FFG(X) - NEWS Only

[Rule of cool]

The problem is a ship design isn't just built to a set of standards, it's built to a set of standards and a set of operational requirements, and the operational requirements result from a process of operational analyses. A ship can meet every standard required of it, and be operationally useless because it didn't meet requirements, or the requirements were wrong. My worry is that FF(X) is, like LCS before it, headed for another analytical virgin birth (to borrow Ronald O'Rourke's incisive phrase).

Operational requirements have caused their own set of problems in the last few decades, resulting in the Zumwalts, LCS and FFG(X). Too often the navy has wanted transformative ships that have not met expectations, or perhaps more accurately hopes.

In any case the Constellations didn't just die a death of a thousand costs from small stuff, but major stuff too. With luck the USN will get something useful with the Legend class cutter base.

 

[Scott Kenny]

With luck the USN will get something useful with the Legend class cutter base.

No, the Flight 0, without any sonars, will not be useful.

A notional Flight 1, with towed array and VDS, would be bare minimum capability for ASW, and still utterly inadequate AAW capabilities. 16x Mk41 means ~6x VL-ASROC and 40x ESSMs. Up to 16x NSM/JSM, and ~21x RIM116.

 

[Rule of cool]

No, the Flight 0, without any sonars, will not be useful.

A notional Flight 1, with towed array and VDS, would be bare minimum capability for ASW, and still utterly inadequate AAW capabilities. 16x Mk41 means ~6x VL-ASROC and 40x ESSMs. Up to 16x NSM/JSM, and ~21x RIM116.

IIUC Flight 0 will have AShMs, so it will be able to sink ships. I've seen reference to 'presence', so Flight 0 will be hang around the Indian Ocean and other distant places to enforce sanctions.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

The "Flight 0" FF(X) is basically just an LCS with the ability to stay underway for an extended period of time, which the LCS generally can't or won't do because of the reliability problems and the limited endurance. The Navy already had to figure out what to do with the LCS fleet, so this situation isn't very different.

 

[Maskoki]

Legend-class FFX is being produced to keep the line open - nothing more. The FFX lends almost nothing to a wartime scenario…can’t contribute materially to AAW (no VLS) or ASW (loud, no tail, no torpedo storage), would be sunk trying to sink enemy surface warships (we should strive to sink enemy warships with aircraft, long range missiles, and/or submarines, not by putting slow undergunned corvette crews at-extreme-risk), and cannot outmatch a Chinese frigate escorting merchant ships in the Indian Ocean (might not even outmatch an armed merchant). The Legend FFX is just a peacetime coast guard cutter painted gray.

I have grave doubts about later Legend flights. Flight II would need to displace significantly more seawater (to include the volume necessary for incremental systems) and be quieter in order to execute wartime missions: ASW for CVSGs, ARGs, & logistics shipping, and independent VBSS privateering in Chinese SLOCs. And yes, to do these missions survivably, a FFG minimally needs a VLS with ESSMs.

Rumsfeld put us here 25 years ago. It will take 25 years to climb out of the hole, but only if we stop seeking design expediency and design a new 21st century FFG to rational requirements that complement a rationally envisioned fleet.

 

[CordyB]

With ref to the FF(X) HII NSC design the SECNAV Phelan has put NAVSEA back in their box and nailed the lid down firmly by mandating that any change orders for the new frigate must go directly through him rather than traditional Navy systems commands as speed of build is the no. 1 priority.

If the previous SECNAVs had followed above policy with Constellation and it had not been subject to hundreds of change orders and would not just be ~10/12%% complete but nearer 90% and in the water and fitting out, a total failure of Navy management and no need for the severely limited operational capability of the FF(X).

 

[whatismoo]

With ref to the FF(X) HII NSC design the SECNAV Phelan has put NAVSEA back in their box and nailed the lid down firmly by mandating that any change orders for the new frigate must go directly through him rather than traditional Navy systems commands as speed of build is the no. 1 priority.

