US Navy FFG(X) Frigate at SAS2018 : FREMM, AUSTAL Frigate, F100, Mk110, L3 ALAMO, Lacroix Sylena

[@leemccurtayne9489]

Well all you Armchair Admirals, times really are changing. Fincantiari gets the gig. Why? Well it’s a totally different approach. American builders will now have to think outside the square. It’s not a bad thing, it just progress.

[@dv2045]

the last contenders were the Navantia F110 (an air defense multicapable role frigate) vs the Ficantieri Fremm (an ASW frigate). I guess the Navy gets the idea that submarines are a bigger threat and better leave cruisers deal with capital ships.

[@danielefabbro822]

Considering that the Arleigh Burke-class have insufficient ASW capabilities, the choice for the Italian ASW FREMM was quite obvious. I guess. Question is: why the Americans have built a Destroyer with poor ASW capabilities? Really, that's basically the only role they have nowadays.

[@buenoobra3443]

...I wish our country's navy would have either FREMM or Navantia Frigates with 76mm main gun and at least 24 VLS...

[@janhollon3078]

Now that the US NAVY has new frigate where can I buy the replaced ones? This would make an excellent luxury cruiser for my company.

[@myms7375]

Most of the Oliver Hazard Perry-class were already sold to many countries.

[@kempmt1]

To me, the choice should be the F100 of the Spanish and Australian Navies, and/or the Huntington-Ingalls design. I hope they don't chose either failed LCS-variants.They have only 16-VLS cells instead of 32 or 48-cell VLS of other frigates.

[@Tagadarealty]

Spanish are not even able to build a submarine with the french plans they have stole...

[@pedrofmc0000]

@Wayne Haile Class Hobart is based on the F-105 Cristobal Colon with some minor changes... It's the newest Spanish frigate bigger than its brothers.

[@pedrofmc0000]

@@Tagadarealty Spain didn't steal anything. DCNS got angry because Navantia began to design a new submarine without them. This new submarine is a new design with a new PIA system. It's had some problems because of its reformer of bioethanol, a revolutionary system to get hydrogen for fuel cells. It caused some delays. The first one will be on the sea in September of this year to begin its sailing tests. France has had much more problems with the Barracuda class. It's widely known. As far as I know, Aussies are not very happy with DCNS either...

[@Tagadarealty]

@@pedrofmc0000 Yeah, they do nothing illegaly. That's why Navantia let all their part of the Scorpen to DCNS. Because it's a known fact, when you are innocent, you let a multibillion program (with a big success) in the hands of the other party. About Autraslia, it's only political australian issue, nothing common with the sub, which is the Shortfin Barracuda, barracuda is the name of the program (Nuclear french version) So, what the point... You try to change the attention 'cause you dont have any clue of what happening...

[@pedrofmc0000]

@@Tagadarealty On May 4, 2009, the French shipyards DCNS filed a plagiarism complaint against the Spaniards of Navantia considering that they copied elements of the Scorpene submarine, jointly manufactured by both companies, to develop the S-80, although what angered most to the French was the decision of Madrid to equip with defensive material of the American company Lockheed Martin the S-80, instead of choosing French technology, and that Navantia has opted with his S-80 to some auctions to which the French submarine also aspired. In those years DCNS didn't even know how the submarine was going to be and therefore, denouncing Navantia was nothing more than childish anger. The only thing that Scorpene and S-80 Plus look like is that they are black and have rounded and elongated shapes, like all submarines. DCNS already manufactured the Scorpene and the agreement was that DCNS continued with the Scorpene and Navantía would be dedicated to the S-80. DCNS continued the same as it was and Navantia continued with its new program because they couldn't develop the new submarine and produce the Scorpenes at the same time, so I don't see where Navantia yielded. Navantia already had a workload for the Spanish navy with the S-80 and hoped to get new customers with that new model in the future, so Navantia didn't give up anything or cared about anything else... The Barracuda class submarines on which the Australians are based had many problems during their design and sea trials. It is widely known and published in the press. Australian submarines are based on the Barracuda and you don't see the relationship? Really curious!. You criticize Navantia and you say they don't know how to make a submarine without even knowing what happened or what problems there were, but you feel bothered when I talk about the Barracuda class problems. And you tell me that the problems with Australia are political ... Now it seems that having a delay of nine months less than a year after the signing is a "political" problem ... www.infodefensa.com/mundo/2020/02/18/noticia-desencuentro-entre-naval-group-australia-cuenta-submarinos.htm

[@RedLegBlazer]

Danger-close doesn't mean the enemy is close to you. It means you'll be dropping ordinance close to your own dudes.

