Is this a smart move to announce that a class of ships have combat vulnerabilities?

LTC Bink Romanick — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:32:39 -0400

The Pentagon's chief of Combat Testing announced that the LCS ships had vulnerabilities. The USS Fort Worth is now engaged in Exercises off the Phillipines. Is it prudent to announce the vulnerabilities of a platform or weapons system? Your thoughts?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-24/littoral-ship-found-vulnerable-to-attack-before-heading-to-asia

U.S. Navy Littoral Ship Found Vulnerable to Attack

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 3:40 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:40:12 -0400

It's NEVER a smart move to announce vulnerabilities of your forces. Or movements. Or exit strategies. etc

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jun 30 at 2015 3:44 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:44:08 -0400

Not prudent at all. However, i'm guessing that the information was released in an effort to pressure the Congress to give them additional funding. I would also guess that the vulnerabilities were well known within the Defense community, which would mean that our potential enemies already knew of them, so the release should have limited operation impact.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jun 30 at 2015 3:48 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:48:56 -0400

That's a low blow for those serving on them. Big Navy is getting media attention for something. Most likely they are trying to get unscheduled upgrades or maybe even trying to go the way of my beloved Kiowa. Either way, no bueno, Godspeed Navy.

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Jun 30 at 2015 3:52 PM

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:52:13 -0400

Everything has vulnerabilities. They weren't specified what they were. Just they it had some and that they had been tested and mitigated through procedures by the crew. This information doesn't give any enemy any additional information about the vulnerabilities. I don't see a problem here.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 4:08 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 16:08:27 -0400

Foot... I shoot thee...

Response by CPO Gregory Smith made Jun 30 at 2015 6:27 PM

CPO Gregory Smith — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 18:27:05 -0400

The LCS's have had big problems from the start. The Navy doesn't want them but certain congress critters are forcing the issue. Billions of dollars have been lost on these ships. Their biggest vulnerability is being underway, which for those of you in Rio Linda, is a bad trait for a naval vessel. The real crappy part is once a Sailor quals on one of these pieces of floating excrement they're stuck in that community.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jun 30 at 2015 7:18 PM

PO1 John Miller — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 19:18:34 -0400

It's almost like they're saying "Mr. Terrorist Sir, PLEASE come and blow up one of our ships!"

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Jun 30 at 2015 10:07 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 22:07:39 -0400

Known vulnerabilities of the LCS have been out there for some time. I can only speculate that the media push is a public attempt to guilt trip Congress into a fix. My concern is we may have a case of trying to fix the unfixable.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 1 at 2015 2:41 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 02:41:15 -0400

If my facts are correct, and if not Im throwing out my sea men shrug, it was not the best thing to do to point out such faults. However, the navy waisted money on something that is now being called a fast frigate. So it all just kinda ended in shambles anyway.

Response by CDR Michael Goldschmidt made Jul 1 at 2015 8:14 AM

CDR Michael Goldschmidt — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 08:14:48 -0400

No, it's downright stupid. Those who need to know should be informed, but it should be classified information.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 1 at 2015 8:18 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 08:18:13 -0400

They probably identified the vulnerability by reading the reports of our enemies.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 1 at 2015 10:47 AM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 10:47:28 -0400

I was an Operational Test Director/Coordinator at Naval Operational Test and Evaluation force. Most Operational Test reports are unclassified. I think in the case of the LCS, which is design by committee at its worst, has two competing hull forms from different vendors, making repairs and supplies extremely difficult and expensive to obtain, and all the limitations of it, suggest that it should not have been built in the first place.

The fact that the plan for the DDG 1000 ship is to make it shallow draft so it can provide cover for the LCS is outrageous. It is admitting that the LCS is completely incapable of defending itself. If so, why buy and deploy them?

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Jul 1 at 2015 2:25 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Wed, 01 Jul 2015 14:25:52 -0400

Its not really relevant. because Defense department contractors are loose lipped and those senators and congressmen have even looser lips. So its probably just more smoke being blown by the PR people because its flaws that were already known by many. And if I am not mistaken almost every single ship in the world has been featured in Janes Fighting Ships, so anyone can get a basic idea of where best to attack any type of ship.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 10:46 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:46:21 -0400

"Loose lips sink ships". We need to practice what we preach.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 20 at 2016 4:41 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:41:50 -0500

Sir, it is never a good move to announce vulnerabilities. We have enemies that might one day use the information that we freely give out.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 20 at 2016 8:37 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 20 Jan 2016 20:37:38 -0500

Or could someone be attempting to sucker an adversary into attacking a ship at one of its strong points? Just kidding, of course. Everyone knows that military leaders don't have imaginations, right?