If the previous SECNAVs had followed above policy with Constellation and it had not been subject to hundreds of change orders and would not just be ~10/12%% complete but nearer 90% and in the water and fitting out, a total failure of Navy management and no need for the severely limited operational capability of the FF(X).

Phelan has no clue about naval architecture why would he have any idea if the changes are necessary or not? SECNAV McMBA micromanaging a frigate program is the kind of bureaucratic horse...produce that makes no sense.

If the USN had just run a clean sheet frigate program instead of getting high on the idea of penny wise pound foolish parent designs we wouldn't be looking at a frigate with severe stability issues or one which can't do the jobs the navy needs done. The USN doesn't need more LCS, even ones that are cheaper to operate, it needs a high end submarine killer that can hold its own in the carrier task force.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

Is "high end ASW combatant" even something the Navy thinks it needs? Surface ships are far from the best ASW platform when submarines will always be quieter and aircraft will always be less vulnerable. What would a CNO who's been a fast attack skipper think?

 

[Scott Kenny]

Is "high end ASW combatant" even something the Navy thinks it needs? Surface ships are far from the best ASW platform when submarines will always be quieter and aircraft will always be less vulnerable. What would a CNO who's been a fast attack skipper think?

That the presence of an ASW ship makes the attack more difficult.

And a full sized ASW DD brings far more capabilities than an ASW FF. More stores, more time on station, more weapons, possibly more helicopters.

Note that the original Cold War carrier escort group was 2x CGs, 2x Burkes, 2x ASW DDs (Sprucans). The Zumwalts were intended to replace the Spruance class, so they have pretty massive silencing done.

 

[Dragonlady]

Phelan has no clue about naval architecture why would he have any idea if the changes are necessary or not? SECNAV McMBA micromanaging a frigate program is the kind of bureaucratic horse...produce that makes no sense.

If the USN had just run a clean sheet frigate program instead of getting high on the idea of penny wise pound foolish parent designs we wouldn't be looking at a frigate with severe stability issues or one which can't do the jobs the navy needs done. The USN doesn't need more LCS, even ones that are cheaper to operate, it needs a high end submarine killer that can hold its own in the carrier task force.

Hell, a “frigatized Burke” a la the DDV studies would’ve been a better option than this NSC-derived abortion.

 

[cccgong]

IIUC Flight 0 will have AShMs, so it will be able to sink ships. I've seen reference to 'presence', so Flight 0 will be hang around the Indian Ocean and other distant places to enforce sanctions.

It won’t be able to sink combat ships. As its NSM be out ranged by Chinese ASM, and it doesn’t have the VLS to carry anything bigger. Hell it won’t even be able to sink Chinese merchants protected by the new cargo ship with VLS.

Legend-class FFX is being produced to keep the line open - nothing more. The FFX lends almost nothing to a wartime scenario…can’t contribute materially to AAW (no VLS) or ASW (loud, no tail, no torpedo storage), would be sunk trying to sink enemy surface warships (we should strive to sink enemy warships with aircraft, long range missiles, and/or submarines, not by putting slow undergunned corvette crews at-extreme-risk), and cannot outmatch a Chinese frigate escorting merchant ships in the Indian Ocean (might not even outmatch an armed merchant). The Legend FFX is just a peacetime coast guard cutter painted gray.

I have grave doubts about later Legend flights. Flight II would need to displace significantly more seawater (to include the volume necessary for incremental systems) and be quieter in order to execute wartime missions: ASW for CVSGs, ARGs, & logistics shipping, and independent VBSS privateering in Chinese SLOCs. And yes, to do these missions survivably, a FFG minimally needs a VLS with ESSMs.

Rumsfeld put us here 25 years ago. It will take 25 years to climb out of the hole, but only if we stop seeking design expediency and design a new 21st century FFG to rational requirements that complement a rationally envisioned fleet.

