Military Review

US Navy replenished with another ship of the coastal zone

48
US naval forces replenished with another warship. In the city of Burns Harbor, Indiana, the ceremony of putting into operation the ship coastal zone USS Indianapolis (LCS 17). It is reported by the command of the American fleet.


US Navy replenished with another ship of the coastal zone


The US Navy commissioned the latest USS coastal ship Indianapolis (LCS 17). He is the seventeenth ship of this class and the ninth type of "Freedom". Ships in the US coastal zone are available in two versions: the first (Freedom type) is a high-speed single-hull ship developed by Lockheed Martin Corporation, the second (Independence type) is a trimaran developed by General Dynamics Corporation.

The ship was laid down on 18 on July 2016 of the year at the Marinette Marine shipyard in Marinette, Wisconsin. Launched on 18 April 2018 year.

Full displacement - 3500 tons. Length 115,3 meters, width 17,5 meters, draft 3,7 meters. Speed ​​45 knots. Engines: 2 gas turbine engine Rolls-Royce MT30 36 MW; 2 diesel engine Colt-Pielstick; 4 Rolls-Royce. Total power 36 MW.

Cruising range declared in 3500 miles on 18 nodes. Autonomy - 21 day. Crew: from 15 to 50 people of the main crew, during the deployment of the crew 75 people.

In the arsenal of the ship: Anti-aircraft artillery: 1 × 1 57-mm BAU Systems Mk 110 missile systems, missile weapons: 1 × 21 air defense systems RIM-116, anti-submarine weapons: Honeywell Mk 50 Torpedo, as well as four 50-mm cannon missiles, missile system with modular universal-based PU NETFIRES PAM. The configuration of weapons may vary depending on the tasks.

В aviation The group includes 2 helicopters MH-60R / S Seahawks and one UAV MQ-8 Fire Scout.

The main purpose is to act in coastal waters and shallow areas of the sea in order to ensure the safety of navigation in its own coastal zone, as well as in the most important areas of maritime navigation.
48 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tlauicol
    tlauicol 27 October 2019 07: 36
    +6
    as well as four 50 mm guns
    incorrect translation: referring to machine guns of the 50th caliber (12.7)

    Idianapolis is not the happiest name for the ship
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 08: 10
      +1
      Quote: Tlauicol
      I mean machine guns of the 50th caliber

      Then I will correct you. = 3
      . 50 inch caliber.
      In general, Independence is also a bad name, although it survived WWII.
      But what should be noted - 2 helicopters is very good. Our corvettes and even frigates can only envy.
    2. hrych
      hrych 27 October 2019 08: 24
      +3
      Quote: Tlauicol
      Idianapolis is not the happiest name for the ship

      Well yes. His ancestor cruiser was torpedoed by a Japanese submarine, and sharks devoured the surviving sailors and those who were floating on the water. But, shortly before that, it was he who delivered the first atomic bomb to the base of Tinian Island, from where they burnt along Hiroshima. The Japanese had to drown it a little earlier. And so today, Trump will announce the liquidation of the Daishak leader and the final victory over the caliphate. And the flight from Syria of the Americans will be victorious and brilliant. And in the election race, beaten Trump will be New Caesar. Well done!
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 27 October 2019 07: 46
    0
    For the tasks being solved, the ship is simply huge ... Although ... if there is a lot of money, then you can rivet a whole fleet of such. It has no shock weapons ... only anti-submarine. And air defense.
    1. Private-K
      Private-K 27 October 2019 08: 09
      0
      That way, under only 1000 tons of displacement, they went on to ensure the permanent basing of helicopters.
      And so, yes - too weak weapons for such a displacement and with those "threats" in the environment of which it is supposed to operate.
    2. novobranets
      novobranets 27 October 2019 08: 11
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It has no shock weapons ... only anti-submarine. And air defense.

