• Ed L

    looks like that would be a fun ride.

    • Stephen

      Paint it white & put a For Sale sign on it…

  • Corporatski Kittenbot 2.0

    “It is expected the Billings will return to drydock for upwards of 6 months to repair the damage to its hull incurred from being launched into water”

  • PolicyWonk

    Any ship that the USN commissions that isn’t capable of taking on (or protecting its crew from) a peer opponent in the same size class (or smaller) isn’t an asset – its a liability, and an easy target.

    • Lazarus

      The FFG 7 was hardly a match one on one verses the KRIVAK, the CG47’s were heavily outgunned by the KIROV’s, etc. Seems that is not a historically accurate assumption.

      • TheFightingIrish

        In terms of guns, the Russian ships outgunned us. With the exception of the Iowa’s, they always did. But, I think we had better missiles, especially the SM-1/2 series. And, I’ll bet had better radar and electronics too. Plus, the Perry’s carried 2 helicopters.

        The comparison between the CG-47’s and Kirov’s is a bit of a stretch. The Kirov’s were 827 feet long and displaced 28,000 tons. The CG-47’s were 567 feet long and displaced 9,800 tons. But, CG-47’s had the better radar.

        The CG-47’s were more similar to the Slava-class.

        The Kirov’s were more akin to the Iowa’s, in terms of being biggest, baddest, warship each side could field.

        • Stephen

          Russians have always over-armed their ships. Never proven, they sure looked ready for anything. We build sea-going boxes, a little top-heavy, and full of hope. Where are our Naval Architects? Build better ships, single-purpose, more classes…

        • Lazarus

          LCS also carries two helicopters. It is the stripped down model warship that can accept other systems as required. So far that has included harpoon and Hellfire; weapons LCS was never intended to carry when designed.

          • TheFightingIrish

            They mounted 4 Harpoon missiles on the Coronado last year in what was basically one-off test. It was the exception not the rule. And, Hellfire is only good for short-range engagements against much smaller opponents.

      • PolicyWonk

        Good Lord…

        Comparing what is classified as a battle-cruiser, double the size of and to a CG47, is simply preposterous. It seems that there is something about “same size class” (or smaller) that you’re not getting, because in this case you’re comparing apples to watermelons!

        And the FFG 7’s were at least able to defend themselves, and were built to take a beating. A Krivak would at least have to take an OHP as an adversary that could cause it some major damage – which is *entirely* unlike either LCS variant going up against any naval adversary in the same general size range.

        Unbelievable…

        • ElmCityAle

          I agree LCS should have better defenses, including a minimum of ESSM in VLS and the required fire control systems. However, if the FFGs were so great, why was there such a major update effort after the USS Stark incident? Answer: because they were unable to detect and engage anti-ship missiles, a rather large gap in their ability to defend themselves. Having the ability to throw SM-1s is not the same thing as being able to detect and kill certain targets.

        • Lazarus

          As usual. I really don’t think you understand modern naval combat. one on one measurements have NEVER been an accurate assessment of naval strength.

        • hollygreen9

          Ever hear of a Harpoon missile?