US Navy is planning to lay the keel for the first next-generation Frigate in August 2023. The USS Constellation is the first of twenty planned FFG-62 (was called FFGX) frigates.
The U.S. Navy procured the first FFG 62 in FY2020, the next was awarded in April 2021, and the third is planned to be awarded is FY22. The U.S. Navy’s proposed FY2020 budget request was $1.281 billion for the procurement of the first FFG 62. The U.S. Navy’s FY2020 budget submission shows that subsequent ships in the class are estimated by the Navy to cost $850 to $950 million each in then-year dollars.
Interestingly the size and cost of the new frigates are comparable to the size and cost of the Arleigh Burke Destroyers that were mainly acquired in the 1990s.
The Constellation class frigates are 7,291 tons, fully loaded and are 496 feet long. (151.18 meters)
Constellation speed and range.
Speed In excess of 26 kn (48 km/h; 30 mph)
Range 6,000 nmi (11,000 km; 6,900 mi) at 16 kn (30 km/h; 18 mph), electric drive
The weapons for the Constellation class Frigates:
32 Mark 41 VLS cells with:
BGM-109 Tomahawk Cruise Missile
Possibly RIM-162 ESSM Block 2 and/or RIM-174 Standard ERAM missiles
Planned RIM-66 Standard SM-2 Block 3C
16 × canister-launched over-the-horizon anti-ship weapons (likely Naval Strike Missile)
RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile launched from Mk 49 Guided Missile Launching System (21 cell)
Mk 110 57 mm gun with the Advanced Low Cost Munition Ordnance (ALaMO) projectile and related systems.
Various machine guns M240 or M2
The FFG-62 Frigate has fewer missiles than the Arleigh Burke Destroyers.
The first versions of the Arleigh Burke were 8300 tons. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyers have four separate variants, referred to as “Flights”. Newer Flights enabled the incorporation of technological advancement.
Guided-missile destroyer Displacement
Fully loaded:
Flight I: 8,200 long tons (8,300 t)
Flight II: 8,300 long tons (8,400 t)
Flight IIA: 9,300 long tons (9,500 t)
Flight III: 9,500 long tons (9,700 t).
The Burke Destroyers are faster but have lower range.
Speed In excess of 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph)
Range 4,400 nmi (8,100 km) at 20 kn (37 km/h; 23 mph).
The old Destroyer weapons:
Missiles:
2 × Mk 141 Harpoon Anti-Ship Missile Launcher (Flights I & II only)
Flights I & II: 1 × 29-cell, 1 × 61-cell (90 total cells) Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS)
Flights IIA & III: 1 × 32-cell, 1 × 64-cell (96 total cells) Mk 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS):
RIM-66M Surface-to-Air Missile
RIM-156 Surface-to-Air Missile
RIM-174A Standard ERAM
RIM-161 Anti-Ballistic Missile (BMD-equipped ships)
RIM-162 ESSM quad-packed configuration (DDG-79 onwards)
BGM-109 Tomahawk Cruise Missile
RUM-139 Vertical Launch ASROC
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
Why build these at all… ? Build more Arleigh Burks that are far more capable. Why are we wasting resources on less capable ships. Do they have enough power generation to mount the new lasers? Is there a need for smaller vessels that a destroyer cannot fulfill? The Navy board has proven they are incompetent with the way they approved/built and handled the last two useless, over budget, stealth littoral classes. We cannot afford anymore stupidity.
Nice that The US is finally understanding that it with with a serious competition with China and actually building new equipment rather than cancelling development projects. Are these frigates defenseable against a Chinese attack when the battle of Taiwan starts? God knows.
Over the Horizon Targeting of ships at sea is a lot harder than people think. I did several simulations of it while I was active where a lot of missiles did very little damage – because they kept attacking the same target – the technical term is ‘missile sump’. And that was with a generous assumption that they had been fired with precise enough targeting to get the onboard missile sensors in range of the task force when they started looking. If the missiles start looking too soon, they may acquire a unrelated merchant ship or too late, they over fly the task force.
Ya the intent will be to prosecute subs with it’s Helo and drop he Mk54 ALWTs…
How will the Kinzhal get to the Frigate? By rowboat? Last time I checked Russia’s military is literally half what it was a year ago.
The new Frigates also lack a hull-mounted sonar and shipboard torpedo tubes. This is worrisome, since submarines have proven time and time again that they can sometimes get in close, despite the best efforts of the escorts.
Having an immediate response available when a periscope (or a torpedo wake) pops up close by is still valuable.
If the periscope pops up close then it is too late.
Use helis to listen and use the heli to kill the sub while it is far away.
When the sub fires at you, being able to immediately fire your own torpedo back at it forces the sub to maneuver violently to escape, causing it to break the guidance wires to its torpedo. This improves your chances of luring the torpedo away with countermeasures.
Man if only there was some way to attack a submarine while it was a long ways away. Maybe something airborne like on a helicopter.
Maybe also some kind of vertically launched torpedo with a rocket engine. That way you can attack it before you spot the periscope wake.
But lets just hope that a sub doesn’t have autonomous homing torpedoes. Because boy then it would be rough when you see the periscope’s wake.
And I mean don’t get me going on the lack of flak cannons. How ya gonna stop the kamikazes without overwhelming area firepower?
Submarines aren’t always detected at long ranges. They’re sneaky that way. 🙂
A submarine’s homing torpedoes are easier to lure away with decoys when said torpedoes lose their connection to the launching sub via guidance-wire breakage.
Apparently you have never herd of AS-ROC ,Rocket propelled torpedo, been around since the late 70s early 80s.
Might wanna do ur homework a little beforeing commenting on things that you APPERENTLY no nothing about.
Can we just politely add the information that not everyone knows. We do not have to argue with everyone. If everyone stays polite then we can all learn from each other. Why go to instant outrage every time?
VL-ASROC has a minimum range of 1k yards (roughly 1/2 of a Nautical Mile):
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMUS_ASROC.php
She has a towed array, which is much more sensitive than a hull mounted sonar and not as badly affected by propulsion noises, as it’s on a separate plane. The first Perry’s they decommissioned were the early ones (including mine) without tails.
Looks like they’ll rely on the SH-60 to drop torpedoes out of range of the sub shoot back – always a nice idea. I haven’t seen that the Firescout drones have any capability to carry a torpedo. (And really, we’re now deploying the Son of DASH?)
The later Perrys, as well as the Burkes, Ticos, Spruances etc. all had hull-mounted sonars, as well as towed arrays. How big of a deal is it to lose the hull-mounted sonar?