Wednesday, August 03, 2011

The LCS Primer

Shocking as it may seem - there are a lot of people who are only now starting to see the light on LCS.

Equally shocking - they have not been readers of this blog and others over the last half decade and as such, don't have the full background of the whole nasty bucket of goo.

Picking up the thread of his work, Phil Ewing, Galrahn, and this blog; over at Wired David Axe has a nice "Readers Digest Condensed Books" summary of the last decade of LCS fail.

This is where you need to send people who only have time for one URL to click. Read it all; he quotes all the right folks.
Instead, we have the LCS, the “wrong ship at the wrong time,” to quote retired Navy Cmdr. John Patch. “It is clear that the Littoral Combat Ship program cannot live up to expectations,” Patch wrote in January. “Yet the surface Navy still badly needs low-end ships.”

It’s a need the Navy cannot now meet, thanks to the overwrought, underthought LCS and its human enablers. So we might as well learn to do without.

UPDATE: Galrahn has been inspired. He'll post his thoughts today over at ID.


  1. Salty Gator19:40

    In the early bird this morning I saw a clip from CHINFO which stated that "...despite everything, LCS continues to be a viable program.  The US Navy has more than enough funds to mitigate any problems."

    Sure.  We'll cash out the entire fleet to cover up and correct some stupid admirals' mistakes.

  2. James20:22

    Wow. Its sad even i didnt realise how truely pathetic it has become.

    So for pride and $$$ the men and women that serve on them and the ones that depend on them will die....when they function at all.

    [ this area contains thoughts not suitable for children, dogs, or people fearing for their souls  ]

    So let me get this straight. We are spending our ships budget on vessels that can be destroyed with AK-47s. Have less firepower than a WW2 PT boat. Cant stay out of the rep yard, cant complete their missions, dont really have missions as they cant do much, and are death traps.

    Who's gettin hung?

  3. CDR Salamander20:33

    Do you have a link to that?

  4. Byron20:36

    I started a list five years ago and the list ain't getting any shorter.

  5. Retired Now20:43

    LCS-6 USS JACKSON,  is now officially under construction, as AUSTAL shipyard in Mobile is now cutting steel.

    Good news for all you Aluminum welders out there looking for steady work !   The Aussies have set up a training program to convert the obsolete "steel" welders into the aluminum welders of the future U. S. Navy.  

  6. Anonymous20:52

    And by the way, Navy cant afford the bill for the contractror maintenance program it takes to keep them running.  On top of that, budget hits next year should pretty much mean job certainty for Southwest Regional Maintenance Center when LM and Austal go home when they cant be funded anymore with SCN money.

    I hate LPD-17; but I have LCS more, and then we get to look forward for DDG 1000, where we cant afford to even install the weapon systems since they cost too much.  Mark my words, the ship will sail away with no Combat System on board and they will all be planned to be installed at PSA.  It tricks the SCN budget folks on the hill that way.

  7. UltimaRatioRegis20:54

    Who's gettin' hung? 

    Well, unless they tell an off-color joke that offends a politically-connected victim group, nobody. 

  8. LT B21:20

       LT OFF COLOR, reporting for duty, sir!

  9. LT B21:23

    Ok, I'm guessing several have sent correspondence to those that control the purse strings.  But it may be even worth sending it to the Dems that SO want to cut defense.  This is one program they can take a big hunk out of the budget with and may actually make the Navy stronger when they are forced to build real ships or spend the money to preserve the real ships that are left in the Fleet. 

  10. the first four spruances on the west coast had to go to pier E, lbnsy and have their superstructures above the main deck clad with 1&1/2" tempered aluminum plate when it became obvious that a 30-06 could penetrate them from pierside.


  11. Surfcaster21:53

    This morning I took my son (10) aboard the USS Cassin Young, Fletcher class DD. If she could catch or guile its way across an LCS, it would kick its ass. No question.

