The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) had a flawed purpose but innovative modular mission design concept that held promise. The Navy abandoned the littoral missions but couldn't produce the mission modules. And in the greatest sin couldn't even make the basic ships work. We need to do better to beat China at sea. Give the LCS proper burials at sea.
We should just rename these ships the SINKEX class and write them off, shouldn't we?
The littoral combat ship Wichita suffered a problem in its propulsion plant last month as the ship was on its way home from deployment. But Navy officials say they do not think the mishap was due to the same combining gear issue that has hobbled other Freedom-class LCS in recent years.
Oh, good! A completely new engine problem! What a relief.
The ship is only four years old.
I thought the concept of building a ship with lots of room for equipment and weapons housed in shipping containers that could be rapidly changed was a great concept. It eventually inspired my idea for Modularized Auxiliary Cruisers, which eventually got published in Military Review with a different emphasis.
Aside from failures in shipbuilding, the idea that the expensive and large ship should operate in the littorals close to shore was dangerous nonsense (nor was it the only victim of such thinking).
So the Navy added the LCS to its list of naval power failures. The shortcomings are depressing.
I had hoped that maybe the decommissioning of the class would allow the Navy to experiment with armed transports for Marine Littoral Regiment teams spread around the western Pacific to hammer the Chinese navy.
But we can hardly risk the Marine-laden LCS sailing alone and breaking down within PLAN missile range, can we? Just float around until an ocean-going tug can show up, eh?
Perhaps the best service the LCS can provide is to teach the Navy how modern anti-ship weapons damage ships in the real world.
Behold the SINKEX class.
NOTE: Winter War of 2022 coverage continues here.