It’s not even to keep the line open. As the NSC line has been dead for a few years.

Either way they failed at the first step of procurement, not even identifying what do we need

 

[Rule of cool]

It won’t be able to sink combat ships. As its NSM be out ranged by Chinese ASM, and it doesn’t have the VLS to carry anything bigger. Hell it won’t even be able to sink Chinese merchants protected by the new cargo ship with VLS.

What combat ships will the Chinese be able to put around the Indian Ocean, the Falklands and Arctic shipping lanes?

The Chinese are so worried that they're arming merchant ships now?

The FF(X) will not be undertaking any glamourous work; it will be doing the patrols that you never read about that won WW1 and WW2.

 

[cccgong]

What combat ships will the Chinese be able to put around the Indian Ocean, the Falklands and Arctic shipping lanes?

The Chinese are so worried that they're arming merchant ships now?

The FF(X) will not be undertaking any glamourous work; it will be doing the patrols that you never read about that won WW1 and WW2.

Have you not seen the new Chinese merchant ship with containerized VLS, CIWS, and radars? The Chinese recognize the value in having ships that can be false flagged and unexpectedly engage targets or provide defense to merchants. They likely also recognize that even with their superior industrial capacity they don't have as many hulls as they would like. The fact that you're calling that worry from the Chinese is funny.

You're willing to pay well over 1 billion for a for FF(X) (the 5/6 ships cost 1 billion inflation adjusted)? When the last estimate for FFG(X) was 1.2 billion, and was agreed upon by the navy and the congressional oversight board.

We also don't need to build NSC level ships in peacetime. You can slap a 57mm gun, GMLRS, some mothballed 70s era radars on some cargo ships and call it a day for trade interaction during war time. That will perform just as well as a NSC at that role.

 

[Airbus A340]

The Armed Merchant Frigates (AMFs) lack C^4I. They are most useful as cheap arsenal ships.

 

[cccgong]

The Armed Merchant Frigates (AMFs) lack C^4I. They are most useful as cheap arsenal ships.

There's no way you can know that. We've seen 1 ship at some unknown level of prototype, and sat coms can be incredibly compact.

 

[Ainen]

It won’t be able to sink combat ships. As its NSM be out ranged by Chinese ASM, and it doesn’t have the VLS to carry anything bigger. Hell it won’t even be able to sink Chinese merchants protected by the new cargo ship with VLS.

These aren't to sink combat ships in combat conditions.
If you got merchants so far in your rear as for there to be a chance for them to meet FFx, they're dead anyway.

Armament here isn't for wartime scenario, it's for peacetime threat profile.

The Armed Merchant Frigates (AMFs) lack C^4I. They are most useful as cheap arsenal ships.

There's a literal satcom antenna there. Probably reserve GSO off the shelf one.
But overall it's a very strictly internal LOC(or rearline operations) power node.

And no, with full power 3D radar, OtH targeting passive/active radar and 2 CIWS (1 with its own search radar) - this is one hell of a set. Given that there are likely power and crew containers there to make it work - this equipment set is easily more valuable than contents of all 60 cells.

 

[DWG]

Operational requirements have caused their own set of problems in the last few decades, resulting in the Zumwalts, LCS and FFG(X).

Read the entirety of what I wrote. Requirements are based on analyses, and the LCS had 'an analytical virgin birth' according to CBO's Ronald O'Rourke, whose job is tracking naval programmes. Lots of gosh-wow talk from Cebrowski etc, but no formal analysis of what its job was and how it would do it.

Zumwalt did have proper analysis done, but the problem was at an even higher level - (Forward) From the Sea was trying to find a job for the USN in a post-Cold War World and its conclusions are somewhat questionable, and became outdated post 9/11. Plus the budget to complete the class and its weapons was never there.