    Not long before, we were aboard USS Constition. Draw in  LCS within 400 yards, she'd kick its ass too. With Green power, gotta make someone happy. That's like getting drop-kicked by your Grandma's Grandma.

  12. UltimaRatioRegis21:59


    "Sheriff Bart! They said you was hung!"

    "They was right!"</snort>

  13. UltimaRatioRegis22:36

    Is Cassin Young still in drydock?  She has had extensive work on her.

  14. No problems for a Fletcher to bag either LCS...

    Just stand off at a reasonable 5"38 range from the pier either is welded to and start pumping shells from those 5 mounts....

  15. <span>I see that the chief cheerleader for the LCS is going to write "a response" to the Wired piece...  
    More of:  
    ItsNotAWarshipButItsCalledACombatShipAndItsNotAFrigateButItsReplacingTheFrigatesButItsNotCapableOfConductingAnyWarfareDutiesOriginallyPlannedForItButItsFutureIsBrightBecauseItsNETWORKEDAndIfYouBuyTwentyFourOfThemTheyWillWeighAsMuchAsThe LangleyAndSaratogaAndLexington!!!</span>

    Galrahn is to the LCS what this woman was to Nixon...

    (story here for those who don't know it)

  16. Salty Gator23:00

    Sal, will send it to you tomorrow morning.

  17. CDR Salamander23:33

    You can get a preview of his argument over at my Facebook feed.

  18. Byron04:35

    Why in Gods name would they put that much extra weight above the waterline? It's just as easy to put Kevlar in critical areas and a lot less weight.

  19. Guest of course06:11

    which is what they actually did.  don't know where this plate nonsense came from or if anybody really cared about whether or not a hull and superstructure designed for nuclear battle was 'hardened' against fox hunters.

  20. Surfcaster07:50

    Yes, still in Dry Dock 1, but open for tours.

  21. Facts09:15

    Yawn.  In summary, we have a Wired magazine journalist who has never served a day at sea offering backward looking criticism about the preference of retirement home hacks for a ship capable of fighting yesterday's wars.

  22. CDR Salamander09:40

    You didn't read it, did you?

  23. Spade09:47

    He has a really strange definition of "lots".

  24. Sure "Facts"...

    Here is a song for yah...

    Blood spilled in "your" wars will be no different than blood spilled in the past.

    Big difference for your generation though...

    Instead of being able to replicate this...

    You're more likely to end up at the end of a pi$$ed on rope like this...

  25. Facts10:04

    I did read it.  You haven't served on an LCS, have you?

  26. Facts10:07

    You just validated my comment.  Thanks for the black and white retrospective, though.

  27.  You haven't served on an LCS, have you?

    Glad I haven't Fact.

    As I related over at Info Dis...

    I had a chance to go to the precom unit of the Stark.  I didn't much like the Figs, so I opted for the Wainwright (but got shanghaied to a Coontz)...


    Your Point?

  28. Oh...

    I gettt it...!

    (I'm kinda slow these days)

    Things are Different Now!

    Sure. Talk to your Grandpa about that "Facts"

  29. Aubrey10:22

    Dude, really?

    Tell us all, just exactly HOW will wars at sea, "looking forward" look?

    I know what the professionals think....I know what the people with experience, enlighten me with your wisdom as to what YOU think?

    Please, be specific.

    In your future, how does combat differ?  How does damage control differ?  How does survivability differ?

    If the "retirement home hacks" can think of a hundred ways to sink one of these idiocies, what are your 100 ways to protect it "looking forward"?

    You have posted to imply that you are the second coming of Nimitz, so you better start proving yourself and your "ship"...

  30. Aubrey10:25

    "<span>No problems for a Fletcher to bag either LCS... "</span>
    <span>Seaman Timmy on a 3-day bender with a "borrowed" .45 could bag one of these things...</span>

  31. Mike M.10:34

    Not to mention that the crew of the Constutition would board.  <span>They</span> had cutlasses.

