Italian naval architects and engineers are among the best in the world. Glad they won the bidding war against the competition. The US Navy will have an excellent platform to protect America's interests all over the world.
@@craigbeatty8565 Yea right, apparently the Type 45 Destroyer Daring class was also ment to be the best in the world, and instead it proved to be just a heap of junk spending more time in the docks for repairs, than actual sail time. It's costing your MOD a fortune to put them right and sea worthy, when Italy's destroyers never had a single problem, and put their money where the mouth is. And now you're at it again, loud mouthing the Type 26 is best in the world. You never learn do you, that until your loud mouthing is proven with facts, is't best turn it down a notch or two..
@@sergiodario58able your written english is perfct :o Hows possibile ? Are you italian, arent ya ? I bet your speech is even more better . N.1 bruva ! :D Bela donna tuta pizza mia amore ! :D P.S. Are you a lady ? :*
@@unidentifiedperson7185 There would be no need to have the ability to expand power generation that high if the plan wasn't for a EMW or DEW. It would most likely be a scaled down version though. There are many reason to want a railgun or laser outside of just "Navy ship goes boom!" and I'd imagine the navy will want to move away from conventional guns as soon as it can.
They also removed some compartments from the bow area in comparison to other versions of this design. To save weight. I guess this means they can place a large mass on the front area of the ship without causing problems for the ship. Because the ship is designed to carry more weight there than it initially will in the US version.
@@patricofritz4094 Missiles aren't going away anytime soon given the how useful the ability to carry payloads are but lasers will change the game and force them to evolve.
I'm upset about the 57mm gun in place instead of the 76mm OTO-Melara mount. And I was hoping it would get a 48-cell VLS vice 32-cell. Plus, I believe it would deserve to be called Doris Miller. I was originally calling it the Boorda-class, but I know that will never happen. Otherwise, the ship looks good.
The low VLS count allows more ships to be made, and for each ships cost to remain low. More hulls means more sonars, hangars, and boat bays. The 57mm gun on Constellation is a better CIWS compared to 127mm, though can't do the same amount of missions like shore bombardment. you could buy 2 constellations for 1 Arleigh Burke. When you compare 2 900 million dollar constellation FREMMs to 1 2 billion dollar Arleigh Burke, then... Constellations got a lower crew and likely lower operating costs, the same amount of VLS and missile cells, more CIWS more hangar space, more radar mounts, more sonars, more range (though less speed), more hulls for mission flexibility, and more boat bays. Recent American ship designs havent been that good on the cost-effectiveness front. Zumwalt, Ford, Arleigh Burke, San Antonio, America, etc. They are all over-expensive, with foreign designs offering the same capability for less money.
@@botchii3059 It has 1/3 the mark 41 VLS cells of a Burke, not half. The reason being is they most likely want space to allow for a future laser to be mounted in front of the Bridge. 56mm is simply cost saving. But I would still mount two Mark II Bushmasters aft and if she’s a sub hunter where are the torpedoes. As a Sub hunter I’m not sure she needs that many strike misses, doesn’t hurt, but that’s not the ships role. It’s a nice ship and looks like a solid multi mission design, but looking at the current config, it looks more like a small anti ship strike package rather than a sub hunter which is what they said it was. Looks like a nice light escort. An easy ship though to configure into a true sub hunter. But right now it’s pure multi role, with an emphasis on anti ship strike capability.
@@cedricchiu9763 And Australia upgraded the OHP even more with up to 40 SM-2, an 8 round VLS for 32 advanced Sea Sparrows, up to 8 x Bk2 Harpoon, the 76mm OM, Pharynx, 2 x 3 torps, 2 helos, updated electronics and sonar etc.
@@gdadamos2302 Doubt that, LCS is a joke and couldn't survive in anything but a low threat environment, Blue water Navy is back with the pivot to China
Great to provide for a lot of electric power because laser guns are on the way in only a few more years. They will be needed to deal with missile and suicide drone swarms.
@@jimmellenberger8505 Thanks for that reply. I have been scratching my head over why they didn't choose a bigger gun. If the 57mm is a better anti-air gun, then that makes sense.
I'm agreeing with most of the statements below - but the naval rep said this was to be an ASW platform - where is the sonar system? Will this class depend solely on towed array? Overall a very good looking ship and with a good suite of weapons systems available. Beats the LCS class ships all hollow! ! !
It will be equipped with the state of the art French Thales CAPTAS 4 variable depth towed array and sonar, and the French Thales FLASH dipping sonar from the helicopter, like a lot of other NATO navies, but yes it lacks a hull mounted sonar for operations in shallow depths.
The goal here was to buy a tried and tested hybrid electric power train in a proven hull form. The USN has a less than stellar track record in getting hybrid electric into the fleet. Everything above the waterline is irrelevant: just off the shelf kit. It's the stuff in the hull that the USN wanted.
Yeah, navy needed a frigate fast and at a good price. This ship plays the role of destroyer escort alongside the Arleigh Burkes--which is a fantastic ship but expensive.
At'n. Fincantieri. Will you please explain us, why this FFG (X) ship project is conceptualized as a frigate having those dimensions and weight? I think that a war ship wich has a displacement weight of 7,500 ton. and is as long as 148.9 meters, could get the destroyer category.
@@jorgeestrada5713 Go back to WW2 and the Fletcher class were about 3,000t by the 60s the Adams class about 4500t by the 80s the Spruance class were about 7500t, in the 90s Burke flight 1s 8500t and now the Flight 111 Burkes about 10,000t, Sejong the Great class about 12,000t. Frigates in WW2, the River Class 2000t, by the 60s type 12 3000t, 80s Type 22 4500t, 2000s FREMMs 6500t, today Type 26 8000t+ F126 will be up to 10,000t As you can see there has been a steady increase in Ship sizes, 20 years ago a 8000t Warship was large by 2030 they will only be Medium size.
As Tray said, the destroyer nomination has to do with its capabilities, not the tonnage. Hence a French FREMM’s hull number starts with D and is classified as destroyer by NATO while an Italian FREMM’s hull number starts with F and is classified as frigate by NATO.
