Navy's Newest LCS Little Rock

You both are missing the point of my comment about hammers and damage control plugs.

The items mentioned were used by incredibly untrained and unsupervised sailors to destroy main propulsion diesels because they didn’t know why water was leaking from a mysterious hole and what their stupid response would cost the American taxpayer. Twice!

If the vaunted SWOs on the bridge knew what they were doing there would be no need for heroic acts of damage control after running aground or colliding with merchant ships.

The surface navee is broken, it is incompetent and corrupt and the issues we laugh about here are only symptoms of a much larger problem.

1 Like

Freedom class LCS has Steel hull, aluminum superstructure. Same as the USN Cruisers… Don’t see many complaining about Ticonderoga class cruisers structural integrity.

Tico’s were based on the proven Spruance Destroyer hull. OHP FFG’s, were also steel hull aluminum superstructure, and also proved quite robust in over 30 years of service.

Ssssshhh, They need some excuse to keep it out of sight until they figure out how to fix the latest screwup.

Maybe it’s just real thin steel or they are worried about scratching the boot top paint.

Let’s see the Brits had vessels that could not take the heat in the Gulf and now the USN has a baby ship Iced in on the Lakes.

If we ever get into a shooting war we’re screwed!

Unfortunately the Navy and our Allies are keeping alive one American military tradition that dates back centuries… they are fighting the last war they won. We lost Korea and Vietnam because we mistook it for WWII. We lost to the Nazi’s and Japan for way too long because we were prepaired for Fighting another WWI…

Today we are screwing ip because we are still fighting by the cold war rules of outspend and crank out new technology. Except that our Navy’s primary concern is China who we can’t outspend because they have too much of our money. And we can’t out do them on the technology front because it’s impossible to keep secrets in the internet age.

Bottom line is… we have already lost the next war regardless of how long it takes for the first shot to be fired.

1 Like

I disagree. This forum is chock full of Masters, Cheif Wngineers, NavArch’s and even a few Salvage Masters… no professional mariner with experience in any of those titles needs to actually sail a dog inorder to recoginze one!

Thay said, yes, you are :100: regarding the education, training and raw potential of the average American sailor. Problem is that today’s world is highly complex and tomorrow’s war is going to mind blowingly so. The way you overcome complexity in the modern world is by making yourself as simple and your information and resources as well integrated as possible. The Navy has done a fairly good job of this internally which would be fine if they were going to fight the next war on their own… but that is NOT going to happen. Shit will fall apart and countless Americans will die before the Navy realizes that it must fight alongside ALL of America’s assets including the USA, USAF, USMC, USCG, CIA, FBI and US Merchant Marine.

@tugsailor, Is right we need simple and hardened ships and lots of them. But we also need all those other services spending time on those ships and (and those of close allies) and Navy personel spending lots of time in the field with other units (including Merchant Ships).

What will win us the next war despite peacetime incompetence will be the same thing that won us previous wars which caught us with our pants down… and that is good old American Work Ethic, American Inginuity, A willingness to take risk and, most important, American TEAMWORK.

Untill that happens we are fucked. We sinply can’t do anything untill the US Navy learns to play well with others on their own team starting with the organizations closest to them (i.e. USCG & USMM).

1 Like

I was speaking specifically about LITTLE ROCK being held up for weather or repairs. There’s a very valid debate as to whether the LCS concept and execution is a “dog”. The Little Crappy Ship was never the one the sailors would have picked, but those decisions are made by acquisitions people and leadership, not by the people who have to figure out how to make it work. I remember when the USCG showed up on our pier with their newest NSC and thinking “geez, we should’ve just bought that and painted it grey”.

The fundamental problem with LCS isn’t operational, it’s that it had to be a success. In an ideal world they would have ordered one and tested the concept (and found out it didn’t work). Instead they ordered 50 and said it was going to comprise a sixth of the surface fleet. Now they’re having to come face to face with their failure, and they’re just papering over it with the new frigate program. This isn’t a new phenomenon either; it’s what make the Navy invent blue camouflage, issue it to all hands, figure out it’s flammable, and now are replacing it with new green camouflage. That sailors afloat still won’t wear because they wear coveralls. Except that mistake cost just millions, not billions.

I’m also not convinced that more teamwork is the answer either. Jointness is hard on the Navy, because the joint environment is Army dominated, and the Army has no interest or understanding of operating at sea. Big Navy would be better served bringing the Marines back from land-locked Afghanistan and more closely integrating with them and their attendant land expertise.

The biggest danger though isn’t the Army, but infighting in the Navy itself. SWOs only comprise about 10% of the Navy’s officer corps. The rest are pilots, submariners, SEALs, doctors, nurses, bandmasters, lawyers, and a whole bunch of people who think the Navy would be a great place to work if it weren’t for those pesky ships. Navy bases task Navy ships to give bodies to working parties - a complete inverse of the way things are supposed to work. Power sharing agreements mean that there will always be “fair” representation among the admirals for SWOs, submariners and pilots, but this ignores the fact that not all communities were created equal. The Navy is losing its seagoing roots, and that’s what will cause it to lose the next war.


