US FF(X) Program - DISCUSSION

[DJK]

750 rounds(engagements), easily replenishable at sea. We're comparing to single digit ammo count(on MALEs, nothing on smaller drones), going directly against loiter time and altitude.

If you tried to sail a Zumwalt through a choke point like that, there would be enough projectiles coming your way to exhaust all 80 VLS worth of missiles. You would have to ruin the RCS with a while battery of 30mm mounts.

The other guy in the quote flies, sails nuke submarines, and so on.
The range off the coast is absolutely irrelevant; for SSGN, you're equally vulnerable 25 miles off and 250 miles off coast.
Threat instead is defined by redfor missile pool(at sea and overall, as these are high-end missiles with highly limited available stock), making threat levels effectively "flat".

You have to be able to defend (or assume you can not, and sometimes luck is just not on your side) against this threat regardless of proximity to the coast.

We have missiles for taking out satellites and UAVs.

Doesn’t matter if Burke wasn’t designed for ASW, constellation class didn’t need to be a 7k ton ship with top tier radar in order to be the fleet’a ASW platform.

Please don't take out satellites with your missiles, there are better options that are less likely to cause a Kessler syndrome. And there are other threads where we try to figure out how to efficiently deal with UAVs without draining missile stocks (and their replacement budget). Anyway Burke III has the current top tier radar, not Constellation, which has other functions that complement Burke's limitations quite well.

Are you implying that fiber optic FPV drones are some how a threat to a zumwalt sitting 50 miles off shore?

They might be. Although the demand for fibre has pushed up international prices for fibre optics.

Small FPV doesn't fly 25 nmi....it takes a munition of normal size - perfectly fine target for original DBR and 2x mk.110.

Drones from a couple of years ago maybe, but you can build stuff with the batteries/fuel to reach where you need. Apparently even Ukrainian housewives can build them lol.

It is narrow, but it isn't that narrow. Normal naval LO target(light subsonic ASCM) engagement horizon is below half that number...

The choke pount literally is, and Oman wouldn't like you trying to sail overland.

 

[cccgong]

There's hundreds of normal (non-cube/micro sats) chinese sat that do EO/Radar/SIGINT not to mention commercial systems. You'll never take them all out.

 

[Jimmo952]

Spoken as someone who doesn't know the reality and just gets snippets of news here and there.

Quite the contrary.

There is no threat to Mexico that requires AEGIS and advanced anti-air capabilities.

The threats to Mexico stem from broken institutions, extreme corruption and questionable economic policies.

The Philippines would be a better candidate as the external security threat is very real as is the desire to do something about it.

To get back on topic, I think it unlikely these ships will be sold.

 

[DWG]

Are you implying that fiber optic FPV drones are some how a threat to a zumwalt sitting 50 miles off shore?

No, that a Zumwalt sitting 25 miles offshore, or less, as the From the Sea CONOPS required, is absolutely in their engagement zone.

A Zumwalt 50 miles offshore is in any case still in their engagement zone if they're staged off a Sea Baby or similar. For that matter, 50 miles off shore is within range of the latest Lancets, And of course Ukraine has demonstrated Sea Baby strikes at considerably greater distance.

 

[DWG]

Small FPV doesn't fly 25 nmi....it takes a munition of normal size - perfectly fine target for original DBR and 2x mk.110.

Lancets are reportedly reaching out to 100km+ nowadays. Meanwhile Zumwalt lost the 57mm Mk 110s in development and ended up with the considerably less capable 30mm Mk 46 Mod 2 instead, while DBR (aka SPY-3 + SPY-4) ended up with SPY-3 only and that having to fill in for SPY-4's search role.

Furthermore, Iran isn't exactly great at small drones;

Have you somehow missed the Shaheds impacting all over the mid-East and Ukraine? Plus the common border with Russia? Not to mention the existing Iranian order for Lancets?

It is narrow, but it isn't that narrow.

I'm not sure how wide the navigable channel in the strait is, but it's definitely under 21-22nm (Larak to the islands on the Omani side, or the Tunbs to Abu Musa - both Iranian, incidentally). And as noted, the Zumwalt CONOPS assumed it and the ARG would be that close inshore, if not closer, wherever in the world they were.

