapons mounts. Twin 5"/38caliber guns is good but short ranged. Montana-class twin 5"/54caliber guns would provide a decent mechanism and decent range. Mounting the Mk45 mechanism in twin Mk45 5/54caliber mounts would be a great mechanism with a decent range. Twin 5"/62caliber guns would offer a good mechanism and a good range with the potential to utilize PGMs. After all, being able to put 120 rounds in the air in a minute would be able to deliver an incredible amount of 5" rounds on target at once.

The system described by Busto would possibly yield an excellent modification of a FRAM Gearing in the 1990s. Three mounts of twin 5"/54caliber guns running a SPQ-9A and a TPQ-36/37 would provide an interesting gunnery ship. The DASH hangar and flight deck would be a great storage and launching point for Pioneer UAVs.

However, a modern ship could be pattered after the Gearing-class arrangement but would probably need to be longer and wider than a Gearing, and the 5" of any caliber would probably not cut it. Either the AGS(L) or preferably 155mm/60caliber Mk71 would provide an excellent platform for 155mm delivery. The 155mm version of the Mk71 is quoted to be able to deliver 15-20 rounds per minute. The extra ship's length would be for improved sea keeping, a larger helicopter hangar and landing deck. I would suggest 32 to 48 Mk41 strike length VLS for ESSM, TLAMs, and TASM/LRASMs.

The hull the length of the Perry FFG (445') would provide a good hull and shallow draft hull to mount the three 155mm guns, a helo deck and hangar, etc. I would suggest the Millennium gun as the C-RAM capability and anti-boat capability. I would also embark both Phalanx 1B and RAM for the CIWS capability.

The best way I can see to utilize the Millennium gun for C-RAM is to place them on the on the main deck so 2 guns can engage at once. One may suggest to have them placed on top of the structure, reducing them to 2 total, but 2 per side would be preferable for warfighting capability.

This is certainly an input for the "light NSFS ship" thread. The ship would not be able to utilize a twin hangar but a single instead. The RHIBs would have to go on either side of the hangar reducing it to a single hangar. I suggest a single hangar is alright and could probably embark 2 H-60s if necessary but 1 optimal. The UAVs would be the Pioneer derivative "Shadow" UAVs. Depending on final length, maybe 2 H-60s could be comfortably embarked.

Great discussion and a Great opportunity for a WIF project!!!

Busto, maybe? Would you like to do a WIF modeling challenge with me to see who can come up with a better platform addressing this mission set?

[SumGui]

I've been ghosting out dimensions and estimates of weights, and based on what I could find, there does not seem to be an insurmountable weight or size issue with a double mount of the XM297E2 - essentially two XM2001 Crusader turrets 'welded together' (gross oversimplification, but it communicates the concept)- not dissimilar to how the French did the much larger caliber mountings of their last battleships.

Clearly the mount and weapon would have to be marinized, but retaining the armor as intended for the Crusader to protect the mount. The mount being completely unmanned and auto-loading, should allow this to be operated from a centralized fire support center (or, CIC). Replenishment could be from a deckhouse abaft the mount. If two double mounts could be had, one forward and one aft of the replenishment deckhouse, you have a platform with 4 modern 155mm barrels using most standard 155mm ammunition with minimum manning.

Slap this on to a small modern coastal container ship basic design, add a RAM launcher (perhaps on the reload house) and two Millennium guns for self defense (fore/aft) with a pad aft for UAVs or to receive helos, and all you need is sensors, communications, and a reasonable action centre (CIC) for a 'cheap' fire support ship probably ran by 50-75 personnel.

no, it does not fight other ships, or look for mines, or perform ASW, or deep strike warfare. It supports mud puppies ashore, That's it.

Otherwise the same modified coastal freighter could use a number (4+) of those Mk 45 mounts we have in storage.

I latched onto a coastal container ship as a platform when looking for something with a minimum draft, minimum manning, modern reliable and efficient propulsion which had allot of 'payload volume'. Nonsensical? does it have issues? certainly...but it is the current state of my mental exercise in a 'light NFS' ship.

