Utopia Talk - Politics - The US Navy's next frigate

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Dec 30 01:26:57 UTC 2025

Utopia Talk / Politics / The US Navy's next frigate

murder
rank Mon Dec 22 00:01:30
The U.S. Navy has confirmed its decision to acquire a new FF(X) frigate with a design based on the U.S. Coast Guard’s Legend class National Security Cutter, though there are immediate questions about its expected configuration. The new warships, the first of which is set to be launched in 2028, are intended to fill the gap left by the cancellation of the abortive Constellation class frigate program.

Read the rest here: https://ww...l-be-the-navys-new-ffx-frigate

Pillz
rank Mon Dec 22 00:17:19
This is fine. It'll cost less than designing a new frigate that's already obsolete, too.

All you need now is something to fill holes while you figure out naval drone strategy.

Rugian
rank Mon Dec 22 00:17:56
"The new warships, the first of which is set to be launched in 2028"

Anyone want to take a guess as to who it's going to be named after? :)

Pillz
rank Mon Dec 22 00:21:21
Should be named after Charlie Kirk

jergul
rank Mon Dec 22 12:54:49
Ruggy
Nah. Way too small a vessel. See what capital ships are due for commissioning before end of term.

Rugian
rank Tue Dec 23 01:56:33
Ahahahahhahahahabahahahaha

http://uto...hread=95417&time=1766447752058

Seb
rank Tue Dec 23 02:03:32
No vls? What's the point of them then?

Can't defend themselves or contribute meaningfully to strike.

tumbleweed
rank Tue Dec 23 02:12:09
"What's the point of them then?"

they will look nice

Trump says he will be involved in the design (makes total sense) & repeatedly has complained about ships not looking pleasing enough

murder
rank Tue Dec 23 07:14:55

"No vls? What's the point of them then?"

They will clear the oceans of lightly armed pirates.

-

Sam Adams
rank Tue Dec 23 08:23:32
"What's the point of them then?"

Sinking subs, long range patrol, training, sinking Venezuelan tankers, landing seals, all the baby stuff you don't task a real warship for but still do need reasonable length and mass for comfortable open ocean sailing at speed. Navies have successfully employed medium-light ships in this roll for at least 300 years. As long as we have no more than 5 to 10, that's fine.

Seb
rank Wed Dec 24 02:40:18
Sam:

They won't be sinking subs because without vlms they can only have CIWS so they are vulnerable to enemy aircraft or indeed subs armed with sub launched anti-ship missiles.

If they need to be in an escort group, that's kinda defeated the point of ASW frigates that need to operate autonomously to cover a large area.

The whole point of this class, as I understood it, was additional mass for strike groups and ASW.

Not having a VLMs is like a Napoleonic era frigate not having cannons but lots of men with muskets.

Your use cases here are essentially all peacetime. No utility at all in a major conflict and all tasks that would be de-prioritised in a conflict anyway - they don't really free any capacity to up - just completely pointless and moronic.

Needs a VLMs with a decent short range anti-air missile and option for anti-ship.

Then you've can use it for sub hunting etc.

Sam Adams
rank Wed Dec 24 05:18:14
”They won't be sinking subs because without vlms they can only have CIWS”

So no weapons exist other than those that fit in VLS cells? Retarded.

"Not having a VLMs is like a Napoleonic era frigate not having cannons but lots of men with muskets."

A bit ironic since one of your countries two heros in the war died at Trafalgar specifically due to a lack of musket fighters on his flagship.

Seb
rank Wed Dec 24 12:17:54
Sam Adams:

Nothing effective for an effective layered air and missile defence, no.

Seb
rank Wed Dec 24 12:21:47
Victory had loads of Marines and crew with small arms. So did the French.

But I'm not sure Nelson's plan at Trafalgar would have worked if his ships were predominantly armed with muskets.

Sam Adams
rank Sun Dec 28 21:00:53
Nelson had a handful of lightly armed frigates to scout and not fight much.

