If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Wired: "The US Navy's new class of ship is about to be deployed. Here's how to destroy them"   (wired.com) divider line 75
    More: Stupid, Fighting Ship, warships, vice admirals, corrosion, loading  
•       •       •

9031 clicks; posted to Geek » on 15 Jan 2013 at 4:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-15 03:55:37 PM
It's a Littoral combat ship. Can't you C it will be hard to find?
 
2013-01-15 04:04:57 PM

moran_moran: It's a Littoral combat ship. Can't you C it will be hard to find?


Like searching the waves for a little man in a boat?
 
2013-01-15 04:10:27 PM
Somehow, I don't think "shoot at it" is a huge secret
 
2013-01-15 04:12:46 PM
When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?
 
2013-01-15 04:44:16 PM
This is littorally the worst ship ever.
 
2013-01-15 04:46:11 PM
I'm sure Wired will be the downfall of the US Navy, subby.
 
2013-01-15 04:48:30 PM

AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?


USS Belknap and its aluminum superstructure after colliding with aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy in 1975, catching fire.

upload.wikimedia.org

/History often repeats itself unfortunately.
 
2013-01-15 04:52:21 PM
www.geekvintage.com
Four of these?
 
2013-01-15 04:55:39 PM
Unless it has 2 CIWS, a 64 cell VLS and armour it will not have much of a chance in a real combat situation.
 
2013-01-15 04:56:41 PM
So, which congressional district was this built in? I just want to know where all the pork is going.
 
2013-01-15 04:57:39 PM

Ennuipoet: [www.geekvintage.com image 210x110]
Four of these?


No ... ONE of those.
 
2013-01-15 05:03:37 PM

t3knomanser: So, which congressional district was this built in? I just want to know where all the pork is going.


Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin.
 
2013-01-15 05:10:42 PM
Whatever direction the Navy was thinking of going in to stay relevant in today's threat environment....this is NOT IT.
 
2013-01-15 05:13:27 PM
Freedom of "Speech"? Sure. Freedom of "the Press"? I think it is time for some new, common sense based regulation.

/snark
 
2013-01-15 05:31:39 PM
55 of these? Really? What a waste. This money would be better invested in paying down the national debt.

US Defense Industry. Protecting your freedom the US Defense Industry.
 
2013-01-15 05:31:54 PM

doyner: Ennuipoet: [www.geekvintage.com image 210x110]
Four of these?

No ... ONE of those.


This game sucks!
 
2013-01-15 05:39:33 PM
Abandon ship!
 
2013-01-15 05:40:36 PM
 
2013-01-15 05:45:04 PM

AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?


Mostly every superstructure is aluminum as far back as the USS Long Beach (constr began in '57 commish in '61). At least the ladders were steel.

I'd have to look it up but I remember a nightmare story where a firefighting team was sent into an burning engine room and couldn't retreat because the aluminum ladders melted from the heat. They all suffocated when their OBA's ran out of air (about an hours worth IIRC) that was in the late 80's but I don't remember how old the ship was.
 
2013-01-15 05:58:09 PM

t3knomanser: So, which congressional district was this built in? I just want to know where all the pork is going.


My question exactly. Who built this shiat?
 
2013-01-15 06:00:51 PM

Tr0mBoNe: Marinette Marine shipyard


Thank you. They should be ashamed...if for no other reason than to allow the shiatty guns on their otherwise fine vessel.
 
2013-01-15 06:13:15 PM

One Bad Apple: AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?

Mostly every superstructure is aluminum as far back as the USS Long Beach (constr began in '57 commish in '61). At least the ladders were steel.

I'd have to look it up but I remember a nightmare story where a firefighting team was sent into an burning engine room and couldn't retreat because the aluminum ladders melted from the heat. They all suffocated when their OBA's ran out of air (about an hours worth IIRC) that was in the late 80's but I don't remember how old the ship was.


