Littoral Combat Ship: Difference between revisions
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
{{TOC|right}} | {{TOC|right}} | ||
A '''Littoral Combat Ship''' is a [[United States Navy]] warship intended to reverse the Cold War trend towards large, expensive warships optimized for open-ocean operations. As opposed to [[fast attack craft]], it is capable of transoceanic voyages to reach its operational area, but, once there, is optimized for [[littoral warfare]] in coastal waters. In comparison to LCS, which are ships of approximately 3,000 ton displacement with a crew of 40, the extremely competent, multirole [[Burke-class]] destroyers are in excess of 9,000 tons with a crew of 300-400 sailors. | A '''Littoral Combat Ship''' is a [[United States Navy]] warship intended to reverse the Cold War trend towards large, expensive warships optimized for open-ocean operations. As opposed to [[fast attack craft]], it is capable of transoceanic voyages to reach its operational area, but, once there, is optimized for [[littoral warfare]] in coastal waters. In comparison to LCS, which are ships of approximately 3,000 ton displacement with a crew of 40 to 70, the extremely competent, multirole [[Burke-class]] destroyers are in excess of 9,000 tons with a crew of 300-400 sailors. | ||
[[Image:Two LCS versions.jpg|left|thumb|300px|LCS prototypes LCS 1 ''USS Freedom'' (top) and LCS 2 ''USS Independence'']] | |||
There are two prototype classes being built by different design teams, but they share the ability to be quickly (1-4 days) reconfigured for with '''mission modules''' for [[mine (naval)|mine warfare (MIW)]], [[anti-submarine warfare]] (ASW) and [[anti-surface warfare]] (ASuW). While small, they will always have the capability to operate [[helicopter]]s and [[unmanned aerial vehicle]]s (UAV). | There are two prototype classes being built by different design teams, but they share the ability to be quickly (1-4 days) reconfigured for with '''mission modules''' for [[mine (naval)|mine warfare (MIW)]], [[anti-submarine warfare]] (ASW) and [[anti-surface warfare]] (ASuW). While small, they will always have the capability to operate [[helicopter]]s and [[unmanned aerial vehicle]]s (UAV). | ||
==Relationships== | |||
While bringing new capabilities, they are also seen as replacements for the 30 FFG-7 [[Oliver Hazard Perry-class]] frigates, 14 [[Avenger-class]] mine countermeasures vessels, and 12 MHC-51 [[Osprey-class]] coastal mine hunters).<ref name=DID2011-01-11 >{{citation | While bringing new capabilities, they are also seen as replacements for the 30 FFG-7 [[Oliver Hazard Perry-class]] frigates, 14 [[Avenger-class]] mine countermeasures vessels, and 12 MHC-51 [[Osprey-class]] coastal mine hunters).<ref name=DID2011-01-11 >{{citation | ||
| url = http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-new-littoral-combat-ships-updated-01343/ | | url = http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-new-littoral-combat-ships-updated-01343/ | ||
Line 11: | Line 12: | ||
| date = 19 January 2011}}</ref> | | date = 19 January 2011}}</ref> | ||
115 to 127 meters long, the ships are close to the size of a British [[Type 23-class]] frigate, but differentiate from frigates, both British and the Perry class, by having much higher speed, and also shallower draft for inshore work. Like some frigate types, they lack air defense capability beyond selft defense, which was conceived, in 2003, as being provided by next-generation U.S. [[DD(X)]] destroyers and [[CG(X)]] cruisers. The cruisers have been cancelled; it is unclear if the newly defined Flight III version of the [[Burke-class]] meets the DD(X) requirement. | |||
Modularity in warships was pioneered by the Danish Flyvefisken class, also called the Standard Flex 400. <ref>{{citation | |||
| title = Flyvefisken Class (SF 300) Multi-Role Vessels, Denmark | |||
| url = http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/fly/ | |||
| publisher = Naval Technology.com}}</ref> Israel had considered participating in the LCS project, but ruled out modularity, and now plans to procure German [[MEKO-class]] ships. | |||
It is described as a "relatively" inexpensive ship, but the first two are in the USD $500 million range. [[U.S. Marine Corps]] analysts observe that for each two LCS, one [[Landing Platform Dock]] (LPD) of the [[San Antonio-class]] could be acquired. An LCS can carry 25 passengers, which could be appropriate for [[United States Navy SEAL]] operations, but the Marines have not been involved with the development and it does not support their Force Reconnaissance doctrine. | It is described as a "relatively" inexpensive ship, but the first two are in the USD $500 million range. [[U.S. Marine Corps]] analysts observe that for each two LCS, one [[Landing Platform Dock]] (LPD) of the [[San Antonio-class]] could be acquired. An LCS can carry 25 passengers, which could be appropriate for [[United States Navy SEAL]] operations, but the Marines have not been involved with the development and it does not support their Force Reconnaissance doctrine. | ||