 

[Ainen]

Lancets are reportedly reaching out to 100km+ nowadays. Meanwhile Zumwalt lost the 57mm Mk 110s in development and ended up with the considerably less capable 30mm Mk 46 Mod 2 instead, while DBR (aka SPY-3 + SPY-4) ended up with SPY-3 only and that having to fill in for SPY-4's search role.

Lancet isn't all that small. It isn't especially difficult to engage, especially over open sea.

The Mk.110s were indeed lost, as was DBR, and even AGS(and, as such, the whole mission); however, we were discussing the original concept.
Could vanilla Zumwalt, properly maintained ASUW LCS and Constellation class sealed Hormuz off from Iran? My answer is very likely yes. Iranian flotilla warfighting system can place unaffordable risks only for a non-adapted blue water navy, and even that just barely.
As such, the current situation is a pure failure of procurement for a long-anticipated problem.

Have you somehow missed the Shaheds impacting all over the mid-East and Ukraine? Plus the common border with Russia? Not to mention the existing Iranian order for Lancets?

They aren't small. Small drones are those that meaningfully pass under modern CIWS, over sea(which is harder).
Shahed/Harpy is in a small MALE weight/size class, really.

I'm not sure how wide the navigable channel in the strait is, but it's definitely under 21-22nm (Larak to the islands on the Omani side, or the Tunbs to Abu Musa - both Iranian, incidentally). And as noted, the Zumwalt CONOPS assumed it and the ARG would be that close inshore, if not closer, wherever in the world they were.

Yes. My idea is that you can expect normal enough AA engagement if your stand-off from land matches at least the 1980s engagement area for surface-hugging ASCM.

Which was often <5 miles-ish (and with good low observable properties, it isn't especially better nowadays) - and self-defense was still perfectly doable, proven on multiple occasions.
This was done against weapons more or less equal to modern Iranian ASCMs, but at defensive and sensor level far below modern standard.

 

[johnpjones1775]

No, that a Zumwalt sitting 25 miles offshore, or less, as the From the Sea CONOPS required, is absolutely in their engagement zone.

A Zumwalt 50 miles offshore is in any case still in their engagement zone if they're staged off a Sea Baby or similar. For that matter, 50 miles off shore is within range of the latest Lancets, And of course Ukraine has demonstrated Sea Baby strikes at considerably greater distance.

Is the sea baby also operated via fiber optics?

 

[Titus K]

A containerized and automated version of Captas-4 to be mounted on a USV, could this be the solution for FF(X) ?
https://www.navalnews.com/event-new...ems-destined-for-cancelled-u-s-navy-frigates/

 

[cccgong]

A containerized and automated version of Captas-4 to be mounted on a USV, could this be the solution for FF(X) ?
https://www.navalnews.com/event-new...ems-destined-for-cancelled-u-s-navy-frigates/

That doesn’t solve the noise issue. The NSC was so vibration prone that the early hulls needed to be retrofitted to stop the vibration from effecting their service life.

 

[Jimmo952]

That doesn’t solve the noise issue. The NSC was so vibration prone that the early hulls needed to be retrofitted to stop the vibration from effecting their service life.

I am not saying the hulls are quiet but structural problems with the hulls were corrected years ago.

The Coast Guard runs their ships hard.

There have been supply chain issues that have been problematic.

With the Navy jumping on the platform, it is reasonable to expect the money will be there to support a more robust supply chain.

 

[cccgong]

I am not saying the hulls are quiet but structural problems with the hulls were corrected years ago.

The Coast Guard runs their ships hard.

There have been supply chain issues that have been problematic.

With the Navy jumping on the platform, it is reasonable to expect the money will be there to support a more robust supply chain.

I agree the structural issues were solved. However if there was that amount of vibration to begin with the hulls are likely quite loud. I also can’t imagine hull silencing was much of a consideration for a coast guard ship without sonar

 

[DJK]

That doesn’t solve the noise issue. The NSC was so vibration prone that the early hulls needed to be retrofitted to stop the vibration from effecting their service life.