I never got more than about 30 min of air on my OBA, I think it was rated for 45 minutes, but it never seemed to last that long.

My ship had steel ladders in the engineering spaces, but aluminum other places. Something like that could have very well happened, which is why they put steel in my engine room, 1982 construction.
 
2013-01-15 06:31:02 PM
Oh, this is DOTE's report to congress. They always complain that we don't do enough testing, and they're normally right. The problem is there's always money to buy crap, there's not ever enough to do testing properly. A LOT of crap gets pushed through that has to be fixed later.
 
2013-01-15 06:38:12 PM

One Bad Apple: AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?

Mostly every superstructure is aluminum as far back as the USS Long Beach (constr began in '57 commish in '61). At least the ladders were steel.

I'd have to look it up but I remember a nightmare story where a firefighting team was sent into an burning engine room and couldn't retreat because the aluminum ladders melted from the heat. They all suffocated when their OBA's ran out of air (about an hours worth IIRC) that was in the late 80's but I don't remember how old the ship was.


Burke's are all steel.
 
2013-01-15 06:42:22 PM

the_innkeeper: Burke's are all steel.


...and a very mature platform with a great modernization track record.  We should be building more of them IMO.
 
2013-01-15 06:52:07 PM
I think the LHD is also all steel, but that's pretty damn close to an aircraft carrier.
 
2013-01-15 06:52:47 PM
You know what we should keep doing? Building giant ships, complex aircraft, and cumbersome land vehicles that require expensive, specialized infrastructure, personnel trained on systems so specific that not only can they only do "that one thing", but their skills are useless outside of the military, and take so long to research develop, and build that by the time they deploy, any enemy with a real chance of doing harm to them and their crew already knows how to do so.

What we SHOULDN'T do is spend the same money on developing swarms, fleets, and armies of disposable remotely piloted drones that reduce our loss of life, requisites for a deployed force, and necessary support infrastructure, because then we wouldn't have billions (trillions) of dollars of military contractor welfare handed out to companies (and the select few who decide where those dollars go) while not being accountable for any of it.

/woo america
 
2013-01-15 06:55:39 PM
Sorry Ike, we should have listened to you, but in the 60's businesses realized they can vote themselves money and they've been at the trough ever since.
 
2013-01-15 06:56:50 PM

Richard Saunders: moran_moran: It's a Littoral combat ship. Can't you C it will be hard to find?

Like searching the waves for a little man in a boat?


But stealth could be countered if the enemy were to intercept our communications. Loose lips sink ships.

Perhaps the Navy would employ Navajo code talkers, so that we would only be vulnerable to an enemy with cunning linguists.
 
2013-01-15 06:58:28 PM

whither_apophis: Sorry Ike, we should have listened to you, but in the 60's businesses realized they can vote themselves money and they've been at the trough ever since.


Damnable simulpost. Mine took too long to type.
 
2013-01-15 07:02:30 PM
And I suspect the control software was written in Ada, the language that's never done.
 
2013-01-15 07:04:14 PM

Relatively Obscure: I'm sure Wired will be the downfall of the US Navy, subby.


Well wouldn't know it's not combat ready if nobody revealed that fact. We should be talking about the corbomite device it definitely has that makes it impervious to any attack and will utterly destroy the attacker.
 
2013-01-15 07:07:47 PM
I see no such information in the article, subtard.

If the people of the US bought a lemon with their defense budget, they have a right to know.
 
2013-01-15 07:10:40 PM

Nem Wan: Relatively Obscure: I'm sure Wired will be the downfall of the US Navy, subby.

Well wouldn't know it's not combat ready if nobody revealed that fact. We should be talking about the corbomite device it definitely has that makes it impervious to any attack and will utterly destroy the attacker.


Not to mention the fact that the daily rum ration has been replaced with tranya.

I hope the crew will relish it as much as I.

