Long article about the LCS

All Hi-Tech Developments for the Military and Civilian Sectors
Post Reply
Rocket J Squrriel
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm

Long article about the LCS

Post by Rocket J Squrriel »

Interesting how the crew let one of the engines on USS Freedom stay filled with seawater to go on a RIMPAC exercise. The brass pushed them *hard* to be out there. When they got back to port, the whole engine was rusted out.

https://gcaptain.com/a-deep-dive-us-nav ... g-failure/
In July 2016, warships from more than two dozen nations gathered off the coasts of Hawaii and Southern California to join the United States in the world’s largest naval exercise. The United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea and others sent hundreds of destroyers, aircraft carriers and warplanes. They streamed in long lines across the ocean, symbols of power and prestige.

The USS Freedom had its own special place within the armada. It was one of a new class of vessels known as littoral combat ships. The U.S. Navy had billed them as technical marvels — small, fast and light, able to combat enemies at sea, hunt mines and sink submarines.

In reality, the LCS was well on the way to becoming one of the worst boondoggles in the military’s long history of buying overpriced and underperforming weapons systems. Two of the $500 million ships had suffered embarrassing breakdowns in previous months. The Freedom’s performance during the exercise, showing off its ability to destroy underwater mines, was meant to rejuvenate the ships’ record on the world stage. The ship was historically important too; it was the first LCS built, the first in the water, commissioned just eight years prior.

But like the LCS program’s reputation, the Freedom was in bad shape. Dozens of pieces of equipment on board were undergoing repairs. Training crews for the new class of ships had proven more difficult than anticipated. The sailors aboard the Freedom had not passed an exam demonstrating their ability to operate some of the ship’s most important systems.

As the day to launch approached, the pressure mounted. Top officers visited the ship repeatedly. The Freedom’s sailors understood that theirs was a “no fail mission” with “‘no appetite’ to remain in port,” according to Navy documents obtained by ProPublica.

The Freedom’s Capt. Michael Wohnhaas consulted with his officers. Despite crippling problems that had left one of the ship’s engines inoperable, he and his superiors decided the vessel could rely on its three others for the exercise.

The Freedom completed its mission, but the accomplishment proved hollow. Five days after the ship returned to port, a maintenance check revealed that the faltering engine had suffered “galloping corrosion” from saltwater during the exercise. A sailor described the engine room as “a horror show” with rust eating away at the machinery. One of the Navy’s newest ships would spend the next two years undergoing repairs at a cost of millions.

It took investigators months to unravel the mystery of the engine’s breakdown. But this much was clear at the outset: The Freedom’s collapse was another unmistakable sign that the Navy had spent billions of dollars and more than a decade on warships with rampant and crippling flaws.
Johnnie Lyle
Posts: 2876
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:27 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Johnnie Lyle »

Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
Rocket J Squrriel
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Rocket J Squrriel »

Johnnie Lyle wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:21 am Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
When you get into the story its actually three things: flawed ships, flawed Navy, and politics.

How the admiral who dreamed up the debacle wanted things they were essentially impossible and/or would make the ships junk. Namely the demand of the 40+ knots and tiny crews. How the crew of the USS Freedom were getting technical advice from Navy 'experts' including a 'guru' on the east coast whose fix was nonsense. Many of the manual were in the language of wear the equipment was built. Like the ship's crane was Norwegian so the manual was in...you guessed it. SecNav Mabus torpedoed any attempts by the Navy to cut the planned buy of ships even when they didn't want them. It took a direct order from SecDef to stop interfering. Standard senators & congress critters and pork spending.

A lot of this is known but its in one nice, and tragic, story.
Poohbah
Posts: 2620
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Poohbah »

Johnnie Lyle wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:21 am Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
Add to that an utter inability to figure out (a) what the mission environment will be, and (b) how to fight and win in that environment.

The Little Crappy Ship came out of the Naval Postgraduate School's Streetfighter concept. Now they're developing the New Navy Fighting Machine. They're not content to screw up a class of ships, they want to screw up the entire Navy.
clancyphile
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 11:28 am

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by clancyphile »

Poohbah wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 4:04 am
Johnnie Lyle wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:21 am Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
Add to that an utter inability to figure out (a) what the mission environment will be, and (b) how to fight and win in that environment.

The Little Crappy Ship came out of the Naval Postgraduate School's Streetfighter concept. Now they're developing the New Navy Fighting Machine. They're not content to screw up a class of ships, they want to screw up the entire Navy.
And the armament they gave it was decent... for a Coast Guard cutter, not something you'd rely on to fight a war.

32-cell Mk41 VLS and SPY-1F were bare minimums to add on.

Not that the Freedom would have been a bad Coast Guard vessel as built...
https://dailycaller.com/2015/10/05/give ... s-reality/
Poohbah
Posts: 2620
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Poohbah »

clancyphile wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 12:56 pm
Poohbah wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 4:04 am
Johnnie Lyle wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:21 am Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
Add to that an utter inability to figure out (a) what the mission environment will be, and (b) how to fight and win in that environment.

