One of the most annoying things about the Constellation class is that people complain about the fact that the US Navy bought an existing design and then modified it. Like, what was it supposed to do? Operate French and Italian radars, missiles, guns, sonars, combat systems?
Lol yeah it's makes no sense to operate them without integrating into domestic systems . Using korean , Euro systems make sense unless you want to shelve those ships to a very early retirement
All this talk about strengthening the atrophy in the shipbuilding industrial followed by cancelation of major shipbuilding programs that are sustaining whatever dwindling number of shipyards the US has left.
LCS deployment chart
F-35 program chart
US RCPFH 2024 vs 2025
But that causes more mods in the design and increases costs further . Ultimately i would like to conclude this rant ( for now ) by saying this happened because USN badly fucked up it's modernization from the end of the cold war to in the 2010's
Given USN preferring more capability in design. Also while Burke to Connie vls ratio is thing do consider Burke as a class has been on the production line for like 30 yrs and 32 vls is the general ASW FFG vls cell number , now there is option to make it bigger and give it 48 vls
Unless you wanted something like a MMSC/ Modded LCS/ NSC type frigate good and but not as capable and ASW capability bit ? And given the relatively short program to procurement timeline companies couldn't present a tailor made design.. wouldn't have made that much of difference
Keep in mind I have not read the latest figures and my knowledge is a bit rusty .Initial Constellation class are expected to cost to 1.2$ billion USD and eventually settling around 1 billion USD that's alot correct . USN initial thinking of 750 million USD frigate were fantasy
Thanks for listening into the rant will now change over to cost structure form the next post
The upgraded versions does but good luck making a USN specific version . Lastly we have some other competitors like MEKO and South Korean FFX all great but same problem integration of USN equipment and technical requirements
Next up Mogami , people often say they are cheap ..which is true but they aren't produced in US yards which would really drive up the price . Apart from the design changes required for radar and internals i don't think og Mogami evens passes the FFGX requirement of 16 vls min
Coming to next bit ,above were the FFGX competitors let's look at some of the other ships that are talked about.
Type 26 derivative - Basically CSC 2.0 given delays + adjustments in that program we would get a similar internet reaction
Is exactly new but for ASW duties the latter is much better.
Next come we have Modded LCS's
I don't think I need to ramble why they would have been a suboptimal choice . Between having less vls , being derived from not so optimal FFG design you get the point
F-100
Very nice ship , has more cells and already equipped with USN standard equipment would have been produced in BiW iirc so much less workforce related delay probably too . But the fundamental problem as i understand is it's a AAW design and bit old one that not saying FREMM
They can hire alot , there is no wartime push for quick construction ( or for people join ) and maybe salary isn't enough to stay in Marinette . In the next section i will see what people generally propose and the pro and cons of that ( mostly cons )
Cause of delay it's isn't the primary factor . The more important thing in the delays is FMM is running late they have workforce shortages and another program ( FMS Saudi MMSC) that need to be completed . So they are busy with that and recruitment of new employees and it's not
Continuing many people also can't understand USN has different technical requirements that has caused internal change + weight change , but again those become necessary given the whole structure of the ship is being changed for the USN . P.S from what I understand while it's a
(copy pasting my rant)I have come to conclusion most people have no idea what's going with the FFG program. First getting the basics out of the way , modifications are necessary you can't expect a USN ship to be operating on Italian equipment like USN have different radars , VLS , missiles etc (1/n)
So I made a Substack and made bigger version of the F-22 development thread , still a newbie so any criticism /thoughts would be appreciated. open.substack.com/pub/geopolit...
END 🧵 (17/17)
Sources
1)1)https://secwww.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/content/techdigest/pdf/V16-N04/16-04-APLteam.pdf
2)https://secwww.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/Content/techdigest/pdf/V23-N2-3/23-02-Grant.pdf
3)https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/event/171214_RADM_Hill_CSIS_USNI.pdf
CEC Antenna evolution (16/n)
This also goes for TBM interception . What was once a concept can now be done in reality (15/n)
Over time USN has further enhanced CEC , by integrating more ships/planes and programs such as Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) which itself was built Forward Pass to extend the battle space (14/n)
In 2001 CEC faced its biggest test OPEVAL and TECHEVAL. It had 18 days of at-sea testing with 10 warships, 198 dedicated aircraft sorties, 43 drone presentations, and 29 missile firings and CEC excelled in every scenario . Notable this test was the one with the Big Crow aircraft (13/n)
Post this USS Dwight D. Eisenhower battlegroup
participated in a series of Joint Task Force-95 (JTF-95) exercises to further test out CEC.Such as cueing and composite tracking of a TBM target , CEC data was made available to Army Patriot and USMC Hawk Radars. (12/n)
In June 1994, a CEC-equipped battle group tested its capabilities at the AFWTF(Atlantic Fleet Weapons Test Facility). Sea-skimming drones and ECM aircraft simulated complex threats. The group practiced networked air defense under severe electronic countermeasures. (11/n)
Early testing and integration into units (10/n)
The CEC system was also integrated into CMS of CVN and Amphibs to provide better protection , along the Aegis DDGs (9/n)