*sip* ahhhh

HAAA, HA-HAAA, HA HA, HA HA HA HA HA
 
2013-01-15 07:19:55 PM

grinding_journalist: ...
What we SHOULDN'T do is spend the same money on developing swarms, fleets, and armies of disposable remotely piloted drones...

You sound like you'll help me find Sarah Connor. Would you happen to know where she is?

 
2013-01-15 07:20:08 PM
fark you. It was $670 million of stimulating the economy. When it's destroyed and rebuilt, that much more economy stimulating.
 
2013-01-15 07:21:06 PM
Ack. Bad formatting on that last one. Sorry.
 
2013-01-15 07:29:54 PM
A Navy vessel that doesn't work and will require extensive and expensive design fixes to correct.  Lemme guess, Lockheed or General-Dynamics is the builder...

USS Freedom (LCS-1) is produced by the Lockheed Martin consortium, in competition with the General Dynamics-designed USS Independence

Can we nuke those two from orbit already?  Farking corporate welfare and theft at its worse.
 
2013-01-15 07:41:11 PM

Dinjiin: A Navy vessel that doesn't work and will require extensive and expensive design fixes to correct.  Lemme guess, Lockheed or General-Dynamics is the builder...

USS Freedom (LCS-1) is produced by the Lockheed Martin consortium, in competition with the General Dynamics-designed USS Independence

Can we nuke those two from orbit already?  Farking corporate welfare and theft at its worse.


Was just onboard LCS-1 about an hour ago, dealing with a hanger door issue. Getting a kick, etc.
 
2013-01-15 07:56:32 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Somehow, I don't think "shoot at it" is a huge secret


No, but knowing it can't target you or shoot back is a big plus when it comes time for you to pick a target.
 
2013-01-15 08:06:15 PM
I agree that our overall defense spending is far excessive, but honestly the complaints sound the same as every new piece of military hardware in the last 50 years. If it performs it's role effectively will be the real test, regardless of what additional assets it ends up requiring to do so. Honestly, name ONE piece of modern military hardware that was released and everyone said 'holy shiatsnacks, this thing is amazing'.

/Disqualifying the SR-71 because it was, in fact, amazing.
//Also, it didn't get revealed until well past the new hardware shakedown and 'whoops, if you turn right with the left blinker on it explodes' stages.
 
2013-01-15 08:17:15 PM

AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?


Didn't they find out aluminum hulls, fires and salt water are not a good mix in Ww1??
 
2013-01-15 08:18:26 PM

LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly, name ONE piece of modern military hardware that was released and everyone said 'holy shiatsnacks, this thing is amazing'.


Armed Predator Drones.

See my previous post in this thread.
 
2013-01-15 08:54:39 PM

LowbrowDeluxe: I agree that our overall defense spending is far excessive, but honestly the complaints sound the same as every new piece of military hardware in the last 50 years. If it performs it's role effectively will be the real test, regardless of what additional assets it ends up requiring to do so. Honestly, name ONE piece of modern military hardware that was released and everyone said 'holy shiatsnacks, this thing is amazing'.

/Disqualifying the SR-71 because it was, in fact, amazing.
//Also, it didn't get revealed until well past the new hardware shakedown and 'whoops, if you turn right with the left blinker on it explodes' stages.


The Switchblade SUAV?
 
2013-01-15 09:01:48 PM

LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly, name ONE piece of modern military hardware that was released and everyone said 'holy shiatsnacks, this thing is amazing'.


F117
 
2013-01-15 09:04:51 PM

LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly, name ONE piece of modern military hardware that was released and everyone said 'holy shiatsnacks, this thing is amazing'.


The X-37 seems like it might fit the bill if anyone knew what the fark it was up to.
 
2013-01-15 09:50:12 PM
Did any bothans die to get us this information?
 
2013-01-15 09:55:12 PM

jigger: fark you. It was $670 million of stimulating the economy. When it's destroyed and rebuilt, that much more economy stimulating.


You're a monster, Zorg.
 