I was saying that a VDS with automated launch/recovery could go on a MUSV like Sea Hunter. The only use for FF(X) would be servicing the USVs and providing a ASW helo. Put the seaboat back on the launch ramp so engineers can get out to do repairs in any weather.

 

[cccgong]

I was saying that a VDS with automated launch/recovery could go on a MUSV like Sea Hunter. The only use for FF(X) would be servicing the USVs and providing a ASW helo. Put the seaboat back on the launch ramp so engineers can get out to do repairs in any weather.

I agree it would help. However this now means your expensive usv mother ship has 0 self defense capabilities and needs to be pair with another ship.

Also I’m skeptical the NSC would work as a usv mother ship due to the size of future usv that will work in the ASW role (200 tons or more)

 

[DJK]

I agree it would help. However this now means your expensive usv mother ship has 0 self defense capabilities and needs to be pair with another ship.

Also I’m skeptical the NSC would work as a usv mother ship due to the size of future usv that will work in the ASW role (200 tons or more)

Agree. Why would anyone except the "downed aviators" kid want a USV mothership with little self defence priced almost as much as something thats better defended? Kind of like the Nestle milkybar kid... guess you didnt have those ads.

The mothership wouldn't be docking with USVs or anything, just doing support, maybe some C3. And perhaps monitoring that USV navigation hasn't gone haywire. So maybe the only drones it actually hosts are a collection of VTL recon assets that can monitor operations and also relay Link16 from the USV, similar to what coastguard and marines already use.

I really feel its time for Navy to use a "low probability of intercept" signalling protocol. Maybe something compatible with F-35.

 

[cccgong]

Agree. Why would anyone except the "downed aviators" kid want a USV mothership with little self defence priced almost as much as something thats better defended? Kind of like the Nestle milkybar kid... guess you didnt have those ads.

The mothership wouldn't be docking with USVs or anything, just doing support, maybe some C3. And perhaps monitoring that USV navigation hasn't gone haywire. So maybe the only drones it actually hosts are a collection of VTL recon assets that can monitor operations and also relay Link16 from the USV, similar to what coastguard and marines already use.

I really feel its time for Navy to use a "low probability of intercept" signalling protocol. Maybe something compatible with F-35.

I don't think there's any value you add by having a USV support ship close by, that couldn't be done with another drone ship expect for USV recovery/maintenance/fueling. The reason you would want crewed ships for vessels with large radars/lasers/power generation/large amounts of missiles is those objects are expensive and you want low likelihood of jamming being effective and some amount of damage control/fault tolerance.

In the mid term I don't see much reason for anything up to and including FFGX sized to not be fully automated.

 

[DWG]

Is the sea baby also operated via fiber optics?

SATCOM, and you daisy-chain the FPV drone's fibre-optic over that link, or install a second Starlink terminal on the Sea Baby just for the FPV drone(s).

 

[DWG]

we were discussing the original concept.
Could vanilla Zumwalt, properly maintained ASUW LCS and Constellation class sealed Hormuz off from Iran? My answer is very likely yes.

If the Iranians were facing that threat, they would have adapted to it.

However, I'm not convinced Cebrowski's dream team could reliably take on the current threat either. While Iran has hit back in ways we weren't expecting, targeting the Gulf States, it hasn't actually gone all out. We haven't seen a sustained mining effort, we haven't seen a scaled-up Houthi-style counter-shipping campaign, we haven't seen a sustained swarm attack, we haven't seen a sustained counter oil terminal campaign, we haven't seen special forces activity, nor a general rising by their surrogates (look how quiet the Houthis have been). Yes, some of those assets have been attritted, but could the US have kept the ships on station to keep the Strait open if every Gulf ally is screaming for help because their oil terminals are under 24 hour Shahed attack, not to mention IRGC SOF blowing up pipelines in the desert and lobbing RPGs into government offices, while ships are hitting mines up and down the full length of the Gulf, and other ships are reporting they're under attack from FIAC swarms and USVs.

Iran doesn't even need those attacks to succeed, as we've literally just seen, it just needs the threat of them to bring the traffic through the Straits to a grinding halt.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

If the Iranians were facing that threat, they would have adapted to it.