Oh gee it's almost like it's the same exact roll as the modern ship with the same name. Go figure.

Sam Adams
rank Sun Dec 28 21:07:21
"Victory had loads of Marines and crew with small arms.”

Ya but not allowed to fight properly because Nelson was afraid they might set the sails on fire. His one great mistake. Not that it had any effect on the final outcome. It just got him personally(probably)... It's possible he would have still been hit even if victory was properly manned by marines up high. His odds would certainly have gone up.

murder
rank Sun Dec 28 21:21:57

These things will be $1 billion per ship clay pigeons.

They would have been better off fixing the LCSs.

-

Habebe
rank Sun Dec 28 23:15:22
When will have Spacefprce space ships and space sharks with frigging laser beams on thete heads???

murder
rank Sun Dec 28 23:43:35

"By next year. The end of 2027 at the latest." -- Elon

Seb
rank Mon Dec 29 01:21:11
Sam:

Frigates were lightly armed in comparison to a ship of the line, but very much able to defend themselves against other frigates, and outrun a ship of the line.

A modern frigate without the ability to defend itself against anti-ship missiles or aircraft is like Nelson's frigates having no guns at all.

And an effective picket line

Seb
rank Mon Dec 29 01:22:37
*an effective picket ship needs to be able to have basic ability to defend itself from air and missile attack or it will not be able to operate outside of a task group. It will just get sunk quickly.

Habebe
rank Mon Dec 29 02:05:20
Sometimes I get the vibe the MIC just phones it in....the government flaunts useless weapons to just make their friends money.

murder
rank Mon Dec 29 13:19:30

There are competing interest involved. The easy solution would be to just make more Burkes faster. If you insist on saving some money, then just revert to a previous proven flight of the Burke's and equip them like they were going to equip the Constellation frigates.

Easy peasy.

But the Navy doesn't want more Burke's, they want a brand new ship because ... well the air force is getting new fighters and bombers. And they sure as hell wouldn't want smaller degraded Burkes. They want NEW.

Of course new means unproven, which means higher costs and slower development and production.

But the administration wants FAST because China ... and because Trump likes being able to claim that we have the largest Navy. It also wants cheap.

But fast and cheap means something already in production and proven, which means Legacy class cutters because that's the next largest class of combat(ish) ships we produce.

Of course those aren't designed for actual combat, so we're going to crank out coast guard cutters ... and send them to combat lightly armed pirates.

-

Seb
rank Mon Dec 29 14:26:21
Adapting cutters to be a light frigate ought to be easy. But it means a vls.

More ABs in a high-low mix seems sensible.

Or if this is about a dedicated ASW platform, the T26 is right there (missed out last time as not in the water): a big enough order book now (34) across Canada, Australia, Norway and UK that spiral development is possible, especially if the US went for it.

Seb
rank Mon Dec 29 14:32:28
I assume coastguard cutters are already built to military spec, even if not fitted for serious combat. If not, then that's an even worse idea.

You can just send a standard coast guard cutter to deal with pirates if the bulk of the USN was busy fighting China.

But it couldn't even do escort duty against the Yemeni done/missile threat without a decent short range VLS system. Totally pointless for the USN I'd have thought.

And I assume the mission spec is distributed ASW / air/missile picket until it's safe to move a carrier group forward.

Seb
rank Mon Dec 29 18:21:41
4500t is the same as the French FDI frigates that sport 8 Exocets and 16 to 32 vls cells for aster 15/30 as well as a similar load out of guns and CIWS air defence.

Also needs about 30 fewer crew to operate.

jergul
rank Mon Dec 29 19:27:27
Smaller vessels have endurance issues.

Sam Adams
rank Mon Dec 29 21:04:48
Seb why do you insist only VLS weapons are useful? This is very silly.