FFG(X)'s operational requirements have yet to be tested in the water by the USN*, but remain valid - the USN needs an ASW escort/sub-Spruance sized combatant. FF{X) cannot fill the ASW part of that requirement and can only fill the presence part of it in a permissive environment - you couldn't have sent it to blockade Venezuela, for instance. It's basically a US version of the RN's River class OPVs.

*But have been by France and Italy, and the UK's Type 23 (to a degree) and Type 26 to come.

 

[a5mg4n]

The FF(X) will not be undertaking any glamourous work; it will be doing the patrols that you never read about that won WW1 and WW2.

Converted civilian ship or commercial standart newbuilds will do this job well enough.
(Naval trawler,AMCs,Sperrbrecher...or Castle/River/Lochs in modern form)
Since number is critical factor for this mission,why spend 5x~10x cost on NSC hull?

 

[johnpjones1775]

So just keep building the Constellation.

Cause that's the Constellation you are describing.

50 percent of the issues is from trying to stick a SPY hat on a FREMM.

That was NEVER going to be an Easy Modification no matter who or what said it would be.

Cause you basically had to redesign all the guts to fit that system on its own before adding in the Damcon standards differences.

This aged poorly

 

[johnpjones1775]

I see a lot of ignorant comments here.

The FF(X) will not be just an LCS with longer range.

Things aren’t yet written in stone, but the first batch are planned to have containerized VLS either side of the boat ramp aft.
Not ideal for a frigate, but it does allow for a handful of serious SAMs at least unlike the LCS.

 

[TomS]

I see a lot of ignorant comments here.

The FF(X) will not be just an LCS with longer range.

Things aren’t yet written in stone, but the first batch are planned to have containerized VLS either side of the boat ramp aft.
Not ideal for a frigate, but it does allow for a handful of serious SAMs at least unlike the LCS.

Two Mk 70 containers? So, eight missiles? And no radar capable of guiding anything with significant range?

 

[cccgong]

I see a lot of ignorant comments here.

The FF(X) will not be just an LCS with longer range.

Things aren’t yet written in stone, but the first batch are planned to have containerized VLS either side of the boat ramp aft.
Not ideal for a frigate, but it does allow for a handful of serious SAMs at least unlike the LCS.

You're correct it's worse than a LCS with more more range. They've put 2x containerized VLS on the LCS before. The MMSC has integrated VLS + VDS + towed array + more range + is currently in construction. To top it off the MMSC is ~50% the price of what the first flight FF(X) will be.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Two Mk 70 containers? So, eight missiles? And no radar capable of guiding anything with significant range?

32 ESSM. That’s a lot more than an LCS, and perfectly capable of conducting local AAW operations for escort missions like the Red Sea.

 

[johnpjones1775]

You're correct it's worse than a LCS with more more range. They've put 2x containerized VLS on the LCS before. The MMSC has integrated VLS + VDS + towed array + more range + is currently in construction. To top it off the MMSC is ~50% the price of what the first flight FF(X) will be.

I would much prefer the MMSC, but it’s a political stillbirth, so this is what we get for now.
It will be capable of ASuW, AAW, and ASW. Not great, but good enough as a stop gap for now, and once the next batch is ready, we’ll have a frigate that is simply good enough

 

[cccgong]

I would much prefer the MMSC, but it’s a political stillbirth, so this is what we get for now.
It will be capable of ASuW, AAW, and ASW. Not great, but good enough as a stop gap for now, and once the next batch is ready, we’ll have a frigate that is simply good enough

That’s the thing I don’t think ffx will be capable of any of the even in its final form. The ffgx was the minimum viable product for aaw, asuw, and asw. The ffx is a waste of money, time, yard space, and political will

 

[Rule of cool]

the USN needs an ASW escort/sub-Spruance sized combatant. FF{X) cannot fill the ASW part of that requirement and can only fill the presence part of it in a permissive environment

I don't disagree with the capability requirement, but the US isn't on the verge of getting it within the next 8-10 years.

