Delete comment from: Elements Of Power
I haven't thought too much on armament because of the Navy's focus on mission packages that involve a lot of remote (and therefore indirect) force application. One of the things I actually like about the program is an unwillingness to tie the ships down to any weapons/sensor configuration before they (Navy) really figure out how they're going to use them. This approach has the added advantage of driving the usual suspects batsh*t crazy: they can't complain about what isn't there, so they have to focus on trying to convince people using the 'it doesn't work - waste of money' BS.
As to configurations, I'm leaning towards favoring the LCS 2 design for a lot of the reasons similar to what you mention. What I'd like to know is how they compare from the survivability POV. The LCS 1 is supposedly more maneuverable (a plus for susceptibility considerations, but the Tri-hull of the LCS 2 has to be a big plus on the vulnerablity side of the equation. This is the kind of 'diversity' that actually has benefits.
May 23, 2012, 9:30:09 PM
Posted to Why Suddenly I Find Myself Writing So Much About the LCS