      According to purpose. The vessel is good for patrolling the coastal zone and combating smugglers, water cannons allow you to walk in shallow water, and speed increases efficiency. Plus elements of invisibility, helicopters. Judging by the published data, I think the boat is not bad.
    3. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 08: 13
      +1
      The littoral ship construction program is considered one of the main failures of the Pentagon, even in the United States itself.
      1. Corn
        Corn 27 October 2019 08: 19
        +6
        That is why almost 20 pieces have already riveted them and are not going to stop?
        1. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 27 October 2019 08: 22
          -1
          Money has already been allocated, construction is in full swing. Freezing is simply harder than finishing it (then the money will really go nowhere with zero exhaust). But you can manage to limit the series, which has already been done in Congress.
          1. Corn
            Corn 27 October 2019 08: 27
            +4
            The littoral ship construction program is considered one of the main failures.

            Money has already been allocated, construction is in full swing.

            ?????
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 27 October 2019 08: 37
              +2
              At the time of signing the contract, the idea was considered promising.
              In short, the usual corruption legalized in the West - i.e. the political lobby paid by the industrialist (many of the Pentagon’s lumps - those that may affect the adoption / non-adoption of the next technique - are at the forefront of the main arms corporations in the USA). When, however, they suddenly realized (having heeded the voice of the mind of independent and knowledgeable experts ... who rarely listens to them, just because they are knowledgeable and independent) - it’s more expensive to terminate a contract already concluded.
              1. Corn
                Corn 27 October 2019 08: 48
                +4
                The moment the contract was signed, the idea was considered promising.
                Now what idea is considered “promising” and why are the Chinese going to transfer the coastal fleet to similar ships?
                paid by industrialist political lobby.
                What prevents the production of “necessary and useful” ships, if they do not care what money is made from?
                When the State Department caught on
                you at least ask what the State Department is, and what relation it has to the fleet.
                1. Kuroneko
                  Kuroneko 27 October 2019 09: 08
                  0
                  Quote: Corn
                  you at least ask what the State Department is, and what relation it has to the fleet.

                  State Department of Arms? Direct. I simply abbreviated, and made it clear by writing the abbreviation in lower case.
                  Quote: Corn
                  What prevents the production of “necessary and useful” ships, if they do not care what money is made from?

                  Just the lobby and the exorbitant appetites of the US hawks and "gun lords". For a long time, the White House just looked at all their machinations condescendingly, considering itself the only superpower on the planet after the collapse of the USSR. But times, as practice has shown, have changed. Hence the criticism (but also completely tame and biased) from other forces.
                  Quote: Corn
                  Now what idea is considered “promising” and why are the Chinese going to transfer the coastal fleet to similar ships?

                  Ukrainian "wolf pack" of boats with machine guns and hand-held MANPADS, lol. ^ _ ^ Just kidding, essno.
                  Seriously, most likely, in the near future, the old, but dying out projects of arsenal ships will be revived. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship-arsenal

                  As for the Chinese, they have their own atmosphere there, and just for China, littoral is still quite a topic, because China has nearby and disputed territories. In general, the Chinese Navy strategy, along the way, focuses on zerg rush. But who can argue with the United States on the other side of the globe?
                  1. Corn
                    Corn 27 October 2019 09: 33
                    +2
                    State Department of Arms?
                    do you mean the ministry of defense?
                    Just the lobby and the exorbitant appetites of the US hawks and "gun lords".
                    This is all clear and understandable. But these very “weapon barons” don’t give a damn what to deliver to the state, if only they paid, but the military ordered these littoral ships. I just google it, there are no long-term contracts for dozens of ships.
                    arsenal ship designs that were old but dying away will be reborn.
                    Arsenal ships are already in every normal fleet, these are submarines and aircraft carriers, barges with missiles are too vulnerable.
                    But who can argue with the United States on the other side of the globe?
                    the US has bases around the globe, littoral ships will graze near them.
                    1. Kuroneko
                      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 09: 49
                      +1
                      Quote: Corn
                      Arsenal ships are already in every normal fleet, these are submarines and aircraft carriers, barges with missiles are too vulnerable.