[@chiefseadawg5164]

It appears to me that the F100 would be the best design for the U.S. Navy. The last thing the Navy should do is build its new frigate around the failed Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)! Both variants of the LCS are experiencing significant problems, to the point that most of the ships are not even deployable. Moreover, they are not suited to operate in a high conflict environment. Yes, the LCS’ are fast, light and very maneuverable. But all of those features have been met by sacrificing the one critical element that every warship needs - survivability. The LCS’ could not even withstand fire from a .50 caliber gun! They are also too lightly armed, so they do not have an effective offensive punch. Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), which is responsible for all new ship designs, went through a very bizarre phase, beginning a couple of decades ago. NAVSEA decided that the U.S. Navy needed new highly innovative ships, built with cutting edge-technology. While that sounds great, what NAVSEA did not do, was to ensure that the ships would actually work as advertised. Much of the highly vaunted technology was not mature at the time, so both the manufacturers and the Navy itself ran into huge problems with the deficient ships. Nor were costs kept under control. So, the U.S. Navy ended up with the highly failed Littoral Combat Ships, as well as the highly failed DDG-21/Zumwalt-class destroyers, which cannot even fire their main guns, because each round of ammunition cost an unbelievable $800,000 per round! In the end, only three (3) Zumwalt-class destroyers will be built. The Navy also had to cancel the highly anticipated new cruiser program - the CG(X), because costs got out of control. And the new aircraft carrier program - the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) has also experienced such significant problems with new technologies, such as its electro-magnetic aircraft launching and recovering system (E-MALS), that commissioning of the Ford had to be delayed for over a year, while problems were worked out. (The problems have not totally been resolved.) As a result of all of these failed new ship programs, the Navy has had to keep the DDG-51/Arleigh Burke-class destroyer production lines open, and now expects to continue building the Arleigh Burkes at least well into the 2030s. But, construction on the Arleigh Burke Flight III variants in the mid-2030s. The Flight IIIs will incorporate much of the technology that was supposed to go into the CG(X). Fortunately, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are outstanding ships! Whatever the U.S. Navy finally decides on for its FFG(X) program, it had better get it right this time! The U.S. Navy can ill-afford any further disastrous new ship building programs.

[@lunabranwen]

Chief Seadawg yes everything you say about the LCS is very true. They should stop building them and maybe transfer them to coast guard ? Our older Hazard Perry Frigates were built like tanks. So get a new multi purpose Frigate or some sort of corvette ?

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

LCS wasn't designed for high conflict environment, which is unlikely anyways. It's designed to fend off against swarm tactics.

[@GH-oi2jf]

Chief Seadawg - The LCS are not supposed to have the characteristics of a frigate, so their shortcomings are not important here. The Independence-based design has already dropped out. I don’t expect a Freedom-based designto be chosen, but that does not mean the LCS are not useful in their intended roles.

[@jccalvente]

USA knows F100 vey well and how good they are, I think this will be the option.

[@Tagadarealty]

Spanish are not even able to build a submarine with the french plans they have stole...

[@ASTFRER36]

Shut Up Trol, USA knew well F100 in his Rota Naval Base South of Spain.

[@ASTFRER36]

The First S80 Submarine is ready, and three more the next years the most advanced conventional submarine in the world. When you are building new Project is Logical make corrections and commit mistakes, which try to use against you by competitots.

[@garwhittaker3743]

@@ASTFRER36 Thought this sub had weight problems ??

[@buddyalmensbalcin5864]

@@garwhittaker3743 The problem was solved

[@hiltonryllecabeguin9192]

they must choose the huntington designs the US National Security Cutter Bertholf Class because it has Good Sea Capabilities and firepower or either F100

[@doc7440]

And the winner is... FREMM

[@pollywogA1]

I'm impressed that all the European salesmen speak English. How many American salesmen can speak a second language?

[@ASTFRER36]

Here in Spain if you want to work in a company English is demanded.

[@theunitedstatesofamerica2848]

Say what you want about frigates, NOTHING beats the DDGs of the US NAVY.

[@mehmetkemalcansevdi5569]

Im from Turkiye and i hope someday we can build as f 100 frigate. Its the best warship and i love it

[@ASTFRER36]

Today you are building LHD from Spanish Juan Carlos Primero LHD design

[@mehmetkemalcansevdi5569]

@@ASTFRER36 Yeah Juan Carlos style LHDs are the best aswell. I wish our workship goes more for frigates and more too. I really want to see that f100 ships in our army

[@d.a.g.c961]

@@mehmetkemalcansevdi5569 Can i ask where did turkey got the money for their army?

