The US Naval Institute News Service reports,
“The Navy is walking away from the Constellation-class frigate program to focus on new classes of warships the service can build faster, Secretary of the Navy John Phelan announced Tuesday on social media.
“Under the terms negotiated with shipbuilder Fincantieri Marinette Marine, the Wisconsin shipyard will continue to build Constellation (FFG-62) and Congress (FFG-63) but will cancel the next four planned warships.”
This seems an odd way to get more ships faster, but it may be an opportunity to develop a class of ships that can serve in both the Navy and Coast Guard.
I have to believe they have a design in mind to replace the Constellation class.
Marinenette is contracted to build ships for Saudi Arabia based on the Freedom Class LCS called the multi-mission surface combatant. These could be what would be built for the Navy instead of the larger Constellation class.
The only other likely design I am aware of is a Gibbs and Cox design being built in Taiwan.
Drawing of Taiwan’s light frigate project. This image shows the AAW configuration, with VLS. (Official Photo by Simon Liu / Office of the President).
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Other than a Israeli Sa’ar 6 this unit is perhaps the closest to my ideal design with a few U.S. systems (VLS system, ESM, radar, sonar, others) not present. I even like the propulsion system.
Not likely to happen because of Israeli Strategic Proprietary Rights of SA’AR-6 design! On the other hand ThyssenKrupp Marine System would probably be more than ecstatic to sell the U.S. Navy the MEKO-100 Patrol Corvette design plan on which the SA’AR-6 is based on…
Look, we’re deep into this naval arms race, and China is straight-up devouring our lunch. They’ve cranked out dozens of frigates and corvettes. Type 054s swarm their fleet like bees. Meanwhile, the US Navy sits stuck. They can’t spit out anything smaller than an Arleigh Burke destroyer. Those Burkes pack Aegis radar magic for slamming missiles and planes from miles away. But the Navy went overboard. They built over 70 of them already. Now they’re hooked. No room for cheap ships.
Here’s the snag. You can’t slap Aegis guts into a frigate and call it a Burke clone. Frigates stay lighter. They handle basics like hunting subs or guarding supply ships. No need for destroyer-level firepower there. China gets this. They flood blue waters with low-cost hulls for patrols and shows of force. US lacks that swarm.
We need frigates now. Real ones for grunt work. Escort convoys through hot spots. Chase pirates off coasts. Track quiet subs in shallow seas. Give them solid self-defense too. Pack on missiles for close threats. Guns for boats. Radar to spot incoming jets early. That way, a Burke nearby swings in as the heavy hitter. It blasts the big bads. Frigate tags along safe.
Without these ships, Burkes burn out on babysitting duty. China laughs while we scramble. Time to build smart. Fill the gaps yesterday.
The US Navy, Congress, and everyday Americans must face facts. Our shipbuilding game is a total wreck. A freaking disaster. It started right after the Cold War ended in 1991. We slashed defense budgets for that so-called peace dividend. Shipyards shut down left and right. Jobs vanished. Skilled workers retired or left the trade. Nobody stepped up to stop the slide. We all let it happen.
Decades on, the bill has come due. Big time. We scrape by on massive projects. Like Virginia-class subs from Electric Boat. Arleigh Burke destroyers at Bath Iron Works. Ford-class carriers at Newport News. Amphibious assault ships too. But that’s it. We can’t crank out even basic stuff. Small frigates? Nope. The Constellation-class frigate sat idle for years before the first keel was laid. Coast Guard cutters? Backlog grows. Offshore patrol vessels, or OPVs? Same story. These are workhorse ships for patrols and presence. Vital for control at sea. Yet our yards can’t deliver them on time or in numbers.
No magic wand fixes this. Yards run short on welders, pipefitters, electricians. Workers average age hits 50-plus. Training pipelines dried up. Costs skyrocket. Delays pile up. GAO reports hammer it home year after year. Navy goals slip further away. China builds ships three times faster. Pumps out hulls like candy.
This mess screams negligence. Downright criminal. Folks who gutted the yards and ignored warnings deserve federal time. Lock them up. Our security hangs by a thread because of it. Wake up before it’s too late.