The [[Joint High Speed Vessel]] is similar in being a high-speed ship designed for the littoral, but otherwise quite different; the JHSV is a transport built to commercial standards while the LCS is a warship with naval damage resistance. In littoral operations, however, LCS would be a plausible escort for the JHSV. | The [[Joint High Speed Vessel]] is similar in being a high-speed ship designed for the littoral, but otherwise quite different; the JHSV is a transport built to commercial standards while the LCS is a warship with naval damage resistance. In littoral operations, however, LCS would be a plausible escort for the JHSV. | ||
==Mission equipment== | ==Mission equipment== | ||
Separately from the modules, there is a launching and retrieval ramp on the stern, as well as a side hatch; this will allow all configurations to launch [[special operations]] boats and remotely piloted vessels. Internally, there is a three-axis crane over the area near the side hatches, for efficient movement of equipment inside the modular storage area. There are hangars for two [[H-60 helicopter|MH-60 helicopter]]s, but the landing area is sufficient for the large [[CH-53 Sea Stallion]] heavy-lift, [[MH-53 PAVE LOW]] special operations helicopter, which is being replaced by the [[V-22 Osprey]]. They also are using the [[MQ-8]] helicopter UAV, three of which will fit in the hangar space of one MH-60. | {{Image|General Dynamics LCS Concept.jpg|right|thumb|550px|Modular concept illustrated with General Dynamics design}} | ||
Separately from the modules, there is a launching and retrieval ramp on the stern, as well as a side hatch; this will allow all configurations to launch [[special operations]] boats and remotely piloted vessels. The side ramp also can handle [[Stryker (armored fighting vehicles)|Stryker wheeled armored vehicles]] Internally, there is a three-axis crane over the area near the side hatches, for efficient movement of equipment inside the modular storage area. There are hangars for two [[H-60 helicopter|MH-60 helicopter]]s, but the landing area is sufficient for the large [[CH-53 Sea Stallion]] heavy-lift, [[MH-53 PAVE LOW]] special operations helicopter, which is being replaced by the [[V-22 Osprey]]. They also are using the [[MQ-8]] helicopter UAV, three of which will fit in the hangar space of one MH-60. | |||
In all configurations, the vessels have a light 57mm [[autocannon]] that can still provide close-in naval gunfire support as well as engaging surface and air targets. They also carry lighter autocannon and [[RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile]]s for self-defense against aircraft and cruise missiles; the ships are also designed to mesh into military electronic networks. | In all configurations, the vessels have a light 57mm [[autocannon]] that can still provide close-in naval gunfire support as well as engaging surface and air targets. They also carry lighter autocannon and [[RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile]]s for self-defense against aircraft and cruise missiles; the ships are also designed to mesh into military electronic networks. | ||
Ship common equipment also includes Mission Package Application Software written to a common interface, and running on: | |||
* Seven multipurpose user consoles<ref name=NWSC-base/> | |||
* Four racks of computer servers | |||
* Networks that interface with the total ship computing environment | |||
===Surface warfare=== | ===Surface warfare=== | ||
For surface warfare, either a pair of 30mm guns, or a surface-to-surface missile module can be carried. Gun Mission Module MK 50 MOD X consists of two modules: | |||
* MK 46 30mm Gun Weapon System | |||
* Uses All Navy Qualified 30mm x 173mm Ammunition | |||
* 400 Rounds in Turret | |||
* Two Ready Service Magazines with 240 Rounds Each | |||
* 3 Shipping Containers | |||
