US FF(X) Program - DISCUSSION

[Kat Tsun]

What FF(X) actually presents is more expensive than Freedom while having a larger RCS, less tactical mobility, and a lesser surface warfare capability.

If the actual intention is to free up Burkes then buy more Freedoms. The problems have finally been resolved and the potential work to upgrade them has been, in large part, paid for by the Saudis

Once the FF/FFG(X) printer starts the ship costs will drop.

Freedom has a lot of problems relating to the hull, and is basically incapable for the jobs required of FF/FFG(X), which is "ersatz Burke".

For a few things: where's the Mk 41s? The TLAMs? The cruising diesels? The actual unrefueled range at low speeds? The maintenance capability of the crew given the berthing? The shipboard manning that's not dependent on massive amounts of contractor provided shore support that won't be available without airlift from CONUS? The other things you said aren't really worth addressing simply because the LCS is a failed design outside of one particular role: fast littoral attack.

LCS is more similar to a Visby or a Tarantul than a frigate of any European type. It just happens to be big enough to cross the ocean.

Ideally, they will die quickly and rapidly in a war, and take a few of the Type 22 FACs with them.

 

[cccgong]

Once the FF/FFG(X) printer starts the ship costs will drop.

Freedom has a lot of problems relating to the hull, and is basically incapable for the jobs required of FF/FFG(X), which is "ersatz Burke".

For a few things: where's the Mk 41s? The TLAMs? The cruising diesels? The actual unrefueled range at low speeds? The maintenance capability of the crew given the berthing? The shipboard manning that's not dependent on massive amounts of contractor provided shore support that won't be available without airlift from CONUS? The other things you said aren't really worth addressing simply because the LCS is a failed design outside of one particular role: fast littoral attack.

LCS is more similar to a Visby or a Tarantul than a frigate of any European type. It just happens to be big enough to cross the ocean.

Ideally, they will die quickly and rapidly in a war, and take a few of the Type 22 FACs with them.

I’ve provided proof that during the NSC production run they cost 1 billion inflation adjusted. They are not cheap ships.

That gives the impression you are seeing US weapon systems through rose tinted glasses. I have a more cynical bent of view and do not trust service chiefs views as they have been trying for years to hamstring the DOT&E and this year Hegseth obliged them by massively cutting their budget in June '25

The last seen report on the Mk 54 LWT was the DOT&E FY2023 Annual Report: Navy: Mk 54 a few quotes
"The Navy ended the Mod 1 Increment 1 IOT&E in October 2022 (2 live firings) without completing the DOT&E approved test plan. IOT&E was adequate to evaluate performance in a limited set of scenarios, but not in the acoustically challenging environment of shallow water for which improvements were expected to have the greatest effect on torpedo performance // The Mod 1 Increment 1 torpedo is not operationally suitable due to low availability and reliability. Mod 1 torpedoes are more likely to shut down early compared to Mod 0. A detailed assessment is in the classified IOT&E report for Mod 1 Increment 1 dated April 2023. "

The other point to highlight is that submarines have moved on since the Falklands War with their ability to significantly both reduce their ability to reflect or generate sound waves through a combination of anechoic tiles and hull design with ability to absorb the incoming sound waves from an active sonar, which reduces and distorts the return signal, making the submarine much harder to detect, why Navy is spending hundreds of $billions on Columbia and Virginia/SSN(X).

Sonars have also moved on. The commander of the first block Virginia class was amazed in 2012 when the newly launched Astute class held the Virginia class at a range they didn’t think was possible, due to its new sonar system. This was possible as the US was still using towed arrays designed in the early 80s at the time, and this was done with a sonar system designed in the mid 2000s.

 

[Seragina]

There's one vital non-combat task in wartime that tends to be forgotten for both FF(X) and NSC for that matter: rescue shipwracked people.
Them doing this would free up the other more combat capable ones. Naturally, NSC is preferred before commiting FF(X). Just saying.

 

[Kat Tsun]

I’ve provided proof that during the NSC production run they cost 1 billion inflation adjusted. They are not cheap ships.