                      Nit!
                      The whole charm of arsenals is just cheapness. And even donating 1-2 such ships is not a problem, unlike submarines and aircraft carriers.
                      Quote: Corn
                      the US has bases around the globe, littoral ships will graze near them.

                      I told you not about that. Reread my words more closely. Especially about the "gunboats" - ie. which is why the program was considered a failure.
                      In the meantime, I can tell one fairy tale (in fact - 100% true) about a certain McNamara Robert Strange and the projected Oliver Perry frigate project, which was neither fish nor meat - in general, the devil had a bow on the side, but on the other hand perfectly suited for the task of covering Atlantic convoys from submarines and light forces of the USSR Navy. Olivers were riveted just a wild (for a similar ship) quantity - 51 pieces. Now - yes, Olivers are being written off with might and main and distributed / sold to US vassals. The ship, however, was DIKO necessary for its time. I simply did not play, because the expected conflict with the USSR did not happen then. Therefore, he remained in history as a deliberately unsuccessful project.
                      So, it's the same with littoral. They were made for the same geopolitical realities - and the world has already changed. Therefore, they will not play, and will remain just one more "Oliver Perry". They are good only against natives with spears and slings (and when the American air "umbrella" is not at risk of getting from the SUDDEN S-400), and in the modern world there are less and less of them.
                      In America, they already understood this very well, and that’s why they consider the project a failure. Expensive and useless.
    4. tlauicol
      tlauicol 27 October 2019 08: 37
      +4
      depending on what task - you can build a patroller and build 10 tons
    5. Zeev Zeev
      Zeev Zeev 27 October 2019 09: 15
      0
      Of the shock weapons there are only NETFIRES PAM. The program seems to have been canceled, but they saw it revived.
    6. Dikson
      Dikson 27 October 2019 10: 25
      0
      The ship is huge .. but at least a crew of 15 people !!! weird. how do they divide them 4x8? Is there everything so automated? even if 50 people. with the declared weapons and characteristics .. it would be interesting to look at the staffing list ..
  3. Corn
    Corn 27 October 2019 08: 24
    +1
    All you need to eat, and there is nothing superfluous.
    These are the ships that Russia needs, and not super-caliber carriers of dubious value.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 08: 55
      0
      Quote: Corn
      All you need to eat, and there is nothing superfluous.

      Yah? One may inquire of what is their complete self-sufficiency, taking into account the assigned responsibilities?
      Quote: Corn
      These are the ships that Russia needs

      If you are a conscious pest, then yes. Then such Russia needs it. However, we and our pests have enough projects of 20380 or 22350 with leapfrog (which are already being built per hour on a teaspoon for almost decades).
      1. Corn
        Corn 27 October 2019 09: 09
        +1
        What is the specificity of their complete self-sufficiency, taking into account the assigned responsibilities?
        in high mobility and the presence of 2 helicopters, which allows you to control vast territories.
        1. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 27 October 2019 09: 17
          +1
          As for the 2 turntables - this is the very first comment in the discussion of the news that I designated somewhere above. That is yes. Plus big. We would have two turntables on all corvettes / frigates.
          Mobility? Heh. This is where the difficulties begin. Multiplying by mediocre seaworthiness.
          And the main gag is in weapons. Littoralki is a belated continuation of the idea of ​​"gunboat politics". Such ships are good (even ideal) only against the Papuans, whom the United States previously considered everyone except itself. It turned out that they thought it wrong. This is why the program failed.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 27 October 2019 11: 19
            +1
            "And the main gag is in armament" ///
            ----
            Corrected more or less. They delivered RCC. see my post below.

            This is a "live test" after assembling missiles on an old ship.
  4. Irek
    Irek 27 October 2019 09: 06
    0
    And junk hahlam was discarded at the price of a new one.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 09: 59
      +2
      Quote: Irek
      at the price of a new one.

