The LCS was found to be more useful in open water operations than previously considered. The wargame found that an LCS operating the ASW package could perform the mission, which freed up a destroyer that would normally perform the mission to contribute to the lethality of the strike group.
In July , the Navy awarded three contracts to reduce the weight of the package elements down to or below metric tons total to meet mission package weight requirements.
Since both elements are mature and fielded the VDS on Royal Navy Type 23 frigates and MFTA on Arleigh Burke and Zumwalt -class destroyers , the systems cannot be overhauled and other weight reduction ideas need to be implemented like lightening sensors and using composites in the handling system.
The ASW elements were chosen as cost-effective COTS sensors, so weight reduction needs by between percent have been planned for since their selection for integration onto the LCS.
The Mine Counter-Measure MCM module is designed to provide minesweeping, remotely detecting and bypassing mines, as well as minehunting, detecting and then disabling.
It was envisioned to perform "influence" minehunting via acoustic and magnetic signatures rather than contact or mechanical minehunting.
The first increment of the MCM module included three systems: To destroy mines, the AMNS is lowered by the helicopter and guided by an operator on board to neutralize it.
Increment three will involve adding the Fleet-class unmanned surface vessel USV with the unmanned surface sweep system USSS , a cable towed behind the boat.
It will mimic the acoustic and magnetic signature of a ship to fool magnetic and influence mines into detonating; introduction is expected in The final increment will be the Knifefish unmanned underwater vehicle UUV to find and detect buried mines in If the Knifefish UUV can have its endurance increased, the vessel will take over the mission from both systems.
The Navy included an irregular warfare package in its budget request to Congress. In , the U. Coast Guard began advocating the LCS as a tailor-made platform for drug interdiction missions.
Under pressure from Navy vessels retiring, the Coast Guard will suffer a surface vessel shortage for intercepting smuggling ships in the Caribbean area, forcing the Navy to examine other platforms for drug interdiction.
The Coast Guard noted that the LCS has previously performed this task, and pointed towards its high speed and embarked helicopters to run down smuggling fast boats; the Navy plans to base 10 Freedom -class ships at Naval Station Mayport, Florida which could be tasked to conduct interdiction missions.
During the late s, the U. Navy realized its Cold War -era cruisers and destroyers had been designed for open-ocean warfare, and would be vulnerable in shallow coastal waters, where they would face dangers from high-speed boats, missile-firing fast-attack craft, small submarines, sea mines, and land and air-launched anti-ship missiles.
Being small, light and numerous, the Streetfighter was envisioned as a "single-serving" ship to be abandoned once hit, made possible by its low cost.
The concept of a manned expendable warship was contentious and the idea was not picked up. When Donald Rumsfeld was made Secretary of Defense in early , he promised transformational approaches and doing jobs with fewer people.
Clark declared the LCS was his "most transformational effort" and number-one budget priority in Proponents typically pointed to its speed, asymmetric littoral threats, and impact on the American shipbuilding industry.
The LCS suffered from requirements creep, adding more missions and equipment, potentially rendering it too complex and expensive to use. When it was decided the ship would not be expendable, the original concept of a small, cheap, simple coastal warship became bigger, more expensive, and more complicated; with a smaller crew due to automation.
The task force assigned six different missions which had been previously performed by individual ships: The Navy was only willing to build one type of ship, the task force, realized it was virtually impossible for one vessel to fill all roles, advocated a large hull to cover the mission range through modularity, organic combat power, and unmanned systems.
When the first production contracts were awarded in , no mission module worked outside of a laboratory. Fast, cheap construction was emphasized, solving problems with technology.
Navy released the LCS requirement. The ultimate decision was to fund both designs as two variants of the class.
LCS-2 was launched 30 April In April , the Navy announced its revised procurement plan that three ships be funded in the FY budget; officials also hinted that the Navy may not down-select to one design for further orders, pointing out complementary features of the two designs.
The Congress asked the Navy to study improvement programs on existing ships in place of the LCS program. In May , Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems released a study that showed seven LCS can more efficiently perform anti-piracy patrols in the Western Indian Ocean than a fleet of 20 conventional ships for a quarter of the cost.
The Government Accountability Office GAO found that deploying the first two ships will delay the overall program because these two ships were not available for testing and development so changes may have to be made in the second pair of ships during construction instead of in advance.
Navy responded that "Early deployment brought LCS operational issues to the forefront much sooner than under the original schedule, some of which would not have been learnt until two years on.
