PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AUKUS
Thread: AUKUS
View Single Post
Old 9th February 2024 | 20:29
  #1502 (permalink)  
SLXOwft
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 376
From: Hampshire
From what I understand the even the theoretically low risk conversion of FREMM to FFG-62 has had issues particularly with software development and integration. I will be interested to see how the Canadian Surface Combatant T26 adaptation progresses, but I don't think I would lose money betting on delays.

Number of VLS Tubes
Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the number of vertical launch system (VLS) missile tubes in the FFG-62 design. The VLS is the FFG-62’s principal (though not only) means of storing and launching missiles. FFG-62s are to each be equipped with 32 Mark 41 VLS tubes. (The Mark 41 is the Navy’s standard VLS design.)

Supporters of requiring each FFG-62 to be equipped with a larger number of VLS tubes, such as 48, might argue that FFG-62s are to be roughly three-quarters as large, and at least half as expensive to procure, as the Navy’s DDG-51 class destroyers, and might therefore be more appropriately equipped with at least 48 VLS tubes, which is one-half the number on recent DDG-51s. They might also argue that in a context of renewed great power competition with potential dversaries such as China, which is steadily improving its naval capabilities,29 it might be prudent to equip each FFG-62 with 48 rather than 32 VLS tubes each, and that doing so might only marginally increase FFG-62 unit procurement costs. They might also argue that equipping each FFG-62 with 48 rather than 32 VLS tubes will permit the Navy to more fully offset a substantial reduction in VLS tubes that the Navy’s surface fleet is projected to experience when the Navy’s 22 Ticonderoga (CG-47) class cruisers, which are each equipped with 122 VLS tubes, are retired, and provide a hedge against the possibility that Navy plans to field VLS tubes on Large Unmanned Surface Vehicles (LUSVs) will be slowed or curtailed for technical or other reasons.

Supporters of having each FFG-62 be equipped with 32 VLS tubes might argue that the analyses indicating a need for 32 VLS tubes already took improving adversary capabilities (as well as other U.S. Navy capabilities) into account. They might also argue that FFG-62s, in addition to having 32 VLS tubes, will also to have separate, deck-mounted box launchers for launching 16 anti-ship cruise missiles, as well as a separate, 21-cell Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) AAW missile launcher; that Navy plans continue to call for eventually deploying additional VLS tubes on LUSVs, which are to act as adjunct weapon magazines for the Navy’s manned surface combatants; and that increasing the number of VLS tubes on each FFG-62 from 32 to 48 would increase (even if only marginally) the procurement cost of a ship that is intended to be an
affordable supplement to the Navy’s cruisers and destroyers.

A May 14, 2019, Navy information paper on expanding the cost impact of expanding the FFG-62 VLS capacity from 32 cells to 48 cells states
To grow from a 32 Cell VLS to a 48 Cell VLS necessitates an increase in the length of the ship with a small beam increase and roughly a 200-ton increase in full load displacement. This will require a resizing of the ship, readdressing stability and seakeeping analyses, and adapting ship services to accommodate the additional 16 VLS cells.

A change of this nature would unnecessarily delay detail design by causing significant disruption to ship designs. Particularly the smaller ship designs. Potential competitors have already completed their Conceptual Designs and are entering the Detail Design and Construction competition with ship designs set to accommodate 32 cells.

The cost is estimated to increase between $16M [million] and $24M [million] per ship.This includes ship impacts and additional VLS cells.
Compared to an FFG-62 follow-on ship unit procurement cost of about $1.0 billion, the above estimated increase of $16 million to $24 million would equate to an increase in unit procurement cost of about 1.6% to about 2.4%.

Congeressional Research Service - Navy Constellation (FFG-62) Class Frigate Program: Background and Issues for Congress Updated December 20, 2023
I forgot to mention the workforce issues which are going to delay FFG-62 by at leat a year

ARLINGTON, Va. – The first Constellation-class guided-missile frigate will deliver at least a year late due in large part to workforce shortfalls at the Wisconsin yard where it’s built, USNI News has learned.

The service has briefed Congress that the future USS Constellation (FFG-62) could deliver in 2027 and that shipyard Fincantieri Marinette Marine has undergone an independent review to assess the delay, a legislative source confirmed to USNI News this week.

During a program briefing on Thursday at the annual Surface Navy Symposium, the deputy manager for the frigate program acknowledged potential schedule slippage in the program due to the workforce issues. When asked for a ballpark on the schedule, Andy Bosak told USNI News the assessment is “ongoing.”

“We do have challenge in the schedule. We are working that. Fincantieri has communicated to us of challenges within the schedule,” Bosak told USNI News.

“We are doing our analysis, as the Navy does, of doing deep dives of causes and effects and various different levers of which we can pull within that shipyard,” he added. “And we need to, as a program, work with our leadership, kind of figure out what we want to do. And from that, we will make that assessment as to what the actual schedule impact is of where we are. And that effort is ongoing.”

Following an earlier version of this post, Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro announced a review of Navy shipbuilding, citing concerns with the frigate program and the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine program. NAVSEA head Vice Adm. Jim Downey and assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition Nickolas Guertin will lead the evaluation.

“The American public should know that the Department of the Navy is committed to developing, delivering, and sustaining the finest warfighting capability to our Sailors and Marines,” Del Toro said in a statement. “We will continue to work with industry and all other stakeholders to strengthen our national shipbuilding capacity, both naval and commercial.”
USNI News - January 11, 2024 5:04 PM - Updated: January 11, 2024 9:59 PM

Last edited by SLXOwft; 9th February 2024 at 21:20. Reason: Workforce issues
SLXOwft is online now  
Reply