And jergul is correct. If you want to do a good job offshore for any amount of time you want a larger ship.

jergul
rank Mon Dec 29 23:51:26
The problem with VLS systems is simple. The US has more launch tubes than missiles to put in them. 8200 I think it is.

show deleted posts

murder rank	Mon Dec 22 00:01:30 The U.S. Navy has confirmed its decision to acquire a new FF(X) frigate with a design based on the U.S. Coast Guard’s Legend class National Security Cutter, though there are immediate questions about its expected configuration. The new warships, the first of which is set to be launched in 2028, are intended to fill the gap left by the cancellation of the abortive Constellation class frigate program. Read the rest here: https://ww...l-be-the-navys-new-ffx-frigate
Pillz rank	Mon Dec 22 00:17:19 This is fine. It'll cost less than designing a new frigate that's already obsolete, too. All you need now is something to fill holes while you figure out naval drone strategy.
Rugian rank	Mon Dec 22 00:17:56 "The new warships, the first of which is set to be launched in 2028" Anyone want to take a guess as to who it's going to be named after? :)
Pillz rank	Mon Dec 22 00:21:21 Should be named after Charlie Kirk
jergul rank	Mon Dec 22 12:54:49 Ruggy Nah. Way too small a vessel. See what capital ships are due for commissioning before end of term.
Rugian rank	Tue Dec 23 01:56:33 Ahahahahhahahahabahahahaha http://uto...hread=95417&time=1766447752058
Seb rank	Tue Dec 23 02:03:32 No vls? What's the point of them then? Can't defend themselves or contribute meaningfully to strike.
tumbleweed rank	Tue Dec 23 02:12:09 "What's the point of them then?" they will look nice Trump says he will be involved in the design (makes total sense) & repeatedly has complained about ships not looking pleasing enough
murder rank	Tue Dec 23 07:14:55 "No vls? What's the point of them then?" They will clear the oceans of lightly armed pirates. -
Sam Adams rank	Tue Dec 23 08:23:32 "What's the point of them then?" Sinking subs, long range patrol, training, sinking Venezuelan tankers, landing seals, all the baby stuff you don't task a real warship for but still do need reasonable length and mass for comfortable open ocean sailing at speed. Navies have successfully employed medium-light ships in this roll for at least 300 years. As long as we have no more than 5 to 10, that's fine.
Seb rank	Wed Dec 24 02:40:18 Sam: They won't be sinking subs because without vlms they can only have CIWS so they are vulnerable to enemy aircraft or indeed subs armed with sub launched anti-ship missiles. If they need to be in an escort group, that's kinda defeated the point of ASW frigates that need to operate autonomously to cover a large area. The whole point of this class, as I understood it, was additional mass for strike groups and ASW. Not having a VLMs is like a Napoleonic era frigate not having cannons but lots of men with muskets. Your use cases here are essentially all peacetime. No utility at all in a major conflict and all tasks that would be de-prioritised in a conflict anyway - they don't really free any capacity to up - just completely pointless and moronic. Needs a VLMs with a decent short range anti-air missile and option for anti-ship. Then you've can use it for sub hunting etc.
Sam Adams rank	Wed Dec 24 05:18:14 ”They won't be sinking subs because without vlms they can only have CIWS” So no weapons exist other than those that fit in VLS cells? Retarded. "Not having a VLMs is like a Napoleonic era frigate not having cannons but lots of men with muskets." A bit ironic since one of your countries two heros in the war died at Trafalgar specifically due to a lack of musket fighters on his flagship.
Seb rank	Wed Dec 24 12:17:54 Sam Adams: Nothing effective for an effective layered air and missile defence, no.
Seb rank	Wed Dec 24 12:21:47 Victory had loads of Marines and crew with small arms. So did the French. But I'm not sure Nelson's plan at Trafalgar would have worked if his ships were predominantly armed with muskets.
Sam Adams rank	Sun Dec 28 21:00:53 Nelson had a handful of lightly armed frigates to scout and not fight much. Oh gee it's almost like it's the same exact roll as the modern ship with the same name. Go figure.