That's the target price of the Connies and cheaper than the LCS-1/2s! Add another notch to why FFG(X) is a huge W.

 

[cccgong]

Yeah because they made like 9 of them lol. Scale it up to 30-40 and they might be $800 mn a piece.

They likely be even more expensive based on the degradation of the us ship building industry, any additions to the ship, political waffling on what they should be, and likely survivability changes.

They ended up making 10. There’s likely most much more economies of scale to be had there

 

[Kat Tsun]

They likely be even more expensive based on the degradation of the us ship building industry, any additions to the ship, political waffling on what they should be, and likely survivability changes.

They ended up making 10. There’s likely most much more economies of scale to be had there

It doesn't actually matter. $1-1.4 billion is essentially the same. It's half a Burke, which is what the FFGs need to be, so it's fine.

 

[cccgong]

It’s the same or more than the ffg(x) price. That’s the issue

 

[johnpjones1775]

Not only were they not on, according to very reputable OSINT collators, sat imagery proves their best systems were moved a day beforehand (likely because they had been on constant duty for months at that point and needed maintenance). iirc the active system was a Buk which was destroyed inside a Venezuelan airbase in Caracas

Yeah, and the realistic conclusions reached have been that FF(X) is useless given that:
A) convoy warfare of the type needed in the Pacific has no relevance to a ship with 0 VLS and 0 ASW sensors
B) it is more expensive than a Freedom class LCS while still having a substantially lesser surface warfare capability, and that's before we consider that the USN considers the surface warfare role filled by existing ships

It's not cheap, even when compared to other classes of comparable capability

The fact NSC was developed in parallel with LCS and were openly discussed as units to complement each other notwithstanding, LCS has actually, finally, found a role in the US Fleet which FF(X) does not fill.

What FF(X) actually presents is more expensive than Freedom while having a larger RCS, less tactical mobility, and a lesser surface warfare capability.

If the actual intention is to free up Burkes then buy more Freedoms. The problems have finally been resolved and the potential work to upgrade them has been, in large part, paid for by the Saudis

Share these ‘reputable OSINT’ sources.

No, it’s been your conclusion. Most people here and elsewhere don’t agree with you.

 

[johnpjones1775]

It doesn't actually matter. $1-1.4 billion is essentially the same. It's half a Burke, which is what the FFGs need to be, so it's fine.

Our frigates need to be noticeably less than a Burke imho. We need to be able to get 3 frigates for the cost a Burke at least, ideally 4.

 

[johnpjones1775]

It’s the same or more than the ffg(x) price. That’s the issue

And the FFGX was increasing in price every year…

 

[cccgong]

And the FFGX was increasing in price every year…

Find some official proof. I've seen nothing. Everything I've seen has shown the Navy and CBO moving towards a 1.2B cost.

Share these ‘reputable OSINT’ sources.

No, it’s been your conclusion. Most people here and elsewhere don’t agree with you.

That's definitely been the agreement on the internet. Find some sources that say otherwise.

 

[johnpjones1775]

Find some official proof. I've seen nothing. Everything I've seen has shown the Navy and CBO moving towards a 1.2B cost.


That's definitely been the agreement on the internet. Find some sources that say otherwise.

Agreement on the internet by who? Like I said share these OSINT sources.

I mean the fact that some US aircraft were damaged and troops injured by antiaircraft fire would point to their AA systems being online and functioning.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/07/us/politics/trump-venezuela-helicopter.html

 

[Felocie]

For a few things: where's the Mk 41s? The TLAMs? The cruising diesels? The actual unrefueled range at low speeds? The maintenance capability of the crew given the berthing? The shipboard manning that's not dependent on massive amounts of contractor provided shore support that won't be available without airlift from CONUS?

FF(X) doesn't feature most of what you just mentioned... Now I totally agree that FFG(X) should be procured but if it isn't then FF(X) is worse than LCS at the one thing FF(X) could theoretically do; surface warfare. Hence procuring more LCS (the problems with which have finally been fixed) makes more sense

It doesn't actually matter. $1-1.4 billion is essentially the same. It's half a Burke, which is what the FFGs need to be, so it's fine.