We’ve been tossing around ideas to replace that scrapped Constellation class frigate. I’ve heard tons of them. I’ve even thrown out a few myself. But let’s get real. First off, we have to tear apart NAVSEA from top to bottom. That’s the Navy’s Sea Systems Command. They handle ship design and building. The whole place stinks of screw-ups and shady deals. Send in the DOJ right now. Let them probe every corner for negligence and corruption. Look at the Constellation mess. Years of delays. Billions over budget. First ship pushed back to 2029 or later. That’s no accident.
Then there’s Congress. They need a hard wake-up slap right across the bow. We suck at making ships smaller than an Arleigh Burke destroyer. Burkes? Gold standard. Proven track record. Over 70 built since the 90s. Fast enough. Reliable. But frigates? Corvettes? Offshore patrol vessels? Not our strong suit. Yards here crawl. Costs explode. Allies laugh at our pace.
Time to shop overseas. Hit up our top buddies. UK pumps out Type 31 frigates quick. France nails FDI class ships. Italy delivers FREMM variants on time. South Korea spits Incheon and FFX batches yearly. Japan rolls Mogami hulls like clockwork. They build faster than Congress prints cash. Pay them to crank our frigates. Our corvettes. Our OPVs. Then slap on US gear. Our missiles. Radar. Sonar suites. Combat software. Gas turbines. Keeps jobs here for the smart stuff. Secures the fleet now. No more waiting a decade. Readers might ask why trust foreigners. Simple. Their ships sail today. Ours rust in drydock. This fixes it. Gets hulls in water fast.
It’s not that easy to make the substitutions you mention. Each of them requires analysis, wiring changes, and possibly structural modifications. Also, even the mundane things need to be considered, like light switches and outlets, which differ among countries and lead to wiring and other requirements.
China pumps out Type 054 frigates, Type 054A versions, and now the newer Type 054B models at a crazy pace. The US Navy? It struggles to build even one Arleigh Burke destroyer, or anything smaller, each year. Those Chinese yards spit out hulls like a factory line on steroids. Take the Type 054A: they have over 50 in service since 2008. Newer ones hit the water every few months.
Burke destroyers pack a punch with missiles and radar. They cost billions each. US yards like Bath Iron Works or Northrop Grumman crank maybe two a year, tops. Smaller ships? Forget it. The Constellation frigate program lags years behind schedule. First one won’t sail till 2026 or later.
China eats our lunch in ship numbers. If they push harder, they grab breakfast and dinner too. Their fleet swells fast. PLAN now boasts more surface combatants than us. Experts like retired Admiral James Stavridis warn this gap grows. “China builds ships in months; we take years,” he said in a recent talk.
Our shipbuilding mess stems from bad choices. Yards closed after the Cold War. Unions faded. Skills vanished. Now we beg allies for help. South Korea and Japan build faster. It’s criminal how leaders let factories rust. Bills pile up. Delays mount. Sailors wait for hulls.
Fix it now. Ramp up yards. Train workers. Or China sails right past us in the Pacific. Wake up call? This is it.
If we’re lucky we’ll see an initial RFI for a new frigate/small surface combatant (or whatever the hell they’re going to call it) around the 3rd qtr of FY 2026,
Then another year before the actual program solicitation.
Then another year before design is selected
Then another year before design finalization.
I believe everyone is getting where I’m going with this.
I’m betting on “Golden Frigate (FFG47)” as part of the “Golden Fleet”
That’s actually my post Chuck, don’t know what the hell happened
It’s unlikely to be an RFI or any of these other things you’re talking about. There’s literally nobody available to bid. Ingalls is buried with Burkes, San Antonios, and Americas. Bath is buried with Burkes, and the Koreans don’t own enough of the former Philadelphia naval yard to take a stab at this. Marinette is the only game in town.
There’s unlikely to be a long design study or a lot of rework, otherwise they’d have stood pat with Constellation.
As someone else said, they likely already have a design. I’m betting the National Security Cutter. It’s big enough to do the job. It just needs space for a VLS.
They can not just choose a boat design, choose a builder and issue a contract. That is AGAINST THE LAW.