    I wonder how much an LCS would be worth as a prize?

  32. Aubrey10:44

    "I wonder how much an LCS would be worth as a prize?"

    I think scrap aluminum is still running at historic highs...

  33. Aubrey10:55

    Is it just me, or does it seem like his heart just isn't in it anymore?

    Galrahn's current defense is focusing on the vaunted wake-attack, and using the basis that no one (except the LCS folks by implication) understand small boat warms, and that a big ship going really fast in circles is the primary defense.

    Just what we need, NASCAR at sea...

  34. Facts10:57

    I'd invite you to go for a ride and show you a few things, but then you couldn't operate under the cloak of a pseudonym anymore.  You only exist in an anonymous blogger world.  At least David Axe signs his name when he writes for Wired magazine.

  35. Facts10:58

    I'd invite you to go for a ride and show you a few things, but then you couldn't operate under the cloak of a pseudonym anymore.  You only exist in an anonymous blogger world.  At least David Axe signs his name when he writes for Wired magazine.

  36. Salty Gator In Extremis10:59

    What have we learned from LCS and LPD-17?  Apparently nothing.  Behold, the LSD(X).  The LSD(X) AoA is currently underway, but what we have learned so far is that it may look like LPD-17, and will be completely affordable.  No, no:  we haven't even written one requirement yet.  no, no:  we haven't even done the AoA yet.  But to satisfy FMB, the answers are "commonality" and "affordability."  I laugh at the "commonality" piece because all of the solutions to fixing the existing LPD-17 are power point.  Sure, they make sense while pouring over blueprints, design plans, CASREPs and network diagrams, but they haven't been implemented yet.  We don't know how the yards will do, and if the crew will skosh them up.  For that matter, the crew is not going to expand sufficiently to accomplish all of the maintenance that is required, so we will likely have another rash of problems not to far down the road.  As for affordability, intentionally low-balling shipbuilding costs is a recipe for a few things:
    1. initial design that does not meet DoD, Navy or MARINE CORPS requirements
    2. a re-design!
    3. A whole lot more costs!
    4. Reduction in number of planned ships
    5. Not meeting DoD, Navy and MARINE CORPS requirements
    6. Reductions in manpower and training
    7. Double pump deployments
    8. Added maintenance issues from insufficient manpower and training.

    So, we assume that LPD-17 will be the greatest thing since sliced bread (again) once all of her defects are fixed (or not), and we assume that we can hopey changey our way through the requirements generation and shipbuilding processes just like we did in LCS.

    Because it worked out so well for both the 17 and LCS.

  37. Salty Gator In Extremis11:05

    Your ship is not even rated for Africa Partnership Station.  Deal with it.  My old ship, LPD-4, is not rated for BMD.  Our ships are our babies.  We get defensive about them and our fellow sailors.  Nobody is ragging you for serving on an LCS.  In fact, it probably speaks highly of you since only the best sailors get sent to those ships due to the difficulty built into its manning CONOPS.  So have a powder and lighten up, Francis.  We're attacking the concept and its execution. Because as of now, both are failing horribly.  You and your fellow sailors are working your asses off and should be commended.  But you need to get off the myopic rants.  And don't insult the commander.  You will find him to be a much greater friend than enemy.

  38. <span><span>I'd invite you to go for a ride and show you a few things</span>  
    <span>Show us what?</span>  
    <span>Rust and oxidation not getting taken care of while pierside?</span></span>
    <span><span>Imaginary mission modules?</span></span>
    <span><span>A 57 mm pac fire?</span></span>

  39. DeltaBravo11:26

    Hmmm.... let's look at it from what a totally uninformed landlubber's perspective would be. 

    (tee hee)

    Let's reduce it to the bare bones.  (Using no technical language at all)

    Ships at sea have some things they worry about:  Staying at sea, keeping moving at sea, keeping the seawater out of the seagoing thingie, and keeping the things inside out of the seawater.  And preparing to maybe meet flying things, or other things in the sea that want to put holes in your seagoing thingie and send you and your seapeople to the bottom of the sea.