However, I'm not convinced Cebrowski's dream team could reliably take on the current threat either. While Iran has hit back in ways we weren't expecting, targeting the Gulf States, it hasn't actually gone all out. We haven't seen a sustained mining effort, we haven't seen a scaled-up Houthi-style counter-shipping campaign, we haven't seen a sustained swarm attack, we haven't seen a sustained counter oil terminal campaign, we haven't seen special forces activity, nor a general rising by their surrogates (look how quiet the Houthis have been). Yes, some of those assets have been attritted, but could the US have kept the ships on station to keep the Strait open if every Gulf ally is screaming for help because their oil terminals are under 24 hour Shahed attack, not to mention IRGC SOF blowing up pipelines in the desert and lobbing RPGs into government offices, while ships are hitting mines up and down the full length of the Gulf, and other ships are reporting they're under attack from FIAC swarms and USVs.

Iran doesn't even need those attacks to succeed, as we've literally just seen, it just needs the threat of them to bring the traffic through the Straits to a grinding halt.

Shahed numbers aren't infinite, I doubt they had the capacity to spam many more than what they were already were doing during the height of this fighting. Even well dispersed stockpiles can only launch them so quickly and the flow of replacements is going to be slower than the rate they're being expended.

A sustained mining effort would put their own naval and air assets at greater risk which honestly might be preferable to the present state of things since everyone is already acting as if there is a high mine risk.

I'd wager the sort of material support the Houthis usually get is much reduced since Iran needs it all for themselves now.

 

[Firefinder]

Also doesnt help that all that gear needed to support that effort got freaking DELETED within the first week.

Remember Iran been THE pain in the middle east for the last near 50 years, there has a been ALOT of recon assets from Sats to boots on the ground looking at their everything the entire time.

The List been made, it been check THICE and most the stuff Iran needs to go out... Got deleted in a few nights.

Leaving Iran with basically the fun issue of...

I have all this ammo...

AND NOTHING TO SHOT IT WITH.

Well in this case they have a fraction of what they need to actually shot it all in a realistic timetable they are STILL being shot at as well as stuff miss gets found and hit. IE instead of the needed 20000 dudes, they now got 200, and one gets head shot everytime they pop up.

The point of all those Tomahawks and JASSMs were to degrade Iran ability to go all out and that worked well.

Recon for the win happens again.


So long as Recon assets remain in play, stuff like the FFX have a hope of working. Still Prefer that the FFG gets unfucked with the LCSs but I take anything for the navy at this point.

 

[Desertfox]

Quite the assumption you made there. Let's just say the situation is not quite as dire for Iran as it was stated. Lets remember Israel claimed 70% of lran launchers destroyed 3 days in, only for the US to confirm that only like 30% had been destroyed a month later.

 

[DWG]

Shahed numbers aren't infinite, I doubt they had the capacity to spam many more than what they were already were doing during the height of this fighting.

We know launching a hundred Shaheds at once is easily viable because we've seen the Russians do it. It should be easier for the Iranians. But they haven't really focussed their attacks in the way the Russians have, mostly it seems to have been low numbers in a scattergun harassment/intergovernmental message 'we could do worse' mode. If they salvoed a hundred or more towards a Kuwaiti refinery before breakfast, then another hundred towards a UAE oil terminal in time for elevenses, you can bet every US ambassador to a Gulf state would be skipping lunch while trying to fend off the demands to have US warships off their ports protecting their infrastructure. And the US would have to respond, diluting the assets available in the Straits.

A sustained mining effort would put their own naval and air assets at greater risk which honestly might be preferable to the present state of things since everyone is already acting as if there is a high mine risk.

Iranian merchant shipping has been sailing freely for the last month, there's been plentiful opportunity for mine laying from ostensibly civilian platforms. And given the distance from Iranian ports to the shipping channels there's certainly the opportunity for minelaying from small craft and even minisubs. They don't need to sow mines in such density as to close the channel to a determined vessel, just sufficient to worry the ship-owners and have them demanding sweeping operations.

I'd wager the sort of material support the Houthis usually get is much reduced since Iran needs it all for themselves now.

Undoubtedly, but we've only seen local harassment level operations, and I suspect the Houthis and the Iraqi militias are capable of more.

 

[DWG]

The List been made, it been check THICE

And they still managed to hit a school that stopped being a target a decade ago. The accuracy of the US target list is open to question.

 

[Kat Tsun]

And they still managed to hit a school that stopped being a target a decade ago. The accuracy of the US target list is open to question.

What's more American than using a target list from the Bush era in the late 2020s?

Maybe using tourist maps because the MI ones are 20 years out of date I guess.

 

[Jimmo952]

What's more American than using a target list from the Bush era in the late 2020s?

Maybe using tourist maps because the MI ones are 20 years out of date I guess.

What does that have to do with FFX?

 

[cccgong]

Is this the FF(X) thread? Not sure. Here's something new on FF(X):

The FF(X) schedule according to the FY27 PB: FF(X)-1 ($1.67B) delivers in 2030. FF(X)-2 ($1.94B) delivers in 2033. FF(X)-3 and -4 ($1.83B) deliver in 2036, the additional build time reflecting new shipyards potentially joining the construction effort.

That's amazing. So much worse than I could have expected. I expected low 1B and they are nearly at 2B.

Slower delivery than FFG(X), more expensive, and much less capable. Seems like Trump admin corruption just like BBG(X) costing 17 bil.

 

[SlothmanAllen]

Navy Secretary Phelan leaving post immediately, Pentagon says

“Secretary of the Navy John C. Phelan is departing the administration, effective immediately,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a social media post today. “On behalf of the Secretary of War and Deputy Secretary of War, we are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy. We wish him well in his future endeavors. Undersecretary Hung Cao will become Acting Secretary of the Navy.”

FF(X) on the chopping block going forward?

 

[Kat Tsun]

That's amazing. So much worse than I could have expected. I expected low 1B and they are nearly at 2B.

Imagine how much FFG(X) would cost if they restart it.

Well, you won't need to imagine. That'll perhaps happen sometime in the next four years. Then we'll get to see how long it'll take the USN to restart LCS-1 or something in 2036 and so on. USN forever denied new combatants simply because it can't stick to a program for more than 48 months? More likely than you'd think.

 

[CastleBravo]

Imagine how much FFG(X) would cost if they restart it.

Well, you won't need to imagine. That'll perhaps happen sometime in the next four years. Then we'll get to see how long it'll take the USN to restart LCS-1 or something in 2036 and so on. USN forever denied new combatants simply because it can't stick to a program for more than 48 months? More likely than you'd think.

No, they won't restart FFG(X). The next program will be based on Coast Guard Sentinel class. Expected cost is $3.5B for the first hull.

 

[Kat Tsun]

No, they won't restart FFG(X). The next program will be based on Coast Guard Sentinel class. Expected cost is $3.5B for the first hull.

They'll end up copying the Iranian Zolfaghar class PTMs with the NSM launchers for $5.8 billion a pop. Put them in a Caribbean Squadron.

 

[johnpjones1775]

The NSCes could be doing the majority of this blockade, and that’s why the FFX is needed.
2-3 burkes just to cover high end air defense, and several FFXs and LCSes would be much more ideal than 11 burkes, 3 amphibs a carrier and an ESB.

We have roughly 1/3 of our deployable ships tied up on a blockade of a relatively small region of ocean.

This proves we don’t have nearly the number of ships needed for a war against China.

 

[cccgong]

Navy Secretary Phelan leaving post immediately, Pentagon says



FF(X) on the chopping block going forward?

https://www.axios.com/2026/04/22/navy-secretary-john-phelan-hung-cao
Seems like he was fired due to taking his own initative. We will likley get someone more spineless that listens to Hegsbeth.

No funds requested going forward for FFG(X) how are they going to finish those two hulls..

 

[DJK]

Funny thing, with all the generals being fired, shouldn't Phelan have been the first on the chopping block?

I didn't think Hegseth was listening...

 

[Jimmo952]

https://www.axios.com/2026/04/22/navy-secretary-john-phelan-hung-cao
Seems like he was fired due to taking his own initative. We will likley get someone more spineless that listens to Hegsbeth.

No funds requested going forward for FFG(X) how are they going to finish those two hulls..

