New term for the new class of US Navy ships

BOP

Well-Known Member
You might miss it, but it's the Cancellation Class.

(Another) U.S. Shipbuilding Disaster - The Constellation Class & U.S. Fleet Modernisation​


There's a lot that goes into having a capable navy - but being able to design and build quality warships usually helps.

Since the end of the Cold War the U.S. has been able to design and introduce a range of new designs including a new supercarrier and the Virginia class submarine.

But attempts to build new surface combatants have struggled. Zumwalt, LCS...and now the Constellation class Frigate.

Now announced as cancelled, Constellation (FFG-62) was meant to be a safer option, based on a proven parent design and critical to future US shipbuilding plans.

So today, we ask why the U.S. turned to a Frigate program, how it fit into the struggle to modernise the post cold war fleet, and what the end of the program might mean for the USN.


 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Haven't watched the video yet. During the Cold War, the Navy had no use for small surface combatants. If it couldn't keep up with the carrier group, which small combatants can't, the blue water Navy didn't want them. The LCS was supposed to be the Navy's answer for littoral (green water) operations, but that failed miserably. And Special Ops owns brown water operations.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
The Navy and contractors completely negated every possible benefit originally claimed by going with a "proven design"...the FREMM. They made so many changes and additions that, in typical NAVSEA fashion, they created an overpriced turd.
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
. They made so many changes and additions that they created an overpriced turd.
Isn’t that the standard protocol for every military contract?

i’m thinking all the way back to the book the Pentagon wars.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Isn’t that the standard protocol for every military contract?

i’m thinking all the way back to the book the Pentagon wars.
Yes, but....the justification for finally folding up and basing a major USN combatant ship on a foreign design was *gasp* a horror to even contemplate, justified ENTIRELY by all the cost savings that would certainly accrue. And still they totally blew it anyway.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Navy has made a snap decision to add ships by simply continuing production of the USCG NSC and paint them grey. This opinion of that from a person once very high up within USN/DoD:

Speed to fleet was the over-riding criteria for the choice. But if you want it bad, you will get it bad. And this choice is going to lead to a dog of a ship and combatant.

Oh boy...dog food again!
 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Navy has made a snap decision to add ships by simply continuing production of the USCG NSC and paint them grey. This opinion of that from a person once very high up within USN/DoD:



Oh boy...dog food again!
Quantity is a quality all on its own.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Who didn't see that debacle coming from a mile away. Navy should went with the Danish Absalon frigate design. The NSC seems to be doing well at the moment.
Going with a proven design is something the Navy is really good at. Google Constellation Class or FREMM. :killingme
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
Navy has made a snap decision to add ships by simply continuing production of the USCG NSC and paint them grey. This opinion of that from a person once very high up within USN/DoD:



Oh boy...dog food again!
With a quick change in leadership these can quickly be painted white and we can move on to the next cluster ****
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
And why a frigate anyways? Their purpose in life is to throw their bodies in the way of the important guys
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
The next step up then should have been a corvette then, just as useless at half the price
 
Top