Yes, Lockheed Martin's FFG(X) design... nothing much to see haha. It was the same at SNA back in January: Check this out (at the bottom) www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/03/how-lockheed-martin-plans-to-make-the-freedom-class-lcs-more-lethal-and-survivable/
Great vid👍like Freedom LCS layout but can ship take on more weight in future refits? Surprised with Navantia purpose F100 design on Australia AWD does this have ASW capability like what was purpose for Australian frigate n why has Radar system been basic? It’s able connect to US n Australian warships? Especially in fleet where frigate is outside ship of the fleet, think about distance of protection n detection of enemy attack. Lessons can be learnt from Falkland war when missle was in bound toward Sheffield the reaction time was factor.
I find it hard to be persuaded to invest in an all-up PGK round vs modifying existing rounds with the a PGK. I think it makes more sense logistically to have a lot of conventional rounds with some upgraded with the PGK sort of like how the JDAM kits enhance regular dumb bombs. It would be easier to scale up the production of PGKs if the need for more guided rounds materialize.
basically they can actually sell it to other countries within rights. but the U.S can bar you from selling if they afraid those tech is too good or may be against themselves
@@possiblyadickhead6653 no supersonic cruise missile can do sea skimming Other than that it's range is too short NSM,cm-802,Babur,tomahawk and some other cruise missiles have a range of over a 500
Well I guess we'll see how good the stealth is on the nsm if it only goes supersonic speeds hypersonic is what you need in any rockets or missiles now days because hypersonic is the most effective way to get passed any radars systems
The Freedom class? It’s not necessarily bad, but it promises too much wand delivered two little in design, and cost way more than it should have. Typical government mismanagement
I could design a better FFGX than these clowns did. Both poor designs. Neither incorporate nearly enough VLS cells to be effective for much. And we need a minimum of a 5" forward gun. The first shown doesn't appt to have any aegis radar coverage at all aft leaving a serious gap. The seconds superstructure looks hideous at best and would be an embarrassing thing to look at or serve aboard. It also makes a nice big block target.
The BAE Systems Mk110 (57mm Bofors) main gun is a requirement set by the US Navy. So each competitors in the FFG(X) program has to submit a design proposal featuring this gun otherwise they will be eliminated. FFG(X) and LCS will be getting two new "smart and guided" rounds for these guns. The ALAMO round by L3, a guided 57mm to counter swarming (surface) targets and the MADS-Fire by Raytheon to use against incoming missiles.
@@NavalNews I know the background. But we still need a larger more capable gun. One that can do much more damage and has better range. Laser systems are useless in certain conditions. And rail guns are still a way off. Hell tanks have larger guns than ships
So basically your design will be a DDG and not a Frigate. We already have over 80 DDG ships at sea and more are being developed. Before anyone disses the Frigate's lethality, you have to remember how they are classified. Frigates and LCS classified as Small Surface Combatants. The Destroyers and Cruisers as Large Surface Combatants. The Large Surface Combatants have 96 VLS in DDG and 122 VLS in Cruisers. If you need more VLS, just order 20 more DDG at twice the cost. Most countries don't have Destroyers and Cruisers. They basically have mini-destroyers they call Frigates. Remember, the frigate is estimated around $800-900M where a DDG is more like $1.8B. More VLS is more money all around. The more VLS, the bigger the ship, the bigger the ship, the more steal, pipe, cable, etc. Get it? The Frigate is not going to do the heavy lifting of the Large Surface Combatants. It will handle the lighter stuff in general. Sure it can bring a punch to the fight, but you don't need a DDG for monitoring pirate activities off the Somali coast. Too much boat for that job. There will never be more than 32 VLS installed on the Frigate. They will keep the costs down as much as possible or else congress will cut the program.
Is the blacked out picture the fgx concept from lockheed ? Quite different from the 2018 mock up
Yes, Lockheed Martin's FFG(X) design... nothing much to see haha. It was the same at SNA back in January: Check this out (at the bottom) www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/03/how-lockheed-martin-plans-to-make-the-freedom-class-lcs-more-lethal-and-survivable/
@@jonnytaco7671 freedom LCS has a narrow hull ..is that ok for essentially a heavy frigate ffgx ?
@@NavalNews so lockheed has a late 2018 mock up design and this new secret concept ffgx ? Too late for the competion ?
