Lockheed has won a second contract for its AGM-158C LRASM. This is the second production lot and is for the USN and USAF.
Lockheed wins second Long Range Anti-Ship Missile contract
Lockheed wins second Long Range Anti-Ship Missile contract
Many lessons to be learnt, hopefully some very positive changes for the future can come out of these incidents.Fort’s team of investigators described a bridge team that was overworked and exhausted, plagued by low morale, facing a relentless tempo of operations decreed by admirals far above them, distrustful of their superiors and, fatally, each other.
And Navy officials knew all of that at least a year before the tragedy.
Looks promising with the mentioned electronics and weapons, especially at $800 million per boat. Hopefully the price doesn’t ballon out and the build number gets cut. I guess these will be diesel only?
Unless the FFG(X) programme is awarded to either of the designs based off the two LCS classes, then I do not really expect a significant amount of modification or retro-fitting to the existing LCS vessels. After all, if neither of the two LCS-based designs are selected, that would suggest that the combination of cost and capability was insufficient when compared to other options. It could also quite easily be that of the systems which are found to be really useful and/or desirable aboard ship are ones which cannot be easily fitted to the LCS designs.It should be interesting to see how much of the tech going into the FFG-X eventually gets retrofitted into LCS.
I believe the USN has said in the impending RFP the class is to have a minimum of 32 MK41 VLS.If so, VLS would probsbly be unfeasible but at the very least I'd expect the addition of an OTH missile capability, most likely via deck launchers. This would be in keeping with the Distributed Lethality concept.
I believe the USN has said in the impending RFP the class is to have a minimum of 32 MK41 VLS.
Article is cited in the above thread
Here as well
Navy Squeezing Costs Out of FFG(X) Program as Requirements Solidify - USNI News
I was referring to the possibility of deck-launched OTH ASMs on LCS should VLS prove unviable.
It should be interesting to see how much of the tech going into the FFG-X eventually gets retrofitted into LCS.
Agreed, the only consistent upgrades I’ve hear discussed are the deck mounted quad OTH ASHM launchers. Beyond that the UDN has also discussed specializing each hull, ASW etc, and seems to be moving away from the modular concept. Perhaps in part due to the delays, cost overruns, and lack luster results of the modules.Both LCS designs don't have a lot of margin unfortunately - there's about 150 tons of free displacement that can be assigned to various systems so anything you add, well, that has to subtract from that total.
If there's a like for like swap like a sensor or something, yeah, that can work and maybe a single face rotating EASR might be a potential trade for the existing TRS or Sea Giraffe could happen but there's no room for a lot of additional stuff without kissing goodbye to the ability to fit mission modules.