I got there through the mental exercise of a modern build of the Fletcher hull basic layout (with diesels or GT) and 4xMk45 + RAM and Millennium guns P/S

Of course, this may make the Mk45 much better at the fire support job:
http://www.baesystems.com/product/BAES_ ... 8vs0mv5o_4

Also found video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNIjgBgqGFU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGN4zyPwMdw

[navydavesof]

Concerning the projectiles, I am more of a fan of the 5" Excalibur GPS/SAL round over the Lockheed round at this time. The Lockheed projo might prove to be better for GPS/RAPGPS capability, but from a laser guided point aspect (anti-boat and moving land target), the Excalibur round is still looking to be a better system. If one wanted strictly a GPS capability, all you would need to do is take a standard or 5"/54 RAP projo and put a CCF on it. The real benefits to aim for here are range, additional guidance capability, and rate of fire. The Lockheed projos look like they are so long that they will require a double ram to get them ready to fire. The Excalibur round and the CCF adapted projos look like they will be able to be stacked on top of propellant cans. Where this matters is that the rounds that can be stacked on top of the prop charges. This lets them be a "single ram" load from a single loader drum cell vs a "double ram" which means having to load a projo from one cell and load a prop charge from another cell.

On another note, Lockheed is preparing some sort of anti-surface missile. When building the WIF model, do you think this would be worth including?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09PFcj3m6Fo

[Sciquest2525]

Just a note about the Mk 71.
The US Army, a long time ago was developing a ramjet assisted 8 inch shell.
Perhaps such an air breathing projectile could be developed for the MK 71 and a smaller projectile for 155 mm naval guns.
I remember the range being on the order of 80 miles, if memory serves me right.
An air breathing assist engine would have greater range per unit weight of fuel than conventional rocket assisted projectiles with precision guidance.

[SumGui]

I guess the biggest thing about 127mm now is that there does seem to be some options on the horizon- Excalibur, SGP (which DOES require a double ram operation), Vulcano- that may make the extant weapon more valuable for fire support. (and, granted this is based on manufacturers advertising, those may have complementary capabilities)

The net effect on this is to make a new gun system LESS likely to be deployed

I can hear the arguments now:

"We can get these rounds, and they aren't quite as effective, but they don't require a new gun system and NGFS is going to be a rare mission..."

So now the question is how many 127mm/62 barrels can we get onto a platform which can go close to shore.

(and all this goes into the crapper once the brownshoes think the guided projectiles are taking any of their missions - they will find a way for one of their cronies to pull the funding and blame sequestration)

While not technically the LCS mission - hitting shore threats to the brown water is certainly a 'Littoral Combat' role. (trying to bring the thread back around for ya Dave...)

So then if a Mk 45 Mod 4 can go onto an LCS-1 hull, there may be a glimmer of hope, but
1 - One barrel will not be enough for NGFS (still could be effective at strike)
2 - Fire Support ashore is not a stated mission of the existing LCS platforms.

And the last thing the LCS needs is more missions it can't do.

A dedicated fire support vessel seems more likely, with the LCS defending it from swarm attacks if needed.

And as far as that missile in Dave's video - while it sounds neat, that's allot of manufacturers hyperbole and no hard data to speak of, so it is difficult for me to give an opinion there. (what is the missile? What is the range? How is it guided? It implies OTH targeting of small fast targets - how is that achieved? etc..)

[carr]

..

[navydavesof]

And as far as that missile in Dave's video - while it sounds neat, that's allot of manufacturers hyperbole and no hard data to speak of, so it is difficult for me to give an opinion there. (what is the missile? What is the range? How is it guided? It implies OTH targeting of small fast targets - how is that achieved? etc..)

I didn't think so, either. Glad to see we're still on the same page

[Busto963]

�I latched onto a coastal container ship as a platform when looking for something with a minimum draft, minimum manning, modern reliable and efficient propulsion which had allot of 'payload volume'. Nonsensical? does it have issues? certainly...but it is the current state of my mental exercise in a 'light NFS' ship.

I got there through the mental exercise of a modern build of the Fletcher hull basic layout (with diesels or GT) and 4xMk45 + RAM and Millennium guns P/S

This concept is unconventional, but has much to offer.

I would suggest a fast feeder container ship which would be on the order of 20,000 tons displacement, and 25knot speed. Extra money would have to be spent in compartmentalization, and the addition of an H-47/H-53 and V-22 capable flight deck. The flight deck is critical as I would expect internally loaded ammunition pallets would be the preferred means of resupplying ammunition. I would not bother with embarking a helicopter. Armor in the form of poured concrete and sand would installed in the hull for mine resistance. [edited to add] The ship could further be protected by filling unused spaces with non-toxic, inflammable foam. This would guarantee flotation in the event of damage.

I would also not bother with crusader, the gun is a 39 caliber weapon. What is needed is a modern 155mm gun-howitzer with a 50+ caliber length barrel, and larger chamber volume: the weapons from the AS-90, PzH2000, or FH77BW L52 are perfect. No turreted SP gun (even the ubber state of the art PzH 2000) has resistance to much more than 7.62 small arms. Deploy a full battery of six-tubes - with MRSI capability this would give the ship the ability to absolutely saturate an area with fire.

