3 ms·
It is outside the mission scope of the littoral class of ship. They're not ice breakers, and frankly would be terrible ice breakers due to their tonnage. They'
by Someone1234 9y ago
It is outside the mission scope of the littoral class of ship. They're not ice breakers, and frankly would be terrible ice breakers due to their tonnage.
They're designed to sit close off of someone's coastline and "discourage" small boats (e.g. piracy, terrorism), detect submarines, and destroy mines. And definitely fits a niche some of the US's larger ships struggle to fulfil.
They're who you'd send in to deal with Somali Pirates for one example. Just have it patrol up and down the coast.
- dtparr 9y agoYeah, I'm not sure why this is big news. The headline reads to me like "Man buys McLaren P1 for $1M. Doesn't take it out of garage after winter storm covers roads in sheets of ice".
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago"Navy is not exited to be hard on it's $440m taxpayer funded new toy by using it as an icebreaker. Millions of taxpayers are outraged." (sarcasm should be obvious)
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jfoutz 9y agoTaxpayers wonder why the initial voyage went somewhere where the ship could be stuck for 3 months. Sure, they can train in port and that's probably a good move for an all new ship and crew, but losing even the option to go out to sea seems, well, odd. i'm not a sailor, maybe this is the best way to go.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y agoPart of it is there is a large body of officers below flag rank, and a few notable ones at flag rank(maybe the current CNO) who think the LCS is a waste of procurement resources, especially at half the cost of a major combatant. That and the Australians are getting a lot more bang for less buck.
- dtparr 9y agoSo, sure, I get people don't like it, but I don't think that's due to the fact that it can't serve effectively as an ice breaker. If this was another story about engines breaking down or something like that, sure, but as is I'm not sure why this is interesting.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y agoAbsolutely agree, but it's another excuse to poop on it. I don't expect real analysis of why it's a bad buy at half the price of a SSN for a sped up Island class capabilities from the press.
- megaman22 9y agoIt sounds like it's designed to fulfill the roles of the inexpensive WW2 PT boats, or Vietnam-era swift boats. I'm not sure why that role necessitates a half-billion dollar, complicated vessel... You could build quite a swarm of cheap, disposable craft for the same price tag.
- GCU-Empiricist 9y agoThe big price driver on it was the 50kt speed requirement. There's a big trade off between the threat of swarming small boats that can go that fast and the fact that the big boys fight with supersonic cruise missiles or naval gunfire.
- fludlight 9y agoIt sounds like the Navy wanted a Coast Guard cutter with better sensors but got carried away. Now they have a giant floating Bradley.