[@doc7440]

Now, it is highly unlikely

[@donkoh5738]

A Navy could utilize that huge rear aviation deck space of the Austal trimaran design quite a bit more... think a row of say 6-8x extra VLS launch tubes (Barak 8?) skirting each side just aft of the superstructure? Also contemplate a total of 3x 57mm guns configured on that hull, or 1x 76mm STRALES + 1x 57mm gun? It could furthermore probably fit a generator and battery pack in the below deck cargo hold area to power a couple DEW systems up top! Round it off with a couple MQ-8 UAV and call it a day .. Other than that, go for the FREMM in my view and just do it. Stop dragging.

[@Robert66734]

They are all old designs. Allthough not in the competition, in my opinion they should go for the Dutch Omega design. It is designed with the future in mind. www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/november-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/6660-indodefence-2018-damen-unveils-6000-tons-omega-frigate.html

[@robertv8851]

There's no market for alum ships

[@GlenCychosz]

USA future frigate program is using a 57mm. UK type 26 frigate will use 5" (127 mm). Strange times.

[@swaghauler8334]

I guess that the UK hasn't forgotten the harsh lesson that The Falklands War taught them about ships being able to provide Naval Gunfire Support to the troops ashore. The US has apparently forgotten how big a role NSG played on multiple occasions during Vietnam (not to mention its role during Grenada, Lebanon, and The First Gulf War)

[@jamieshields9521]

Australian Navy will have 5 inch gun, I wonder if they change their mind or US Navy is not choose F110 but one Freem or LCS?

[@GlenCychosz]

Do you know what weapon system is left when all the missiles have been fired?

[@GlenCychosz]

Do you remember the F-4 phantom? It was originally built with out a gun because missile made the gun obsolete. All modern fighter aircraft have guns.

[@GlenCychosz]

Rail guns wont be ready for at least 10 years. The 57 mm will work great in anti air and anti missile. OTO Melara 76 mm has far more range. Most corvettes and frigates are armed with a 76 mm gun for a reason. OTO Melara 76 mm is an outstanding gun system.

[@johnpitchlynn9341]

I do not like the fact that this design does not include a bulbous bow. That means in heavy sea states it will be less stable. The crew isn't going to like it either. Also it needs to have more fuel capacity.

[@hh9852]

One can't be very confident with ones service and product when one refuse to talk to the press about it...

[@robertv8851]

We should be building more ship yards for the future

[@agrimensor6406]

I'm not a navy man, but why the US abandoned the multi-purpose destroyer class to turn to frigate class?... If they really want the European ship features then they should request them to make a destroyer class following the FREMM design...

[@danielefabbro822]

The new frigate is basically a small destroyer.

[@jfwl1985]

When did BAE bought Bofors?

[@garwhittaker3743]

Long time ago .

[@normandong4479]

The U.S. Navy’s FF program has to get beyond planning and concepts. Most of the major systems and subsystems of frigates already exist or have been tested. The U.S. Navy needs to get moving on this, especially in these uncertain times. The debate among naval planners as what capabilities this planned frigate should have should consider building a frigate that has almost the same capabilities as the current Burke destroyers for the simple reason that the frigates can fill-in a fleet should a destroyer be sent on other missions or have to head back to port for repairs. Nobody wants to see any war or confrontation on the oceans, but the U.S. Navy’s strength, depth and deterrence all help in keeping that peace.

[@Baseshocks]

They are looking for Anti Sub frigates. In regards to the Fremm, it has battery's so it can turn off its generators while sub hunting to listen. I am not sure about the others.

[@jccalvente]

@@Baseshocks Probably the spanish proposal will be closer to the new development F110 than to the F100. F110 has more stealth capabilities and is specialized in antisubmarine warfare. Have a look at the video done by INDRA with nice images and showing some sensor capabilities kzbin.info/www/bejne/qmq5kqx8qsmnr7M

[@exposingthedarknesswiththe9190]

Can the Mark 110 penetrate a submarine's hull over a medium distance? These guns must be able to penetrate the steel of a surfacing submarine if to save a missile!!

[@AC-ri3qz]

Very simple ship .

[@msmf3122]

Plz video on the french project

[@davidebonannini640]

Matthias Madeuf what french project, there's no french project shortlisted for the FFGX program.