Armament would be mounted forward of the superstructure:
1. (6) FH77BW L52 howitzers
2. (1) 64-cell VLS in anticipation for a VLS variant of GMLRS or MLRS - otherwise add three MLRS launchers for counter-battery fire.
3. (4) RAM/Sea RAM CIWS
4. (4) millennium guns set up as a C-RAM
5. Iron Dome C-RAM VLS containerized launcher
6. (2) 76mm or 57mm guns
7. Hellfire/brimstone weapons stations for defense against small boat swarms

Add radar for Iron dome and a counter-battery system and you are good to go.

Pluses
1. Stable gun platform
2. Plenty of volume and weight capacity
3. Difficult to sink (assumes extra compartmentalization is installed along with poured concrete and sand in keel)
4. Inexpensive
5. Long range

Cons
1. Huge radar signature
2. Poor maneuverability
3. Draft

[Busto963]

On another note, Lockheed is preparing some sort of anti-surface missile. When building the WIF model, do you think this would be worth including?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09PFcj3m6Fo

This looks like the N-LOS all over again, or the IAI Jumper missile .

Maybe a VLS variant of Brimstone or Hellfire would do?

[SumGui]

I would suggest a fast feeder container ship which would be on the order of 20,000 tons displacement, and 25knot speed. Extra money would have to be spent in compartmentalization, and the addition of an H-47/H-53 and V-22 capable flight deck. The flight deck is critical as I would expect internally loaded ammunition pallets would be the preferred means of resupplying ammunition. I would not bother with embarking a helicopter. Armor in the form of poured concrete and sand would installed in the hull for mine resistance. [edited to add] The ship could further be protected by filling unused spaces with non-toxic, inflammable foam. This would guarantee flotation in the event of damage.

As far as operating helos , I was thinking H-60 as a minimum, V-22 as an objective, H-53 is the cost is not to high.
I like filling the voids for damage resistance.

I would also not bother with crusader, the gun is a 39 caliber weapon.

the XM297E2 of the XM2001 Crusader gun system is/was a 56 caliber weapon

What is needed is a modern 155mm gun-howitzer with a 50+ caliber length barrel, and larger chamber volume: the weapons from the AS-90, PzH2000, or FH77BW L52 are perfect. No turreted SP gun (even the ubber state of the art PzH 2000) has resistance to much more than 7.62 small arms. Deploy a full battery of six-tubes - with MRSI capability this would give the ship the ability to absolutely saturate an area with fire.

What was appealing about the Crusader gun system was the modern cooled barrel, 56 caliber ordnance, and fully automated turret operation - so that during operation the crew could operate it from the deckhouse inherited from the cargo ship design - which I would armor to turn into an operational citadel. Most of the alternative weapons you suggest have similar characteristics and would fill that function as well.
Archer is the FH77 with the ability to operate remotely - but the capacity is of course smaller than the Crusader - however the smaller size may make shipping 6 barrels easier.

[Busto963]

I would suggest a fast feeder container ship which would be on the order of 20,000 tons displacement, and 25knot speed. Extra money would have to be spent in compartmentalization, and the addition of an H-47/H-53 and V-22 capable flight deck. The flight deck is critical as I would expect internally loaded ammunition pallets would be the preferred means of resupplying ammunition. I would not bother with embarking a helicopter. �

As far as operating helos , I was thinking H-60 as a minimum, V-22 as an objective, H-53 is the cost is not to high.

I do not think the ship needs to embark any helicopters as the point of the ship is to operate where it can deliver artillery (missile and gun-howitzer fire), which means it is likely to be hit as well.

However, the ability to land heavy lift helicopters is critical, because when the ship comes off �the gun line� � it will need to replenish ammunition as fast as possible. Even with a CONREP, the ship will also be receiving many, many pallets of propellant and projectiles.

H-60s are too small for sustained heavy lifts of ammunition pallets � that is the mission H-47s/H-53s and V-22s were designed for. The flight deck needs to accommodate H-53s and H-47s at a minimum. On a ship this size it should not be an issue.

I would also not bother with crusader, the gun is a 39 caliber weapon.

the XM297E2 of the XM2001 Crusader gun system is/was a 56 caliber weapon

My error, the spec certainly evolved over time.