Work explained that cost overruns were partly due to the shipbuilders bidding to American Bureau of Shipping commercial standards, the Navy changed this to Level I survivability standards for greater crew survivability, although the ships were not expected to operate after being hit.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus pointed out that new vessels traditionally start off costing more to operate due to difficulties with ships being built and tested simultaneously; GAO reports of new warships since the s support this claim.
As more littoral combat ships are built and enter service, Mabus said operational costs will decline to acceptable limits.
Instead of declaring a winner out of the two competing designs, the U. Navy in November asked the Congress to allow for the order of ten of each design.
In December , the Government Accountability Office identified some problems with the designs including extremely long crew training time, unrealistic maintenance plans, and the lack of comprehensive risk assessment.
The Navy would be forced to award the contract to only one team if it failed to secure Congressional approval.
In order to increase commonality, the Navy will force both types to use the same combat system electronics.
The handoff from General Dynamics to Austal of management for the Independence class led to a month schedule slip as the company struggled with building the JHSV ships at the same facilities.
A report by Rear Admiral Samuel Perez, USN, found that the ships lacked the manpower and firepower to complete the missions required by regional combatant commanders.
The report found that the LCS is "ill-suited for combat operations against anything but" small, fast boats not armed with anti-ship missiles.
It also found that the excessive beam width of the trimaran Independence class ships may pose a "navigational challenge in narrow waterways and tight harbors".
As contract workers are required to be American, they must be flown out to any foreign ports visited by an LCS. In , Captain Kenneth Coleman, the U.
Copeman III is reported to be considering an upsized "Super" LCS,  with space to install needed firepower, because he noted that the 57mm main gun was more suitable to a patrol boat than a frigate.
The Navy has said the LCS was designed to pull out of combat upon sustaining damage. Hunt added that the anti-submarine warfare ASW mission package would play an important role in protecting aircraft carriers and amphibious ships, and the mine countermeasures MCMs mission package would also provide necessary port security and waterway patrol capability following combat operations.
The first two vessels from each maker were found to be overweight and not meeting performance requirements for endurance or sprinting over 40 knots.
The GAO report recommended the Navy consider buying fewer ships of the type if its limitations prevent effective use in the Pacific theater. On 24 February , Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel directed the Navy to submit alternative proposals for a new surface combatant comparable to a frigate that can operate in all regions under conflict conditions.
Proponents point out that the LCS was not designed to function like destroyers but for littoral tasks like high-speed patrols and counter-piracy missions, moving at 40 knots and within shallow water where other ships cannot.
A new ship class would need built-in anti-submarine and surface warfare mission features, as opposed to swappable mission modules.
Greenert explained that the LCS meets or exceeds survivability and recoverability standards, was as survivable as a frigate, and was more survivable than mine countermeasures and patrol craft; susceptibility has to be improved upon, and he would consider modifications to increase survivability and flexibility.
The navy continued to look into improvements for the last 20 ships of the ship LCS procurement, that would increase the capabilities to that of a frigate.
It was reported that the navy was considering four different options as "leading contenders" for the role of this new frigate. Another being the group of three Freedom -class variants of differing size, both shorter and longer than the current Freedom class.
One RFI was for design concepts and information on cost and lethality, and the other was for specific systems and technologies. Mission areas consisting of anti-air, surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, and mine countermeasure missions will offer a range of mission and capability options based on the threat environment that will drive design work and costs.
Options for the proposed small surface combatant were a modified version of the LCS, an existing alternate ship design, or an entirely new design.
Austal USA submitted a modified Independence -class ship, adding permanently installed systems like a towed array sonar, torpedoes, vertical launch anti-submarine rockets, and aviation capability to support the MH helicopter in place of mission modules.
Huntington Ingalls submitted a larger, more heavily armed National Security Cutter. General Dynamics also made an unspecified response. A decision is to be made by February in advance of the budget submission.
The SSC shall have an improved 3D air defense radar, air defense decoys, better electronic warfare system, over-the-horizon anti-ship missiles, multi-function towed array sonar, torpedo defenses, additional armor, and displace less than Flight 0 vessels.
The SSC will focus on anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare; mine countermeasures will be handled by existing LCS ships. Current plans lack vertical launchers for Standard missiles; the SSC is planned to be able to operate alone.
The over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile will likely be in the Harpoon Block II class. Hagel also directed the Navy to study which improvements could be added to LCSs; completed ships cannot accommodate all changes, more can be added to incomplete ones, the final number and mix of each type has yet to be determined.
The decision was made on SSC upgrade features to prioritize over-the-horizon surface and ASW capabilities with a greater degree of self-defense, not anti-aircraft or missile defense, which will be left to large surface combatants.
Although a 3D radar is included in the designs, a VLS was absent from the hulls, contrary to what naval experts suggested and industry submissions contained.