The Little Crappy Ship came out of the Naval Postgraduate School's Streetfighter concept. Now they're developing the New Navy Fighting Machine. They're not content to screw up a class of ships, they want to screw up the entire Navy.
And the armament they gave it was decent... for a Coast Guard cutter, not something you'd rely on to fight a war.

32-cell Mk41 VLS and SPY-1F were bare minimums to add on.

Not that the Freedom would have been a bad Coast Guard vessel as built...
https://dailycaller.com/2015/10/05/give ... s-reality/
No, it was a horrible vessel and unfit for any military or revenue cutter mission. Part of the problem was that the design compromises needed to get that crazy speed level required a lot more maintenance, but the small crew meant a lot fewer man-hours would be available.

When you're so short-handed that the Captain has to participate in sweepers, you're doing it wrong.
Lukexcom
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:03 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Lukexcom »

ProPublica is piling on the LCS as well now, floating up the issues up to the mainstream’s ever-fickle attention.

https://www.propublica.org/article/how- ... ombat-ship
-Luke
Craiglxviii
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:25 am

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Craiglxviii »

Rocket J Squrriel wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 4:04 am
Johnnie Lyle wrote: Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:21 am Is the ship flawed, or the Navy?

The quoted excerpt reads a lot more like the latter - improper and insufficient training, maintenance, burned out crews and admirals who do not care.
When you get into the story its actually three things: flawed ships, flawed Navy, and politics.

How the admiral who dreamed up the debacle wanted things they were essentially impossible and/or would make the ships junk. Namely the demand of the 40+ knots and tiny crews. How the crew of the USS Freedom were getting technical advice from Navy 'experts' including a 'guru' on the east coast whose fix was nonsense. Many of the manual were in the language of wear the equipment was built. Like the ship's crane was Norwegian so the manual was in...you guessed it. SecNav Mabus torpedoed any attempts by the Navy to cut the planned buy of ships even when they didn't want them. It took a direct order from SecDef to stop interfering. Standard senators & congress critters and pork spending.

A lot of this is known but its in one nice, and tragic, story.
In my last job (finished in April this year) I worked for the company that supplied that crane, and many other bits of cargo handling kit of the USN (and other navies) besides.

Each crane (or indeed anything else they make & sell) is fully customisable. There are virtually no standard of the shelf products. That’s something I was (unsuccessfully) trying to change btw, but a story for another time.

However. LCS’ cranes. And the cargo handling equipment for the latest USN amphibs. And the last batch of USN blue water tugs. And the last batch of USN minehunters. All built in Kristiansand. LCS was unusual because the RFQ sent by the DoD specified that the cargo handling kit required had to be strictly off the shelf, commercially available. Now this was bonkers (and the sales guys said so); for no more money they could have a purpose built crane (or winch, hoist, hatch covers etc, it wasn’t just the crane they supplied for LCS)… we amend the design to suit the customer. No no, said the DoD buyer. You misunderstand. We want it as you would sell it with zero mods. It must be Commercial Off The Shelf. We have a box to tick. Hmm, well we have a base design, but it’s not what we usually sell to the USN. We could sell you a repeat of <insert name of last USN programme which took that crane>, it’ll be cheaper because we never build base spec designs as literally no one buys them.

The order duly came in for the base spec. Which of course had operating manuals, parts lists etc. in Norwegian.
Rocket J Squrriel
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 5:23 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Rocket J Squrriel »

Oh good gravy..... :roll: I should be shocked but I am not.
Jotun
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2022 8:27 pm
Location: Ze Bocage Mudflats

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Jotun »

From what I know about this clusterfuck of a project, the DoD and USN never really consulted with allied navies who had a lot more institutional knowledge about littoral naval combat than the USN. Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Turkiye come to mind immediately.

And if they did, the advice was not heeded. The complete package reads like "we have ideas for even rounder wheels that MUST be implemented, come hell or high water“. To me, it was a predetermined failure from day one.
kdahm
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2023 3:08 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by kdahm »

Jotun wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 7:00 pm From what I know about this clusterfuck of a project, the DoD and USN never really consulted with allied navies who had a lot more institutional knowledge about littoral naval combat than the USN. Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Turkiye come to mind immediately.

And if they did, the advice was not heeded. The complete package reads like "we have ideas for even rounder wheels that MUST be implemented, come hell or high water“. To me, it was a predetermined failure from day one.
Which is what Stuart was saying for years.

The only saving grace that he had was that it did give a platform for comparatively junior officers to get command responsibility.
Jotun
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2022 8:27 pm
Location: Ze Bocage Mudflats

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Jotun »

kdahm wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 7:02 pm
Jotun wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 7:00 pm From what I know about this clusterfuck of a project, the DoD and USN never really consulted with allied navies who had a lot more institutional knowledge about littoral naval combat than the USN. Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, Greece and Turkiye come to mind immediately.

And if they did, the advice was not heeded. The complete package reads like "we have ideas for even rounder wheels that MUST be implemented, come hell or high water“. To me, it was a predetermined failure from day one.
Which is what Stuart was saying for years.