@@mostlymessingabout the first one in the class yes but as the class gets populated the cost will decrease dramatically, especially as a lot of other nations are considering this design and will likely chose a version of the FREEM for their next ship
The primary threat today is from small boat swarms and drones. This 57mm gun is faster firing, and can fire far more different types of rounds making it far more capable against those types of targets. They have the 16 LRASM to take on larger opponents. The change from the gatling gun to RIM launcher allows them to engage multiple targets quickly not just one. It's highly automated with a higher kill probability. A RIM missile is far more effective against an incoming cruise missiles than the gun as well with longer range as well. It has two torpedo launchers (one on each side) in triple launchers behind the roll-up doors amidship. The torpedos can be both surface and subsurface. The VLS will have asroc ASW torpedos as well. With their VLS launchers, this ship is very lethal as much as a destroyer capable of dealing with any level surface or air threat as well as ASW as well. Think of it as a scaled down Burke with all the same capability and more. The 57mm gun allows them to deal with boat swarms and drones better than a Burke. The mission role of this ship is escort and littoral combat, it's replacing the the puny and underarmed LCS. This is going to be a very good ship for a long time.
I like the design but what bothers me is that there is no CIWS on the ship nor Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes. I think it should carry more VLS cells then 32. It’s my opinion tho.
European weapons have always been top tier, just stifled by political budgetary concerns, like this "Frigate" displaces almost as much as an Horizon Class/Daring Class Destroyer but European nations still insist on calling them Frigates because Destroyer sounds too aggressive.
RAM is more useful, has greater range, and can engage multiple targets simultaneously. There is also SM-2, and quad-packed ESSM, and the Mk 110 adds to capabilities. CIWS is steadily losing favor because it is somewhat limited, and with faster missiles, engages too close to guarantee that the unit won't receive damages from destroyed inbounds.
Time to bring back the 16" guns with the new artillery shells and technology would help the ground forces from a far with pin point accuracy. Plus it's time to build ships that are totally for missiles and lasers.
I want the best for the US Navy, is this three-faced radar (one forward and two facing aft) going to be sufficient? Is it another cost-cutting measure or is it a viable solution for the Navy?
Replace the 50 cal with 25 or 30mm chain gun and put helios laser too. The curent light weapon are kindna economicaly lack to defend asymetrical attack
Excellent choice. Really is a Flight 2A but smaller with less VLS and flight illuminators, a critical draw back with RANs Hobarts. That added third illuminator an and does make all the difference. And yes as someone has posted already, the 'pork', like the F35 for example and one of the reasons ending the JSF was never an option, the pork is spread wide, sprinkled as it is. But the USN need a FFG, badly.
The will probably use ESSM Block2s which have an active radar homing head. They don't need as much use of the ship's illuminator radars, you just have to get the missile in the general area.
@@MalfosRanger incorrect. Those diesels are running on fuel to generate the power for the drive motors, they just use less doing it than a gas turbine does. When they kick the gas turbine in, they'll definitely burn it faster. There are no battery banks for those drive motors.
China CCP: "More pictures! More Pictures! By noon tomorrow our secret shipyard at ShangKnocKov will have produce them at 1/50 the cost!" "Will it be as good?" "Who cares?! We have over a billion citizens, we can always get more sailors!"
need a big power supply one large enough to push a particle generator so as to develop real directed energy weapons, and get rid of the panty waste killowatt range lasers.
@@Chickenworm9394 And? fyi, there plan to equip the frigate with laser. www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/05/05/5-things-you-should-know-about-the-us-navys-new-frigate/
It is a Guided-Missile Frigate, missiles are the main weapon, not the gun, the fast firing MK110 57mm is more than enough to protect itself against small boats
Even though the US Navy had dozens of 76 mm guns removed from the scrapped Perry class frigates that could have been upgraded the Navy decided to put a 57mm as main gun.
@Legio XXI Rapax No. The 76mm Strales ammos are infrared beam guided, not laser guided. And about the 127mm Vulcano projectile, it is gps guided, not laser guided. There are no laser guided ammos on planet Earth.
Interesting that the US ordered just 10 FREMM Frigates - with a second order on hold. My bet is that America is interested in the British Type 26 Global Combat ship which has been ordered by GB, Australia and Canada.
Seems a little under gunned, ? With no close in weapons systems (phalanx), only a 57mm main gun when most ships of this size and class use a 76mm or larger and no 25mm or 30mm auto-cannons. Also no torpedoes ?
US Navy has approximately 100 large surface combatants employing 5 inch naval gun. That’s more than adequate for naval gun fire supports. The 57mm is not only cost effective but also comes with lots new innovation in terms of smart munitions. US navy plans to deploy two types of guided 57mm ammos: L3 Alamo rounds for anti surface warfare (against multiple small boats attack, a tactic favored by Iranian IRGC), and a high end Raytheon developed MadFires round for cruise missile defense. They are much more effective for their intended mission roles in comparison to traditional 76 or even 127 round. Again it’s the ammo that matters the most, not the caliber. As for ASW, FFG-X will eventually deploy VLA Asroc using some of the VLS cells. It’s a better option than torpedo launcher.
@@aps125 Guided ammunitions for 76mm, both AA and anti-surface, had been out for years. They don't need to still be invented. Advocates of the 57mm point out that, thanks to the higher ROF it puts (slightly) more explosive in the air in the same amount of time, but the 76mm has 60% longer range for AA, so it simply starts firing way before and has much more time to fire a second salvo if the first one fails.
So, since this configuration comes in at around 7500 tons displacement, doesn't that really bump it into destroyer territory (the DDG runs at 9000 tons)? It lends credence to the early criticism that the USN has again underestimated the potential real cost for each unit purchased (assuming similar capabilities and expense per ton displacement). If this vessel is what the USN needs to accomplish the mission, then build it in sufficient numbers to justify the cost over the entire program duration (rather than cut the production schedule to 3 ships and watch the budget explode beyond control).
@Joshua N. Ajang Up to a point, due to economies of scale and efficiency. But remember that the USN originally planned to build 32 Zumwalts, and ultimately purchased only 3 (pushing the cost per unit to an astronomical $7.5 billion). The USN literally cannot afford to repeat this fiscal disaster with the FFG(X), or continue to fill its roster with complex ships that don't work (Zumwalt, Ford and the LCS).
@@MelonHead887 They're not total write-offs: I hope we learned something about new systems integration and power distribution from building these classes of ships. The Zumwalt hull form might be the basis for the Large Surface Combatant the USN wants in the next ten years.
Thomas Romanelli those ships include development costs off a new design. This is off the shelf. X ships for X $$$. But yeah, unknown costs seem to develop anyways as they figure out the production.
