Home » News & Analysis » Littoral Combat Ship USS Jackson Completes First Full Ship Shock Trial Blast


Littoral Combat Ship USS Jackson Completes First Full Ship Shock Trial Blast

USS Jackson (LCS 6) successfully completed the first of three scheduled full ship shock trials June 10. US Navy photo.

USS Jackson (LCS 6) successfully completed the first of three scheduled full ship shock trials June 10. US Navy photo.

Littoral Combat Ship USS Jackson (LCS-6) successfully completed the first of three scheduled full ship shock trial blasts on June 10, the Navy announced today.

Jackson is the first ship since 2008 to undergo FSST, former Program Executive Officer for LCS Rear Adm. Brian Antonio told USNI News last month.

“The shock trials are designed to demonstrate the ship’s ability to withstand the effects of nearby underwater explosion and retain required capability,” according to a Navy statement.

Jackson returned to port at at Naval Station Mayport, Fla., for inspections, data collection and preparation for the next blast, scheduled in about two weeks.

Antonio said in the interview last month that the shots would come every two weeks and increase in severity.

“This is no kidding, things moving, stuff falling off of bulkheads,” he said.
“Some things are going to break. We have models that predict how electronics are going to move and cabinets are going to move, but some things are going to happen, and we’re going to learn a lot from this test.”

USS Milwaukee (LCS-5) will undergo the same test plan later in the summer.

  • Jffourquet

    6 six ships commissioned and 20 in varoius stage of building and now the Navy does the shock test! Too late to make any meaningful design changes now. The Navy is stuck w/ what it has bought. But who cares, it just lives and money and the admirals will alway be able to get more of both.

    • Lazarus

      Got news for you; the Navy’s flag officers care deeply about the people that sail in the nation’s warships.

      • PolicyWonk

        In most cases I’m convinced you are correct. However, not all of the navy is firing on all cylinders. In the case with LCS, you might recall in the earlier days the claim out of the LCS program office (when being severely criticized for building ships based on commercial standards), was that the LCS sea-frames would be reinforced sufficiently so that if hit in battle, they would sink slowly enough for the crew to abandon ship.

        This baffling, and less-than-lucid argument ignited something of a firestorm, which then compelled the LCS program office to claim that a major part of the reason for the staggering cost increases were due to upgrading the sea-frames (while a-building on the slipways) to the level-1 standard.

        Then, maybe a year ago, Defense Industry Daily published an article citing the lamentable fact that the LCS program office finally admitted that no version of LCS, present or future, would ever meet the Navy’s level-1 standard (note that common fleet oilers are built to the level-2 standard – which is notable, because its a noncombatant). They knew this was the case long ago, and deliberately lied to Congress and the American taxpayers in order to keep the LCS CWPO (corporate welfare program office) in business. Yet no court-martials, no demotions, no BCD’s, no investigations, no nothing.

        The current story w/r/t LCS, is that if hit, it’ll have to leave the area, and “retire” from the battlespace.

        Note that who ever the adversary is will have a say in that matter.

  • Ash

    This was the right time. You have to understand first of class builds and the time to incorporate change to appreciate the more complex test events such as these. This will provide valuable data for future decision making.

  • @USS_Fallujah

    The eternal fight between “We need to get these ship to sea and see what they can do & Integrate them into the fleet” and “We need to thoroughly vet these ship before we send them into harm’s way” continues, without resolution.

  • Ed L

    Did the Jackson make it under back to port under it’s own power?

    • JonLo

      Yes it did. Quite quickly too actually.

  • PolicyWonk

    Sir,

    There is a significant difference between all of the classes you list above and what is called the “Littoral Combat Ship”: No one questioned or doubted the engineering, survivability, and design intent of any of the sea-frames you list.

    The LCS, which former CNO Adm. Jonathan Greenert admitted in an interview on Breaking Defense, that the (so-called) “Littoral Combat Ship” was “never intended to venture into the littorals to engage in combat”, has been controversial from the start. The USN’s own Inspector General issued a scathing report (as has every other auditing agency) declaring that “neither version of LCS is likely to survive the missions commanders where likely to assign it…”.

    Under-gunned, under-protected, little room for growth, turned down by every ally that was initially interested (all saying it was far too expensive given the small ROI), too large for the littorals, too small for blue water, and if you include a mission package – as expensive as our allies high-end frigates with few of the benefits – it shouldn’t come as any surprise that people are unimpressed. Even worse, the so-called “FF/SSC” variants of what is deceitfully given the moniker of “Littoral Combat Ship” will not only cost considerably more than its predecessors (therefore exceeding the cost of our allies high-end frigates), but will (according to DOT&E) merely be a “marginal improvement” over what the taxpayers are currently paying for.

  • Sayit Strait

    Big deal, this is like testing a tank by firing a shot near it. Not a real test.
    An actual torpedo explodes under the ship. Try that next.