      Not certainly in that way. Let’s be fair. Boats were really GIFTED, but staff training, transportation, and refurbishment of boats flew into the pots of a sickly hryvnia. At the same time, judging by recent news and photos, with sloppy cables sticking out here and there on the bridge, the Americans did not particularly bother with the conversion.
  5. Ros 56
    Ros 56 27 October 2019 09: 16
    0
    Who knows, the fate of the Zumvolts does not threaten him?
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 10: 36
      0
      Quote: Ros 56
      Who knows, the fate of the Zumvolts does not threaten him?

      No. "Zamvolty" are essentially modern "Yamato" (not in terms of combat power): expensive, ambitious, it is not clear at all why (even in the USA they did not understand, and limited the series from 32 planned ships to of three). So they will be cherished like the apple of an eye (as was the case with Yamato at the time), only occasionally walking on some secondary tasks with a minimum of risk and a maximum of PR.
      And littoral are really kamikaze consumables for any serious batch.
      So it does not threaten.
      Until the Third World Hot begins. This one equalizes everyone.
  6. Avior
    Avior 27 October 2019 09: 37
    +3
    Formidable Frigates
    Displacement 3200
    Range 4200 at 18 knots.
    Full-fledged air defense for 32 cells Aster 15/30, a wind, 8 harpoons, stealth and more.
    Crew 71 man.
    A full-fledged frigate for all cases for $ 275 million.
    The Americans had to buy from the French, replacing the UVP with the MK41 and setting up their radar, it would have turned out to be an excellent frigate for all occasions, an ideal addition to the expensive Arly Berks. If necessary, extend by 2 helicopters

    And it’s not clear what the bad money is.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 27 October 2019 10: 54
      -1
      Quote: Avior
      Range 4200 at 18 knots.

      One of the main requirements for littoral was - high speed. Not economical, yes, but littoral can issue 44/47 nodes (Freedom / Independence). Formidable here and there did not lie with their 27 nodes.
      1. Orkraider
        Orkraider 27 October 2019 11: 08
        +1
        hi
        Kuroneko, welcome!

        By the way, the question is, in many sources the difference in total displacement varies greatly.
        Scatter from 2800 (Russian Vika) to 3900 tons (English-speaking Vika).
        What is real? If you know, please write. Now I began to search, I realized that the difference is depending on the modules, but whether there is a large spread of 1100 tons.
        1. Avior
          Avior 27 October 2019 19: 48
          +2
          Perhaps the problem is still in units of measurement - metric tons or long.
          Long again can be English and American.
          By the way, 3900 is not in English.
          Independence
          Displacement:
          2,307 metric tons light, 3,104 metric tons full, 797 metric tons deadweight
          Freedom
          Displacement:
          3,400 long tons (3,500 t) (full load)
          1. Orkraider
            Orkraider 27 October 2019 19: 51
            +1
            Thank you.
            But just in English 3900, here is the screen:
            1. Avior
              Avior 27 October 2019 19: 54
              +2
              Got it, the discrepancies are even greater
              I quoted from a mobile version of the English.
              I did not know that they did not coincide with the usual one. Live and learn.
              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Freedom_(LCS-1)
            2. Avior
              Avior 27 October 2019 20: 34
              +2
              1 short ton of the United States is 0.91 metric tons or 0.89 long English
      2. Avior
        Avior 27 October 2019 11: 16
        +1
        For high speed in the littoral zone, such a displacement is useless.
        Now they are trying to turn them into a semblance of corvettes, but the frigates really need the fleet, it’s too expensive a pleasure to drive expensive Arly Burke on every occasion.
        Despite the fact that such a frigate is five times cheaper than Burke, he could perform most tasks in low-intensity conflicts on his own, in other cases it would be a great addition to Arly Burke.
        We would finalize the project for 2 helicopters and put our lm2500 instead of diesel engines, as the Singaporeans would have added in speed and seaworthiness, the displacement would have increased slightly, and an excellent frigate for their tasks would have been obtained.
        A high-speed patrol for the littoral zone would be done separately, with much less displacement and cost.
    2. Kettle
      Kettle 27 October 2019 15: 37
      +2
      Well, the French themselves in the Navy are full of under-armed frigates - about 3/4 of the composition. The very own Lafayette, on the basis of which France made this Formideable to Singaporeans, does not have serious air defense, the decrepit Naval Crotal does not count. All serious NATO countries - France, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, and now the USA - have been building a series of watchdog frigates since the 1990s and 2000s, not for a serious war.
      Large dimensions and internal volumes, but weak or specialized in frigate tasks missile and electronic weapons. Versatility is not for military purposes, but for peacetime missions and local conflicts - spacious helicopter platforms, large high-speed boats with easy descent, large internal reserve rooms for landing / cargo / hospitals, etc., a small crew.
      At the same time, space and volumes are left for installation, although not fast, if necessary, of additional missile systems and REO.