@@TheBooban I agree about the potential for cost overruns, but off the shelf? Sorta. The weapons, sensor suites and integrated electronics will come from Uncle Sam, but this will still be a (heavily modified) FREMM variant tailored for the needs of the USN. By the rep's own statement, "this has all the capability of a DDG Flight IIa, but not the capacity". So, it's a frigtroyer... 😊
RAM is a CIWS, with better capabilities than a Mk 15, since they can engage more than one target at a time. The Mk 110 also has a significant CIWS capacity with guided ammo.
A single 57 mm gun!! My dad was on a 57 mm anti-gun in WWII. When practicing on destroyed Sherman the 57 mm bounced off. The ship should have a 5 " gun and more than just one. They are designing for failure
It’s not meant to engage a warship with its cannons. It could but missiles are preferred, especially since this is a frigate and not a destroyer. Smaller cannon gives it a better ability to deal with lightly armored enemies like raiding boats or corvettes
Overall nice ship, but that 57mm is a significant downgrade from the 76mm that the Oliver Hazard Perry class had. That is an absolutely tiny gun for a ship big enough to handle a 5" Mk 45. Pretty big sacrifice in the name of commonality.
But you've gotta admit, the Perry class put the gun in a bad location that hid it, purely from an aesthetic consideration. I served on a Perry class ship, and that always bugged me, lol.
This is a message to Naval News. Why have you deleted a message of mine in responce to such "YerffoeG DranoeL" who insulted me for no reasons, and where i gave him a peace of my mind in tone with his offences, but his message has been allowed to stand? It seems two weights and two measures to me..If you want to moderate the messages, i suggest you do it for all, not only for those who react in kind to ill mannered individuals..
Shouldn’t our Navy ships be built in the United States? Having them built overseas just doesn’t make sense to me. How is having a bunch foreign nationals designing and building a U.S. military ship not a security risk?
1) Italy is a close ally of the US, you trust us with keeping 2 big airfields with 50+ nukes stored here... no security risks. 2) These frigates will be built in the US.
US navy : we gonna build frigate ship Me : that looks like destroyer 😂😂😂😂😂 Nice ship,I like it.....but maybe the front side in command system or where is the crew is control the ship it can be build more aerodynamis 👍👍👍 Edit : i got a typo
Are you talking about the 32 VLS? Remember this is a frigate, not a destroyer so different missions. Adding more VLS significantly adds cost so they want to keep the ship under a billion dollars. This ship is pretty darn spot on what the navy needs for a frigate.
This frigate has only 16 missile hatches while the Russian Admiral Gorshkov class frigates have 48, which means the US frigates are severely outclassed!
@@ignacioburkhardt789 Greek guy from ages ago. Liked alot of leather.......nah its a rapid fire 20mm gatling gun with integrated radar. Bolt on bolt of system which only requires power and I think maybe cooling. Weighs 6 or 7 tons and has just on or over 1000 rounds. Proven but starting to become obsolete given increasing size and speed of anti ship weapons. Case in point the Russian Zircon which is reported to have a top speed of 2.7km a sec and weighs something like a ton plus. Off the top of my head so might not be quite accurate numbers.
When you sell that you are a multi-mission warship capable of projecting power ashore...don't show me a 57mm gun and expect me to believe you. 32 cell VLS...hmmm; not enough to have more than one or two uses for surface, sub-surface, anti-air, anti-submarine, and land attack. These ships would have to be configured before sailing and would be stuck with their load out throughout a deployment. In this regard they would not be "Agile". They would perform as a screening unit fairly well, but selling this as an independent warship...no way. Very much a step up from the Little Crappy Ship, but not by much. The helos will make it a decent anti-submarine platform but you will have to send a division of these with different configurations to come close to providing the actual multi-role capabilities of one of the old Spruance class destroyers. I served aboard the USS Fife, DD991 for two deployments to the Arabian Gulf. We saved around 200 Vietnamese boat people. We followed the Frunze (independently), until they gave up. We followed a unnamed Soviet submarine across the Pacific from Japan to Guam. We did blockade and raid duties in the Gulf. Operated with the African (Great White) fleet for piracy suppression/show the flag operations. Made land attacks during the war with cruise missiles. Blah, blah, blah. (Not including scaring the Soviets, because we were on their door step with a VLS launcher almost twice the size of the one on the new Constellation class). This ship is a glass cannon. It will function as a decent screening ship, but it is doubtful to me that it will truly be capable of the multi-role functions that are touted by the manufacturer. The Navy lost the bubble in the early 2000s; they supported the GWOT with large numbers of personnel and put the fleet at risk. They are no longer the blue water threat they used to be. They have lost experience that will take at least a decade to make up. In the interim this Frigate will be a step in the right direction. Just don't expect it to be the be all end all that we are being told.
should have bought 50 of these ships instead of those 30 crappy litoral ships that does nothing for the us navy an oversize fast offshore patrol boat cant.
@@smc1942 I absolutely agree but will the framing handle the increased weight and vibration harmonics over time. That bow would have to be a lot more robust for that particular gun and you would definitely have to add a bulbous bow which it should have anyway.
@@johnpitchlynn9341 ; Agreed. They should have that bow with a full sonar array. I was in the USN in the last half of the 1980's. I liked having a Spruance class, or other class with that gun along-side my flattop than an OHP. Even the Knox class had 5" guns! I liked them better than the OHP's, even though they were older. What bothered me was the waste of time & resources put to the Littoral type "ships". Little more than brown-water gunboats, imo. I guess I'm an old fashioned blue-water seadog. For the tonnage they're building, they should have a better bow & gun. At 7,500 tons, they outweigh the Atlanta class light cruisers of WW2. Let me add; I believe the Littoral's would be very useful in places like the Philippines. But with their limited range, I don't see a role for them in the USN. If I were in charge, these classes would be given to the U.S. Coast Guard, or sold to the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Greece, etc.
Why are American warships not being built in America? The American ship designers brought us the IOWA class, Nimitz class the trident subs etc. We build the best here and our ship workers need the work.
i do not think that uk type 26 have not been built already. and your delivery has been postpone with a price which increase a lot..... as f35... fremm are already in use in italie and france. yous should select a fremm. you jut have got anglo saxon to choice an anglo saxon solution....that fo not means that they will be ok. a lot of bids. remind your f35 bid... you will pay a lot for a poor solution.
They US Navy really screwed up the FREMM design. The French and Italian versions have enclosed forecastle and stern line handling areas. STUPID. Just plain STUPID.
no france do not cry. as france build everything and do not buy usa technologie, usa will not buy french technologie. fremm have been build together , . not thesames of course. so fremm are europeen technology and we enjoy the usa choice. we know that italie hae got a mind problem with france. you should no. we are normaly allies. you bought f35, so usa thanks you.good job
I was hired as a contractor and got reprimanded for wearing top of the line safety equipment I have skin in the game and purchase these things out of pocket the local 696 boilermakers shit on us free agents that go there. Yeah hourly we do make more than them 25 an hour and 120 a day for cost of living. But let's do the math shit heals. How much is health insurance cost? What would it cost for you to leave all your creature comforts? Then add all you perks of employment? Oh and let's not forget the tool replacements you take from free agents because the union members that think you are doing better financially than they are or just don't like u steal from a guy. I was a member of local 83 for eight years I know the fight down shit that goes on. But never have I been reprimanded on wearing a higher quality ppe product wow absurd.
Politics and money choose the designs of warships today, unfortunately. The gun is far too small and there should be more than 1. The missile systems are too few and too small. The ship looks naked because it wears only a string bikini of armament. This ship might make an excellent Coast Guard cutter for peacetime, but it is too fragile and under armed to make it on todays dangerous seas. The gun should have been a 90mm and there should have been at least two of them and two of the 57mm's for secondaries. The missile capacity should have been doubled. The ship should have been given modern protection enough to make her proof against small arms fire, rpg's and light cannon up to say 40mm. I certainly hope watertight integrity is good, but honestly the ship looks quite fragile to me and too much like another negative incident in the news waiting to happen.
Italian naval architects and engineers are among the best in the world. Glad they won the bidding war against the competition. The US Navy will have an excellent platform to protect America's interests all over the world.
Or invade Iran and claim they are just patrolling
NJTDover Really? Britain’s Type 26 is way better.
@@craigbeatty8565
Yea right, apparently the Type 45 Destroyer Daring class was also ment to be the best in the world, and instead it proved to be just a heap of junk spending more time in the docks for repairs, than actual sail time. It's costing your MOD a fortune to put them right and sea worthy, when Italy's destroyers never had a single problem, and put their money where the mouth is. And now you're at it again, loud mouthing the Type 26 is best in the world.
You never learn do you, that until your loud mouthing is proven with facts, is't best turn it down a notch or two..
@@sergiodario58able your written english is perfct :o Hows possibile ? Are you italian, arent ya ?
I bet your speech is even more better .
N.1 bruva ! :D
Bela donna tuta pizza mia amore ! :D
P.S.
Are you a lady ? :*
@@taipeinova101
Don't be daft, i'm a man. And yes i'm Italian.
"We can go up to 16mW."
What they're saying is, "We wanna slap a railgun and or lasers on this sucker."
On a frigate?
@@unidentifiedperson7185 There would be no need to have the ability to expand power generation that high if the plan wasn't for a EMW or DEW.
It would most likely be a scaled down version though. There are many reason to want a railgun or laser outside of just "Navy ship goes boom!" and I'd imagine the navy will want to move away from conventional guns as soon as it can.
They also removed some compartments from the bow area in comparison to other versions of this design. To save weight. I guess this means they can place a large mass on the front area of the ship without causing problems for the ship. Because the ship is designed to carry more weight there than it initially will in the US version.
@@TheRyujinLP lasers are cheaper than missiles so they will complement them until missiles might be replaced in the mid future or transformed
@@patricofritz4094 Missiles aren't going away anytime soon given the how useful the ability to carry payloads are but lasers will change the game and force them to evolve.
This with the new distroyer class is going to badass. Beautiful ship.
Frigate not destroyer. This will not be the US navy’s frontline warship, that’s the Arleigh Burke flight 3.
@@zeitgeistx5239 actually the new DDG(X) destroyer will be the new main horse of the fleet.
Great! Italy again!
Egipt ordered 6 FREMM
2 on delivery
After what happened these days, we should send them for war......
I'm upset about the 57mm gun in place instead of the 76mm OTO-Melara mount. And I was hoping it would get a 48-cell VLS vice 32-cell. Plus, I believe it would deserve to be called Doris Miller. I was originally calling it the Boorda-class, but I know that will never happen. Otherwise, the ship looks good.
The low VLS count allows more ships to be made, and for each ships cost to remain low. More hulls means more sonars, hangars, and boat bays. The 57mm gun on Constellation is a better CIWS compared to 127mm, though can't do the same amount of missions like shore bombardment.
you could buy 2 constellations for 1 Arleigh Burke. When you compare 2 900 million dollar constellation FREMMs to 1 2 billion dollar Arleigh Burke, then...
Constellations got a lower crew and likely lower operating costs, the same amount of VLS and missile cells, more CIWS more hangar space, more radar mounts, more sonars, more range (though less speed), more hulls for mission flexibility, and more boat bays.
Recent American ship designs havent been that good on the cost-effectiveness front. Zumwalt, Ford, Arleigh Burke, San Antonio, America, etc. They are all over-expensive, with foreign designs offering the same capability for less money.
Me too ! Actually it should have a 5" gun for even more firepower.
I agree about getting more missiles especially missiles that can defend the aircraft carriers.
@@botchii3059 It has 1/3 the mark 41 VLS cells of a Burke, not half. The reason being is they most likely want space to allow for a future laser to be mounted in front of the Bridge. 56mm is simply cost saving. But I would still mount two Mark II Bushmasters aft and if she’s a sub hunter where are the torpedoes. As a Sub hunter I’m not sure she needs that many strike misses, doesn’t hurt, but that’s not the ships role. It’s a nice ship and looks like a solid multi mission design, but looking at the current config, it looks more like a small anti ship strike package rather than a sub hunter which is what they said it was. Looks like a nice light escort. An easy ship though to configure into a true sub hunter. But right now it’s pure multi role, with an emphasis on anti ship strike capability.
Look here: th-cam.com/video/61YnsQ1v0mw/w-d-xo.html
I wanna buy that scale model....
I have three aircraft carrier models...
I want a 1/200 FFG7 class frigate. It's not like it would be all that large.
I build models like that professionally at propmeup1@verizon.net
Excellent choice, I really like this new Frigate design unlike the hideous Perry class frigates of the 1980’s.
Designer of Perry did a good job fitting all those armament into a 4100 ton frame... this one is 7500 ton...
