DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Uncategorized » USS Independence, LCS 2, Launched

USS Independence, LCS 2, Launched

The sec­ond hull-​​form of the Littoral Combat Ship class was launched a few days ago in the Austal Shipyard in Mobile, Alabama (Mobile is turn­ing into quite the mil­i­tary man­u­fac­tur­ing base when you think about these ships and these ships, exist­ing ship­build­ing capa­bil­i­ties and the new Air Force tanker).
In%20dock%20prior%20to%20launch.jpgLooking unlike any­thing that had graced the seven seas, at least with the US Navy, the three-​​hulled tri­maran floated off its blocks in its dry­dock on 29 April. Further work and out­fit­ting needs to be com­pleted, but from the looks of it, its will be one wild look­ing ship as it bears down on a pirate dhow off the horn of Africa.
Why do we need these new littoral-​​capable ships? From the Program Executive Office for Ships:

In devel­op­ing capa­bil­ity to over­come access denial threats from sur­face and sub­sur­face threats in the lit­toral, the Navy sought improved mine war­fare capa­bil­ity, an effec­tive counter to small, fast, highly-​​armed boats, and a ship bet­ter suited against quiet diesel sub­marines. These capa­bil­i­ties high­lighted the need for a high-​​speed, shallow-​​draft ves­sel with endurance. The lit­toral com­bat ships are designed to meet that need.

Any way you cut it, hav­ing this improved and increased capa­bil­ity in the lit­toral regions close to shore will expand the toolkit avail­able to the Joint Force Commander regard­ing avail­able mil­i­tary options. I’m look­ing for­ward to see­ing this new ship at work.
–Pinch Paisley

Share |

May 2nd, 2008 | Uncategorized | 282641 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/05/02/uss-independence-lcs-2-launched/USS+%3Ci%3EIndependence%3C%2Fi%3E%2C+LCS+2%2C+Launched2008-05-03+00%3A20%3A29 You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Fire Scout to Fly On Frigate | US Electronic Fingerprints in Syria? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. G says:
    May 3, 2008 at 1:48 am

    That’s one mean-​​looking ship.

    Reply
  2. Roy Smith says:
    May 3, 2008 at 3:48 am

    This is what I thought LCS-​​1 Freedom was sup­posed to look like until I saw the pic­tures of it.LCS-1 looks too “conventional,“this looks promising.I hope it works.

    Reply
  3. murc says:
    May 3, 2008 at 4:23 am

    I’ve liked the mean look of this ship the first moment I saw the artist ren­der­ing sev­eral years ago.
    It looks cool, I hope General Dynamics beat the Lockheed designed LCS-​​1.

    Reply
  4. Roy Smith says:
    May 3, 2008 at 5:24 am

    LCS-​​2 Independence looks fierce,but LCS-​​1 Freedom is a hot tranny mess.

    Reply
  5. Roy Smith says:
    May 3, 2008 at 5:29 am

    Not in a good way either(talking about LCS-​​1 Freedom).

    Reply
  6. asdfadf says:
    May 3, 2008 at 12:21 pm

    http://​instap​inch​.com/​?​p​=​1​085
    3 pic­tures of the ship there. Looks amaz­ing in the water.

    Reply
  7. JK says:
    May 3, 2008 at 2:48 pm

    LCS2 doesn’t have a chance of win­ning. Want to know why? Because Israel said they are only inter­ested in LCS1 and not LCS2. We all know that what Isreal wants, Isreal gets from us. If they don’t, then they just steal it. Hence the recent arrests of Isrealis spy­ing on the US.
    With friends like Isreal who needs enemies.

    Reply
  8. G says:
    May 3, 2008 at 7:45 pm

    Is this a pre­cur­sor for large-​​ship tri­marans? A tri­maran cruiser, maybe? Or how about a tri­maran air­craft carrier?

    Reply
  9. canoli says:
    May 4, 2008 at 3:49 am

    Google “Benchijigua Express”; the LCS-​​2 is based on a com­mer­cial ferry.

