Mailing Lists

> and networked surface combatant, LCS's modular, focused-mission design

Pulled up the above quote for focus.  Two points:

'networked'.  We need to carefully define what that means.  And
understand that you don't network just a ship.  You extend the internet
TO the ship FROM somewhere.  You can network a battle group and you can
network a navy.  But you can't network a single platform (unless you
trivialize the problem to a LAN within the ship).  
	What is the radio-WAN that interconnects LCS into the rest of a battle
group?  What is the radio-WAN that interconnects LCS into the rest of
the internet (presumably via a NCTAMS like our other ships)?  The poor
LCS PM can't solve this problem ... neither can any other PLATFORM
manager.  
	I'll believe the term 'modular' when I see that all the communications
systems both TO and WITHIN the ship are routable networks.  The trouble
is that I _know_ that some of the $B comms programs the Navy is managing
don't do that.


I'm starting to think that LCS was (is) a good idea but isn't radical
enough.  The idea of 'cheap, expendable' platform has been there since
the beginning of the LCS discussion.  But as long as you have human crew
on board, you can't get there.  In the aircraft world, we're seeing the
blossoming of UAVs for a variety of missions.  They are cheap,
expendable and can perform several of the laundry list of missions ...
and don't need to be do-all to be able to do something well. 
	Consider getting all of the crew off LCS, not just part of it.  This
does require fixing the comms problems noted above.   



On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 13:16 -0500, Charles Knight wrote:
> Global Security <
> http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/lcs.htm > says
> this about the LCS:
> 
> "The LCS is an entirely new breed of U.S. Navy warship. A fast, agile,
> and networked surface combatant, LCS's modular, focused-mission design
> will provide Combatant Commanders the required warfighting
> capabilities and operational flexibility to ensure maritime dominance
> and access for the joint force. LCS will operate with focused-mission
> packages that deploy manned and unmanned vehicles to execute missions
> as assigned by Combatant Commanders. 
> 
> "LCS will also perform Special Operations Forces (SOF) support,
> high-speed transit, Maritime Interdiction Operations (MIO),
> Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), and
> Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP). While complementing
> capabilities of the Navy's larger multi-mission surface combatants,
> LCS will also be networked to share tactical information with other
> Navy aircraft, ships, submarines, and joint units. 
> 
> "Secretary of the Navy Gordon England described this new ship as "a
> small, fast, maneuverable, and relatively inexpensive member of the
> DD(X) family of ships, which began construction in FY 2005. The goal
> is to develop a platform that can be fielded in relatively large
> numbers to support a wide range of joint missions, with reconfigurable
> mission modules to assure access to the littorals for our Navy forces
> in the face of threats from surface craft, submarines, and mines." 
> 
> I note that descriptives such as "operational flexibility" and
> "reconfigurable mission modules" suggest both desireable attributes
> and plenty of room for Aaron's "mission creep" and for straying
> from Gordon England's goal of being "relatively inexpensive" and thus
> affordable to "be fielded in relatively large numbers." 
> 
> To move this discussion further I would ask Aaron to address several
> of his assertions:
> 
> 1.  What is the point (design attributes, requirements, etc.)  at
> which a ship like this "transforms from the low cost patrol craft to a
> full on Ship-of-the-line"? Can you point to devlopment/procurement
> decisions where the LCS has crossed this line?
> 
> 2. "It looks like we are going in a direction where the LCS is a
> picket for a  ddx/g/1000."  What specifically do you see happening in
> this regard?
> 
> Looking forward to the discussion,
> 
> Charles Knight
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NWC_OnlineDiscussion mailing list
> NWC_OnlineDiscussion at osiris.usnwc.edu
> http://osiris.usnwc.edu/mailman/listinfo/nwc_onlinediscussion


-- 
Rex Buddenberg
Naval Postgraduate School
Code IS/Bu
Monterey, Ca 93943
831/656-3576