      In the 60s and 80s, hundreds, if not thousands, of large ships were built around the world, armed to the maximum, as far as the possibilities allowed, for operations around the 3rd World War. They served their entire term without using, probably, a fifth of their combat capabilities.
      The exception is perhaps the aircraft carriers (Vietnam and numerous local wars), part of the British fleet (Falklands), partly - American submarines, “Berks” and “Ticonderogs” with Tomahawks, I forgot something else, I guess. For the rest, such patrolmen would be enough.
      The entire service was carried by expensive rockets, radars, and trained crews, which were expensive in the production and operation.
      In principle, this applies to all weapons. Tens of thousands of aircraft, hundreds of thousands of tanks and BMs, missiles basically still have not revealed their full potential. Most did not take part in any hostilities at all. It is clear that in many ways this was necessary to deter the enemy.
      Now the probability of large wars between large countries is less. In general, politicians understand that there will be no winner in such serious conflicts. Almost any contradictions, even with weaker countries, are easier, cheaper, politically more profitable (very voters today do not like military losses) to be resolved through negotiations or political and economic pressure (USA-DPRK, for example, from fresh).
      Leaving as a basis heavily armed equipment, produce more or less cheap in production and operation - "for every day." Specialized for frequent local conflicts. Minimize (as they can) military spending - modern guns are very expensive.
      Accordingly, partly instead of universal frigates - watchdogs, instead of armored personnel carriers - MRAP, instead of tanks - more mobile BKM, instead of jet attack aircraft and fighter-bombers - "Tukano".
      1. Avior
        Avior 27 October 2019 20: 28
        +1
        Tens of thousands of aircraft, hundreds of thousands of tanks and BMs, missiles basically still have not revealed their full potential.