    Do I have that right?

    What does the future of naval warfare look like?

    Probably a lot like the past of naval warfare:

    Things out there want to make other things go boom and put lots of seawater into your seagoing thingie and then they win.  Right?

    So the sturdier your seagoing thing, and the more people you have and the bigger your boom things are the better chance you'll make them go boom and put them at the bottom first.

    Have things changed?  Will they? 

    The only thing that really doesn't change is the sea.  That's the first enemy.  Sturdiness counts.  If your seagoing thingie can't handle that for long periods the rest is academic (and inevitable.)

    Am I missing something?  Where does the LCS fit in here?  Is it a sturdy seagoing thingie that won't end up with its seapeople on the outside and seawater on the inside the minute things start going boom?

  40. DB!

    That may just be a new Sea Classic!!!!

    But I doubt "Facts" will get it

  41. UltimaRatioRegis11:43


    I'd invite you for a ride in crowded waters where my ZU 23-2 is under a tarp and I am disguised as one of hundreds of fishing boats.  And you have to follow the tenets of San Remo.  When I seemingly innocently wotk my way off your port quarter where your vaunted 57mm cannot engage, I will pump a hundred AP cannon shells into you before you even know where it is coming from. And by the time you can do anything about it, I will have emptied both drums into you. 

    Or, if you prefer, I will sit in hide with a 100mm AT gun somewhere at the water's edge and slam a half-dozen HE rounds into your bridge, or better, right at the water line. 

    Either way, you get to be on CNN.  But not in a good way.

    So save the "you don't know" crap.

  42. UltimaRatioRegis11:44

    Salty!  You were on Austin????  Me too! 

  43. leesea11:53

    come on down to Jax Maritime Heritage center and look at some models of real ships like a late WW2 Fletcher.

  44. CDR Salamander11:55

    Oh, I get it ... its about me!

  45. leesea11:58

    URR in a smaller manner, I saw all of what you describe in the Brownwater Navy - right on!

    And it led me to the strong conviction that every ship must be able to cover its six.

    I as others have concluded the LCS cannot as currently configured.

  46. (not taking anything away from lee's excellent suggestion...)

    or go visit a real one...

    Of course, for those who think its DIFFERENT now, I realize these ideas are beneath them.

  47. UltimaRatioRegis12:46

    More than that, LCS has to survive initial damage and stay in the fight.  Littoral combat is characterized by sudden, surprise, extremely violent engagement from all spectra.  The attacks I posit would have killed sailors aboard a Gearing, and perhaps even caused significant damage.  But they are posited with very light weapon systems (plentiful ones in almost any trouble spot), and in no way would they have been a mission kill, or worse, loss of a vessel.  And the response from a Gearing would have been overwhelming and decisive.  

    Point being, the Littoral Combat Ship is simply not built for combat in the littorals.  Would we consider an aircraft carrier that couldn't carry any aircraft?  Or a submarine that couldn't submerge?  Or a deep-draft landing craft?  What the hell is the point? 

    With the amount of money we have poured into LCS, and seemingly are willing to continue pouring in, what is it we have to show for it?

  48. UltimaRatioRegis12:48


    Roger that on the brownwater Navy.  Seems we forget that which we don't care to remember.

  49. Salty Gator In Extremis13:02

    Oh $hit......I'm giving my identiity away today....

  50. can these beasts (LCS) withstand an 06 or 300 magnum round fired from a warehouse window a pierside???

    navy has had that problem in the past.


  51. UltimaRatioRegis13:39

    I was only on Austin as an embarked Marine.  You know, the ones who use all the fresh water and make the chow line longer.  But my stateroom got good and wet when we hit that Hatteras storm, as there was about an inch of bulkhead that had rusted away all along the starboard side.  Waking up to seawater sloshing around in the space, with your shower shoes bobbing up and down, that's better than a shot of coffee to bring you around!!!!