2013-01-15 10:00:13 PM
This was spun off from a earlier idea that the navy needed more smaller ships. The navy then turned it into a ship 3X as large as recommended. Then to add insult to injury the price was originally estimated at 200 million each, then 400 million, and finally ballooned into a 650 million ship that has had serious issues. Not the least of it was the shipyard mixing steel and aluminum and not apparently understanding the issues that would result. They even tried blaming the navy claiming that the navy wasn't doing proper maintenance before a navy bean counter went all medieval on them as I recall.

I'd rather have the original idea, 1/3 the size, and a LOT less money for each boondoggle.

the modular design is great, but it would be better in a smaller vessel. And we would order a LOT more of them. More flexibility, faster integration of changes, and less eggs in one basket in a military environment.
 
2013-01-15 10:36:49 PM
Last I heard submarines cost a lot more than $670 million. So why is everyone so up in arms about this? Seems like a great deal to me. Sure it might have a few "resurfacing" issues, but a few lift bags ought to do the trick.
 
2013-01-15 10:37:38 PM
Sounds like the Navy just launched their own Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
Pentagon Wars anyone?
 
2013-01-15 10:56:34 PM

t3knomanser: So, which congressional district was this built in? I just want to know where all the pork is going.


Probably had parts made in at least 30 different states. That way it's tough to get a majority to vote against it as they will be bashed for killing jobs in their states come election time.
 
2013-01-15 11:02:27 PM
Ah, reminds me of the stealch destroyer they build that couldn't defend itself from short and medium range air assault, the most common method for destroying destroyers.
 
2013-01-15 11:09:47 PM
"Eez seemple. Vee vait for Amereekan sheeps to rust."

*frantic Cossack dancing*
 
2013-01-15 11:17:49 PM

AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?


The Independence (trimaran type) is 100% aluminum. SO glad I got retired before I'd have to worry about fighting fires on one of them. (Hull Tech)
 
2013-01-15 11:55:16 PM
700million for a coastal warship? Someone is getting fleeced.
 
2013-01-16 01:04:06 AM

iaazathot: Ah, reminds me of the stealch destroyer they build that couldn't defend itself from short and medium range air assault, the most common method for destroying destroyers.


An air assault from whom? The US has air superiority everywhere it goes. If it is a coalition aircraft and it is flying in US-controlled airspace, it either won't be flying for long or the US is letting it fly. Besides, most ships travel in groups that contain the full range of offense and defense.
 
2013-01-16 01:12:57 AM

AirForceVet: When I heard they were using an aluminum superstructure on the Littoral class, I was wondering didn't anyone remember the lessons from the 1970s?


The Pentagon Office of Ruminant Procurement is standing by in case a test is needed

i.imgur.com
 
2013-01-16 04:44:15 AM
At least they're finally getting around to designing and building the whiskers...

We should now expect to see the Seaquest being announced some time soon!
 
2013-01-16 05:04:33 AM

Tobin_Lam: iaazathot: Ah, reminds me of the stealch destroyer they build that couldn't defend itself from short and medium range air assault, the most common method for destroying destroyers.

An air assault from whom? The US has air superiority everywhere it goes. If it is a coalition aircraft and it is flying in US-controlled airspace, it either won't be flying for long or the US is letting it fly. Besides, most ships travel in groups that contain the full range of offense and defense.


While true about the air superiority part, I think you're wrong about the group travel part. The point of this ship's mine-sweeping and littoral functionality means a big part of its job is going to be outside the group. While it may still be under the protective umbrella of an AEGIS system, this is not necessarily going to be the case in a large percentage of its uses.

I think what they should have been going for is a supermegaPT boat, but they ended up with something like a castrated corvette.
 
2013-01-16 05:34:17 AM

The Snow Dog: Tobin_Lam: iaazathot: Ah, reminds me of the stealch destroyer they build that couldn't defend itself from short and medium range air assault, the most common method for destroying destroyers.

