Skip to content
 
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.

(Popular Mechanics)   Littoral Combat ships being rejected for having motor, boat problems   (popularmechanics.com) divider line
    More: Facepalm, Littoral combat ship, Royal Navy, United States Navy, U.S. Navy, USS Detroit, World War II, Gas turbine, Ship  
•       •       •

1420 clicks; posted to STEM » on 23 Jan 2021 at 7:20 AM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



37 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-01-23 2:32:56 AM  
The two engines combined can push a Freedom-class LCS ship to a top speed of 40 knots, or 46 miles per hour on land.

They're amphibious too?
 
2021-01-23 2:53:40 AM  
Try harder. You'll eventually find the little man in the boat.
 
2021-01-23 3:14:02 AM  

whither_apophis: The two engines combined can push a Freedom-class LCS ship to a top speed of 40 knots, or 46 miles per hour on land.

They're amphibious too?


The article is even worse, there's four engines total, two of each.  Then again it's LCS so it being farked up is kinda appropriate.
 
2021-01-23 3:17:35 AM  

fragMasterFlash: Try harder. You'll eventually find the little man in the boat.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-23 3:53:59 AM  
I am littorally outraged.
 
2021-01-23 6:26:29 AM  
Those c.littoral ships are gonna be hard to find.
 
2021-01-23 7:27:43 AM  
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.comView Full Size


Get it? Because it sounds like-


Yeah. I get it.
 
2021-01-23 7:40:07 AM  
You got to be more cunning than that.
 
2021-01-23 7:44:19 AM  
Over-stimulation?
 
2021-01-23 8:04:24 AM  
Your not trying to rub out a smudge! Be gentle.
 
2021-01-23 8:04:39 AM  
*you're
 
2021-01-23 8:05:35 AM  
Maybe they should stick to home ownership.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-23 8:07:15 AM  
Just have the hideously expensive LCS that can't sail protect the hideously expensive Ford-class carriers that can't launch our hideously expensive F35s that can't fly.
 
2021-01-23 8:22:02 AM  
Littoraly unusable!
 
2021-01-23 8:28:08 AM  

fragMasterFlash: Try harder. You'll eventually find the little man in the boat.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-23 8:39:33 AM  

fragMasterFlash: Try harder. You'll eventually find the little man in the boat.


It helps to call a lady friend over and search together.
 
2021-01-23 8:46:37 AM  
Is this the one that capsized in New Zealand?
 
2021-01-23 10:08:38 AM  
Wait... Weren't these ships just launched to much fanfare about how awesome they were only a few years ago? And weren't they ridiculously expensive, too?

I really can't understand US military spending. You guys are nuts.
 
2021-01-23 11:04:45 AM  

SomeAmerican: Just have the hideously expensive LCS that can't sail protect the hideously expensive Ford-class carriers that can't launch our hideously expensive F35s that can't fly.


The F-35 is capable of working, LCS is so much worse.

/Subby, first greenlit too!
 
2021-01-23 11:15:33 AM  
What kind of weapon can you "zip in and out" of the range of at 46 mph?
A Senagalese fighting kite?
 
2021-01-23 11:17:35 AM  
Lockheed Martin?

Come on, guys! That's an airplane company.

Obvious mistake, it's no wonder you can't get the damn things to work in the water!
 
2021-01-23 11:19:22 AM  

whither_apophis: The two engines combined can push a Freedom-class LCS ship to a top speed of 40 knots, or 46 miles per hour on land.

They're amphibious too?


Not really.  They work best when moist.
 
2021-01-23 11:24:25 AM  
Look!

Fark user imageView Full Size


He's littorally outraged!
 
2021-01-23 11:42:52 AM  

uttertosh: I really can't understand US military spending. You guys are nuts.


This will explain it nicely
Pentagon Wars - Bradley Fighting Vehicle Evolution
Youtube aXQ2lO3ieBA
 
2021-01-23 11:47:45 AM  

leeksfromchichis: [encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 739x415]

Get it? Because it sounds like-


Mulva?
 
2021-01-23 11:51:20 AM  
Lockheed-Martin: when you absolutely, positively, need a Congresscritter to force the military to buy a POS that won't work and is over-priced.
 
2021-01-23 11:52:31 AM  

SomeAmerican: Just have the hideously expensive LCS that can't sail protect the hideously expensive Ford-class carriers that can't launch our hideously expensive F35s that can't fly.


Two reasons i periodically sell my lmt stock.
 
