NLOS-LS Missile ($466,000) Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS ($580,000+)

[unhappycamper]

NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS

The failure of the Army’s Non Line-of-Sight-Launch System (NLOS-LS) Precision Attack Missile (PAM) to hit its intended targets in a recent series of live fire tests might not just be an Army problem. See, the NLOS-PAM system, also called “missiles-in-a-box,” is also supposed to outfit the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), giving the ships a much needed long-range strike weapon.

The NLOS-LS was to substitute for the LCS’ lack of vertical launch system cells — which can handle anti-ship, anti-aircraft or land attack missiles — carried on larger surface ships, if in a smaller package. The only weapon the LCS currently carries is a single 57mm rapid fire cannon that can range out to nine miles.

The missiles-in-a-box for LCS were to come in two versions, the PAM, with a range of around 40 miles, and a Loitering Attack Missile, that when fully developed was to have nearly a 124 mile range. The missiles would give the LCS some of the much needed firepower it currently lacks, and when coupled with ship launched aerial drones, an over the horizon strike capability.

In a mostly favorable white paper on the LCS, Martin Murphy, of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, pointed to the LCS’ lack of organic fires as a serious shortcoming. If the missiles don’t come on line anytime soon, the LCS’ operational effectiveness could be negatively impacted.

As we reported last month, during live fire tests in late January and early February, the NLOS-PAM missed its target four out of six times. Senior Army leaders are pretty fed up with the costly missile system (each missile costs roughly $466,000), according to Army sources, and are considering cheaper solutions.


Rest of article at: http://defensetech.org/2010/03/18/nlos-ls-fail-could-impact-navys-lcs/



unhappycamper comment: Wow. Firing a missile that cost half a million bucks of a ship that cost more than half a billion bucks. Sorry about prescription drugs. And health care. And teachers. And police. And senior programs. And roads. And . . .

[damyank913]

1. Do you know how many of these LCS ' have been built.

The ships not the missiles? I haven't seen one yet.

[unhappycamper]

2. Two are built and two more underway.

The 300%+ cost increase ($584 and $704 million) over estimated cost ($200 million) slowed down the hemorrhaging temporarily. So we changed the delivered cost to $500 million a pop and we're rocking on now.

[damyank913]

3. A half billion dollar ship with no over-the-horizon capabilities, eh?

It won't take long for a rocket to negotiate 9 miles. Ostensibly, littoral means shallow water, doesn't it?

[unhappycamper]

4. Yes, littoral does mean up close and personal.

[damyank913]

5. Why not just stay with the old Tin Cans until you have a system that works?

Otherwise, they'll be a defensive task for our already overworked carriers. Doesn't make sense.
In fact, for all the capability they're getting out of them-they might as well invest more in the Brown Water Navy.

[freddie mertz]

6. A conventional frigate would make just as much sense.

Something like the smaller destroyers built by the Japanese.

Much cheaper and less high-tech stuff to go wrong.

[damyank913]

9. Agreed 100%-and we've got plenty around.

[freddie mertz]

10. They are getting old though... refits could improve their ability and extend life...

Or else, just build a replacement class of basic, mid-size FF/DE type ships, with decent speed and armament, but without all the jazzed up expensive stuff.

[damyank913]

11. True-Other countries get decades out of our older ships.

Amazing that they could get so much value out of ships that the US would've moth-balled.

[freddie mertz]

13. That's very true.

There were some ex-US WW2 DDs and DEs in service until the 80s and even the early 90s.

50 years service.

[MadHound]

7. Sad, one missle is equivalent to five years of good pay for a teacher

Just shows you where are priorities are.

[damyank913]

8. Not in Virginia-They're sorely underpaid around here.

[Fumesucker]

12. Ah, but if teachers are failing it's OK to fire them..

Can't you see the difference?

/snark