An air assault from whom? The US has air superiority everywhere it goes. If it is a coalition aircraft and it is flying in US-controlled airspace, it either won't be flying for long or the US is letting it fly. Besides, most ships travel in groups that contain the full range of offense and defense.

While true about the air superiority part, I think you're wrong about the group travel part. The point of this ship's mine-sweeping and littoral functionality means a big part of its job is going to be outside the group. While it may still be under the protective umbrella of an AEGIS system, this is not necessarily going to be the case in a large percentage of its uses.

I think what they should have been going for is a supermegaPT boat, but they ended up with something like a castrated corvette.


That's a good point.
 
2013-01-16 07:13:28 AM

grinding_journalist: You know what we should keep doing? Building giant ships, complex aircraft, and cumbersome land vehicles that require expensive, specialized infrastructure, personnel trained on systems so specific that not only can they only do "that one thing", but their skills are useless outside of the military, and take so long to research develop, and build that by the time they deploy, any enemy with a real chance of doing harm to them and their crew already knows how to do so.

What we SHOULDN'T do is spend the same money on developing swarms, fleets, and armies of disposable remotely piloted drones that reduce our loss of life, requisites for a deployed force, and necessary support infrastructure, because then we wouldn't have billions (trillions) of dollars of military contractor welfare handed out to companies (and the select few who decide where those dollars go) while not being accountable for any of it.

/woo america


Do you know what a littoral combat ship is?
 
2013-01-16 08:15:25 AM

meanmutton: grinding_journalist: You know what we should keep doing? Building giant ships, complex aircraft, and cumbersome land vehicles that require expensive, specialized infrastructure, personnel trained on systems so specific that not only can they only do "that one thing", but their skills are useless outside of the military, and take so long to research develop, and build that by the time they deploy, any enemy with a real chance of doing harm to them and their crew already knows how to do so.

What we SHOULDN'T do is spend the same money on developing swarms, fleets, and armies of disposable remotely piloted drones that reduce our loss of life, requisites for a deployed force, and necessary support infrastructure, because then we wouldn't have billions (trillions) of dollars of military contractor welfare handed out to companies (and the select few who decide where those dollars go) while not being accountable for any of it.

/woo america

Do you know what a littoral combat ship is?


Better than a figurative combat ship?
 
2013-01-16 09:33:18 AM

The Snow Dog: Tobin_Lam: iaazathot: Ah, reminds me of the stealch destroyer they build that couldn't defend itself from short and medium range air assault, the most common method for destroying destroyers.

An air assault from whom? The US has air superiority everywhere it goes. If it is a coalition aircraft and it is flying in US-controlled airspace, it either won't be flying for long or the US is letting it fly. Besides, most ships travel in groups that contain the full range of offense and defense.

While true about the air superiority part, I think you're wrong about the group travel part. The point of this ship's mine-sweeping and littoral functionality means a big part of its job is going to be outside the group. While it may still be under the protective umbrella of an AEGIS system, this is not necessarily going to be the case in a large percentage of its uses.

I think what they should have been going for is a supermegaPT boat, but they ended up with something like a castrated corvette.


Anti-ship missiles are the biggest threats. Not having a true multi layer defence system is the biggest problem with these little ships. If the missiles fail to get the silkworm then the gun can try. If that fails then it's up to the CIWS. If that fails... well... swim. The missiles on this ship are small and short range, the gun is the same that's on the Canadian frigates, and the missiles are actually the CIWS... I wouldn't want to drive this too far from my AEGIS equipped cruiser while transiting the straits of hormuz.
 
2013-01-16 09:46:49 AM
So have the Republicans started blaming Obama and his magical time machine yet?

You know they will. Never mind when the ships were designed or when the lead ship of the class was built or that it's military spending. Tremendously expensive government property doesn't work right? They'll be blaming Obama by sundown.
 
2013-01-16 10:33:02 AM
There is nothing in this article that anyone with any interest in destroying a ship like this didn't already know.
 