The only saving grace that he had was that it did give a platform for comparatively junior officers to get command responsibility.
I do not have Stuart‘s expertise on subjects like this, but fifteen years as a sailor in one of the navies I mentioned gave me enough common f***ing sense to see immediately that the LCS concept was a turd the size of Mt. Everest. I made O-3. Do officers have to hand in their common sense when they advance past O-5 or 6? Hell, even as an E-3/4, I would have seen that. I was lucky to be able to read the German equivalent to Proceedings when I was a seaman on FGS Lütjens thanks to a several friendly and approachable officers, and that alone gave me enough knowledge to at least give an educated guess.
Then there is the politicians and high level bureaucrats…a plague the world over.
Primacy of politics can be detrimental…
Drunknsubmrnr
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2022 2:35 am

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Drunknsubmrnr »

I think Stuart also pointed out that against all odds the USN was actually able to make them work more or less ok.

That seems to be more a case of low expectations, but still something.
Poohbah
Posts: 2620
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 2:08 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Poohbah »

Little Crappy Ship
User avatar
jemhouston
Posts: 4191
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 12:38 am

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by jemhouston »

Jotun wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 7:12 pm

I do not have Stuart‘s expertise on subjects like this, but fifteen years as a sailor in one of the navies I mentioned gave me enough common f***ing sense to see immediately that the LCS concept was a turd the size of Mt. Everest. I made O-3. Do officers have to hand in their common sense when they advance past O-5 or 6? Hell, even as an E-3/4, I would have seen that. I was lucky to be able to read the German equivalent to Proceedings when I was a seaman on FGS Lütjens thanks to a several friendly and approachable officers, and that alone gave me enough knowledge to at least give an educated guess.
Then there is the politicians and high level bureaucrats…a plague the world over.
Primacy of politics can be detrimental…
Per reg 90% of officers have to hand in their common sense to make it past O-5. Of the remaining 10% most retire when they make O-6.
User avatar
Pdf27
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 10:49 pm

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Pdf27 »

Craiglxviii wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 4:34 pmHowever. LCS’ cranes. And the cargo handling equipment for the latest USN amphibs. And the last batch of USN blue water tugs. And the last batch of USN minehunters. All built in Kristiansand. LCS was unusual because the RFQ sent by the DoD specified that the cargo handling kit required had to be strictly off the shelf, commercially available. Now this was bonkers (and the sales guys said so); for no more money they could have a purpose built crane (or winch, hoist, hatch covers etc, it wasn’t just the crane they supplied for LCS)… we amend the design to suit the customer. No no, said the DoD buyer. You misunderstand. We want it as you would sell it with zero mods. It must be Commercial Off The Shelf. We have a box to tick. Hmm, well we have a base design, but it’s not what we usually sell to the USN. We could sell you a repeat of <insert name of last USN programme which took that crane>, it’ll be cheaper because we never build base spec designs as literally no one buys them.

The order duly came in for the base spec. Which of course had operating manuals, parts lists etc. in Norwegian.
I'm sorry, but your sales guy is a moron. The answer should have been to rapidly write a new base specification around the USN requirements and assure them that this is your COTS baseline (literally a matter of updating the website to say so, in which case it is even true).
War is less costly than servitude. The choice is always between Verdun and Dachau. - Jean Dutourd
Craiglxviii
Posts: 2276
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:25 am

Re: Long article about the LCS

Post by Craiglxviii »

Pdf27 wrote: Thu Dec 21, 2023 11:14 pm
Craiglxviii wrote: Sun Sep 10, 2023 4:34 pmHowever. LCS’ cranes. And the cargo handling equipment for the latest USN amphibs. And the last batch of USN blue water tugs. And the last batch of USN minehunters. All built in Kristiansand. LCS was unusual because the RFQ sent by the DoD specified that the cargo handling kit required had to be strictly off the shelf, commercially available. Now this was bonkers (and the sales guys said so); for no more money they could have a purpose built crane (or winch, hoist, hatch covers etc, it wasn’t just the crane they supplied for LCS)… we amend the design to suit the customer. No no, said the DoD buyer. You misunderstand. We want it as you would sell it with zero mods. It must be Commercial Off The Shelf. We have a box to tick. Hmm, well we have a base design, but it’s not what we usually sell to the USN. We could sell you a repeat of <insert name of last USN programme which took that crane>, it’ll be cheaper because we never build base spec designs as literally no one buys them.

The order duly came in for the base spec. Which of course had operating manuals, parts lists etc. in Norwegian.
I'm sorry, but your sales guy is a moron. The answer should have been to rapidly write a new base specification around the USN requirements and assure them that this is your COTS baseline (literally a matter of updating the website to say so, in which case it is even true).
Sales team is based in Norway. The People’s Democratic Republic of Norway. And yes, the sales team were crap. So bad in fact that the whole division was closed down late last year; there’s a reason I’m back in automotive!
Post Reply