Adding a vertical launch system was evaluated, but was determined to be too heavy and large and requiring long and costly changes; modular aspects of the ships may allow for the addition of the smaller Mk 56 VLS for the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile.
Aside from lethality changes, the service also intends to have a common combat management system for both variants. In January , the Navy announced that the up-gunned LCS will be reclassified as a frigate, since the requirements of the SSCTF was to upgrade the ships with frigate-like capabilities.
A report released in September indicated that the first 24 ships would retain the basic design principles of the LCS program, with upgrades where needed.
This group would be considered "Block 0" and also retain the "LCS" designation, for the time being. Ships 25 through 32, "Block 1" would include significant upgrades and design changes, inline with the intended capabilities of the last 20 ships of the total ship procurement, these being the new "Frigate" class.
The new frigates will be larger, have increased defensive and survivability capabilities and more permanent missions packages, as opposed to the original modular design.
Though fewer ships will be available in some instances, those needs will be met by higher-end ships to ensure forces in various fleets have the capabilities and posture to defeat potential advanced adversaries.
Saudi Arabia and Israel both expressed an interest in a modified version of the Freedom variant, the LCS-I,  but it was reported that Israel has dropped out of this project in favor of a new frigate design to be built in Israel.
Japan will design its own version of the Independence class. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Project class patrol ship Gowind-class corvette Braunschweig -class corvette Holland -class offshore patrol vessel Kamorta -class corvette Khareef -class corvette Tuo Chiang -class corvette Type corvette La Fayette -class frigate River-class patrol vessel MEKO or "littoral combatant ship" Milgem-class corvette Sigma-class corvette.
Archived from the original on 1 March Retrieved 8 May Retrieved 19 July Retrieved 19 January Retrieved 14 November Archived from the original on 6 January Retrieved 2 May Navy specs reveal major design shift - Defensenews.
Archived from the original on 20 February Sizing Immediate in case of automatic sizing. Could require further clarifications of the subscription estimate.
Sizing team Automatic sizing based on subscription estimate by default, manual sizing by exception. If there are any questions about your request, they will be posted as Comments on the service request.
When the package deployment succeeds, the environment will be available as soon as the package deployment has finished, which means that the longer downtime window does not have any negative effect on the availability of the system.
Copy database Five hours lead time and two hours downtime Dynamic Service Engineering DSE Generally, the database copy is completed in less than one hour.
We still recommend that you provide a downtime window of two hours in case a rollback is required for any reason.
The process of completing a step has two parts: Do the actual work, such as a fit-gap analysis or user acceptance testing UAT. Mark the corresponding step in the LCS methodology as completed.
To help ensure a successful go-live, you should consider the following as you complete the UAT phase: Test cases cover the entire scope of requirements.
Test by using migrated data. Test by using the correct security roles default roles and custom roles that are assigned to users.
Make sure that the solution complies with any company-specific and industry-specific regulatory requirements. Document all features, and obtain approval and sign-off from the customer.
Here are the reasons: The topology of the Tier-1 environments differs from the topology of your production environment. This servicing includes the processes of applying deployable packages, creating service requests, and moving database between environments.
FastTrack Go-live assessment All Finance and Operations customers must complete a go-live review with the Microsoft FastTrack team before their production environment can be deployed.
About eight weeks before go-live, the FastTrack team will ask you to fill in a go-live checklist: If you have or more seats, and a Microsoft solution architect is assigned to your project, the solution architect will contact you.
If you have 20— seats, the checklist will be sent to you from go-live microsoft. If you have 20— seats, send the checklist to go-live microsoft.
If you have or more seats, and a Microsoft solution architect is assigned to your project, send the checklist to the solution architect.
You can cancel an environment deployment request while it is in a Queued state by following these steps: On the Customer sign-off tab, click Clear sign-off.
Here are some scenarios where the Admin user must access an environment: First sign-in to any environment after initial deployment — In this case, the Admin user is the only user who can access the environment.
First sign-in to a sandbox environment after a database refresh from the production environment — In this case, all user accounts except the Admin account are unable to sign in.
Product feedback Sign in to give documentation feedback. You may also leave feedback directly on GitHub. There are no open issues.
Follow the instructions provided in the "FastTrack Go-live assessment" section later in this topic. Architect delivers assessment after checklist is received and continues review until questions are clarified and mitigations are in place, if applicable.
If the production deployment request has already been submitted, deployment will start. The production deployment request should only be submitted after the FastTrack Architect has finished the assessment.
Immediate in case of automatic sizing. Status in LCS reflects the deployment progress. Follow the instructions in the topic, Apply updates to cloud environments.