• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

USN Large Surface Combatant - Delayed

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
123
Lets hope they make the right and unconventional choice emphasizing aircraft and Marines as well as a deep magazine for missles and DEW shots.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
196

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
2,128
Reaction score
148
The schedule has changed from FY23 award, to FY25 award and now late 2020's award. This reflects the Navy's approach of investing in a development process that builds and de-risks sub-systems. Plus it also gives them a little more freedom in the budget. By the Late 2020's, both the DDG-51 Flight III's, and the FFG(X) would have de-risked and the same for the carriers and possibly even the Columbia Class.
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
123
Plenty of time to de-risk a VGS which can place various types of payloads in near space (and alot of them). :oops:;)
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,056
Reaction score
1,095
Plenty of time to de-risk a VGS which can place various types of payloads in near space (and alot of them). :oops:;)
Northrop Grumman Modular Launch System FTW.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
535
Reaction score
226
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
even the Columbia Class.
Frankly, I never understood the role of Columbia-class. Why not just build a ballistic-capable variant of "Virginia"? Yes, it may lose a bit in capabilities, but it would be an order of magnitude cheaper, and gave a great commonality in maintenance and crew training.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
196
even the Columbia Class.
Frankly, I never understood the role of Columbia-class. Why not just build a ballistic-capable variant of "Virginia"? Yes, it may lose a bit in capabilities, but it would be an order of magnitude cheaper, and gave a great commonality in maintenance and crew training.
"A bit in capabilities" is an understatement. This has been studied, extensively, and it never really competes with the large SSBN. The greater affordability would not offset the loss in capability, endurance, and survivability. In a no-treaty environment, one could argue a large fleet of far less-capable SSBNs would adequately preserve deterrence. But in a treaty-limited environment, not a chance.
 

rooster

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 21, 2019
Messages
142
Reaction score
48
even the Columbia Class.
Frankly, I never understood the role of Columbia-class. Why not just build a ballistic-capable variant of "Virginia"? Yes, it may lose a bit in capabilities, but it would be an order of magnitude cheaper, and gave a great commonality in maintenance and crew training.
I would think that by the time Virginia is modified that the costs and requirements basically lead it to become close enough to a Columbia that the Columbia makes more sense. Are we not arming Virginia now with nuclear tipped tomahawks or isn't there talk about that?
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
123
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,211
Reaction score
196
Senators Reed and Inhofe laying out the case for well-made plans, prototypes, and testing.
We believe this is a critical juncture and opportunity for all of us to do better on lead ships. To this end, we call for—and are encouraging with this year’s National Defense Authorization Act—the return to an Aegis-type development model in which critical subsystems are matured before the Navy procures the lead ship of a new class. This development should be based on a detailed understanding of the systems engineering necessary to mature the subsystems and the technical integration needed to achieve overall platform performance. Without such an approach, we are convinced the cost overruns, schedule delays, and substandard performance that have defined Navy lead-ship development over the past two decades will continue. It does not have to be this way.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,056
Reaction score
1,095
Top