@@cedricchiu9763 And Australia upgraded the OHP even more with up to 40 SM-2, an 8 round VLS for 32 advanced Sea Sparrows, up to 8 x Bk2 Harpoon, the 76mm OM, Pharynx, 2 x 3 torps, 2 helos, updated electronics and sonar etc.
@@briananthony4044 Yeah... but the 8 cell VLS shortened the life of these Perry..... (The original design didn't accounted all those weight... )
The Perry Class was the best warship in the history of the US Navy
OHPs were real frigates, workhorses with precisely defined primary and secondary mission.
So does it mean that Fincantieri will be the contractor of US Navy's FFG(X) project?
Yes.
And now they have won the competition officially, with the name of Constellation Class.
Planned to build at Fincantieri's Marinette Marine in Wisconsin.
NO Potato Joe will nix all these contracts
@@gdadamos2302 Doubt that, LCS is a joke and couldn't survive in anything but a low threat environment, Blue water Navy is back with the pivot to China
Very nice design but I am wondering if one SPY radar panel facing forward is going to be enough?
Great to provide for a lot of electric power because laser guns are on the way in only a few more years. They will be needed to deal with missile and suicide drone swarms.
That's partly why they went with the 57mm gun.
@@jimmellenberger8505 Thanks for that reply. I have been scratching my head over why they didn't choose a bigger gun. If the 57mm is a better anti-air gun, then that makes sense.
I'm agreeing with most of the statements below - but the naval rep said this was to be an ASW platform - where is the sonar system? Will this class depend solely on towed array?
Overall a very good looking ship and with a good suite of weapons systems available. Beats the LCS class ships all hollow! ! !
Slated for a tail and VDS, from my understanding.
It will be equipped with the state of the art French Thales CAPTAS 4 variable depth towed array and sonar, and the French Thales FLASH dipping sonar from the helicopter, like a lot of other NATO navies, but yes it lacks a hull mounted sonar for operations in shallow depths.
Anyone notice the two machine gun posts on the fore right next to the VLS?
for use against small boat attacks
Malaysia need this FREMM. To protect from China.
To protect what from china? Be spacific
@@monkeylee4818 ≤-against this
Protect from bodoh bumis like you?
Just another insignificant Chinese-hater
China is occupying the whole sea below them as far as Indonesia
The goal here was to buy a tried and tested hybrid electric power train in a proven hull form. The USN has a less than stellar track record in getting hybrid electric into the fleet. Everything above the waterline is irrelevant: just off the shelf kit. It's the stuff in the hull that the USN wanted.
Yeah, navy needed a frigate fast and at a good price. This ship plays the role of destroyer escort alongside the Arleigh Burkes--which is a fantastic ship but expensive.
It's funny because before this, we Italians worked with the Americans in develop those hybrid engines. And their fuel. Eco fuel to be precise.
Great news. My dad worked at the predecessor company of Fincantieri in Trieste. Great news for the Italian shipyard.
Long Range Strategic Agis Missile Frigate?
At'n. Fincantieri. Will you please explain us, why this FFG (X) ship project is conceptualized as a frigate having those dimensions and weight? I think that a war ship wich has a displacement weight of 7,500 ton. and is as long as 148.9 meters, could get the destroyer category.
Its has to do with the the job its built for not the size
Destroyers are now 10-12000t, nobody is building 8000t Destroyers anymore. All Warship types steadily get bigger and bigger,
@@Harldin . Ok. Thank you.
@@jorgeestrada5713 Go back to WW2 and the Fletcher class were about 3,000t by the 60s the Adams class about 4500t by the 80s the Spruance class were about 7500t, in the 90s Burke flight 1s 8500t and now the Flight 111 Burkes about 10,000t, Sejong the Great class about 12,000t.
Frigates in WW2, the River Class 2000t, by the 60s type 12 3000t, 80s Type 22 4500t, 2000s FREMMs 6500t, today Type 26 8000t+ F126 will be up to 10,000t
As you can see there has been a steady increase in Ship sizes, 20 years ago a 8000t Warship was large by 2030 they will only be Medium size.
As Tray said, the destroyer nomination has to do with its capabilities, not the tonnage. Hence a French FREMM’s hull number starts with D and is classified as destroyer by NATO while an Italian FREMM’s hull number starts with F and is classified as frigate by NATO.
Where is the Sonar dome?
we can assume this is an Early Design of the ship
and maybe a Sonar Dome will be added
It’s about damn time they came out with a more affordable hi tech tin can slugger
It's not cheap. Probably will be another $1Bn ship 🤷🏼♂️
@@mostlymessingabout the first one in the class yes but as the class gets populated the cost will decrease dramatically, especially as a lot of other nations are considering this design and will likely chose a version of the FREEM for their next ship
a smart move from the navy
The primary threat today is from small boat swarms and drones. This 57mm gun is faster firing, and can fire far more different types of rounds making it far more capable against those types of targets. They have the 16 LRASM to take on larger opponents. The change from the gatling gun to RIM launcher allows them to engage multiple targets quickly not just one. It's highly automated with a higher kill probability. A RIM missile is far more effective against an incoming cruise missiles than the gun as well with longer range as well. It has two torpedo launchers (one on each side) in triple launchers behind the roll-up doors amidship. The torpedos can be both surface and subsurface. The VLS will have asroc ASW torpedos as well. With their VLS launchers, this ship is very lethal as much as a destroyer capable of dealing with any level surface or air threat as well as ASW as well. Think of it as a scaled down Burke with all the same capability and more. The 57mm gun allows them to deal with boat swarms and drones better than a Burke. The mission role of this ship is escort and littoral combat, it's replacing the the puny and underarmed LCS. This is going to be a very good ship for a long time.
I like the design but what bothers me is that there is no CIWS on the ship nor Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes. I think it should carry more VLS cells then 32. It’s my opinion tho.
There is CIWS on the top of the helicopter hangar, in modern ships the torpedo tubes are inside the ship and fired through an opening trap.
Seems European stuff has gotten an edge here and there, lately.
Cool.
jetaddicted italian stuff here.
@@gg-eo6ez lol....
European weapons have always been top tier, just stifled by political budgetary concerns, like this "Frigate" displaces almost as much as an Horizon Class/Daring Class Destroyer but European nations still insist on calling them Frigates because Destroyer sounds too aggressive.
@@marcofava No, Europe calls them frigates because it is a long History based tradition to call these ships "frigates", not "destroyers"
@@marcofava no,we call them "frigates" because we have a different naming system from the US
Very smart to do a 1 + 9 contract. These ships needs to be thoroughly tested and use proven systems.
