I first saw this on Military Photos...Get ready to be pissed off.
The Ambassador IV Fast Missile Craft is being sold to Egypt by the US and is even manufactured in Mississippi.
Additionally the program is being governed by the US Navy to fulfill basically the same function as the LCS but at a much lower cost with much greater firepower!
Not wanting to re-invent the wheel I'll simply quote Eagle Speak Blog ... "For my son's Navy I want what we sell to Egypt!" Click here to read his analysis of this ship.
Note: The ship has a rapid fire 76mm gun, is surface to air, surface to surface and antiship missile defense capable.
.jpg)
Hilarity ensues. that is classic.
ReplyDeleteLCS should look out....the FAC could kick the LCS' ass.
We should have just built 20 Absalon, 40 MEKO and 40 of these FACs.
Do you know whats even worst?
ReplyDeleteThere are versions of both classes of the LCS for foreign sales that have VLS(ESSM and VL-ASROC),torpedo tubes and Harpoon missiles...and there is even an AEGIS version for sale to the gulf states...so the LCS could have this specs IF the Navy wants to...
Why they are buying underarmed ships i will never know...
Between the two, LCS is probably the better ship. In a straight up duel, the Ambassador has the advantage of 8 antiship missiles, but how is it going to use them at greater then horizon range without support? LCS on the other hand can use its drones and helicopter to locate and attack the Ambassador at long range while using its superior speed to maintain a safe distance. And whereas the RAM launcher used by both vessels has a decent chance of intercepting antiship missiles, its range is about the same as a hellfire missile which puts LCS in a position where its helicopters can attack with minimal danger.
ReplyDeleteWhen looked at as a part of a larger force, LCS is even more effective. Its much maligned range is over twice that of the Ambassador, it is capable of mine countermeasures and antisubmarine warfare, and for the anti piracy missions so often talked of it carries twice the crew as well as more boats.
why are you allowing the LCS to have supporting forces and air but denying it to the FMC? either its a one on one fight OR both ships get support. and lets not forget the biggest factor. cost. you can get twice as many FMC as you can LCS meaning more...much more throw weight!.
DeleteRAM Block 2 just entered LRIP but has twice the range of Block 1 putting anything less than a JAGM (as originally conceived) armed heli well within RAM's engagement range. Granted, it will be some time before Egypt's new FAC (which is quite pretty and deadly) gets the upgrade.
DeleteThe combination of CIWS and RAM make the FAC pretty survivable in the face of rotary wing attack.
It's more correct to say that the LCS can do anti-mine OR anti-sub OR anti-piracy depending on what mission modules are installed and whether or not the crew has had enough training time with the module set they have. LCS's are not capability A AND capability B, they are Capability A OR Capability B . . .
DeleteAlso Visby class is designed for a similar range of missions all at once, can handle UAVs for OTH targeting, and incorporates stealth, all for 640 tons.
Solomon, what supporting forces am I allowing LCS? By drones I meant its organic Firescouts. Your point about cost is true, but if the FMC cannot reliably find LCS first then the cost then the higher cost of LCS will be as unimportant as the higher cost of the F-35.
DeleteMarauder, I was unaware that RAM Block 2 had entered production. That certainly makes helicopters a less viable means of attack without newer missiles. Do you have any insights as to why the Egyptians choose both RAM and CIWS? The latter seems to offer little additional capability.
sfo milspec, I understand that LCS cannot preform all missions simultaneously. However, being able to shift hulls to different missions as the campaign progresses is still much more useful than a single mission vessel.
The newer RAM blocks are capable of engaging highly mobile surface threats as well (boghammers for examples) in a fire-and-forget manner. I presume this influence the design decision to have both RAM and CIWS; Save the Harpoons for the rival FACs or heavier capital ships, while still retaining a good self-defense capability with the CIWS.
DeleteThis infuriates me on so many different levels. We are stuck buying useless LCS crap costing close to $1b each while we are GIVING these ships away to egypt. Egypt, you know the country now controlled by radical islamists who want to destroy the west and all the jews. Not only is our procurement absolutely FUCKED, but our corrupt liberal political system that GIVES away free things to our ENEMIES. WTF
ReplyDeletebe careful! you'll end up on a watch list talking like that. but seriously it is curious. a squadron of these with a modified MPS ship to act as mothership and you have serious firepower in a can. i don't get it but either our leaders are stupid or they're corrupt...one or the other.
DeleteNot surprising at all. The Israeli Saar V, which is both more directly comparable to the LCS and which does an even better job of putting the LCS to shame, was built by Northrop Grumman Ship Systems (formerly Litton-Ingalls Shipbuilding Corporation of Pascagoula, Mississippi)
ReplyDeleteHelos/Drones can drop a torpedo from beyond RAM range.
ReplyDeleteWow..I had no idea modern air dropped torpedoes had such range. I guess electronics miniaturization enables a much greater allocation of internal volume for fuel.
Deletetoo much here for me not to say something. FMC is NOT a subsitute for LCS it is a compliment. FMC flotillas will have LCS a force enabler, i.e. air assets for OTH targeting and UAV as long range sensors. The LCS will probably have only one modules onbard in addition to SUW might be MIW~~
ReplyDeleteMPS is poor mothership and are all employed in enhanced MPFrons. The T-AKEs have been mentioned but NOT setup to husband small ships. More likely a smaller tender type NOT in USN service now?? Of course the USN will want to modify and OLD big expensive to operate amphib - dahh.
Both LCS classes have been marketed aboard with NO takers to date.
For better or worse LCS is the Program of Record which might be truncated at 24?