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Maybe using tourist maps because the MI ones are 20 years out of date I guess.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?
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Maybe using tourist maps because the MI ones are 20 years out of date I guess.
That's amazing. So much worse than I could have expected. I expected low 1B and they are nearly at 2B.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.
“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.”
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.
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.
Navy Secretary Phelan leaving post immediately, Pentagon says
FF(X) on the chopping block going forward?
I didn't think Hegseth was listening...Funny thing, with all the generals being fired, shouldn't Phelan have been the first on the chopping block?
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 don't care who ya are, that right there's funny.Hegseth's track record actually is he doesn't suffer fools too well.
No funds requested going forward for FFG(X) how are they going to finish those two hulls..
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.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.
The ship would have been a much better combatant than FFX.
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.
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.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".
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.
Navy Ship Construction budget for FY27, page 305:Where are these numbers from?
How would another 5” gun be useless in the age of drones when guns have been swatting drones from the sky at sea for the last 3 or 4 years?I would argue that the extra 5" is useless, but I dunno, maybe he meant that a 5" gun is extra useless?
Because its a bit big and slow? It might be less useless than mk-110, depending on future 57mm projectiles.How would another 5” gun be useless in the age of drones when guns have been swatting drones from the sky at sea for the last 3 or 4 years?
Not for FFX as it sits now.A containerized and automated version of Captas-4 to be mounted on a USV, could this be the solution for FF(X) ?
![]()
What's next for the Thales sonar systems destined for cancelled U.S. Navy frigates? - Naval News
Thales gave insights into the CAPTAS-4 Variable Depth Sonar (VDS) systems once destined for the now cancelled Constellation-class of frigateswww.navalnews.com
You'd take the RHIB or Helo over to the ASW USV, not recover the ASW USV on the FFX.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)
I could see an argument for the FFGs to still be manned because there's no intention for DDGs to escort convoys.In the mid term I don't see much reason for anything up to and including FFGX sized to not be fully automated.
Doubt it, the USN really needs the hulls. Any hulls. No matter how useless they are in combat.FF(X) on the chopping block going forward?
No, you need stability for your radars to be able to track things.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.
Agreed that if you want to recover ASW USV of the size that are needed you’d need to forgo the helo deck too. But that’s a nonstarter and would take forever to figure out a design for as we’ve only just started to work with USV.Not for FFX as it sits now.
It'd be very useful for an ASW 2XL-USV that would replace FFX for ASW screen. By my count, the USN would need hundreds of these, 3 for every single combatant hull. And control channels for 6 to 18 on every ship, because the Convoys need a large number of ASW USVs.
You'd take the RHIB or Helo over to the ASW USV, not recover the ASW USV on the FFX.
I could see an argument for the FFGs to still be manned because there's no intention for DDGs to escort convoys.
Doubt it, the USN really needs the hulls. Any hulls. No matter how useless they are in combat.
No, you need stability for your radars to be able to track things.