As a former sonar tech, exactly how are diesels quiet?
It would be nice if they had battery banks to operate in a stealth mode with. The old prairie masker systems were only a half measure at best.
@@9999plato since they are decoupled from the drive train, they are heavily isolated from the hull and quieted.
Is that cannon stralis?
Welcome to Indonesia FREMM....🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩
🇮🇹 Ship Builders since Roman Empire and Maritime republics 🇮🇹
No Phalanx?
RAM is more useful, has greater range, and can engage multiple targets simultaneously. There is also SM-2, and quad-packed ESSM, and the Mk 110 adds to capabilities. CIWS is steadily losing favor because it is somewhat limited, and with faster missiles, engages too close to guarantee that the unit won't receive damages from destroyed inbounds.
Nice ship. But will it be built in Italy or the U.S.A.?
In the USA
Wiscoins i believe
1:02 Can someone enlighten me why they decided not to have an enclosed Mast?
Americans do not want sexy ships I guess
Completely different Radar system
Lowered center of gravity.
Time to bring back the 16" guns with the new artillery shells and technology would help the ground forces from a far with pin point accuracy. Plus it's time to build ships that are totally for missiles and lasers.
I want the best for the US Navy, is this three-faced radar (one forward and two facing aft) going to be sufficient? Is it another cost-cutting measure or is it a viable solution for the Navy?
This system is comparable to the Spy-1D on Burke class destroyer.
What about the CIWS?
No more Corvettes now we get Ferrari’s
Replace the 50 cal with 25 or 30mm chain gun and put helios laser too. The curent light weapon are kindna economicaly lack to defend asymetrical attack
Excellent choice. Really is a Flight 2A but smaller with less VLS and flight illuminators, a critical draw back with RANs Hobarts. That added third illuminator an and does make all the difference. And yes as someone has posted already, the 'pork', like the F35 for example and one of the reasons ending the JSF was never an option, the pork is spread wide, sprinkled as it is. But the USN need a FFG, badly.
The will probably use ESSM Block2s which have an active radar homing head. They don't need as much use of the ship's illuminator radars, you just have to get the missile in the general area.
Interesting that the design doesn't allow the main gun to shoot over the bow.
Oh, but it does.
Right Choice!
Sonar Dome?
Did he say it cruises at 16 knots? A little slow?
Cruising on electricity, not burning fuel. Of course it can cruise faster with the engines running.
@@MalfosRanger got it! Thanks
@@MalfosRanger incorrect. Those diesels are running on fuel to generate the power for the drive motors, they just use less doing it than a gas turbine does. When they kick the gas turbine in, they'll definitely burn it faster. There are no battery banks for those drive motors.
China CCP: "More pictures! More Pictures! By noon tomorrow our secret shipyard at ShangKnocKov will have produce them at 1/50 the cost!"
"Will it be as good?"
"Who cares?! We have over a billion citizens, we can always get more sailors!"
need a big power supply one large enough to push a particle generator so as to develop real directed energy weapons, and get rid of the panty waste killowatt range lasers.
No laser, no rail gun?
Please. This is a frigate.
@@Chickenworm9394 And? fyi, there plan to equip the frigate with laser. www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/05/05/5-things-you-should-know-about-the-us-navys-new-frigate/
For such size of boat, why such a small pop gun?!
It is a Guided-Missile Frigate, missiles are the main weapon, not the gun, the fast firing MK110 57mm is more than enough to protect itself against small boats
why they have some many small guns?
Even though the US Navy had dozens of 76 mm guns removed from the scrapped Perry class frigates that could have been upgraded the Navy decided to put a 57mm as main gun.
@Legio XXI Rapax No. The 76mm Strales ammos are infrared beam guided, not laser guided.
And about the 127mm Vulcano projectile, it is gps guided, not laser guided.
There are no laser guided ammos on planet Earth.
Speedboat defense. Can't use a Harpoon for everything.
No torpedoes? ASROC doesn't count
Constellation Class FFG(X)
Get rid of that tiny 57mm and stick an auto loader 16” trio stack on the front. Old school battleship. America!🤪
Like it very nice 👍🏻
Submarine ?🤔🤷🏻♂️
It looks like there are gaps in the spy 6 coverage. I could be wrong, but that's what it looks like.
Your wrong
@@oobiegoobie940
Ok, thanks for clearing that up with such detailed information. 👌
No depth charge?
US Navy hasn't used depth charges in decades.
Depth charges can be dropped via ASW helicopters
WHY DONT THEY JUST MAKE A HYPERSONIC WEAPON NOT THE N.S.M
Interesting that the US ordered just 10 FREMM Frigates - with a second order on hold. My bet is that America is interested in the British Type 26 Global Combat ship which has been ordered by GB, Australia and Canada.
Them were ordered only because all parts of comonwelth
Seems a little under gunned, ? With no close in weapons systems (phalanx), only a 57mm main gun when most ships of this size and class use a 76mm or larger and no 25mm or 30mm auto-cannons. Also no torpedoes ?
US Navy has approximately 100 large surface combatants employing 5 inch naval gun. That’s more than adequate for naval gun fire supports. The 57mm is not only cost effective but also comes with lots new innovation in terms of smart munitions. US navy plans to deploy two types of guided 57mm ammos: L3 Alamo rounds for anti surface warfare (against multiple small boats attack, a tactic favored by Iranian IRGC), and a high end Raytheon developed MadFires round for cruise missile defense. They are much more effective for their intended mission roles in comparison to traditional 76 or even 127 round. Again it’s the ammo that matters the most, not the caliber. As for ASW, FFG-X will eventually deploy VLA Asroc using some of the VLS cells. It’s a better option than torpedo launcher.
Also I forgot to mention it does comes with CIWS. It’s called SeaRAM using missiles instead of gatlin guns
A lot of torpedo launcher are effectively useless as they are out ranged by the subs they are supposed to defeat. Helicopters are your best option.
Hopefully the guided weapons don’t fail like what happened to the Zummwalt class.
@@aps125 Guided ammunitions for 76mm, both AA and anti-surface, had been out for years. They don't need to still be invented. Advocates of the 57mm point out that, thanks to the higher ROF it puts (slightly) more explosive in the air in the same amount of time, but the 76mm has 60% longer range for AA, so it simply starts firing way before and has much more time to fire a second salvo if the first one fails.