  52. xbradtc13:46

    I'm currently writing a series of posts on the naval war in the Falklands. One of the lessons of littoral warfare is that you are often tied to a specific location. See also Okinawa, Invasion of. 

    The LCS's vaunted speed to flee attacks won't do it much good when operations demand that it remain on station.

  53. salty:

    in this day and age when every thing is estimated and scheduled i would like to discuss just how hard the current crop of white hats are actually working.

    i remember days when the yoemen were complaining bitterly about having to work 8 hours a day 6 days a week and screaming that they were overworked, sitting in undress blues at a desk, when in the chow line right behind them were boilermakers that had so far that week put in 5 days 16 hours a day rolling tubes in a steam drum in a ship along side with the prospect of that schedule continuing for another thirty days or so.

    i put in 90 days of 12 hours a day, had a day off then put in another 56 at that schedule. i chose to do it on the 1900-0700 shift and then when it was to late realized that a winch for the ships booms was installed directly above my bunk and when they ran that (which seemed to be continously) it was NOISY.

    the thing about the modern gun on the modern boat is, what is the weight of a single round. the current crew on the MODERN BOAT doesn't have to handle aboard ~ 3600 rounds of ammunition when they off/onload that the projectile weighs 40 lbs and the powder case weighs 20 lbs. or 54lbs. with the powder case 30lbs. those parties kept my weight down to 34" pants size for several years.

    there were times when guys in my duty section would do something to get extra duty knowing that that duty was scraping paint because it was easier work than what they had to do in the duty section.

    most of the my taxi drivers and warrents served during WWII we thought that the stories that they told about the hardships and heavy work during the war were tails well laden with seasalt until we saw the citations for their medals.

    what i'm saying is,  is the current concept of "heavy workload" diluted by the modern concepts of "work smarter (dump it on someone else) not harder" hurting the navy as much as the diversity industry is hurting the country.


  54. Anonymous15:41

    I lay much of the blame here on VADM LaFleur who has the distinction of coming up with a number of the stupidest ideas in Naval History, including Sea Swap among many others.  This guy was a scoundrel who could never get anything straight and would never listen to the slightest snippet of dissent.  Read all his BS on LCS--never the slightest quesstion about the validity of this concept.  Just kowtowing to his buddy Norm Clark who was kowtowing to Rumsfeld and on and on.  The Emperor's clothes look just dandy.  He wanted to be the Navy's Senior Surface Warrior and this is what he brought us.  This guy never meant a Beltway bandit he didn't like or see a post-retirement opportunity in some decision.  And talk about a a tyrant in the wardroom.  A-hole number one.  And now it is all coming to fruition.  Good to see him get his come-uppance in terms of his legacy but sad for our Navy.  

  55. xbradtc19:09

    I'll mention ALL the damaged or sunk UK warships. And RFAs, and STUFS.

  56. leesea23:54

    can't leave any suggestions alone huh~

  57. cdrsalamander00:00

    Look at his post-USN career.  Is is doing quite fine.

  58. leesea00:04

    URR, and I would add that brownwater warfare is even more eye to eye (short range) which is one of the distinctions I like to make between it and green water warfare.  That later being more attack and manuever where there is room.  We had more "tubes" (6) than LCS minus its ASUW guns which of course they should NEVER be without~  Weaponizing LCS should be priority number one.

    The next flight costs are probably in the right neighborhood, but again that is only for the "seaframe".  The yet to get IOC mission modules are still on an upward dollar path.  R&D for LCS is out of sight.  So overall you are right.