2021-01-23 11:55:29 AM  

bigdog1960: SomeAmerican: Just have the hideously expensive LCS that can't sail protect the hideously expensive Ford-class carriers that can't launch our hideously expensive F35s that can't fly.

Two reasons i periodically sell my lmt stock.


Also am hoping for layoff to start my retirement. I expect a 10% cut to military spending. It should start at 25%.
 
2021-01-23 12:10:53 PM  
Little Crappy Ship

The whole program needs to be shut down and the Navy needs to move on. LCS is a waste of money at this point. The ships would be put to better use by being turned into soda cans than anything they are used for now. In a shooting war they would be deathtraps and in peacetime they are a waste of sailors and money.
 
2021-01-23 12:24:08 PM  
I think they're more like Figurative Combat Ships.
 
2021-01-23 12:30:57 PM  

Vermithrax Perjorative: Little Crappy Ship

The whole program needs to be shut down and the Navy needs to move on. LCS is a waste of money at this point. The ships would be put to better use by being turned into soda cans than anything they are used for now. In a shooting war they would be deathtraps and in peacetime they are a waste of sailors and money.


LCS was like a tech demo / research ship
that for some reason they decided to build a whole class of
 
2021-01-23 12:41:56 PM  

Vermithrax Perjorative: Little Crappy Ship

The whole program needs to be shut down and the Navy needs to move on. LCS is a waste of money at this point. The ships would be put to better use by being turned into soda cans than anything they are used for now. In a shooting war they would be deathtraps and in peacetime they are a waste of sailors and money.


The entire concept was doomed from the start. They built the hulls before the planned "hot-swap" modules were even designed, much less produced (and said modules STILL do not exist). The super-complicated reduction gearing used to combine the effects of gas-turbine engines with diesel engines (which rotate at vastly different speeds) are incredibly sensitive and break down if anyone even thinks hard at them. The crews are so small, they can;t perform their own regular maintenance on the ship's systems- they have to fly contract workers to where the ship is located in order to get routine maintenance accomplished.

So we're left with hideously over-priced, ridiculously over-complicated, laughably under-armed floating grey turds which lack the range to cross any ocean. They have to be towed or carried as cargo to get anywhere. A pack of Cub Scouts with pocket knives in a zodiac could out-gun the ships. They're designed to operate close ashore- within the range of enemy small arms- but have no armor and very few weapons aboard. They're entirely helpless against air or submarine attacks. LCS ships are deathtraps for their crews, and cannot even survive accomplishing their assigned role.

For a LOT less money, the Navy could have bought useful, proven-design frigates/corvettes from Germany or Sweden and retrofitted them with advanced electronic systems. Those foreign-built ships have armor, guns, can cross oceans under their own power, and are in every way (except maximum speed) superior to the LCS.
 
2021-01-23 4:36:59 PM  

Konlii: Lockheed Martin?

Come on, guys! That's an airplane company.

Obvious mistake, it's no wonder you can't get the damn things to work in the water!

Didn't work for Airbus either.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-23 5:25:09 PM  

Wenchmaster: For a LOT less money, the Navy could have bought useful, proven-design frigates/corvettes from Germany or Sweden and retrofitted them with advanced electronic systems. Those foreign-built ships have armor, guns, can cross oceans under their own power, and are in every way (except maximum speed) superior to the LCS.


Which is what they eventually did after spending a couple billion on the LCS program.  The five finalists the Navy picked for the next generation frigate tender were designs that were already in service or were based on designs already in service.  They ended up going with the Italian FREMM design, which is presently in service with France, Italy, Morocco, and Egypt.

Side note:  Don't buy your frigates from the Germans, not even the Germans ended up wanting to buy frigates from the Germans.
 
2021-01-23 10:36:03 PM  

Colour_out_of_Space: I think they're more like Figurative Combat Ships.


This comment needs more funnies.
 
2021-01-24 1:16:07 PM  

Wenchmaster: Vermithrax Perjorative: Little Crappy Ship

The super-complicated reduction gearing used to combine the effects of gas-turbine engines with diesel engines (which rotate at vastly different speeds) are incredibly sensitive and break down if anyone even thinks hard at them.


Should have put alternators on the turbines and diesels and driven the props with electric motors. Put the drives in pods like some other ships already do. Extra bonus: all the electricity you could possibly use.

If a landlubber civilian like me can come up with that in 30 seconds, why can't Lockheed?
 
2021-01-24 4:53:27 PM  
General Dynamics did too good a job with the Independence class LCS, so to reduce future expectations, Congress decided to let Lockheed Martin do their normal shoddy, over budget thing with the Freedom class.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.