        And this is the problem of all weapons.
        Yes, in Europe there was a situation that inside there is no one to fight, but in non-European affairs they are used to raiding the Stae.
        Ships are made unarmed
        Nevertheless, a place for installation when changing the political situation is provided.
        But we are talking about the States, not Europe. And Arly Burke can’t be called unarmed.
        Yes, and no one requires loading rockets into all cells.
        And the United States, unlike Europe, has a growing fleet of China, and we need to respond to this.
        Frigates - the need of the States
        1. Kettle
          Kettle 27 October 2019 21: 38
          +2
          Well, I'm generally about the same.
          Europeans have a normal ship / underfreg ratio - roughly 1: 1-1: 2. In the USA - 5: 1.
          If there are under 90 pieces - a hefty fleet - Ajisson bearers with about 10 VPU cells ..
          If you are planning a series of frigates in the classical sense, this is just the Formidable type, only larger, also well-armed.
          It is also not bad to have 20 Littoral - high-speed large ships "on parcels", replacement for minesweepers in distant zones, assistance to patrol ships, high-speed supply / special operations, in general - running around the world. Cheap to maintain, minimal crew.
          In serious batches, such as with China, they probably will not participate. Neither weapons for this, nor combat stability.
          1. Avior
            Avior 27 October 2019 22: 58
            +1
            As I understand it, it was originally supposed that they would act on their shore.
            And then it dawned on that such a large ship it was not clear what it would do, they began to hastily equip them.
            As for the frigates, there should be at least as many as Berkov.
            In fact, a pair of Berk frigate will be equal to a pair of Berks, since frigates will take on many of the functions that are small for an destroyer.
            Yes, I’d take the Formidebl project as a basis, for example, I would increase the displacement to 4000, lengthen, so that I could accommodate 2 helicopters, maybe with one hangar, put 32 cell µ41, add 8 cell under 32 ЕССМ perhaps he would replace the gun with 127 mm and get a ship with the most of Betklev’s capabilities in low-intensity conflicts, and intensive help to the berks would be noticeable.
            And it costs 4 to 5 frigates for one burke.
  7. Igor Pa
    Igor Pa 27 October 2019 10: 18
    0
    In WOW, his strongholds knock out well.)
  8. Alien From
    Alien From 27 October 2019 10: 19
    -3
    This is a boat, the Buyan was not standing nearby.
    1. Orkraider
      Orkraider 27 October 2019 10: 56
      +1
      Quote: Alien From
      This is a boat, the Buyan was not standing nearby.

      Of course I didn’t. There is nothing that 21631 has a displacement of 950 tons, and this coastal area is 3 tons. Difference in THREE times.

      Compare with 20380 (total 2250 tons) they are closer in size and displacement.
  9. internal enemy
    internal enemy 27 October 2019 10: 49
    +1
    A good ship and this is only the coastal zone, no one has such.
  10. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 27 October 2019 11: 17
    +1
    Forgot to say that the weapons on these ships were added: they put in front of the cabin two launch Norwegian anti-ship missiles, improved Lockheed (4 missiles)
  11. boriz
    boriz 27 October 2019 11: 32
    +1
    The choice of anti-aircraft artillery is more than strange. A single gun will not provide round-fire. Its low rate of fire under rolling conditions casts doubt on its effectiveness over relatively long distances. A rapid-fire small-caliber artillery is not at all. Have I really missed something and canceled the long-familiar six-barrels in the world? And how to shoot down planes and missiles from behind? 21 missile development of the late 70s - early 80s is not impressive. Speed ​​even for an airplane is not super, and for a missile defense it sucks. This is not to mention the technical progress since that time on control systems. Again, the SAM - one.
    1. Kettle
      Kettle 27 October 2019 15: 41
      +1
      The transition from Vulkan-Falanks to RAM is justified: 1,5 km of range (5-8 seconds of anti-ship missile) versus about 10 km from an air defense system, 100-gram shells against somewhere around a 10-pound warhead for missile defense, uncertainty in connection with this for AU - hit? damaged? knocked down? - and in fact, the time for shooting only one rocket, and if two? On many modern ships they put "RAM" or RAM-like instead of ZAK, or with it.
      And the speed for self-defense missiles is not so important, to shoot in the opposite direction, and not to catch up. And maneuvering anti-ship missiles near the target will no longer be active - either a direct or standard slide.
  12. Fantazer911
    Fantazer911 27 October 2019 14: 34
    -1
    Class, old junk ukroine yourself new, such a good business, nothing personal!
  13. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 27 October 2019 16: 50
    +2
    Judging by the given specifications ... Miracle steamer! Develop 45 knots in a displacement position (such speeds as long as only hydrofoils developed) with a full hull exit from the water. How?! .. And even with a tonnage of 3500 tons Karl! ...
    There is clearly someone somewhere bummed. hi
    I am reporting this to you as an employee of a factory specializing in the construction of very high-speed sea steamboats.