The LCS - 21st century "battlecruiser"??

The warships of today's navies, current naval events, ships in the news, etc.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

The LCS - 21st century "battlecruiser"??

Postby paulcadogan » Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:32 pm

What do you think of this?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ships-cos ... 42721.html

Reminds me of the development of the battlecruiser - but substitute "armament" for "armour" being sacrificed for speed...

Same story, different century??
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

culverin
Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:31 pm
Location: Hampshire. England.

Re: The LCS - 21st century "battlecruiser"??

Postby culverin » Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:06 pm

Norman P's views should be respected.

But paulc, please do do draw any comparisons between the LCS and the 'battlecruiser'.
That is downright ludicrouus and shortsighted.
Plus most crucially you are 110 years adrift. Man has even been to the Moon since. Apparently.

I should also remind you that the battlecruiser was never termed as such when built.
Indomitable, Inflexible and Invincible were armoured cruisers, the first three, with 12" and turbines. Fishers fantantic freesome. Then fearsome.

The LCS brings nothing new to naval warfare. How it measures up in due course will be watched with interest or indifference.

Oh incidentally, the next USS Enterprise, CVN 80, will, in my opinion, which i value, will be the last of these 100,000 ton dinosaurs.
And that is far more relevant than any bit part LCS platform.
The US lost the plot in the 1970,s.
A full broadside. The traditional English salute.
Thanks. Sean.

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: The LCS - 21st century "battlecruiser"??

Postby paulcadogan » Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:49 pm

culverin wrote:But paulc, please do do draw any comparisons between the LCS and the 'battlecruiser'.


I'm cerainly not comparing the ship types, hence the quotation marks - maybe I should have titled it differently - but in reading the article I could not help but think of a parallel:

“These ships are designed for speed,” Rear Admiral Tom Eccles, deputy commander for naval systems engineering at the Naval Sea Systems Command, said at a Surface Navy Association conference in January. “They’re designed to be in the fight and then get out of the fight when it’s required.”


Just like the BC's of old - "speed is armour" - they can catch anything they can beat and can outrun anything they can't.

The ship “is not expected to be survivable in that it is not expected to maintain mission capability after taking a significant hit in a hostile combat environment,” Michael Gilmore, the weapons tester, said in a January report.


That just gives me an image of Indefatigable, Queen Mary, Invincible and Hood - lacking the defences needed to avoid a catastrophe and suffering the consequences.
But that's the extent of the comparison.

The LCS is an interesting concept and I have to do more reading on it, but so far it seems they have a lot of kinks to iron out- which I hope they do.
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man


Return to “World Navies Today”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests