3 ms·
> TFA says the motivator is lack of capabilities against China. If the LCSs can be easily retrofitted to add capabilities, why not do so? I don't think that's
by riku_iki 4y ago
> TFA says the motivator is lack of capabilities against China. If the LCSs can be easily retrofitted to add capabilities, why not do so?
I don't think that's the issue. LCSs are small ships which goal to do small missions which would be much more expensive to do on large ships, cruisers for example. I don't think confronting China was their goal ever.
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoConceptual design started around 2001. Well, in 2001, China didn't have the navy it did today. If they didn't "skate to where the puck is going", they could easily have built a ship for countering what China was in 1995.
- riku_iki 4y agoUS navy has other ships with missions to counter China.
- ImPostingOnHN 4y agoyou don't think what is the issue? TFA does indeed say that the motivator is lack of capabilities against China if I understand correctly, the LCSs were built to be easily retrofitted to add capabilities, as long as none of those capabilities are any we actually need
- riku_iki 4y agowhat is tfa? > if I understand correctly, the LCSs were built to be easily retrofitted to add capabilities, as long as none of those capabilities are any we actually need yes, but they were not intended to have strike capabilities, nor operate in deep sea as required to confront China in that region, that's why they called littoral.