For missions where the 57mm does not provide sufficient range, the [[XM501 NLOS launch system]] with [[Precision Attack Missile]]s (PAM), developed as part of the Army's cancelled [[Future Combat Systems]], has been discussed as the base for anti-surface warfare. Military news sources, however, suggest the cheaper [[Raytheon Griffin|Griffin]] missile is being considered. In its present form, the Griffin is shorter-ranged than the PAM. It was intended as a replacement for the [[AGM-114 Hellfire]] launched from [[unmanned aerial vehicle]]s, and reuses components from the [[FGM-148 Javelin]] anti-tank and [[AIM-9 Sidewinder|AIM-9X]] air-to-air missiles, and is in competition for the [[Joint Air-Ground Missile]] procurement. [[Raytheon]] makes both systems. <ref>{{citation | For missions where the 57mm does not provide sufficient range, the [[XM501 NLOS launch system]] with [[Precision Attack Missile]]s (PAM), developed as part of the Army's cancelled [[Future Combat Systems]], has been discussed as the base for anti-surface warfare. Military news sources, however, suggest the cheaper [[Raytheon Griffin|Griffin]] missile is being considered. In its present form, the Griffin is shorter-ranged than the PAM. It was intended as a replacement for the [[AGM-114 Hellfire]] launched from [[unmanned aerial vehicle]]s, and reuses components from the [[FGM-148 Javelin]] anti-tank and [[AIM-9 Sidewinder|AIM-9X]] air-to-air missiles, and is in competition for the [[Joint Air-Ground Missile]] procurement. [[Raytheon]] makes both systems. <ref>{{citation | ||
| title = Navy Close to Choosing Griffin Missile for LCS | | title = Navy Close to Choosing Griffin Missile for LCS | ||
| author = John Reed | date = 11 January 2011 | | author = John Reed | date = 11 January 2011 | journal = Defense Industry Buzz | ||
| url = http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/01/11/navy-close-to-choosing-griffin-missile-for-lcs/}}</ref> | | url = http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/01/11/navy-close-to-choosing-griffin-missile-for-lcs/}}</ref> | ||
Line 27: | Line 49: | ||
Features include the [[WLD-1|AN/WLD-1]] Remote Minehunting UUV System; [[AQS-20|AN/AQS-20A]] towed mine-detecting sonar and sensors; the Organic Airborne Surface Influence Sweep (OASIS); the Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (AES-1 ALMDS); the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS); and the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) 30mm cannon with its “supercavitating” ammunition | Features include the [[WLD-1|AN/WLD-1]] Remote Minehunting UUV System; [[AQS-20|AN/AQS-20A]] towed mine-detecting sonar and sensors; the Organic Airborne Surface Influence Sweep (OASIS); the Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (AES-1 ALMDS); the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS); and the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) 30mm cannon with its “supercavitating” ammunition | ||
===Anti-submarine warfare=== | ===Anti-submarine warfare=== | ||
With the cancellation of several projects, the entire ASW module is under redesign. It may share some sensors with the mine warfare module. | With the cancellation of several projects, the entire ASW module is under redesign. It may share some sensors with the mine warfare module. Increment I development, integration, test, and procurement plans were ended in Fiscal Year 2010.<ref name=Gavin>{{citation | ||
| url = http://www.navsea.navy.mil/Media/SNA2011/Victor%20Gavin%20SNA%2013%20Jan2011VGfnl.pdf | |||
| title = LMW Mission Module Support | |||
| author = Victor Gavin, Naval Sea Systems Command | |||
| publisher = Surface Navy Association | |||
| date = 13 January 2011}}, p. 7</ref> | |||
A new Increment II design is in process. | |||
===Maritime Security Module=== | ===Maritime Security Module=== | ||
* Two 11m [[Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat]]s (RHIB)<ref name=NWSC-base>{{citation | * Two 11m [[Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat]]s (RHIB)<ref name=NWSC-base>{{citation | ||
Line 36: | Line 64: | ||
* One Equipment Module | * One Equipment Module | ||
* VBSS Detachment | * VBSS Detachment | ||
==Designs== | ==Designs== | ||
Both contractors were to build prototypes. Lockheed Martin is building two ships, ''USS Freedom'' and ''USS Courage''. The other two, by General Dynamics, are the ''USS Independence'' and ''USS Liberty''. While the performance of the two is intended to be in the same range, the hull forms are quite different. Lockheed Martin's is a single hull that "semi-planes", or moves partially out of the water at high speed. The General Dynamics approach is a multi-hulled trimaran, based on a design from the Australian firm, Austal. Austal USA also builds the [[Joint High Speed Vessel]]. | |||