The are LEGALLY REQUIRED to have a competitive the solicitation
If they already own the design, rights, data package for a particular vessel they still must offer a competitive solicitation to contract someone to build the ships. As seen when the USCG solicited for additional OPCs beyond the ones contracted to Eastern, and awarded Austal hulls 5-thru-11. Or when the USN solicited competitors to build hulls 6-thru-10 of the Navajo-class rescue/salvage tugs
The US likely has certain rights to the NSC design/data package, and could possibly compete a solicitation for additional builders to build an NSC. They can’t just decide to have another builder use that data package to build a “NSC based frigate” design
Responding to affable04937145cd reply to Jomo.
Look what they did to get LSM moving. They said we are just going to build the existing LSVs for Israel for our own use continuing an existing program. Even easier to do the same legal loophole here with the Saudi LCS. Then buy the data package for the Taiwan frigate.
Here is a suggestion that the USN may go in with Japan and Australia and build upgraded Mogami Class. They would be a good choice, more than a 1000 tons smaller than the Constellation, but I still think we need to build a smaller class of escort, something 3,000 to 4,000 tons full load. https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/naval/17276-us-navy-kills-constellation-frigate-program-ahead-of-strategic-shift?utm_source=Defence%20Connect&utm_campaign=29_11_2025&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Maritime&utm_emailID=e98a6dae0edec9cda16c8b817e1ea0a2e8965a3d1cd004159f22772a6ad101af&utm_dod=false
Thanks to Paul for bringing this to my attention.
The G&C Light Frigate and International Corvette designs have some merit. I can see elements of the NSC in the Light Frigate.
The light Constellation and should be since G&C was hired to try and fix/save the Fincantieri ship. They haven’t given all the details but I suspect its propulsion is basically a CODELAG version of South Korea’s CODELOG FFX Batch 2,3,4. Use the same 12V MTU gensets and DRS PMMs mated to an LM2500 rather than MT30.
G&C days their International Frigate and Corvette designs are built is US Navy standards.
Given G&Cs long relationship with the US Navy, this is not surprising.
The Legend Class would be perfect.
Ellen
I don’t know if the Navy wants Legend Class ships, but the U.S. should at least continue building Legend Class cutters for the Coast Guard, especially now that the first four Heritage Class cutters were canceled and the others in the pipeline have severe delays. With the elderly 210- and 270-foot medium-endurance cutters being retired, nothing to replace them until the 2030s (yep, 2030s!), and the 11th Legend Class cutter canceled, the Coast Guard is going to be severely short on large cutters.
Does anyone know why the Trump administration also canceled construction of the 11th Legend Class cutter, USCGC Friedman (WMSL-760) in June? If you-know-who didn’t like the fact that a ship was going to be named after a woman (he hates that), he could’ve just renamed it, instead of canceling it entirely. Heck, he could even rename if after a Confederate General as he has done with several Army bases, just don’t cancel it entirely!
They should have kept buying and building NSCs until the first OPC was in the water.
The Coast Guard would be in a much better position had that strategy been taken.
It is a puzzling why the final NSC was canceled.
It was years behind schedule and 15% complete. More money would be needed. I have also heard only unofficially there was an issue with some of the steel which had already made it onto the ship. Getting better maintenance and parts for the 10 good ships seems prudent given the original program was for 8 ships.
The US building anything under 5000 tonnes is utterly stupid. You need things that can keep up with carrier. You need something that can self-deploy.
The US is becoming a power among a handful. The US needs Australia like it needs Canada. The US needs a fleet to control the Pacific backed up by the USAF using island bases.
There is one design that matches the OHP, the Danish Iver Huitfeldt. US systems. Simple diesel engines. Robust big hull.
ASW? You guys have lots and lots of data on the Spurance hull. Come on! You put a man on the moon. Are you telling me you can’t pour a diesel electric system into that hull and design some stealthy superstructure within 5 years? I bet Musk could do it in that time frame.
Not every escort needs to keep up with carriers.
Recently Military Sealift Command was told they could not count on being escorted. That they would be on their own.
That is not acceptable.
GAO has found that cost is roughly proportional to displacement.
Just as the Royal Navy needed corvettes and the USN needed Destroyer Escorts in WWII, we are going to need escorts that can be built in large numbers in yards other than the big five.
All the destroyers of WWII were less than 3,000 tons. Destroyer Escorts were half that. Not everything has to be close to 10,000 tons to cross the ocean.