So, since this configuration comes in at around 7500 tons displacement, doesn't that really bump it into destroyer territory (the DDG runs at 9000 tons)? It lends credence to the early criticism that the USN has again underestimated the potential real cost for each unit purchased (assuming similar capabilities and expense per ton displacement).
If this vessel is what the USN needs to accomplish the mission, then build it in sufficient numbers to justify the cost over the entire program duration (rather than cut the production schedule to 3 ships and watch the budget explode beyond control).
@Joshua N. Ajang Up to a point, due to economies of scale and efficiency. But remember that the USN originally planned to build 32 Zumwalts, and ultimately purchased only 3 (pushing the cost per unit to an astronomical $7.5 billion). The USN literally cannot afford to repeat this fiscal disaster with the FFG(X), or continue to fill its roster with complex ships that don't work (Zumwalt, Ford and the LCS).
@@thomasromanelli2561 Zumwalts and LCS was a painful episode. All that money--cringe when I think about it.
@@MelonHead887 They're not total write-offs: I hope we learned something about new systems integration and power distribution from building these classes of ships. The Zumwalt hull form might be the basis for the Large Surface Combatant the USN wants in the next ten years.
Thomas Romanelli those ships include development costs off a new design. This is off the shelf. X ships for X $$$. But yeah, unknown costs seem to develop anyways as they figure out the production.
@@TheBooban I agree about the potential for cost overruns, but off the shelf? Sorta. The weapons, sensor suites and integrated electronics will come from Uncle Sam, but this will still be a (heavily modified) FREMM variant tailored for the needs of the USN. By the rep's own statement, "this has all the capability of a DDG Flight IIa, but not the capacity".
So, it's a frigtroyer... 😊
no CIWS ?
RAM is a CIWS, with better capabilities than a Mk 15, since they can engage more than one target at a time. The Mk 110 also has a significant CIWS capacity with guided ammo.
Even though I know that the Arleigh Burke has more weaponry, the
Yeah but it more design as a naval ship and better capable anti-submarine warfare capable of killing a lot more anti-ship weapons
Here's an idea you got a lot of supertankers laying around convert 1 into a submarine aircraft carrier
16 Mw will make a great laser system. Coming soon.
A single 57 mm gun!! My dad was on a 57 mm anti-gun in WWII. When practicing on destroyed Sherman the 57 mm bounced off. The ship should have a 5 " gun and more than just one. They are designing for failure
Bill Bishop - If the shells didn’t penetrate a Sherman, they were the wrong type.
It’s not meant to engage a warship with its cannons. It could but missiles are preferred, especially since this is a frigate and not a destroyer. Smaller cannon gives it a better ability to deal with lightly armored enemies like raiding boats or corvettes
Overall nice ship, but that 57mm is a significant downgrade from the 76mm that the Oliver Hazard Perry class had. That is an absolutely tiny gun for a ship big enough to handle a 5" Mk 45. Pretty big sacrifice in the name of commonality.
@Legio XXI Rapax 5" gun for a ship that size
But you've gotta admit, the Perry class put the gun in a bad location that hid it, purely from an aesthetic consideration. I served on a Perry class ship, and that always bugged me, lol.
RAM is still behind the stacks. It’s a shitty place to work.
This is a message to Naval News.
Why have you deleted a message of mine in responce to such "YerffoeG DranoeL" who insulted me for no reasons, and where i gave him a peace of my mind in tone with his offences, but his message has been allowed to stand? It seems two weights and two measures to me..If you want to moderate the messages, i suggest you do it for all, not only for those who react in kind to ill mannered individuals..
I want one.
Shouldn’t our Navy ships be built in the United States? Having them built overseas just doesn’t make sense to me. How is having a bunch foreign nationals designing and building a U.S. military ship not a security risk?
1) Italy is a close ally of the US, you trust us with keeping 2 big airfields with 50+ nukes stored here... no security risks.
2) These frigates will be built in the US.
Will be built at Fincantieri Marinette Marine, Wisconsin.
1 billion apiece mini-Burke - USN still doesn't know what FRIGATE is.
A 7,500 ton frigate? Looks more like the Dollar Store version of a Burke class DD.
Nice
This ship was for France and Italy ans was sold to others countries.
Really good thing I'm French
It dosent hurt that Wisconsin is an election battleground state 🤔
normal in USA Just like new Boeing tanker over Airbus Tanker eventho Airbus is superior
stole it so potato can nix the military budget
US navy : we gonna build frigate ship
Me : that looks like destroyer
😂😂😂😂😂
Nice ship,I like it.....but maybe the front side in command system or where is the crew is control the ship it can be build more aerodynamis 👍👍👍
Edit : i got a typo
60 knots, did i heard right???
Nur a Shams Ack! Go to captions (I’ve got bad hearing as well ;-) … “16 kts” on electric - quiet and fuel efficient.
Nur a Shams - Sixteen knots is the cruising speed. Top speed somewhat higher.
@@dennisdonovan4837 i was shocked, didn't wear headphone then...
🇲🇨🇲🇨🇲🇨
why would the us navy give up launch capacity?!?!
Are you talking about the 32 VLS? Remember this is a frigate, not a destroyer so different missions. Adding more VLS significantly adds cost so they want to keep the ship under a billion dollars. This ship is pretty darn spot on what the navy needs for a frigate.
This frigate has only 16 missile hatches while the Russian Admiral Gorshkov class frigates have 48, which means the US frigates are severely outclassed!
Oh, yeah, and in 14 years Russia even built two of them. US have to be scared.
It has a 32 vls in the front, 16 launchers on top in the middle and in the rear on top of the hanger a 21 cell RAM launcher.
@dennytenny and some of those cells will be quad-packed ESSM.
This has aged poorly 😂
Needs more weapons
😁👍🏆
I can't believe that the ship doesn't have a phalanx
Excuse me, what is a phalanx?
@@ignacioburkhardt789 Greek guy from ages ago. Liked alot of leather.......nah its a rapid fire 20mm gatling gun with integrated radar. Bolt on bolt of system which only requires power and I think maybe cooling. Weighs 6 or 7 tons and has just on or over 1000 rounds. Proven but starting to become obsolete given increasing size and speed of anti ship weapons. Case in point the Russian Zircon which is reported to have a top speed of 2.7km a sec and weighs something like a ton plus. Off the top of my head so might not be quite accurate numbers.