Both contractors were to build prototypes. Lockheed Martin is building two ships, ''USS Freedom'' and ''USS Courage''. The other two, by General Dynamics, are the ''USS Independence'' and ''USS Liberty''. While the performance of the two is intended to be in the same range, the hull forms are quite different. Lockheed Martin's is a single hull that "semi-planes", or moves partially out of the water at high speed. The General Dynamics approach is a multi-hulled trimaran. | |||
==Deployment== | The ''Freedom'' class has a hangar, flight deck, and mission bay half the size of that on the ''Independence'', but does have full-size Mark 41 [[vertical launch system]] tubes capable of taking fleet [[RIM-156 Standard SM-2]] area air defense, [[RIM-162 ESSM]] medium-range air defense or [[BGM-109 Tomahawk]] long-range cruise missiles. Area air defense and land attack, however, have not been considered core LCS capabilities. Both air defense missiles also have [[anti-surface warfare]] capability. | ||
==Procurement and Deployment== | |||
LCS 1 was commissioned in November 2008, following LCS 2's commissioning in October. These are Flight 0 vessels. In January 2007, the USN stopped work on LCS 3 due to cost concerns, and terminated the contract in April. LCS 4 was also cancelled in October 2007. New production will be of Flight 1. | LCS 1 was commissioned in November 2008, following LCS 2's commissioning in October. These are Flight 0 vessels. In January 2007, the USN stopped work on LCS 3 due to cost concerns, and terminated the contract in April. LCS 4 was also cancelled in October 2007. New production will be of Flight 1. | ||
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in presenting the proposed Defense Department budget on April 6, 2009, said "We will increase the buy of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) – a key capability for presence, stability, and counterinsurgency operations in coastal regions – from two to three ships in FY 2010. Our goal is to eventually acquire 55 of these ships." | Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in presenting the proposed Defense Department budget on April 6, 2009, said "We will increase the buy of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) – a key capability for presence, stability, and counterinsurgency operations in coastal regions – from two to three ships in FY 2010. Our goal is to eventually acquire 55 of these ships." To increase availability, each ship will have two crews, "Blue" and "Gold", which will take turns manning the vessel at sea. This approach has been used successfully with submarines. | ||
===First deployments=== | |||
''USS Freedom'' completed an initial deployment, assigned to [[United States Souther Command]], in February-April 2010. She was configured with two Gun Mission Modules and a Maritime Suecurity Module, and successfully carried out drug interdiction operations. <ref>Gavin, p. 8</ref> The small crew was a concern, with some officers, during a training exercise in the Pacific, mentioning that they might get 4 hours sleep in 36-48.<ref>{{citation | |||
| title= Duty Aboard the Littoral Combat Ship: ‘Grueling but Manageable’ | |||
| date = September 2010 | |||
| author = Grace V. Jean | |||
| journal = National Defense Magazine | |||
| url = http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/September/Pages/DutyAboardtheLittoralCombatShip%E2%80%98GruelingbutManageable%E2%80%99.aspx}}</ref> | |||
===New procurement approach=== | |||
A reevaluation of the competition between Lockheed Martin, and the new group of General Dynamics, and Austal USA, resulted in a new procurement strategy. Rather than buy 19 vessels from a single vendor, 10 each would be bought from both at an initial fixed price $430 million, fixed-price contract to each company to build one apiece of their ships through 2015. | |||
<ref>{{citation | |||
| title = Littoral Combat Ship Contract Award Announced | |||
| date = 29 December 2010 | publisher = U.S. Navy | |||
| url = http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=57917}}</ref> | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist|2}} | {{reflist|2}} |
Revision as of 19:43, 19 February 2011
A Littoral Combat Ship is a United States Navy warship intended to reverse the Cold War trend towards large, expensive warships optimized for open-ocean operations. As opposed to fast attack craft, it is capable of transoceanic voyages to reach its operational area, but, once there, is optimized for littoral warfare in coastal waters. In comparison to LCS, which are ships of approximately 3,000 ton displacement with a crew of 40 to 70, the extremely competent, multirole Burke-class destroyers are in excess of 9,000 tons with a crew of 300-400 sailors.
