A new frigate design for the U.S. Navy is being developed on a Coast Guard hull form, rather than a warship.
The FF(X) concept emerged with a level of detail specification and combat system designation that suggests a program aimed at minimizing design cycles. The ship is shown as a small surface combatant based on a Legend-class National Security Cutter with minimal hull changes, intended to move from requirements to production with fewer surprises than the Navy has experienced in its latest frigate designs. In Navy speak, the objective is not to shrink an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer but to deliver more operational ships with enough range for forward presence and escort missions.
This design strategy is most evident in what this concept is not including in its design: a vertical launch system. Instead, the frigate icon includes an aft “Flexible Weapons Station” that is meant for containerized and modular payloads. This strategy was explained at the Surface Navy Association conference by Navy leaders, with NAVSEA’s Chris Miller saying, “The vision here is we will have capability in a box,” and, “This ship [FF(X)] is done being designed.” Rear Adm. Derek Trinque also explained the needs in relation to not wanting to add too much expensive capability, saying, “There was a lot of desire to put an awful lot of expensive capability into these ships.”
The weapons fit is said to be compact but detailed. The Navy design concept involves up to 16 Naval Strike Missiles in a surface strike mission, or an anti-unmanned option involving up to 48 Hellfire-class missiles, along with one 21-cell Rolling Airframe Missile launcher for point defense. The guns are conventional and involve 57mm forward and 30mm rear guns, which are designed to support maritime security missions and close-in action against small surface and air targets. The aim is to have a ship that can be configured for a specific problem set in a given deployment.
Survivability and self-protection are seen as necessary, even in the simplicity of the program. The phrase emphasizes the SPS-77 air search radar, the SLQ-32(V)6 electronic warfare system, and the Nulka active decoys. In its entirety, it seems to be a “stay alive and stay useful” escort ship design, based on point defense and electronic warfare rather than area air defense. The physical characteristics, which are also very much a part of the cutter lineage, are what give the Navy the basis for their schedule desires.
The frigate in the picture has a length of 421 ft, a beam of 54 ft, a displacement of 4,750 tons, a top speed of 28 knots, an endurance of 60 days, and a range of 12,000 nautical miles. This is significant because the previous program collapsed because of design instability, as was seen in a GAO review of the Constellation-class design, which indicated instability in weight growth above 10% and a large number of design products that were not completed at the time of construction. FF(X) also has aviation and unmanned operations as a normal course of operations, not a choice.
The concept is to have a flight deck and hangar that can support a helicopter or unmanned aerial vehicles, and the mission is to emphasize unmanned command and control putting the ship as a node of coordination that can reach out through unmanned systems. Conversely, the Navy is also working on autonomous teaming in the air domain, with a demonstration of Shield AI’s Hivemind software controlling BQM-177A targets that are tasked by a simulated manned mission lead in an LVC environment. The unanswered engineering question is how much flexibility in a containerized form can be traded for the natural width of capability.
Modular payloads are less problematic in terms of integration and can be modified without having to re-cut the hull, but they also represent tough decisions about what is going to be carried along on a given mission particularly anti-submarine sensors and extended-range air defense missiles that have historically defined the “frigate” concept of capability. The promise of the concept is speed and endurance combined with flexible mission payloads; the problem is that flexibility still has to be traded one container, and one configuration, at a time.