View attachment 810015

I doubt FFGX ever floats. Last estimate I saw was it was only 10-12% complete and still undergoing design/redesign.

Probably a more messed up program that we were even told, which is too bad.

Workers were kept busy and on the payroll to preserve the investments made in the facilities and workforce.

I hope someone is studying how that program got so far off the track.

 

[MadRat]

Not sure why the SoW keeps entering the discussion as a hold up on FFG(X). Hegseth's track record actually is he doesn't suffer fools too well. He doesn't mind admirals or generals standing up to him when it comes to reality. But let's face it, NAVSEA hasn't been operating well. If FFG(X) hulls are not being finished it is for reasons you probably would not accept. This isn't aimed at Jimmo, moreso the general population of our country.

I like the concept but many of the contracts were rumored to be loaded heavily with irrelevant garbage.

 

[Moose]

Hegseth's track record actually is he doesn't suffer fools too well.

I don't care who ya are, that right there's funny.

 

[Kat Tsun]

No funds requested going forward for FFG(X) how are they going to finish those two hulls..

They won't. The ship is rather overweight anyway and likely would be a poor combatant. It's been frozen for several years now, since FMM can't figure out how to make it work without tearing the whole thing down again, and NAVSEA isn't budgeting for more work. It's probably about as bad as USCGC Friedman was before it was canceled.

Maybe in four years they'll ask FMM to build another FFG(X) and get promised hulls in 2042.

 

[cccgong]

They won't. The ship is rather overweight anyway and likely would be a poor combatant. It's been frozen for several years now, since FMM can't figure out how to make it work without tearing the whole thing down again, and NAVSEA isn't budgeting for more work. It's probably about as bad as USCGC Friedman was before it was canceled.

Maybe in four years they'll ask FMM to build another FFG(X) and get promised hulls in 2042.

They got 650/100M of funds in 2025/2026. So it hasn't been frozen for several years. Also funny thing about a ship being overweight you can usually increase the length of the ship slightly to gain back some margin.

The ship would have been a much better combatant than FFX. This isn't the 1920s anymore rough sea state stability is nice to have but not critical due to ships not being gun platforms anymore. It's a similar story with speed, as these do not seem capable of keeping up with CVN's anyways a 1kn speed reduction won't kill the ship.

Regarding damage control, current weapons are so destructive that the Japanese put minimal damage control on the new FFM as they realized a single hit from a heavy ASM would sink the ship. The leaked Chinese datasets showed a single DF-21 would pretty much break the back of a Nimitiz class and sink it. So damage control isn't that important anymore either.

 

[Kat Tsun]

The ship would have been a much better combatant than FFX.

Yeah well, you get the shipbuilding industry you have, not the one you want. Maybe we can ask Japan or Korea to build something while still building FF(X) for secondary theaters.

It's a similar story with speed, as these do not seem capable of keeping up with CVN's anyways a 1kn speed reduction won't kill the ship.

FFG(X) was supposed to be fight in INDOPACCOM as a minimum viable escort-SAG combatant thingy. It needs to keep up with the carriers and can't afford to lose speed. But I think FMM's problems are more immediate than "we don't know how to fix it". Probably something like "paying the wages of our furloughed workers".

 

[cccgong]

FFG(X) was supposed to be fight in INDOPACCOM as a minimum viable escort-SAG combatant thingy. It needs to keep up with the carriers and can't afford to lose speed. But I think FMM's problems are more immediate than "we don't know how to fix it". Probably something like "paying the wages of our furloughed workers".

Speed is only marginally important these days even for CVN escort. It's just important for transits and a 1kn difference will increase your transit times by ~3% and that's assuming you're going full speed the entire time and burning all the escort's fuel. That's not particuarlly viable with the anticpated logistical issues of fighting in the Pacific.

It's marginally important as it's no longer the cold war where you can hide your battle groups by sprinting after last known contact to create a possible region where the ships are. These days there's continual sat coverage by both EO and radar sats around China so the position of your ships will always be known.

 

[DWG]

So if Phelan's gone, does that give the USN a convenient person to blame for FF(X) if they're having buyer's remorse?