There are two prototype classes being built by different design teams, but they share the ability to be quickly (1-4 days) reconfigured for with mission modules for mine warfare (MIW), anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and anti-surface warfare (ASuW). While small, they will always have the capability to operate helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
Relationships
While bringing new capabilities, they are also seen as replacements for the 30 FFG-7 Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates, 14 Avenger-class mine countermeasures vessels, and 12 MHC-51 Osprey-class coastal mine hunters).[1]
115 to 127 meters long, the ships are close to the size of a British Type 23-class frigate, but differentiate from frigates, both British and the Perry class, by having much higher speed, and also shallower draft for inshore work. Like some frigate types, they lack air defense capability beyond selft defense, which was conceived, in 2003, as being provided by next-generation U.S. DD(X) destroyers and CG(X) cruisers. The cruisers have been cancelled; it is unclear if the newly defined Flight III version of the Burke-class meets the DD(X) requirement.
Modularity in warships was pioneered by the Danish Flyvefisken class, also called the Standard Flex 400. [2] Israel had considered participating in the LCS project, but ruled out modularity, and now plans to procure German MEKO-class ships.
It is described as a "relatively" inexpensive ship, but the first two are in the USD $500 million range. U.S. Marine Corps analysts observe that for each two LCS, one Landing Platform Dock (LPD) of the San Antonio-class could be acquired. An LCS can carry 25 passengers, which could be appropriate for United States Navy SEAL operations, but the Marines have not been involved with the development and it does not support their Force Reconnaissance doctrine.
The Joint High Speed Vessel is similar in being a high-speed ship designed for the littoral, but otherwise quite different; the JHSV is a transport built to commercial standards while the LCS is a warship with naval damage resistance. In littoral operations, however, LCS would be a plausible escort for the JHSV.
Mission equipment
Separately from the modules, there is a launching and retrieval ramp on the stern, as well as a side hatch; this will allow all configurations to launch special operations boats and remotely piloted vessels. The side ramp also can handle Stryker wheeled armored vehicles Internally, there is a three-axis crane over the area near the side hatches, for efficient movement of equipment inside the modular storage area. There are hangars for two MH-60 helicopters, but the landing area is sufficient for the large CH-53 Sea Stallion heavy-lift, MH-53 PAVE LOW special operations helicopter, which is being replaced by the V-22 Osprey. They also are using the MQ-8 helicopter UAV, three of which will fit in the hangar space of one MH-60.
In all configurations, the vessels have a light 57mm autocannon that can still provide close-in naval gunfire support as well as engaging surface and air targets. They also carry lighter autocannon and RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles for self-defense against aircraft and cruise missiles; the ships are also designed to mesh into military electronic networks.
Ship common equipment also includes Mission Package Application Software written to a common interface, and running on:
- Seven multipurpose user consoles[3]
- Four racks of computer servers
- Networks that interface with the total ship computing environment
Surface warfare
For surface warfare, either a pair of 30mm guns, or a surface-to-surface missile module can be carried. Gun Mission Module MK 50 MOD X consists of two modules:
- MK 46 30mm Gun Weapon System
- Uses All Navy Qualified 30mm x 173mm Ammunition
- 400 Rounds in Turret
- Two Ready Service Magazines with 240 Rounds Each
- 3 Shipping Containers
For missions where the 57mm does not provide sufficient range, the XM501 NLOS launch system with Precision Attack Missiles (PAM), developed as part of the Army's cancelled Future Combat Systems, has been discussed as the base for anti-surface warfare. Military news sources, however, suggest the cheaper Griffin missile is being considered. In its present form, the Griffin is shorter-ranged than the PAM. It was intended as a replacement for the AGM-114 Hellfire launched from unmanned aerial vehicles, and reuses components from the FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank and AIM-9X air-to-air missiles, and is in competition for the Joint Air-Ground Missile procurement. Raytheon makes both systems. [4]
Mine warfare
Features include the AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting UUV System; AN/AQS-20A towed mine-detecting sonar and sensors; the Organic Airborne Surface Influence Sweep (OASIS); the Airborne Laser Mine Detection System (AES-1 ALMDS); the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS); and the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System (RAMICS) 30mm cannon with its “supercavitating” ammunition
Anti-submarine warfare
With the cancellation of several projects, the entire ASW module is under redesign. It may share some sensors with the mine warfare module. Increment I development, integration, test, and procurement plans were ended in Fiscal Year 2010.[5] A new Increment II design is in process.