Except FF(X) is not half a Burke capability wise, it isn't even a quarter or a sixth

your conclusion

It's actually just common sense, I'd encourage you to interrogate FF(X) capabilities and the missions they can accomplish thoroughly before asserting otherwise

 

[cccgong]

Agreement on the internet by who? Like I said share these OSINT sources.

I mean the fact that some US aircraft were damaged and troops injured by antiaircraft fire would point to their AA systems being online and functioning.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/07/us/politics/trump-venezuela-helicopter.html

So a helicopter was damaged when close to the target. Likely by crew served weapons or AAA which is entirely different from large radar or other air defense systems.

 

[Felocie]

Agreement on the internet by who? Like I said share these OSINT sources.

Probably not good enough for you so let's get some more:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2009788242837594595

View: https://x.com/trujillocorreo/status/2009788242837594595?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2010773301967102312

View: https://x.com/ConflictsW/status/2010773301967102312?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2009810983104221261

View: https://x.com/trujillocorreo/status/2009810983104221261?s=20

So let's recap: Venezuela had 3-4 Buks, and a couple MANPADS against EA-18s and you're acting like this is some grand proof CHINESE equipment sucks? I mean, for sure this proves Russian equipment isn't the best but Ukraine showed us that. This proves very little, maybe even nothing, about Chinese systems.
Venezuela only operates a couple Chinese radars, no Chinese air defense missile systems and even then sources report that these systems may have not been operational either.

You cited the NYT who have also claimed that a P-8 Poseidon was "disguised as an airliner". Not only is their defense commentary a joke, the damage to the helicopter is in line with small arms fire, which obviously has no connection to Chinese or Russian air defense systems.

 

[johnpjones1775]

So a helicopter was damaged when close to the target. Likely by crew served weapons or AAA which is entirely different from large radar or other air defense systems.

So you’re just making shit up to try to justify the damage.

 

[johnpjones1775]

View attachment 798521
Probably not good enough for you so let's get some more:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2009788242837594595

View: https://x.com/trujillocorreo/status/2009788242837594595?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2010773301967102312

View: https://x.com/ConflictsW/status/2010773301967102312?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2009810983104221261

View: https://x.com/trujillocorreo/status/2009810983104221261?s=20

So let's recap: Venezuela had 3-4 Buks, and a couple MANPADS against EA-18s and you're acting like this is some grand proof CHINESE equipment sucks? I mean, for sure this proves Russian equipment isn't the best but Ukraine showed us that. This proves very little, maybe even nothing, about Chinese systems.
Venezuela only operates a couple Chinese radars, no Chinese air defense missile systems and even then sources report that these systems may have not been operational either.

You cited the NYT who have also claimed that a P-8 Poseidon was "disguised as an airliner". Not only is their defense commentary a joke, the damage to the helicopter is in line with small arms fire, which obviously has no connection to Chinese or Russian air defense systems.

A screen shot from an unknown source. I don’t speak Spanish so that could say Maduro was captured fucking trump’s mother for all I know.

A single launcher behind a house…almost like missiles are shot up in high arcs and can change direction…

Makes sense to try to obscure the launcher from observation or attack…

Ok…so let me get this straight…you think that after months of threats against Venezuela that they turned off all of their air defense radars, and put all of their SAMs away…while there were hostile warships and aircraft 20ish miles off the coast?

And I said between Venezuela, Iran, and Ukraine conflicts we now know Russian and Chinese air defense systems suck.

Isreal and the US destroyed Iran’s air defense network with no problems. Iran operates Chinese SAMs like the HQ-9(B). There are some reports of HQ-16 as well.

 

[MadRat]

How does all this pertain to the topic?

 

[Kat Tsun]

FF(X) doesn't feature most of what you just mentioned...

FF(X) is the first two or three ships. Maybe. The rest will be FFG(X) as HII tools up and acquires long-lead items for their Patrol Frigate.