  59. leesea00:06

    pk, Yes they could survive shotguns shells come on, but that is not the problem, more like RPGs from a small boat

  60. leesea00:09

    cutting what steel?  NNSB&DD has had an apprentice school for decades

  61. Just piling on to a good one....

    A trek west on I-10 can be dubbed the war museum trail...Especially for warships

  62. leesea00:22

    the numbers are in you were right!  This comes from Defense Industry Daily extensive coverage of the LCS:
    "With the FY 2011 budget still in limbo due to the 111th Congress’ failure to pass a budget, The FY 2012 budget request submitted to the 112th (2010-2012) Congress continued the dual-buy plan, asking for $2.169 billion: $286.8M in RDT&E, 2 mission modules (Mine Countermeasures & Surface Warfare at $79.6 million), plus $1.882 billion for 4 ships."

  63. leesea00:24

    there are some in high places who think the coastal and riverines units are at right levels now and if we need more, well its just a matter of buying some~ don't get me started

  64. leesea00:29

    I would add (and expect to fired on) that the patnership station aka GFS missions are more logistic in nature and can be performed by naval auxiliaries.  Not that we have enought NFAF to be sliced off on those soft power missions?

    But my basic problem with sending gators to do station ship ops is that it slices them off from their primary missions AND every one knows when and where those ships are so some asymetric actions could be taken at unopportune times.

  65. A certain Guest01:52

    Got you there.

    As I recall you said you'd grow a pair when you retired.  You know, post under your own name.

  66. A certain Guest02:03

    Like you could not do that to an FFG or a DDG or a CG or a CVN?

    Get with the program dude.  I laughed out loud when I heard that our boat crews demanded Level IV body armor.  Why not ship's crew?  They don't wear it.

    LCS is nothing but pure floating crap but let us not exceed our grasp by claiming that its flimsiness does not apply to every other hull the navy has bought since WWII.

    Yeah yeah, the front porch led by Byron will follow and claim that is not so.  But you know and I know that hull thickness/superstructure material is the same pretty much across the board.

    I'm not opposed to flimsy hulls.

  67. A certain Guest02:07

    Oh please.

    Stark was dead.

    Samual B Roberts was dead.

    Total mission kills on two warships that y'all love.

    Coastal warfare is like that.  Here one minute and gone the next.

  68. A certain Guest02:11


    I watched but did not participate when my ship put a serious dent in Wainright.  I think at that point both the CO and XO gave up driving entirely.

  69. A certain Guest02:13

    There is an answer.  You won't like it.

    Why don't you ask COMPACFLT?

  70. A certain Guest02:19

    5 years after commission and no deployment worth speaking.  It's not the crew's fault but it is the Navy's fault.  Ditto LPD17.

    I watch this oddesy and can't halp but recall the 37 man crew of my ship.  That was peacetime.  That was mostly one of IC, ET, ST, OS, SM, QM, YN, PN, HT, etc.  Same ship in the Gulf had a new crew of 110.  People slept everywhere

  71. A certain Guest02:26


    I won't deny what you say but I don't think you know it "all".  There's worse.

    The monsters who brought us LCS believe in Total Domain Awareness and as such they believe they can predict the weather and storms and possibly steer their lesser warship away and of course it will never serve in the arctic, antarctic or typhoon seas.

    Only a suitable escort for an invasion of Troy.

  72. Byron08:18

    I've seen it through the window...BEAUTIFUL ship and pretty damn big model! Not in the same category as the all steel, to scale model of Saratoga, CV-60 ;)

  73. Spade09:40

    When I went aboard LCS-1 and was on the bridge my first thought was that a guy in a small boat with a RPG or PKM could probably make a mess all by himself.

  74. leesea13:18

    I have finished two of three emails on the Mighty Midgets of WW2 and done some comparisons to LCS.  Sal has seen them.  The last will be most interesting as it goes into the operations around Okinawa (where I was stattioned).