If the choice is to build a bunch of FF(X) while the FFG(X) replacement is designed and built, or doing nothing then I'm on board with the FF(X). At the very least FF(X) will give the USN something to use in secondary theatres and keep the shipyards busy as part of an overall Government policy to boost shipbuilding.

 

[Ainen]

That’s the thing I don’t think ffx will be capable of any of the even in its final form. The ffgx was the minimum viable product for aaw, asuw, and asw. The ffx is a waste of money, time, yard space, and political will

Far too high for mvp.
Constellation is a nice product, but it's one of the strongest frigates in the world. Labelling it as minimum doesn't make sense.

 

[johnpjones1775]

That’s the thing I don’t think ffx will be capable of any of the even in its final form. The ffgx was the minimum viable product for aaw, asuw, and asw. The ffx is a waste of money, time, yard space, and political will

No the constellation class was not the minimum, it was a second rate Burke.

There’s plenty of corvettes smaller with less range and endurance than the legends that are just fine in all of those warfare areas.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Far too high for mvp.
Constellation is a nice product, but it's one of the strongest frigates in the world. Labelling it as minimum doesn't make sense.

Unfortunately newer and newer technology requires larger and larger ships.

The modern version of the WWII sub chaser would have to be 180’ long minimum and the sonar would likely cost more than an entire WWII sub chaser before accounting for inflation.

 

[Mallard]

32 ESSM. That’s a lot more than an LCS, and perfectly capable of conducting local AAW operations for escort missions like the Red Sea.

It’s not capable of escorting missions? With the few ships able to be spared most merchant protection required the use of SM2 and other long range missiles.

 

[Mallard]

No the constellation class was not the minimum, it was a second rate Burke.

There’s plenty of corvettes smaller with less range and endurance than the legends that are just fine in all of those warfare areas.

I’m sorry what? A smaller phased array and 32 VLS makes this into a mini Burke? I cannot understand this argument, the Chinese are building similar frigates without tearing their hair out yet it seems an impossible task for the US who are now building glorified OPVs, reality is the US frontline combatant fleet is going to shrink significantly with aging Burkes and the zero chance of these BBGXs being build in good time or to a decent cost.

And we’re not counting FFX as a frontline combatant.

 

[johnpjones1775]

I’m sorry what? A smaller phased array and 32 VLS makes this into a mini Burke? I cannot understand this argument, the Chinese are building similar frigates without tearing their hair out yet it seems an impossible task for the US who are now building glorified OPVs, reality is the US frontline combatant fleet is going to shrink significantly with aging Burkes and the zero chance of these BBGXs being build in good time or to a decent cost.

And we’re not counting FFX as a frontline combatant.

It was supposed to have SPY panels.
Good for the Chinese? They’ve also had the same president for the last 20 years or something, who can’t be opposed and isn’t constrained by anyone or anything.

 

[Mallard]

It was supposed to have SPY panels.
Good for the Chinese? They’ve also had the same president for the last 20 years or something, who can’t be opposed and isn’t constrained by anyone or anything.

Yes a small scale Spy array, that’s not going to break the bank on the scale it’s being produced.

I’m not praising the Chinese because its so amazing to live there or something, more because they’re the most likely to blow up Americas boats, so yeh, might be good to at least be able to match their surface combatants but reality is they’ll have more so US needs to be making ships of a higher standard and/or fitting more weaponry.

 

[johnpjones1775]

It’s not capable of escorting missions? With the few ships able to be spared most merchant protection required the use of SM2 and other long range missiles.

Bro, they were shooting missiles and drones down with guns.
None of the intercepts required SM2s. That was doctrine, until they realized that we couldn’t afford to use an SM2 against every old ass ASM or drone they launched.

ESSM has a range of 25+ miles, two FFs one at the front of a convoy and one at the back, with the distance between them being 20 miles and yes they can do escort missions just fine.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Yes a small scale Spy array, that’s not going to break the bank on the scale it’s being produced.

