An artist’s rendering of the proposed FF(X) frigate. US Navy image
A US Naval Institute report confirms that the new US Navy frigate will be based on the National Security Cutter.
Following last month’s truncation of the Constellation-class frigate program at Fincantieri Marinette Marine, the Navy selected HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding’s 4,000-ton design cutter to base the new FF(X) program on, Phelan said in the video posted on “X.”
“We will deliver on a wartime footing, and we will unleash the American industrial base to do it, competition, accountability and real output steel in the water,” Phelan said. “To deliver its speed and scale, I have directed the acquisition of a new frigate class based on HII’s Legend-class National Security Cutter design, a proven American-built ship that has been protecting U.S. interests at home and abroad.”
A Defense News report indicates an intention to ultimately have at least two yards building this class.
“Phelan added that the new class will be acquired using a lead shipyard, with a competitive follow-on strategy for multi-yard construction.”
The USNI report was less specific,
“We will initially sole-source the lead ship to Ingalls, but we will move to competition as soon as possible,” a senior official told USNI News.
21 round Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launcher. Image credit Darkone via Wikipedia.
Looking at the artist rendering of the FF(X), I see what appear to be launchers for up to eight Naval Strike missiles on the fantail and a 21 round Rolling Airframe Missile launcher.
Perhaps surprisingly, there are apparently no VLS missile launch tubes on the foc’sle. I also note that the term FF(X) is being used rather than FFG(X) which would indicate a combatant with a significant anti-air capability.
The USNI report indicates the ships will be built with no organic ASW capability,
“… things that are more intrusive to install, like anti-submarine warfare equipment, would be something we would look to do in the future.”
They will have a space on the fantail for containerized mission modules,
“One of the few changes the Navy intends to make to the NSC design is to construct a platform above the open boat deck for containerized mission packages, the officials said…The Navy is developing more containerized packages that can be swapped from ship to ship…“Those containers could do a host of missions. That’s a core element of the future force design.”
I hope this means we will see a containerized towed array that we can use on cutters.
Disappointed I don’t see provision for 30mm Mk38 Mod4, ESSM or vertical launch ASROC. Hopefully the Mk58 very light weight torpedo hard kill torpedo countermeasure will be included with NIXIE.
A full on rush to build these in quantity might mean the Coast Guard could get a few in the new Navy configuration in lieu of a third phase of OPCs.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
chuck,
I believe they are adding VLS 16-cell Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) amidships for up to 64 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM, quad-packed), Anti-Submarine Rockets (ASROC), and Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles (LRASM).
The War Zone has an excellent article on the ship and specifically states its primary mission is anti-surface warfare and they have a vertical view artist rendering which suggests 16 NSMs will be carried.
https://www.twz.com/sea/this-will-be-the-navys-new-ffx-frigate
Firstly, the full render shows 16 NSM, which is the same fit as the Connies. As to the VLS, there’s not really a lot of reason to put that massive protrusion on the bow if they’re not planning on fitting a VLS. Previous renders showed this ship with a significant protrusion when VLS was installed, and this was just for tactical length, which the USN does not prefer. The protrusion was likely added to provide the space to insert Strike Length VLS without significant redesign of the hull. As to the light guns, I wouldn’t expect that level of detail on a press release. Wait until detail info comes out, probably in the new year.
That the superstructure has been extended forward might be to cover strike length VLS but I would have expected the artist rendering to show the covers on the launchers if that were the case.
Then there is the fact the primary mission is anti-surface and they are not adding ASW systems. They are explicitly not thinking of engaging the Chinese with these ships.
You’re right that the render doesn’t have the hatches shown. As an industry person, I have some theories about that.
Ingalls has a large chunk of material for the uncompleted 11th NSC. The SecNav has promised a ship by 2028. Item 1 gets Phelan to Item 2.
How do we get there? The mods shown in the render don’t touch the main part of the ship (which is what killed Connie). I’d guess that changing the fantail to add the sixteen NSM is roughly six months of CAD work. The NSCs have been taking on average 18 months from cutting steel to launch. That gives them a grand total of 2 years, which lines up nicely with 2028.
The SecNav and CNO did say that they would add ASW later, and HII did plan a pathway to add King Clip and a towed array in already existing void spaces. A Coastguard Officer also indicated that there is in fact a VLS-shaped empty spot behind the gun, so the ‘space’ is there for a lot of these things.
If I’m SecNav and my boss (SecWar) wants a fast win to get American shipbuilding going, I’d do the following:
By doing it this way, the SecNav makes the President and SecWar happy, gets people to stop complaining that there is no plan, and gets Congress happy because Marinette is still working.
It’s not the BEST plan, but it’s the best plan we’re likely to get. As far as fighting China, my proposed Flight 2 would do about as well as a Perry would’ve done against the Russians back in the day.