    One relevant take away:  When the Kamikazes first appeared, the Navy set up Radar Picket Stations and put a combination of derstroyers and landing ships on them.  At first, there was one DD to two LCS(L)s.  When the attacks increaed, more ships were assigned in the end some RPS had two DD and four LCS(L).  I was noted in the book that the LCS relied on the DDs for long range target ideftication and fire direction, BUT whenever a group of bpgies were inbound the DD would speed away, leaving the LCS(L)s to there own limited sensors.  The resultes were NOT good for the slow, small, thin skinned, but heavily armed LCS(L)s.  The crews displayed great heroism in the face of a relentless enemy.  And oh BTW helped a number of DD which were hit by the fanatical flyers (i.e extermist aerial IEDs).

    So I would conclude that a BALANCE of speed, weaponry, sensors and survivability are needing in a swarming attack (surface or air).  And that an extensive Battle Network can NOT be depended upon to cover the pickets.

    Speed is for attacking, retreating or covering opareas quickly.

  75. leesea13:19

    come on down I am docent on 13 Aug 1300-1700

  76. leesea13:22

    We had an LDO ChEng on Newport who was proud to say he did NOT go on water hours for one whole deployment.  Many sailors and marines spent some time on the evap watch when caught wasting water

  77. Byron13:52

    I'll take you up on that one, Lee!

  78. Stark was dead.  
    Samual B Roberts was dead.

    Hanit was not.

    And arguably should have been able to stay almost fully mission capable.

    Glamorgan ate an Exocet at near minimum range so it was still full of fuel too.

    It remained partially mission capable...

    And again...if there had been improvements from the nuke era "it doesn't matter anyway"... survivability enginnering in the ship, it would have fared even better.

    Indeed, if you look at the historical record, its those last two that are more representative of surface ship damage.

    But the current SWO community has rolled over on its back on the whole, and just expects to "Run Away" as a solution.

    (kinda thing you'd expect from a puppy that rolls on its back and pees itself when confronted)

    And, before you get started.

    Its NOT about tons of armored steel BB style. Its about smart armor where you need it. Careful engineering of HM&E in regards to placement and needed redundancy (and selective armor where it will help), sufficient crew to absorb  losses and continue mission critical tasks...

    The kind of stuff that NAVSEA is intentionally NOT building into the USN ships of today.

  79. sirrah: what i meant was that the first flight of spruances could not and were tied up at navy yards for a couple of weeks each while shipfitters added additional aluminum plate to the sensitive areas.


  80. B: remember this was about in 1977 and kevlar was not available in quantities then. i remember progress meetings when getting kevlar tube to split and armor some of the electronic cables and fiber optics and air lines going up the masts to the antenna farms was of real concern.


  81. goc: they actually did it. i made a deal with the foreman shipfitter and grabbed the larger scraps which we took to shop 31 and used for base plates for the numerical control machine tools for several years afterwards.


  82. Byron18:34

    Can you slide them my way, Lee?

  83. Byron18:37

    Take ME for a ride and I'll point out every last single point-failure item on board, starting with the fact that if LCS gets into a fight, she can either do damage control or fight the ship but not both. And don't try singing that tired old song about run can't outrun a 12.7 or an RPG or sure as hell not an Exocet. Besides, any serious combat guy will tell you that running just means you die tired.

    And besides that, you're an insolent snot.

  84. Byron19:40

    It's not about the armor, though a little of that in the right places goes a long way; it's not about the redundacy of systems, though this a most important thing; it's about the CREW, jackass, the MOST important "system" aboard a warship, and when a ships crew is reduced below a critical point, the ship is in grave danger...especially, you BLITHERING IDIOT, when the ship and crew are being shot at and shit is breaking and there's holes letting water into the people space! A sound ship needs enough crew to fight the ship and to save the ship, because just sure as hell a warship will find itself doing both. That's if the shock of an explosion doesn't burst every ill-designed weld seam and sink this floating whorehouse where she sails!