Well said. Its an over-complicated platform for an under-complicated job equipped with crew who are stat-sheet assigned regardless of their actual suitability for such a platform. Regardless, the mention (on this forum and others) that the ships require 3rd party contractor labor to correct anything other than routine maintenance is, if true, a gargantuan fuckup on all fronts.


Ha, last week my wife deagged me into an upscale vintage clothing store with a section labled “military cool” and, while the prices where ridiculous, I really wanted to buy an old wool pea coat, navy wwii wool coveralls and everything else They had (except bellbottoms).

Untill the Camo’s started coming into fashion at Navy Bases around the world… the Navy had the best looking, most practical and comfortable clothig ever made.

1 Like

You are :100: correct here but only because you are looking at the problem from the wrong direction. I did not say anything about Admirals and Generals cooperating. What is needed is sailors and soldiers cooperating!!! And that can be done simply by reassigning people (lots of them including civilians) for tours on Navy ships (and vise versa!). Do THAT and the flag officers won’t be able to stop them from working together and kicking the enemies ass during the next war! Trickle down economics does not work, nor does communism.

What works is teamwork, hands on cooperation and free (and honest!) communication between stakeholders at the NCO and JR officer levels without too many dictates from up top.

I’ve been in a very small handfull of situations at sea that I should not have lived through… and each time we made it through when all stake holders put aside differences and the Captain got out of our way. And while I do not have a record of any of those incidents… you only have to look at the true (not hollywood) story of the Maersk Alabama. What other nation’s ships did as well and worked together as well as the crew of that ship? What other ship boarded by pirates displayed that level of ingenuity? None.

I’m not trying to wave the ptriotic flag here (me and my fellow americans have many weaknesses!) but our strenght is out ingenuity and Can Do spirit when (and only when) the high brass gives us the recorces and freedom to engineer our own sucess. That is American spirit and THAT is what will win any war i. The past present or future!

All this talk about how crappy the LCS is… every casualty the ship had can be attributed to simple mistakes by the crew costing millions, not the design of the ship.

The ship has the same certified gear ran in fast farries continuously.

No, I have to agree with Steamer on this one “I don’t think anyone in the navee is capable of being embarrassed. The people “in charge” seem to have no sense of shame or duty to the taxpayer or anyone else.”

1 Like

Yes but how many people with seatime aboard a fast ferry does this ship have?!?

This isn’t the ships fault.

1 Like

Have you tried asking officers with both fast ferry and naval experience if they would prefer to take this type of ship into combat?

I’ve actually worked directly with both DMEC (Duke Marine Engineering Consultants) and crews of these ships. They rightfully complain due trying to make a relatively minimally manned ship work in the bureaucratic system of the Navy that requires many more people, and a Squadron (shore side) that doesn’t take the burden off like it should. This system leads to the problems and complaining, the equipment on the ship however is standard.

We are discussing two different topics, reliability and combat effectiveness.

Every case study revealed that the breakdowns of the ship are fully attributed to the crew, not the ship.

Now combat is a very wide term. if you mean mine warfare and running an RMMV into the mine zone controlled from the ship vice sailing an Avenger class MCM through the mine field with me on it, I’ll chose LCS (as would most).

Another “combat” scenario the LCS was designed for would be fighting small FAC/FIAC. Compared to a cyclone class patrol ship or a LCS, again I would chose LCS with the longbow missile, bigger gun and higher top speed, more weapons. This is one hull it was designed to replace. I would argue most would agree as well.

A third “combat” option would be maritime interdiction operations. With two 11m RHIBs, I would chose LCS over mosts other ships for this.

NOW then, I assume your definition of combat is on the lines of a hollywood set and thus comparing LCS to a DDG or a CG. Of course everyone would rather be on one of those for SuW and AAW, but we wouldn’t compare a PC or MCM to one either. I would rather be on an aircraft carrier for SuW and AAW, not some skimpy cruiser…

I really don’t know why I’m defending it. Its just a fast ship with ABS certified equipment. Nothing special, but I don’t believe the breakdowns are the ships fault. Are there better combat effect designs out there that would be more suited for our Navy? Absolutely. I’ve had too many beers tonight.


The Army operated more ships than the navee during WW2 so it is a fair bet that they had (and still have) an interest and understanding of operating at sea.

The Army doesn’t wreck their own ships because of operator incompetence. Mariner training in the Army leads to a USCG license and meets merchant marine standards of competence.

At least you got that part right. The biggest danger is internal to the navee.

I fully agree with you there.

Let’s hope and pray that there isn’t another war then.