I believe the US Navy is looking at the PF 4923 which has the same lines and linage as the NCS but packs a punch for ASW and ASUW with local area defense. It’s armed with the MK 41VLS for 16 cells that are quadpacked for SM-2, ESSM, VLS ASROC, LRASM. It would have either Harpoon or NSM in the stern along with Torpedo launchers and a 76 mm gun. For Self Defense, it would come with SeaRam. Have the ability to carry 1 MH-6R and a UAV drone.
See my above response to Chuck as to what I think is happening. For what it’s worth, I don’t think the 76mm gun or LRASM are going to happen. This boat is going to be limited to 16 Mk41 VLS. It’s going to need to be mission-focused for that to work. A Knox Class Frigate from waaay back in the day carried 8 ASROC and 8 Sea Sparrow as its weapon loadout. This will be a bit better with the ability to quad-pack ESSM, so 16-32 sea-sparrow. The question you have to ask is: Does adding LRASM or SM2 give me anything that I need to do convoy escort and ASW?
I think the Navy’s biggest failing here was in trying to use Connie to fill the giant gaping hole that the Ticos left with their retirement by larding it up with VLS cells. I really think they should think about doing a cruiser-type ship, even if it’s small numbers.
The ugly reality is that we foolishly let the Ticos expire with no direct replacement and are currently letting the Ohio SSGNs retire without a direct replacement. The Block V and VI Virginia’s can kinda’ do the job the Ohios did without having too many eggs in one basket, but the Connies were never going to replace over 2000 VLS cells.
I would say, keep the 57 mm Gun along with the 16 Mk41 VLS cell for ESSM and ASROC at flight 1’s.
The LRASM and SM2 would come in at flight 2 where we can build upon the NCS design.
What we need right now is to get the flight 1’s out and I am thinking we keep the 57 mm gun, 16 cell VLS with ESSM and VLS ASROC. Put the Harpoon or Naval Strike missile in the stern and also bolt on Hellfire missile for Anti drone defense.
I think at some point some successor to the Constellation will have to be built as sort of a ‘medium’ ship, with the Burke replacement going ‘large’. That ship would be able to carry the loadout you’re suggesting. As I was saying to Chuck, these ships will be closer in role to what the Perry class were. They’re going to top-out in weight very quickly. I wouldn’t quite call them a stop-gap, because I think they can give us decades of good service, but I don’t think we’ll be able to put that much firepower on them.
Realistically speaking, what ought to be done is that once we have ‘enough’ of these to do sea-control, the USN ought to start a clean-sheet design to do that mid-range ship. That ship would definitely have to have 48 VLS plus the adjunct weapons you were suggesting. I just don’t think there’s weight margin in the NSC to do what you’re suggesting.
I say, if we got out the 57 mm gun, 16 cell VLS with ESSM and VLS ASROC. Along with Harpoon or Naval Strike missile and your standard Torpedo loadout. We would have a viable NSC based frigate for ASUW that’s similar to the La Fayette-class frigate, FDI, Kang Ding-class frigate and the Formidable-class frigate. The PF4923 would be a direct linage replacement for the Perry’s that we can get decades of service out of them.
To me the choice of the 21 round launcher rather than the 11 round SeaRAM launcher is because they don’t also have ESSM or Standard to extend the magazine depth.
I also think that the 2028 delivery might only be possible because of the work already done on NSC#11 which will become FF(X)#1.
They indicate they intend to make progressive improvements.
Right now they are not trying to make the best frigate, just one that is good enough.
When I started thinking about what would be the minimum you would need for escorting logistics ships across most of the Pacific–but not through the highly contested parts without some AAW augmentation, I figured towed array, MH-60, and RAM launcher. Assuming we get a containerized towed array, this will qualify.
Meanwhile it can do counter piracy off the Horne of Africa, provide close escort in the Red Sea, and drug interdiction.
But that raises a question, why not just give at least some of them to the Coast Guard.
Also why not improve the installed equipment on the NSCs to match the new ships.
Wow! I missed this one. Take a day away and things happen.
The NSC are fantastic ships and the frigate concept has been out there for a long time. But this patrol frigate cannot fill the hole left by Constellation. She isn’t designed for that sort of work. And patrol tasks are already the USCG bread and butter. Compare with PLAN Type 054.
Keep saying but the ship the USN should have looked is the Danish Iver Huitfeldt. Big. Robust. Simple. Built around USN weapons. You could build some of the Absalon variant to increase helicopter numbers at sea for the outer screen.
USN should have looked at the Spurance hull as a basis for a frigate. A diesel electric version would have been an easy build. You already know Mk41 fits. But no the mighty USN decides to take an establish design and turn it into nothing like that design………
And then there is the Spanish F100…………………..
This is a start. Not perfect, but neither was the Flight I Burke DDGs. I’m pleased that there will apparently be 2 hangars and 2 H-60s or an H-60 plus drones. Also pleased at the 16 NSM and PRAYING that they add at least 16 if not 32 VLS for quad-packed ESSM.
I’m sure they will upgrade the CMS to COMBATSS-21, and I’m praying that they upgrade the SQS-26C as it is older technology – not that they have any torpedo tubes on board right now!
Again, not perfect, but good enough, which is what we need NOW.