What is needed is a modern 155mm gun-howitzer with a 50+ caliber length barrel, and larger chamber volume: the weapons from the AS-90, PzH2000, or FH77BW L52 are perfect. No turreted SP gun (even the ubber state of the art PzH 2000) has resistance to much more than 7.62 small arms. Deploy a full battery of six-tubes - with MRSI capability this would give the ship the ability to absolutely saturate an area with fire.

What was appealing about the Crusader gun system was the modern cooled barrel, 56 caliber ordnance, and fully automated turret operation - so that during operation the crew could operate it from the deckhouse inherited from the cargo ship design - which I would armor to turn into an operational citadel. Most of the alternative weapons you suggest have similar characteristics and would fill that function as well.
Archer is the FH77 with the ability to operate remotely - but the capacity is of course smaller than the Crusader - however the smaller size may make shipping 6 barrels easier.

Well Crusader became an elephant and that is why it was killed � the PzH2000 is recognized as the clear leader of production artillery systems with a price to match, but Crusader was much heavier, cost 2.5 times as much ($25 million per unit), and did not deliver appreciably greater RoF or range or survivability. The AS-90 was roughly $3.2 million per copy � one Crusader certainly was not worth seven AS-90s.

It was the LCS of the Army� at least it died.

My thinking with the FH77BW was that if stabilization was necessary to account for ship motion, the system would be easier to work with than trying to navalize and stabilize a complete turret. I might actually consider carrying extra gun assemblies to replace units destroyed by IDF.

[navydavesof]

The debate can continue here for more and/or better ways to improve both LCS classes.

I will proceed on this particular project, improving the LCS-1 Freedom-class to achieve the original mission requirements, in another thread.

I look forward to seeing you guys here and there!

[Seasick]

The IDF has used the 76mm rapid fire gun fairly successfully in operations against targets in the Gaza strip. In infantry battles fast reaction time is the most important feature. The enemies of the USA have all probably adopted Saddam's hardened bunker strategy by now: Build lots of them and when the shooting starts pull everything out of them and run everything out of the back seat of a Toyota Corolla. Set up your countries cell telephone towers as a peer-peer computer network with no hub, or an expendable hub. Use cell telephones to transmit coded text messages, even use cell telephone towers over the boarder in hostile neighboring countries to pass your information.

[Sciquest2525]

The urgent issue is proper armament for existing and already contracted for ships, LCS 1-24 and make necessary design changes to LCS 25-50 so the ships are more useful as well as being able to meet the original missions. And yes, my fantasy 150 meter Freedom would have the Mk 71 on the lengthened foredeck of Freedom but Independence needs to be changed to steel construction which might involve major design changes, if not redesign of the whole ship. LCS export versions are armed and Independence will have 32 tactical Mk 41 VLS cells. The export Freedom can have 32 strike length cells and both could use a radar vice the existing E/O fire control for an Oto Melara 76 mm Super Rapid DP with STRALES radar guided AA shells in place of the more limited Bofors 57 mm gun.
While titanium is being experimented with, it will probably be many years before we start building deck houses and hulls out of it, to say nothing about the increased costs involved in using titanium in naval construction although the new friction stir welding process improves titanium fabrication by it not needing to be vacuum welded.

[navydavesof]

Sciquest,

Keeping in mind the reality of the USS Hull, Spruance, and Burke designs, what kind of magazine capacity to you personally expect for the Mk71 in your super LCS?

[Sciquest2525]

I would hope for at 225 projectiles, more than the AGS Lite 180 projectiles magazine installation that I saw on a website this week for the Arleigh Burke class. That would be enable the 75 round ready serbice loader to be reloaded twice and even that may require an addiitonal and seperate magazine or storeroom that would have 75 shells that would be loaded into the main magazine ala a slow process of transferring shells from storeroom/magazine to the ready magazine and then reload the ready service loader with 75 rounds and there might be several types of shell to choose from and that would require adequate numbers of these shells such a conventional HE, AP, guided HE, AP and include either rocket assist/guided HE and AP or ramjet assisted guided HE and AP shells.
It might not be possible.
As for the 'super LCS', well there is the illustration of the 150 meter variant on the Lockheed website.
They claim length out to 150 meters and up to 6000 tons using their hullform.
They did not include the waterline/maximum beam or displacement of the 150 meter variant.
The SCS, before becoming the MCS, showed a 3600 ton up armed LCS with 32 strike length VLS cells, gun, torpedo tubes, Millenium gun CIWS, SPY-1F scaled down Aegis and capacity for two H-60 helos or one helo and two VTUAVa.
Probably a pipe dream installing Mk 71 or AGS Lite on even the LCS Freedom type hull.