Maritime Security Module
- Two 11m Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats (RHIB)[3]
- Berthing Module
- One Equipment Module
- VBSS Detachment
Designs
Both contractors were to build prototypes. Lockheed Martin is building two ships, USS Freedom and USS Courage. The other two, by General Dynamics, are the USS Independence and USS Liberty. While the performance of the two is intended to be in the same range, the hull forms are quite different. Lockheed Martin's is a single hull that "semi-planes", or moves partially out of the water at high speed. The General Dynamics approach is a multi-hulled trimaran, based on a design from the Australian firm, Austal. Austal USA also builds the Joint High Speed Vessel.
The Freedom class has a hangar, flight deck, and mission bay half the size of that on the Independence, but does have full-size Mark 41 vertical launch system tubes capable of taking fleet RIM-156 Standard SM-2 area air defense, RIM-162 ESSM medium-range air defense or BGM-109 Tomahawk long-range cruise missiles. Area air defense and land attack, however, have not been considered core LCS capabilities. Both air defense missiles also have anti-surface warfare capability.
Procurement and Deployment
LCS 1 was commissioned in November 2008, following LCS 2's commissioning in October. These are Flight 0 vessels. In January 2007, the USN stopped work on LCS 3 due to cost concerns, and terminated the contract in April. LCS 4 was also cancelled in October 2007. New production will be of Flight 1.
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, in presenting the proposed Defense Department budget on April 6, 2009, said "We will increase the buy of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS) – a key capability for presence, stability, and counterinsurgency operations in coastal regions – from two to three ships in FY 2010. Our goal is to eventually acquire 55 of these ships." To increase availability, each ship will have two crews, "Blue" and "Gold", which will take turns manning the vessel at sea. This approach has been used successfully with submarines.
First deployments
USS Freedom completed an initial deployment, assigned to United States Souther Command, in February-April 2010. She was configured with two Gun Mission Modules and a Maritime Suecurity Module, and successfully carried out drug interdiction operations. [6] The small crew was a concern, with some officers, during a training exercise in the Pacific, mentioning that they might get 4 hours sleep in 36-48.[7]
New procurement approach
A reevaluation of the competition between Lockheed Martin, and the new group of General Dynamics, and Austal USA, resulted in a new procurement strategy. Rather than buy 19 vessels from a single vendor, 10 each would be bought from both at an initial fixed price $430 million, fixed-price contract to each company to build one apiece of their ships through 2015. [8]
References
- ↑ "The USA’s New Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)", Defense Industry Daily, 19 January 2011
- ↑ Flyvefisken Class (SF 300) Multi-Role Vessels, Denmark, Naval Technology.com
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Littoral Combat Ship, Naval Surface Weapons Center, Dahlgren Division
- ↑ John Reed (11 January 2011), "Navy Close to Choosing Griffin Missile for LCS", Defense Industry Buzz
- ↑ Victor Gavin, Naval Sea Systems Command (13 January 2011), LMW Mission Module Support, Surface Navy Association, p. 7
- ↑ Gavin, p. 8
- ↑ Grace V. Jean (September 2010), "Duty Aboard the Littoral Combat Ship: ‘Grueling but Manageable’", National Defense Magazine
- ↑ Littoral Combat Ship Contract Award Announced, U.S. Navy, 29 December 2010