Well said Sir.
We don’t have the funds or industrial capacity to build that many large surface combatants.
We need a more balanced fleet.
Many realize this but we seem institutionally unable to achieve it.
Even in peacetime, Military Sealift Command ships as well as civilian oil tankers have been attacked. The Red Sea attacks last year were an example where ships had to be escorted by US Navy destroyers (since the US Navy has no warships smaller than destroyers) and carriers, but not the only example.
I saw a recent video of a Military Sealift Command oiler being attacked by pirates off the coast of Africa. Fortunately, these were very stupid pirates who mistook the ship they were attacking at night as a civilian tanker, and the pirates only had small arms such as AK-47s, so the Military Sealift Command oiler was able to easily destroy the pirates using .50 BMG machine guns and possibly 25mm autocannons.
Even if we don’t prevent the logistics ships being sunk, we need someone to rescue the crew, because we don’t have enough professional mariners to afford to loss any of them.
The way I see it, helicopters will be the primary ASW weapon so any escort does need to be big enough to host an MH-60R.
The escort should have a towed array to make the initial detection but it might also be possible to use UAS to drop sonobuoys.
How many sonobuoys should a ship carry then for these UAS eh? When do you decide to sent it aloft? Typical American thinking. ASW starts with the HMS, and then TAS when hunting, and the helicopter…….
Good grief.
X, if you want to suggest something different please be more specific.
Not that they have developed the ASW capability yet but compared to helicopters, even a small ship like a cutter can keep UAS airborne virtually 24/7 while we are lucky to have a helicopter airborne 4 hours a day.
FPRI (Foreign Policy Research Institute) just published an excellent article on the Constellation debacle that sums up the “Franken-FREMM” in its last two sentences:
“America’s ability to get the small surface combatants it needs depends solely on the US Navy’s willingness to pick a design and leave it alone long enough for a shipyard to actually build it. This should not be such a difficult task to accomplish.”
See Want of Frigates: Why Is It So Hard For America to Buy Small Surface Combatants?
In case the hotlink above doesn’t work, here’s the URL: https://www.fpri.org/article/2025/12/want-of-frigates-why-is-it-so-hard-for-america-to-buy-small-surface-combatants/
I think the US Navy could take a lesson from the Coast Guard’s most successful 21st-century cutter program: the Sentinel Class cutters, which were based on the Dutch Damen Stan Patrol 4708 patrol vessel without making the mistake the US Navy did for the Constellation Class by adding literally 500 tons worth of changes. As the article above says, for the Connies the US Navy “kept adding ‘just one more’ improvement” until the weight had increased by 500 tons (over 10%) weight growth and many years of delays.
Or the Navy could have done with the FREMM what the Coast Guard is doing with the USCGC Storis (formerly Alviq) icebreaker: paint it with U.S. colors, stick in some U.S. communications gear, U.S. radars, and U.S. guns, and call it a day. China isn’t going to be deterred from invading Taiwan in 2027 (as the PLAN plans to do) by vague U.S. plans on the drawing board of ships still in the planning stages that won’t be delivered until the 2030s. China will only be deterred by ships that are in the water, commissioned and delivered, before 2027. So if the US Navy wants to get ships in the water fast to deter China from invading Taiwan in 2027, then do like the Coast Guard did with the Storis: buy frigates off the shelf immediately, get the ships in the water immediately, put U.S. colors on them, do their first patrols to show the flag even before modifications like the Coast Guard did with the Storis, then add the U.S. electronics (radars, C5i military communications, etc.), and downgrade the guns from the European 5-inch or 76mm to the peashooter 57mm afterwards! I’m still not convinced that downgrading the guns on frigates from 5-inch or 76mm to the peashooter 57mm is a good move, because no matter how rapidly the 57mm fires, it’s still just a 2-inch gun.
That’s my 2 cents (or since pennies are being abolished, that’s my 2 nickels).
Even the FRCs were modified from the original Damen design to meet Coast Guard requirements.
Granted, not to the level of changes being made with the Connies but it’s not accurate to say it’s a complete off the shelf design.
The CG has historically been much better than the Navy though when it comes to gold-plating and adding additional requirements as the program moves along.
Yes, USCG version was faster and had better compartmentation.