Now I totally agree that FFG(X) should be procured but if it isn't then

Then it's no worse than any other USN procurement program of the past 30 years. Most people should be expecting a buy of one or two ships, maybe three, and swift cancellation at this point. That's the normal. A finished buy of 20-30 ships would be a victory.

FF(X) is worse than LCS at the one thing FF(X) could theoretically do; surface warfare. Hence procuring more LCS (the problems with which have finally been fixed) makes more sense

LCS is a dead platform and literally cannot support the systems necessary. Not enough volume. HII's Patrol Frigates have the volume.

Except FF(X) is not half a Burke capability wise, it isn't even a quarter or a sixth

It doesn't need to be. It just needs to be present and offer a few weapons that can be fit inside Mk 70 and Mk 41 silos.

It's actually just common sense, I'd encourage you to interrogate FF(X) capabilities and the missions they can accomplish thoroughly before asserting otherwise

They only need to accomplish presence of being able to ward off a couple anti-ship missiles, attack a diesel submarine or something, and fire a few Tomahawks. That's it. Anything less than that means a COCOM won't have options to deal with brushfires when 80-90% of the U.S. military is engaged in INDOPACCOM.

Our frigates need to be noticeably less than a Burke imho. We need to be able to get 3 frigates for the cost a Burke at least, ideally 4.

This isn't really possible. The U.S. shipbuilding industry is simply expensive. It's why nobody besides Israel buys our FMS designs.

 

[Felocie]

The rest will be FFG(X) as HII tools up and acquires long-lead items for their Patrol Frigate.

HII withdrew their PF derived design from the FFG(X) competition because they assessed it as lacking SLA and other crucial features. Basically, it was too small. I have been told a Type 31 derived design was developed but I cannot verify this beyond word of mouth and a couple obscure references which I could maybe try dig up. The point is, we do know HII stopped developed their PF derived entry on the basis that it wasn't good enough, so why would it be good enough this time?

HII's Patrol Frigates have the volume.

This is incorrect for the above reason

It doesn't need to be. It just needs to be present and offer a few weapons that can be fit inside Mk 70 and Mk 41 silos.

Weapons are a lesser concern when compared to sensors as the USN moves to offboard weapons and manned ships being sensor-shooter platforms.

They only need to accomplish presence of being able to ward off a couple anti-ship missiles, attack a diesel submarine or something, and fire a few Tomahawks.

They cannot do this, a design that could would take at least another 5 years aiui

 

[Scott Kenny]

That's the target price of the Connies and cheaper than the LCS-1/2s! Add another notch to why FFG(X) is a huge W.

If you're comparing first of class, you're doing it wrong. You need to compare with LCS 5/6 ish.

First ship in class always has the R&D for the class included.

 

[CordyB]

Sonars have also moved on. The commander of the first block Virginia class was amazed in 2012 when the newly launched Astute class held the Virginia class at a range they didn’t think was possible, due to its new sonar system. This was possible as the US was still using towed arrays designed in the early 80s at the time, and this was done with a sonar system designed in the mid 2000s.

I do agree sonars have moved on but so have submarines, thanks for the info from Commander, its good to get first hand feed back of the first block Virginia class, early Virginias had a history of sloughing off their anechoic, or echo-reducing tiles often in large sections of up to hundreds of square feet while at sea and so they lost their stealthiness to passive sonar because making noise was not suppressed when moving and to active sonar because there’s so much exposed steel. Also presume the Commander's experience was in the open sea and not in the acoustically/very noisy challenging environment of shallow/littoral waters where DOT&E was pushing Navy to test Mk 54 LWT to test to see if the sonar sensor was effective.

 

[johnpjones1775]

FF(X) is the first two or three ships. Maybe. The rest will be FFG(X) as HII tools up and acquires long-lead items for their Patrol Frigate.



Then it's no worse than any other USN procurement program of the past 30 years. Most people should be expecting a buy of one or two ships, maybe three, and swift cancellation at this point. That's the normal. A finished buy of 20-30 ships would be a victory.