Great vid👍like Freedom LCS layout but can ship take on more weight in future refits? Surprised with Navantia purpose F100 design on Australia AWD does this have ASW capability like what was purpose for Australian frigate n why has Radar system been basic? It’s able connect to US n Australian warships? Especially in fleet where frigate is outside ship of the fleet, think about distance of protection n detection of enemy attack. Lessons can be learnt from Falkland war when missle was in bound toward Sheffield the reaction time was factor.
I find it hard to be persuaded to invest in an all-up PGK round vs modifying existing rounds with the a PGK. I think it makes more sense logistically to have a lot of conventional rounds with some upgraded with the PGK sort of like how the JDAM kits enhance regular dumb bombs. It would be easier to scale up the production of PGKs if the need for more guided rounds materialize.
Cool
Needs more CIWS.
Click the link on the upper left for Chinese and Russian translations of this video...
Nice
Only in the United States will you find the ability to window shop the most advanced warfare technology. I actually like that.
You'll find defense expos in Europe and Asia as well.
Indeed, so far this year we covering two in the USA (SNA and SAS) and two in Asia (LIMA and IMDEX Asia). Subscribe to our channel to check them out
basically they can actually sell it to other countries within rights. but the U.S can bar you from selling if they afraid those tech is too good or may be against themselves
NSM = Best anti ship missile.
best in what? speed? ahah. it's absolute shit. braahmos is the best hands down.
@@riskinhos brahmos is fast but it lacks sea skimming capabilities . because of which it can be detected faster
@@goblincleaver_mshm.9751 it's irrelevant. from the time it's detected until ciws or missiles can be fired it already reach the target.
@@goblincleaver_mshm.9751 ît actually has see skimming
@@possiblyadickhead6653 no supersonic cruise missile can do sea skimming
Other than that it's range is too short
NSM,cm-802,Babur,tomahawk and some other cruise missiles have a range of over a 500
Well I guess we'll see how good the stealth is on the nsm if it only goes supersonic speeds hypersonic is what you need in any rockets or missiles now days because hypersonic is the most effective way to get passed any radars systems
Hypersonic missiles burn up in lower atmosphere though, so they’re hard to make
That ship isn't bad at all lol
The Freedom class? It’s not necessarily bad, but it promises too much wand delivered two little in design, and cost way more than it should have. Typical government mismanagement
Why is it that all these naval equipment reps are overweight. If they were at sea more often and ate more fish that fat belly would melt.
🏆⚔️👍😁📡🎇
I could design a better FFGX than these clowns did. Both poor designs. Neither incorporate nearly enough VLS cells to be effective for much. And we need a minimum of a 5" forward gun. The first shown doesn't appt to have any aegis radar coverage at all aft leaving a serious gap.
The seconds superstructure looks hideous at best and would be an embarrassing thing to look at or serve aboard. It also makes a nice big block target.
Then by all means, go ahead my friend let's see how far you get with that endeavor.
@@courseair1363 lol, you act like it's difficult. It isn't. I have done it before.
The BAE Systems Mk110 (57mm Bofors) main gun is a requirement set by the US Navy. So each competitors in the FFG(X) program has to submit a design proposal featuring this gun otherwise they will be eliminated. FFG(X) and LCS will be getting two new "smart and guided" rounds for these guns. The ALAMO round by L3, a guided 57mm to counter swarming (surface) targets and the MADS-Fire by Raytheon to use against incoming missiles.
@@NavalNews I know the background. But we still need a larger more capable gun. One that can do much more damage and has better range. Laser systems are useless in certain conditions. And rail guns are still a way off. Hell tanks have larger guns than ships
So basically your design will be a DDG and not a Frigate. We already have over 80 DDG ships at sea and more are being developed.
Before anyone disses the Frigate's lethality, you have to remember how they are classified. Frigates and LCS classified as Small Surface Combatants. The Destroyers and Cruisers as Large Surface Combatants. The Large Surface Combatants have 96 VLS in DDG and 122 VLS in Cruisers. If you need more VLS, just order 20 more DDG at twice the cost. Most countries don't have Destroyers and Cruisers. They basically have mini-destroyers they call Frigates.
Remember, the frigate is estimated around $800-900M where a DDG is more like $1.8B. More VLS is more money all around. The more VLS, the bigger the ship, the bigger the ship, the more steal, pipe, cable, etc. Get it? The Frigate is not going to do the heavy lifting of the Large Surface Combatants. It will handle the lighter stuff in general. Sure it can bring a punch to the fight, but you don't need a DDG for monitoring pirate activities off the Somali coast. Too much boat for that job.
There will never be more than 32 VLS installed on the Frigate. They will keep the costs down as much as possible or else congress will cut the program.