[@Tagadarealty]

Only the Italian FREMM version is on the way (Fincantieri and Naval Group share sales project, you will never see these 2 in the same competition)

[@Tagadarealty]

Only the Italian FREMM version is on the way (Fincantieri and Naval Group share sales project, you will never see these 2 in the same competition)

[@ExUSSailor]

The Huntington-Ingalls design is the best. PLEASE don't buy a foreign designed ship for the US Navy!

[@GH-oi2jf]

Anon Nymous - Some people think the British Type 26 should have been considered. What would be wrong with that? The US armed forces do use British systems sometimes. The Harrier fighter is a notable example.

[@batangfirst5993]

Anon Nymous nothing to worry US dont buy any foreign design .. US make their own design

[@namegoeshere9226]

I think we should just built more AB. It's the best value for the money.

[@568843daw]

WTF, we are already having problems with our existing aluminum ships and now we have committed to buying more? This is bologna.

[@haa.8583]

As a filipino i wish for a shipbuilding company to propose to the Philippine Navy and Secretary of National defense of the Philippines a affordable, less maintenance cost, heavy loaded, big and a powerful, well armed frigate and corvette to the Philippines, we need those Naval ships to protect our sovereignty and territory.

[@michaeledwards2535]

Aluminium ships are no good. One hit from a Russian battle cruisers missile and these things are sunk. Literary cut in half.

[@IndoLiberation]

are you trapped on ww2 mindset ? all of the modern ship right now are pretty much unarmored (even the russian one) , that's why they invented an active defense system called as CIWS

[@FooFahFoeFum]

Are we building ships in a ship yard or are we building them in SHEEP yards. No American reporters investigating here, so we have to depend on foreigners to elaborate with their awkward English accent.

[@scottferris6309]

Why is this taking so long? For crying out loud, Navy, make a decision and start putting frigates into production! Where is the sense of urgency and a bias toward action?

[@wanjevi]

the first frigates looks to Euro , American frigates have their own look.. i think the LCS will takes

[@CopperCityPatriot]

I like the design. But it still reminds me of designs from the 1980's. If the USA taxpayers are gonna pay for a sleek, fast, stealthy, extremely maneuverable frigate...then the first item that the frigate design must not have is an island structure. There is no need for it. My proposal, is to use a compliment of unmanned aerial vehicles and...blimps. Both aircraft can carry radar, sonar, weapon guidance, and reconnaissance cameras. Using such would give the frigate an extremely low radar cross-section. And above all, using ceramic material, would make the frigate hard to detect by enemy weapons. Costly? You betcha. But if were gonna build a frigate to stay on the tip of the sword ahead of China, Russia, Iran, India, or any future threat to international waters, then let the USA, build the right ship for the job. Let's not build a new frigate that will require hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades after the first few years of service.

[@PMMM9]

Sad

[@reygieflorestv13]

Philippines need this

[@maccheese9072]

No thanks I want US to build it and a American CO

[@devildog1534]

I agree 🇺🇸

[@GH-oi2jf]

mac cheese - It will be built in Wisconsin.

[@jrblack47jb]

Sailrocket 2

[@blumie006]

Type 26🇦🇺

[@beyourselfrespecteveryone201]

Stupid move of Lockheed Martin !!

[@robertv8851]

We should build our ships no one else

[@BallisticSollution]

I think it's a given that US shipbuilders will be building whichever FF-X design is chosen. Just because some are designs from European shipbuilders does not mean they will build the ships outside the United States (and interestingly, the Navantia F-100 design which is being offered, has a lot of DNA from the USN Arleigh Burke class). Look at Australian naval shipbuilding as an example, we are building what we can given the constraints on local naval yards. However, all our future ships are from overseas (European) designers/builders, and all the major surface combatants (DDG and Frigate) will be all built in Australia, as well as our future submarine which is a modified French design.

[@rk2821]

日常练听力0.0

[@rickfeng4466]

法文聽力？

[@Kurio71]

Why does a country like the US need to buy foreign made boats?

[@danielefabbro822]

Because they are bad at shipbuilding. Almost all of their ship design or lack something or literally are made of gold looking at the final price of the sole first ship. Buying an European ship instead gives them same or superior efficiency and its cheaper. Moreover, Fincantieri will build these frigates in America, giving jobs to the Americans. Tzè, this is the real low hit. It's an Italian company and it make work american people. That's not fair.

[@exposingthedarknesswiththe9190]

The Lacroix system is simply too chaotic and exposed, take too long to reload, risking lives, very bad design!! Consider taking a cue from Russia's platform...it's the perfect system and extremely effective!!