Sam Adams rank	Sun Dec 28 21:07:21 "Victory had loads of Marines and crew with small arms.” Ya but not allowed to fight properly because Nelson was afraid they might set the sails on fire. His one great mistake. Not that it had any effect on the final outcome. It just got him personally(probably)... It's possible he would have still been hit even if victory was properly manned by marines up high. His odds would certainly have gone up.
murder rank	Sun Dec 28 21:21:57 These things will be $1 billion per ship clay pigeons. They would have been better off fixing the LCSs. -
Habebe rank	Sun Dec 28 23:15:22 When will have Spacefprce space ships and space sharks with frigging laser beams on thete heads???
murder rank	Sun Dec 28 23:43:35 "By next year. The end of 2027 at the latest." -- Elon
Seb rank	Mon Dec 29 01:21:11 Sam: Frigates were lightly armed in comparison to a ship of the line, but very much able to defend themselves against other frigates, and outrun a ship of the line. A modern frigate without the ability to defend itself against anti-ship missiles or aircraft is like Nelson's frigates having no guns at all. And an effective picket line
Seb rank	Mon Dec 29 01:22:37 *an effective picket ship needs to be able to have basic ability to defend itself from air and missile attack or it will not be able to operate outside of a task group. It will just get sunk quickly.
Habebe rank	Mon Dec 29 02:05:20 Sometimes I get the vibe the MIC just phones it in....the government flaunts useless weapons to just make their friends money.
murder rank	Mon Dec 29 13:19:30 There are competing interest involved. The easy solution would be to just make more Burkes faster. If you insist on saving some money, then just revert to a previous proven flight of the Burke's and equip them like they were going to equip the Constellation frigates. Easy peasy. But the Navy doesn't want more Burke's, they want a brand new ship because ... well the air force is getting new fighters and bombers. And they sure as hell wouldn't want smaller degraded Burkes. They want NEW. Of course new means unproven, which means higher costs and slower development and production. But the administration wants FAST because China ... and because Trump likes being able to claim that we have the largest Navy. It also wants cheap. But fast and cheap means something already in production and proven, which means Legacy class cutters because that's the next largest class of combat(ish) ships we produce. Of course those aren't designed for actual combat, so we're going to crank out coast guard cutters ... and send them to combat lightly armed pirates. -
Seb rank	Mon Dec 29 14:26:21 Adapting cutters to be a light frigate ought to be easy. But it means a vls. More ABs in a high-low mix seems sensible. Or if this is about a dedicated ASW platform, the T26 is right there (missed out last time as not in the water): a big enough order book now (34) across Canada, Australia, Norway and UK that spiral development is possible, especially if the US went for it.
Seb rank	Mon Dec 29 14:32:28 I assume coastguard cutters are already built to military spec, even if not fitted for serious combat. If not, then that's an even worse idea. You can just send a standard coast guard cutter to deal with pirates if the bulk of the USN was busy fighting China. But it couldn't even do escort duty against the Yemeni done/missile threat without a decent short range VLS system. Totally pointless for the USN I'd have thought. And I assume the mission spec is distributed ASW / air/missile picket until it's safe to move a carrier group forward.
Seb rank	Mon Dec 29 18:21:41 4500t is the same as the French FDI frigates that sport 8 Exocets and 16 to 32 vls cells for aster 15/30 as well as a similar load out of guns and CIWS air defence. Also needs about 30 fewer crew to operate.
jergul rank	Mon Dec 29 19:27:27 Smaller vessels have endurance issues.
Sam Adams rank	Mon Dec 29 21:04:48 Seb why do you insist only VLS weapons are useful? This is very silly. And jergul is correct. If you want to do a good job offshore for any amount of time you want a larger ship.
jergul rank	Mon Dec 29 23:51:26 The problem with VLS systems is simple. The US has more launch tubes than missiles to put in them. 8200 I think it is.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: