<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: LCS No. 1 Underway at Last</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/</link>
	<description>The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 22:17:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: leesea</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/#comment-183754</link>
		<dc:creator>leesea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 06:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4002#comment-183754</guid>
		<description>The real question is what next or to be more precise, what is the next procurement step after the LCS 1&amp;2 go through OT&amp;E?
I like SECNAV&#039;s idea to use both designs.  The USN has spent a bunch on the R&amp;D and design efforts for current LCS and should get some ROI.
As I have stated elsewhere.  The LM/MMG ship should be modified similar to LCS-I or LCS-MMC concept as a true corvette.  And the GD/Austal ship would make a fine tactical sealift ship able to carry mission modules and more.  In both cases, the ships organic weapons and sensors system must be improved.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The real question is what next or to be more precise, what is the next procurement step after the LCS 1&amp;2 go through OT&amp;E?<br />
I like SECNAV’s idea to use both designs.  The USN has spent a bunch on the R&amp;D and design efforts for current LCS and should get some ROI.<br />
As I have stated elsewhere.  The LM/MMG ship should be modified similar to LCS-I or LCS-MMC concept as a true corvette.  And the GD/Austal ship would make a fine tactical sealift ship able to carry mission modules and more.  In both cases, the ships organic weapons and sensors system must be improved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bobby</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/#comment-183753</link>
		<dc:creator>bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4002#comment-183753</guid>
		<description>I think that the basic ship from northrop, stripped of major weapons and with CG specific payloads, would be great for the CG. A large deck for jayhawks and dolpins to fly from and a large internal bay for mission modules for hurricane relief or drug interdiction missions... you name it. And they don&#039;t have to start from scratch in the design. And are they not rated for sea state 5? if so it sounds like a good fit to me...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that the basic ship from northrop, stripped of major weapons and with CG specific payloads, would be great for the CG. A large deck for jayhawks and dolpins to fly from and a large internal bay for mission modules for hurricane relief or drug interdiction missions… you name it. And they don’t have to start from scratch in the design. And are they not rated for sea state 5? if so it sounds like a good fit to me…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: leesea</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/#comment-183752</link>
		<dc:creator>leesea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 20:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4002#comment-183752</guid>
		<description>Coasties are not interested in this kind of vessel.  They are just now getting the NCS in service.  While some have suggested giving homeland MIW to them, I think its the Navy&#039;s job.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Coasties are not interested in this kind of vessel.  They are just now getting the NCS in service.  While some have suggested giving homeland MIW to them, I think its the Navy’s job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/#comment-183751</link>
		<dc:creator>G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4002#comment-183751</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think so. Too heavily armed and too expensive for the Coasties. Also, as far as I know, USCG ships don&#039;t do mine warfare or ASW.
It&#039;s just not designed for what the USCG do.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don’t think so. Too heavily armed and too expensive for the Coasties. Also, as far as I know, USCG ships don’t do mine warfare or ASW.<br />
It’s just not designed for what the USCG do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Old Sailor</title>
		<link>http://defensetech.org/2008/08/08/lcs-no-1-underway-at-last/#comment-183750</link>
		<dc:creator>Old Sailor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=4002#comment-183750</guid>
		<description>Wouldn&#039;t the Coasties love to have some of these ships too? or not?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wouldn’t the Coasties love to have some of these ships too? or not?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