LCS is a dead platform and literally cannot support the systems necessary. Not enough volume. HII's Patrol Frigates have the volume.



It doesn't need to be. It just needs to be present and offer a few weapons that can be fit inside Mk 70 and Mk 41 silos.



They only need to accomplish presence of being able to ward off a couple anti-ship missiles, attack a diesel submarine or something, and fire a few Tomahawks. That's it. Anything less than that means a COCOM won't have options to deal with brushfires when 80-90% of the U.S. military is engaged in INDOPACCOM.



This isn't really possible. The U.S. shipbuilding industry is simply expensive. It's why nobody besides Israel buys our FMS designs.

Someone calling LCS a victory? Thats a first.

As for LCS, they could replace the hellfire VLS with at least 8 mk41 self defense length at least.

 

[johnpjones1775]

HII withdrew their PF derived design from the FFG(X) competition because they assessed it as lacking SLA and other crucial features. Basically, it was too small. I have been told a Type 31 derived design was developed but I cannot verify this beyond word of mouth and a couple obscure references which I could maybe try dig up. The point is, we do know HII stopped developed their PF derived entry on the basis that it wasn't good enough, so why would it be good enough this time?

This is incorrect for the above reason

Weapons are a lesser concern when compared to sensors as the USN moves to offboard weapons and manned ships being sensor-shooter platforms.

They cannot do this, a design that could would take at least another 5 years aiui

The navy’s original FFGX requirements list said 32 VLS minimum. HII’s patrol frigate couldn’t meet that requirement. Even with mk70s on the back they would max out at 24 VLS total. Pretty sure that’s why they withdrew their unknown offering.

 

[cccgong]

Someone calling LCS a victory? Thats a first.

As for LCS, they could replace the hellfire VLS with at least 8 mk41 self defense length at least.

1/2 the LCS class are minesweepers which we needed. The other 1/2 are good for stuff like Veneulza and blockade enforcement. Not what they were intended for but useful none the less. And they are way cheaper than FF(X) will be.

And that's what was done with MMSC + increasing the range.

 

[Not James Stockdale]

1/2 the LCS class are minesweepers which we needed. The other 1/2 are good for stuff like Veneulza and blockade enforcement. Not what they were intended for but useful none the less. And they are way cheaper than FF(X) will be.

And that's what was done with MMSC + increasing the range.

The only LCS I've seen pictures of in the Caribbean in the past few months has been Wichita. There are supposedly ten Freedom class LCS's at Mayport, but I hear a lot more about destroyers and the Coast Guard than LCS's. It seems like the Navy can barely get them underway, so they certainly wouldn't touch the MMSC.

 

[cccgong]

The only LCS I've seen pictures of in the Caribbean in the past few months has been Wichita. There are supposedly ten Freedom class LCS's at Mayport, but I hear a lot more about destroyers and the Coast Guard than LCS's. It seems like the Navy can barely get them underway, so they certainly wouldn't touch the MMSC.

They completely redesigned the propulsion setup for the MMSC. So I wouldn't make that assumption about it.

 

[johnpjones1775]

1/2 the LCS class are minesweepers which we needed. The other 1/2 are good for stuff like Veneulza and blockade enforcement. Not what they were intended for but useful none the less. And they are way cheaper than FF(X) will be.

And that's what was done with MMSC + increasing the range.

I could have sworn they added a deck aft of flight deck for more VLS, but guess not.

The LCSes are doing the things they were designed and intended to do with the exception of ASW.

They were always supposed to be minesweepers, and always supposed to be capable of killing vessels of their capability or less.

 

[johnpjones1775]

The only LCS I've seen pictures of in the Caribbean in the past few months has been Wichita. There are supposedly ten Freedom class LCS's at Mayport, but I hear a lot more about destroyers and the Coast Guard than LCS's. It seems like the Navy can barely get them underway, so they certainly wouldn't touch the MMSC.

There’s been literally 0 issues with them getting underway since they fixed the combing gear issue.

Other than another flight deck and hangar for a helo, there’s no reason for the LCSes to be used in the Caribbean when there’s everything else that’s already there.

There’s no mine threat that’s been reported, and the small boat threat is fairly minimal as well. Those are the two missions of the LCS.

Sure they could chase drug boats or chase down tankers, but there’s already plenty of ships there doing that, and I’d bet if we dug into it we’d find out the LCSes have been maintaining US presence in the CENTCOM area, while our destroyers, amphibs, and carrier are fucking around off the coast of Venezuela.

Edit
Just confirmed we’ve have 5 ships in CENTCOM during this period, 2 destroyers and 3 LCSes.
So 10 freedoms, 1 has been in the Caribbean and 1-3 in the Middle East meaning 20-40% have been deployed the last few months sounds like a pretty normal deployment rate.

 

[Felocie]

LCS isn't exactly a victory because getting to this point has been torturous and the program failed to reach the original goals. However LCS has finally found their place in the fleet architecture and fulfill critical missions now. This is not a controversial statement. FF(X) may also go through a similar process but, even if they find a place in fleet architecture eventually, has the lesson not been learnt?

 

[H_K]

FF(X) is a throwback to the French La Fayette patrol frigate program of the early 90s… ie. a heavy emphasis on ASuW and maritime interdiction ops, to the exclusion of almost everything else. That’s how ancient it is conceptually… a 35+ year old idea about minimally armed combattants to meet post-Cold War surface threats.

BUT… at least the La Fayettes were designed with built-in upgrade paths for full spectrum wartime capability, with designated spaces for future ASW and AAW add-ons (VLS, towed sonar, torpedo launchers etc). And most of all, they were built with very low signature (including acoustic) and with enough compartments and shock proofing to survive an anti ship missile strike. So they could be evolved into a real frigate.

NSC has none of that. You can’t just wave a magic wand and transform it into an FFG(X)… it will take a full redesign and years to get it to a satisfactory Flight II configuration that is able to fill the USN’s ASW escort gap and 2nd tier chokepoint escort role.

 

[johnpjones1775]

LCS isn't exactly a victory because getting to this point has been torturous and the program failed to reach the original goals. However LCS has finally found their place in the fleet architecture and fulfill critical missions now. This is not a controversial statement. FF(X) may also go through a similar process but, even if they find a place in fleet architecture eventually, has the lesson not been learnt?

The sweetest victories are the most hard fought

We always knew what their place in the fleet architecture was though. They didn’t just randomly trip into an open niche.

There were only 2 real failures in the program. Not being able to swap modules quickly, and the ASW module not being viable.

 

[johnpjones1775]

FF(X) is a throwback to the French La Fayette patrol frigate program of the early 90s… ie. a heavy emphasis on ASuW and maritime interdiction ops, to the exclusion of almost everything else. That’s how ancient it is conceptually… a 35+ year old idea about minimally armed combattants to meet post-Cold War surface threats.

BUT… at least the La Fayettes were designed with built-in upgrade paths for full spectrum wartime capability, with designated spaces for future ASW and AAW add-ons (VLS, towed sonar, torpedo launchers etc). And most of all, they were built with very low signature (including acoustic) and with enough compartments and shock proofing to survive an anti ship missile strike. So they could be evolved into a real frigate.

NSC has none of that. You can’t just wave a magic wand and transform it into an FFG(X)… it will take a full redesign and years to get it to a satisfactory Flight II configuration that is able to fill the USN’s ASW escort gap and 2nd tier chokepoint escort role.

I mean an FFG can be whatever a navy says it is. Just like a destroyer or a cruiser can be whatever a navy says it is.

 

[johnpjones1775]

https://www.twz.com/sea/navys-top-a...onstruction-to-speed-new-frigate-construction

 

[Ainen]

FF(X) is a throwback to the French La Fayette patrol frigate program of the early 90s… ie. a heavy emphasis on ASuW and maritime interdiction ops, to the exclusion of almost everything else. That’s how ancient it is conceptually… a 35+ year old idea about minimally armed combattants to meet post-Cold War surface threats.

La Fayete wasn't post-CW idea, it's a CW idea of a stealthy missile battery(designed amidst stealth fever), sort of large, high seas missile corvette. It was born specifically for 1990s high end combat.

Here it is anything but stealth. But it has actual survivability suit as a baseline, not a minimum self-defense LF had/has.
And mission spaces/future growth(which both have).

 

[MadRat]

LCS is very distinguished looking. And I really liked their ability to deploy high speed boats out the back. But the outriggers sit in the wash of their nose and above certain speeds the pressure on them has to be pretty disturbing. Add in wave action and the pulsating side loading is a bad recipe. And making them out of aluminum may have been good for weight, but not for that kind of sideloading. It's a shame they could not have done something to alleviate the stresses on the hulls, but unlike regular hulls the change of one dimension requires 95 doctorates to write an encyclopedia length analysis prior to any changes. In hindsight, the engineers seemed to make choices knowing their were going to be problems. Its a shame, because for a short range warship it really had potential for many things. I just cannot get over that unfortunate short range by design. But the short range is exactly why it can never be a true frigate. Adding on 24 or 36 VLS cells will never change that.

 

[johnpjones1775]

LCS is very distinguished looking. And I really liked their ability to deploy high speed boats out the back. But the outriggers sit in the wash of their nose and above certain speeds the pressure on them has to be pretty disturbing. Add in wave action and the pulsating side loading is a bad recipe. And making them out of aluminum may have been good for weight, but not for that kind of sideloading. It's a shame they could not have done something to alleviate the stresses on the hulls, but unlike regular hulls the change of one dimension requires 95 doctorates to write an encyclopedia length analysis prior to any changes. In hindsight, the engineers seemed to make choices knowing their were going to be problems. Its a shame, because for a short range warship it really had potential for many things. I just cannot get over that unfortunate short range by design. But the short range is exactly why it can never be a true frigate. Adding on 24 or 36 VLS cells will never change that.

Independence class LCS has a range of 4300nmi

OHPs had a range of 4500nmi
Burkes have a range of 4400nmi

Doesn’t sound like the independent class is all that short ranged. It’s comparable in range to both burkes and OHPs

 

[johnpjones1775]

Taiwan seems to be working on a 2500 ton class light frigate.
other than being not proven designs wonder why not just use those. Pictures show a VLS deck behind the gun, ASMs, and a flight deck with hangar.

 

[Ainen]

Taiwan seems to be working on a 2500 ton class light frigate.
other than being not proven designs wonder why not just use those. Pictures show a VLS deck behind the gun, ASMs, and a flight deck with hangar.

It's a rather local, green water design.
It is indeed very well armed, but design focus is just different.
Also, while it does indeed have vls, the point of all small Taiwanese designs is their universal inclined battery. Without it, they're quite meh. And if US is to finish this design, it's fully applicable to FFX, so no point to even start.

 

[MadRat]

Independence class LCS has a range of 4300nmi

OHPs had a range of 4500nmi
Burkes have a range of 4400nmi

Doesn’t sound like the independent class is all that short ranged. It’s comparable in range to both burkes and OHPs

Per the link, the Independence class has a 3,500 nm range at 14 knots, but only approximately 1,000 nm at full load Sprint Speed. https://www.surfpac.navy.mil/Ships/By-Class/Littoral-Combat-Ship-Class-LCS/
The 4,300 nm range in wikipedia articles are from here: https://www.al.com/live/2010/04/in_high-stakes_lcs_competition.html Published in 2010.

Taiwan seems to be working on a 2500 ton class light frigate.
other than being not proven designs wonder why not just use those. Pictures show a VLS deck behind the gun, ASMs, and a flight deck with hangar.

Legend class has options for all sorts of heavy armaments that they produced for the Saudis. But it went sky high in price when they tried to make it comparable to an Arleigh-Burke imitation. Even the Saudis wouldn't accept that price.