  85. Byron19:48

    Sonny, did it ever occur to you that you might HAVE to ride through bad weather to accomplish your mission? The whole point of having a military means ordering people to do stuff that no right minded civilian would do in a million years, like risking my old broke down damn near 60 year old ass. I understand that "going in harms way" means there's a fair chance one of you might not make it back to the pier, truly, I do get it. I've only been reading Naval history and literature since before you were born. The whole reason why I think LCS is such a terrible ship is the fact the Navy delibarately placed good sailors in grave danger by not having enough crew to have a real damage control party who's only responsibility was to keep the ship afloat, dry, not on fire and with power to keep the ship fighting. You can ONLY DO ONE THING. That's...very bad. It was the first think I realized about LCS, and though there's a lot of other things that make this class a polished turd, it's the single most important point failure source. A warship (and don't kid yourself, sonny, LCS is a WARship) is purposely built to sail into "harms way". Let's hope you don't get to find out the hard way that the pirates you were chasing suddenly didn't turn around and bite you on the ass.

  86. Byron19:51

    Hey, dude, don't diss NASCAR! :)

  87. Byron19:52

    Gosh, cutting steel for an aluminum ship? Who knew....

  88. Byron19:55

    Lee, I went from learning to cut construction aids out of scrap to master burner in 2 years. I had a damn good teacher and God blessed me with excellent eye/hand coordination and my hands even today are steady as a rock. It's nothing special really, either the Good Lord gave it to you or he didn't. The other 5% is just the basics that I can teach in two hours.

  89. Byron08:42

    Where's those young'n's that ran their mouth so much yesterday about how cool their floating polished turd is? I turned 60 today and I'm slap damned full of it and just spoiling for serious throw down. You boys talked a lot of trash yesterday and now it's time to see if whether or not you're mocking bird mouth is really overloading your hummingbird asses today!

  90. DeltaBravo09:08

    Very happy birthday, Byron.

  91. A certain Guest10:36

    Bryon ever note where the computing machinery was located on SPRUANCE.  01 level above the main deck.  Hanging out there in the forward superstructure. All the UYK7s, MK 86 GFCS computers.  Whole combat switchboard.  Just an offering to the Gods. We hid sparrow in back.

    I always that Sprucans were the ultimate in design stupidity.

  92. Outlaw Mike12:02

    I turned 46 today. Flowers nor wreaths.

  93. CDR Salamander12:16

    OMC and Byron - a double B-day wishes to both of you!

  94. Happy birthday Byron!

    (I got you set up in Groupon for some doggie shampoos...) 8-)

  95. LT B14:52

    I went to see the USS Kidd, in Baton Rouge.  I was on college swim team w/ his great (I think) grandaughter.  It is a good tour going around that ship. 

  96. LT B14:53

    I am in town this weekend Lee.

  97. leesea17:57

    Sat & Sun houra are 1300-1700 at Jaxksonville Landing just up from the USS Adams historical ship group  904-355-1101

  98. Grandpa Bluewater.22:08

    And you are such a promising young man, too.

  99. UltimaRatioRegis22:50

    SIXTY?!?!?!  A likely story.  Anyone that could possibly have verified your age has been dead for centuries.  You old b*stard.  What was it like working on ironclads?

    Best wishes. 

  100. guest23:15

    Is there a ship in the USN older than Byron?  The Cape Jacob maybe, but she is headed for the Saisson bay.  Great shiip and a Byron is the great ship fitter. 

  101. SCOTTtheBADGER01:49

    Happy Birthday Byron! HUZZAH!

  102. SCOTTtheBADGER02:02

    When did running away become an option with the USN?

    Halsey's Tulagi Harbor billboards: KILL JAPS, KILL JAPS, KILL MORE JAPS!

    LCS guiding philosphy: RUN AWAY!

    The Democrats really are in charge, aren't they?

  103. Byron08:00

    Well, there is a rumor going around that I laid the keel on Noah's Ark, but I swear it ain't true! A trireme, maybe, but not the Ark! :)