I’m not praising the Chinese because its so amazing to live there or something, more because they’re the most likely to blow up Americas boats, so yeh, might be good to at least be able to match their surface combatants but reality is they’ll have more so US needs to be making ships of a higher standard and/or fitting more weaponry.

Bro…the constellations were 3/4 the cost of a Burke…we wanted frigates as a cheaper alternative to burkes.

3/4 the price for 1/3 the VLS is stupid.

I’ll take 1/3 the price for 1/4 or so the VLS any day.
If we could manage 1/2 the price for 1/3 the VLS that would be almost ok.


We need ships that we can afford to build in large numbers, and in multiple shipyards. A 7300 ton frigate with a bunch SPY panels is not that ship.

 

[Mallard]

Bro, they were shooting missiles and drones down with guns.
None of the intercepts required SM2s. That was doctrine, until they realized that we couldn’t afford to use an SM2 against every old ass ASM or drone they launched.

ESSM has a range of 25+ miles, two FFs one at the front of a convoy and one at the back, with the distance between them being 20 miles and yes they can do escort missions just fine.

They were using Guns and other short range weapons when the warships themselves were being attacked, not when protecting Merchants.

A lot of the intercepts requires SM missiles to protect spread out merchants. Especially since said merchants were not under the US or Europe so were not travelling in tight convoys, doesn’t help the latter part of your argument either, hard to get non national merchants organised into your convoy, and they’re going to have to build a lot of FFX if you want to assign 3 to every convoy.

 

[Mallard]

Bro…the constellations were 3/4 the cost of a Burke…we wanted frigates as a cheaper alternative to burkes.

3/4 the price for 1/3 the VLS is stupid.

I’ll take 1/3 the price for 1/4 or so the VLS any day.
If we could manage 1/2 the price for 1/3 the VLS that would be almost ok.


We need ships that we can afford to build in large numbers, and in multiple shipyards. A 7300 ton frigate with a bunch SPY panels is not that ship.

You realise there are other capabilities than VLS right? Like excellent ASW sensors and noise dampening. Those have a cost.

These NSC already cost up to a Billion each for not even a single VLS cell, how much will it cost when actual military capabilities are added?

 

[johnpjones1775]

They were using Guns and other short range weapons when the warships themselves were being attacked, not when protecting Merchants.

A lot of the intercepts requires SM missiles to protect spread out merchants. Especially since said merchants were not under the US or Europe so were not travelling in tight convoys, doesn’t help the latter part of your argument either, hard to get non national merchants organised into your convoy, and they’re going to have to build a lot of FFX if you want to assign 3 to every convoy.

We also weren’t doing an escort mission there.
Ships were sitting in a pre-designated box and sailing in circles.

For actual escort missions, you do not need a missile with a 100+ mile range. That’s if you’re protecting a whole theater. More range is nice because it gives more reaction time if a missile fails or misses, but it’s not necessary.

 

[johnpjones1775]

You realise there are other capabilities than VLS right? Like excellent ASW sensors and noise dampening. Those have a cost.

These NSC already cost up to a Billion each for not even a single VLS cell, how much will it cost when actual military capabilities are added?

Sure, but let’s not pretend surface ships are great for ASW they’re not.

Where do you get they currently cost $1B?

They’re $600-700m

 

[Mallard]

Bro…the constellations were 3/4 the cost of a Burke…we wanted frigates as a cheaper alternative to burkes.

3/4 the price for 1/3 the VLS is stupid.

I’ll take 1/3 the price for 1/4 or so the VLS any day.
If we could manage 1/2 the price for 1/3 the VLS that would be almost ok.


We need ships that we can afford to build in large numbers, and in multiple shipyards. A 7300 ton frigate with a bunch SPY panels is not that ship.

You’ve really got a thing against Spy panels, which part of a far smaller array do you not understand? A Spy 6 V3 is 3 arrays of 9 each! That’s not even as many as a single face on a flight 3 Burke