When you sell that you are a multi-mission warship capable of projecting power ashore...don't show me a 57mm gun and expect me to believe you. 32 cell VLS...hmmm; not enough to have more than one or two uses for surface, sub-surface, anti-air, anti-submarine, and land attack. These ships would have to be configured before sailing and would be stuck with their load out throughout a deployment. In this regard they would not be "Agile". They would perform as a screening unit fairly well, but selling this as an independent warship...no way. Very much a step up from the Little Crappy Ship, but not by much. The helos will make it a decent anti-submarine platform but you will have to send a division of these with different configurations to come close to providing the actual multi-role capabilities of one of the old Spruance class destroyers. I served aboard the USS Fife, DD991 for two deployments to the Arabian Gulf. We saved around 200 Vietnamese boat people. We followed the Frunze (independently), until they gave up. We followed a unnamed Soviet submarine across the Pacific from Japan to Guam. We did blockade and raid duties in the Gulf. Operated with the African (Great White) fleet for piracy suppression/show the flag operations. Made land attacks during the war with cruise missiles. Blah, blah, blah. (Not including scaring the Soviets, because we were on their door step with a VLS launcher almost twice the size of the one on the new Constellation class). This ship is a glass cannon. It will function as a decent screening ship, but it is doubtful to me that it will truly be capable of the multi-role functions that are touted by the manufacturer. The Navy lost the bubble in the early 2000s; they supported the GWOT with large numbers of personnel and put the fleet at risk. They are no longer the blue water threat they used to be. They have lost experience that will take at least a decade to make up. In the interim this Frigate will be a step in the right direction. Just don't expect it to be the be all end all that we are being told.
Nullka decos Australian 🇦🇺
should have bought 50 of these ships instead of those 30 crappy litoral ships that does nothing for the us navy an oversize fast offshore patrol boat cant.
🇺🇸🇺🇸💪💪💪
This ship should have a bulbous bow and the main gun should be a 5"/38 rather than a 57mm which is worthless.
John Pitchlynn - Why didn’t you bid on the procurement?
@@GH-oi2jf That's simple....I'm retired.
I think the 5"/54 rapid fire gun remains the best option. Just my opinion.
@@smc1942 I absolutely agree but will the framing handle the increased weight and vibration harmonics over time. That bow would have to be a lot more robust for that particular gun and you would definitely have to add a bulbous bow which it should have anyway.
@@johnpitchlynn9341 ;
Agreed. They should have that bow with a full sonar array.
I was in the USN in the last half of the 1980's. I liked having a Spruance class, or other class with that gun along-side my flattop than an OHP. Even the Knox class had 5" guns! I liked them better than the OHP's, even though they were older.
What bothered me was the waste of time & resources put to the Littoral type "ships". Little more than brown-water gunboats, imo. I guess I'm an old fashioned blue-water seadog.
For the tonnage they're building, they should have a better bow & gun.
At 7,500 tons, they outweigh the Atlanta class light cruisers of WW2.
Let me add;
I believe the Littoral's would be very useful in places like the Philippines.
But with their limited range, I don't see a role for them in the USN.
If I were in charge, these classes would be given to the U.S. Coast Guard, or sold to the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Greece, etc.
convention of the death merchants
Why are American warships not being built in America? The American ship designers brought us the IOWA class, Nimitz class the trident subs etc. We build the best here and our ship workers need the work.
Because you cant design cost efficient and combat efficient frigates.
They are being built in the usa. Marinette marine in Wisconsin. We bought the design from them and the contractor has to have a American partner.
Needs more missles rockets and gun battle stations they a ship packed full front to back armed to the rims scary as hell fighting battle ship
The US Navy urgently needed a dedicated ASW frigate, not another missile-heavy easy target for diesel submarines.
Canada because of who knows what did not acept Frem bid lol
They went with a better ship, the same as Australia.
@@davidhouseman4328 a not yet existing ship*
@@lorenzo4408 while there's uncertainty because it isn't built they chose a more expensive option because the believe it's a better ship.
i do not think that uk type 26 have not been built already. and your delivery has been postpone with a price which increase a lot..... as f35... fremm are already in use in italie and france. yous should select a fremm. you jut have got anglo saxon to choice an anglo saxon solution....that fo not means that they will be ok. a lot of bids. remind your f35 bid... you will pay a lot for a poor solution.
Nope.. you don't need that against Chinese weapon😉
Waste of time...Metal can still be detected by Radar... Ships should be made out of recycle bottles...
They US Navy really screwed up the FREMM design. The French and Italian versions have enclosed forecastle and stern line handling areas. STUPID. Just plain STUPID.
don't worry
there are more reasons why i hate the US Navy rather than being a Ship Design
FFG look like ROK Navy FFX-1 🤣
FREMM more than 2x displacement, US version anyway.
The bald mans voice sounds like Donald Trump
love how people are praising a ship that's not even out yet lol...
Wow it looks like the past 30 ships the us has made
The FRANCE cry🤣
no france do not cry. as france build everything and do not buy usa technologie, usa will not buy french technologie. fremm have been build together , . not thesames of course. so fremm are europeen technology and we enjoy the usa choice. we know that italie hae got a mind problem with france. you should no. we are normaly allies. you bought f35, so usa thanks you.good job
I was hired as a contractor and got reprimanded for wearing top of the line safety equipment I have skin in the game and purchase these things out of pocket the local 696 boilermakers shit on us free agents that go there. Yeah hourly we do make more than them 25 an hour and 120 a day for cost of living. But let's do the math shit heals. How much is health insurance cost? What would it cost for you to leave all your creature comforts? Then add all you perks of employment? Oh and let's not forget the tool replacements you take from free agents because the union members that think you are doing better financially than they are or just don't like u steal from a guy. I was a member of local 83 for eight years I know the fight down shit that goes on. But never have I been reprimanded on wearing a higher quality ppe product wow absurd.
Sounds like a back room deal. Americans should build their own ships. This took alot of work away from. American ship builders.
Politics and money choose the designs of warships today, unfortunately. The gun is far too small and there should be more than 1. The missile systems are too few and too small. The ship looks naked because it wears only a string bikini of armament. This ship might make an excellent Coast Guard cutter for peacetime, but it is too fragile and under armed to make it on todays dangerous seas. The gun should have been a 90mm and there should have been at least two of them and two of the 57mm's for secondaries. The missile capacity should have been doubled. The ship should have been given modern protection enough to make her proof against small arms fire, rpg's and light cannon up to say 40mm. I certainly hope watertight integrity is good, but honestly the ship looks quite fragile to me and too much like another negative incident in the news waiting to happen.