    Reply
  10. James says:
    May 4, 2008 at 8:24 am

    roy, jk
    Yep paulians…if not Revernd Wright fans. Yall seri­ously need help. One thing that bugs me about this one what are it offen­sive and defen­seive capa­bil­i­ties besides shown? And.….Wtf a 57mm gun?
    Iremember a long time ago 6 to 7 yrs i saw a arti­cle in pop­u­lar mechan­ics about mak­ing tri­ma­ian hulled crusiers destroy­ers and even a huge 800ft long crusier/​helicarrier. Wonder if one of those is on the draw­ing board.
    Plus why not build car­ri­ers with tri hulls like the man said? I fig­ure car­ring com­pac­ity would have some­thing to do with that but maybe just make it big­ger. Anyways just my 2 cents but a ship like this is long over­due its shape and manu­ver­ing capa­bil­i­ties make it a far more sur­viv­able con­fig­u­ra­tion than the one planned for the (and please dont get me wrong its a retarded ship to me but well need some­thing like it in the future)DDX.

    Reply
  11. Rix says:
    May 4, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    It looks like the nut­cases from the klan or wher­ever are out tonight. On the one hand, I hope they crawl back under the rock. On the other hand, it’s good that we are reminded that they are out there.
    on to the sub­ject at hand…
    I would be curi­ous to know what the real advan­tages of this hull form is vs. a more tra­di­tional form. I sus­pect that this form may be more sus­cep­ti­ble to changes in pay­load or cargo size. I mean, weigh it down too much and the front edge starts to hit the water. But it looks more sta­ble than a tra­di­tional ship and cer­tainly has a larger flight deck than other ships of it’s size. I’m glad the navy is exper­i­ment­ing with the next gen­er­a­tion. If this works out, the next cruiser could be a 25k dis­place­ment ver­sion. Now, that would be inter­est­ing although it might not be able to dock in many harbors.

    Reply
  12. leesea says:
    May 4, 2008 at 10:42 pm

    The LCS as are all hydro-​​dynamically sup­ported hulls are sen­si­tive to pay­load vari­a­tions. Burying the hull is not expected but surely pos­si­ble. The T-​​AGOS is a SWATH type hull of dif­fer­ent char­ac­ter­is­tics. It is NOT the qui­etest ship in th world the USNS Hayes is.
    Large tri­marans top out at about 7500 tons. They reach the point were push­ing more dead­weight across the water tops at high speeds requires huge amount of power. And not they do not have suf­fi­cient inter­nal vol­ume to serve as carriers.

    Reply
  13. Trav says:
    May 5, 2008 at 1:14 am

    Hmmm, some weird posts there, aaaany­how… does any­one have a larger photo of the hull/​launch? or a link to one? –thx

    Reply
  14. atacms says:
    May 5, 2008 at 9:04 am

    I also hope that General Dynamics gets this. We really need a rev­o­lu­tion in naval design. The plan­form design of the LCS 1 does NOT cut it.
    Increased Stealthiness, sta­bil­ity and weapon loads are 3 big rea­sons why we should go with the Austal/​General Dynamics design.

    Reply
  15. G says:
    May 5, 2008 at 9:44 am

    “…not have suf­fi­cient inter­nal vol­ume to serve as car­ri­ers.“
    How about an “air­craft dock”? Land, refuel, rearm, take-​​off.
    Kinda like the aer­ial tanker role, but with abil­ity to rearm.

    Reply
  16. End says:
    May 5, 2008 at 10:40 am

    The Main ben­e­fit of that Hull form that I have heard is the abil­ity for ships to han­dle heavy Sea con­di­tions that nor­mally might be dangerous/​damaging to a small ves­sel and also a kind of shield for the inner hull from bat­tle dam­age (though the load sen­si­tiv­ity leaves the lat­ter in doubt). I heard the roll out might have dam­aged the hull abit.
    This site has some decent naval info/​news. Highly opin­ion­ated, and inflam­mi­tory but some decent info. http://​www​.colton​com​pany​.com/

    Reply
  17. Emas says:
    May 5, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    “Further work and out­fit­ting needs to be com­pleted“
    Let’s hope it isn’t the 2 years or so the LCS1 has taken–

    Reply
  18. ohwilleke says:
    May 5, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    Thanks for the link to the pic­tures asd­fasdf, the orig­i­nal post pic­ture is quite grainy.