2013-01-16 10:48:01 AM

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: meanmutton: grinding_journalist: You know what we should keep doing? Building giant ships, complex aircraft, and cumbersome land vehicles that require expensive, specialized infrastructure, personnel trained on systems so specific that not only can they only do "that one thing", but their skills are useless outside of the military, and take so long to research develop, and build that by the time they deploy, any enemy with a real chance of doing harm to them and their crew already knows how to do so.

What we SHOULDN'T do is spend the same money on developing swarms, fleets, and armies of disposable remotely piloted drones that reduce our loss of life, requisites for a deployed force, and necessary support infrastructure, because then we wouldn't have billions (trillions) of dollars of military contractor welfare handed out to companies (and the select few who decide where those dollars go) while not being accountable for any of it.

/woo america

Do you know what a littoral combat ship is?

Better than a figurative combat ship?



d22zlbw5ff7yk5.cloudfront.net
 
2013-01-16 11:07:39 AM
Gilmore discloses that the Navy has "knowledge gaps related to the vulnerability of an aluminum ship structure to weapon-induced blast and fire damage,"

Let me help.

HMS Ardent burning:

c69011.r11.cf3.rackcdn.com

Everyone knows exactly how vulnerable aluminum ships are to blast and fire damage.

The LCS is built with aluminum for the same reason that beer cans are made of aluminum. Both are intended to be cheap and disposable. The navy just lacks the stones to say it out loud.
 
2013-01-16 11:23:41 AM
The Army built the M113 and the M2 out of aluminum. At least the M113 was cheap, even if it was a death trap for the crew and passengers if an IED or RPG hit it.
 
2013-01-16 11:55:15 AM
Admiral: You left dock without a tractor beam?
Captain: It doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

[later]

Admiral: Arm torpedoes to fire on my command.
Helmsman: Admiral! We don't have any torpedoes!
Admiral, to captain: Don't tell me - Tuesday?
 
2013-01-16 12:51:02 PM

Dinjiin: A Navy vessel that doesn't work and will require extensive and expensive design fixes to correct.  Lemme guess, Lockheed or General-Dynamics is the builder...

USS Freedom (LCS-1) is produced by the Lockheed Martin consortium, in competition with the General Dynamics-designed USS Independence

Can we nuke those two from orbit already?  Farking corporate welfare and theft at its worse.


Lets wait a little bit...my employer makes parts for GD (including M231/232 MACS extraction sleeves, made 285 of them myself just last night) and I believe we have a pending contract LM. Id like to keep the job maybe another year...so schedule the nukes for summer 2014, should be good by then.

We also did a test run of parts for Northrop/Grumman a couple months ago. Our next biggest cata gory of products is medical. We blow em up and fix em up.
 
2013-01-16 02:57:16 PM
Although it was already mentioned, this always needs to be posted in threads like these: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA. If you haven't seen this movie, you really should as it describes practically any military equipment development program.

You can just tell thats what happened with this, multi-missions, various capability, all hard to integrate and make work. Also the concept of a "disposable" ship is somewhat flawed as a ship that costs half a billion to a billion dollars each isn't all that disposable. This isn't to say we don't need something with a brown water capability but honestly if you want something you can afford to lose to operate in a hostile environment it needs to be something closer to a PT type boat or the boghammers the Iranians use.
 
2013-01-17 04:50:21 PM
FTA: The Navy ultimately wants to buy 55 of the ships.

Iran seen getting a price estimate on 55 cruise missiles.
 
2013-01-17 04:58:22 PM

AirForceVet:
USS Belknap and its aluminum superstructure after colliding with aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy in 1975, catching fire.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x525]


That'll buff right out.
 
2013-01-17 05:24:25 PM

MisterRonbo: FTA: The Navy ultimately wants to buy 55 of the ships.

Iran China seen getting a price estimate on 55 cruise missiles.


FTFY.
 
Displayed 75 of 75 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report