    Reply
  19. Kaitian says:
    May 6, 2008 at 8:36 pm

    Roy Smith,
    I would sug­gest you dump your stu­pid “Protocols”. The “book” has been exposed as a fraud/​hoax/​forgery/​etc and it’s hilar­i­ous to see you and other Ronulians use it con­tin­u­ously to this day.
    Ya, I agree with the other com­men­ta­tor. You Ron Paul folks need help.

    Reply
  20. coolhand77 says:
    May 7, 2008 at 1:35 pm

    Hey now, I am a Ron Paul sup­porter and nei­ther he, nor I sup­port that kind of “anti-​​zionist-​​conspiracy-​​whacknut” crap. Lets not be diss­ing Dr. Paul by link­ing him to these nut cases when its them who are try­ing to gravy train on him. Yah, I don’t agree with every­thing he says, but his record, and his posi­tion on most things makes him the one, HONEST, CONSERVATIVE run­ning for pres. Yah, I know he doesn’t have the prover­bial “snowball’s chance” at the moment, but I sure as hell won’t vote for Clinton, Obama, or McCain (man sides with peo­ple like Kennedy waaaaay to much to be good for the coun­try).
    Unless you have proof of Dr. Paul endors­ing crap like that, please, lets drop the Paulite label and just call peo­ple who DO belive that stuff what they are…“WHACKNUTS!”

    Reply
  21. Islander says:
    May 8, 2008 at 4:05 am

    You know, if it looks good it prob­a­bly per­forms good. LCS2 def­i­nitely looks good: cool, men­ac­ing, high tech, “don’t mess with me”…
    Congratulations to the GD and Austal part­ner­ship for a job extremely well done!

    Reply
  22. James W. says:
    May 9, 2008 at 12:32 am

    This ship was toured by a del­e­ga­tion from Israel after it was launched.

    Reply
  23. V MIller says:
    May 11, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    I am glad there is finally another USS INDEPENDENCE. The last ship with that great name, was my first ship. All we need now is an AMERICA, a UNITED STATES & the other names of his­tor­i­cal ships (and please, no more politi­cians names, thank you!).

    Reply
  24. Steven says:
    July 9, 2008 at 9:29 pm

    It cer­tainly looks impres­sive. I only hope that some­one can fig­ure out how to build them for an accept­able price so this fierce ship doesn’t end up being a one off.

    Reply
  25. TJ says:
    July 30, 2008 at 8:36 am

    What a cute thing. Too bad it isn’t as manuev­er­able as the LCS-​​1. It’s extra width and huge turn­ing radius make a nice, slow tar­get. Maybe is should get some tribal tat­toos to look ever cooler and fiercer — it might dis­tract the govt from the per­for­mance decrements.

    Reply
  26. iro zeny says:
    August 2, 2008 at 2:04 am

    Others play­ing RO, I also play RO, but I played the RO is very dif­fer­ent of oth­ers. I have not prac­ticed my own, did not earn my own IRO zeny. There are even some time even trans­ferred I do not what is.

    Reply
  27. Tibia Gold says:
    August 9, 2008 at 3:03 am

    When some trusted play­ers were given to the oppor­tu­nity to buy Tibia Gold expand selected parts of the game world, I as well as sev­eral oth­ers stepped in.

    Reply
  28. Knight gold says:
    August 9, 2008 at 3:04 am

    It rep­re­sents K2 Network com­mit­ment to offer­ing cheap Knight gold what today is gamers want and approach to inno­va­tion and creativity.

    Reply
  29. the raz says:
    August 9, 2008 at 6:59 am

    lcs 1 blew the doors off the navy the old man wants 3 more.isreal is sup­posed to want three of the lcs1’s.and what hap­pened to the hull on lcs2,did it hold up

    Reply
  30. Elk says:
    August 13, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Let’s see, LCS1 is much faster and more maneu­ver­able, while LCS2 is slower and lum­ber­ing. But hey, LCS2 looks cooler and meaner, so you pick that one?!?! I hope you folks aren’t in purchasing!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • BREAK-BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    Recent Comments
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      Yeah, I don't get it. The "Dragon...
      Ptsfp
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
      Should wikipedia Ned Kelly.He used armour that worked in...
      Nick
    • UPDATED: Details on Army’s New Afghanistan Duds
      Marines win agin hoo rur
      greg
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      To the poster "batvette" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage