Pic of U.S. Navy's USS Independence

According to Navsource, this is one of the new Littoral Warfare Vessels.  This is LCS2 Independence.  It, and its future sister ship, LCS4 Coronado are Stabilized Trimaran Monohulls.  The LCS1 Freedom and LCS3 Fort Worth are Semi-planing Monohulls.  Navsource has many pictures of LCS1 and LCS2.  LCS3 and LCS4 are scheduled for completion in 2012.  Both hull styles look like they would make interesting models, but the Independence above looks very interesting!  This baby is over 400 ft long and has a top speed of 50+ knots.

50+ Knots!!!  Whoa!  For a vessel of that size to go that fast is unbelievable.  If I model one of these babies I'm not sure if I'll post pics in Ships or the Sci-Fi section.

Yeah, no kiddin'!  And only 26 crew!  Here are all the specs from Navsource:

Specifications - LCS Littoral Combat Ship (Flight 0, first generation):
Hull Type: Stabilized Trimaran Monohull
Displacement: 2176 tons (light), 2784 tons (full)
Dead Weight: 608 tons
Length: 418' (oa)
Beam: 93.2' (extreme)
Draft: 13' (Maximum Navigational Draft)
Propulsion: Two gas turbine engines, two propulsion diesels, two waterjets
Speed: 47 kts (sprint), 50+ kts (top speed)
Armament: Bofors 57mm naval gun; Rolling Airframe Missile (RAM) launcher; 3 - .50-caliber machine gun mounts
Combat Management System: Northrup Grumman ICMS
Electronics: Ericsson Sea Giraffe (air / surface surveillance, weapon assignment);
Decoy System: 3 - Super RBOC; 2 - Nulka Decoy launchers
Complement: 26

Talk about a Cigarette on steroids!

And it is no doubt stealthy to boot!

Interesting specs., thanks!

Today I just received an email from a cousin about the Independence.  The email appears to be making the rounds of the internet.  It says this is the Navy's New Pirate Catcher, and has many photos.  The photo above is one of its pictures and says that picture show approximately half power.  It points out there is NO BOW WAKE.  Another pic says it is going 43 knots and it has a very minimal bow wake.  The email also points out, and you can see it above, the stern wake does not spread out.  All-in-all a very deceptive design that will make it very difficult for an enemy to judge its speed!  The email says the Navy want 55 of these babies.  It also says they are only 208 Million dollars apiece, so the Navy is likely to get them.  If this ship performs as expected that is a pretty good bargain for a ship this size.

Now, how soon can some modeling company tool up for this!  I want one!

Sounds like a tremendously cost-effective platform.  I'd also think Special Operations forces would be using it as well as it is fast and stealthy and has helo platform.

I can't wait for the model either!

~Dave

I think she's a fantastic looking warship if nothing else with so much potential, especially as more of the class are commissioned. I have to wonder though, how well would she survive a anti-ship missile attack? She's fast, powerful with no doubt a vast array of defensive anti missile systems etc. But I wonder if a missile did happen to get through, how well would she cope? Just a thought.

I do look forward to a 1/350 scale kit of this ship being released sometime down the line...maybe...hopefully!  

Leonidas

I do look forward to a 1/350 scale kit of this ship being released sometime down the line...maybe...hopefully!  

I found a paper model of the LCS-2 in 200-ish scale.    Its somewhere in my FINO-queue (first-in never-out) to use it as a basis for scratchbuilding one in 1:350 scale

Who is the manufacturer?

Trent Henry at ecardmodels.com

I'm not greatly enthused.  The construction may be suitable for paper,  but doesn't easily lend itself to plastic sheet stock.

I'd love to build this and Freedom too.

Some very good points, Leonidas, and ones I've been trying to answer as well.  She's built by Austal Ships - an Australian company - in their US facility.  Their bread and butter are fast catamaran ferries and smaller patrol boats (like the Armidale-class now in service with the RAN).  From what I can gather, Independence is built primarily fom aluminium which is one of my concerns.  Prior to the Falklands War many 'tin cans' were built with aluminium superstructures (please correct me if I'm being too general) to reduce top weight.  The RN learnt aluminium in ships burns well when they lost several ships to the Argentinian air force.  This experience influenced warship designs.  I have yet to have an answer about what protection Independence has but am asking around.

Secondly, your comment re missile attack.  At the moment Indy has RAM which, I think, has an 11-cell (or 21) launcher which must be reloaded manually.  I read an article recently that said the Indy and Freedom were too lightly armed for their littoral/coastal role.  Yes, they are set up to have modular packages dropped in (to what extent I don't know) but the Israeli navy learnt recently that their corvettes etc were under-armed when one of two missiles fired at one of their ships operating close to the shore caused substantial damage when it exploded above the foc'sle.  If these USN ships can have a VLS Evolved Sea Sparrow package dropped in, that'll be much better.

Just my ramblings and two cents worth!

I just can't believe that the Navy is using the name "Independence", used for two aircraft carriers and the US Navy's first ship of the line for, what boils down to, a little hotrod coastal patrol ship. I realy feel that the name should have been reserved for a ship that is a little more substantial. There really isn't much to this thing other than it looks cool.

Another shot:

I'm not a fan of aluminium either, all early Tico's and Perry Frigates, and all Spru-cans are gone because of it.

Thanks for that info, ps1scw.    I was wondering about the Spruances as some of them seemed to go a little early.  The early Ticos are still very capapble ships but I didn't know aluminium was a major factor for their retirement.  To some extent it explains why they weren't retrofitted with VLS units from retired Spruances as the Mk 26 twin-arm launcher was given as their main reason for retirement (what I've heard anyway).

I agree with the 'odd' decision to call LCS-2 Independence.  It's like the next Enterprise being an ocean-going tug (no offence to tugs!).  Independence is one of THE names in the USN along with Constellation, Ranger, Enterprise etc.  Ah well, at least the name is active again.  Have to admit I'm still getting to grips with a carrier named George HW Bush but the guy is a veteran as well and I'm glad America is the next name, IIRC, as I don't think the world is ready for the USS William Jefferson Clinton (no offence intended)!

Andy better USS Clinton than USS George Bush Jr, ROFLMAO

Andrew

Andrew, I have to admit I was thinking that when I typed it.  Didn't want to get too political though (although talking about naming ships can be quite political these days it seems).

Just out of interest, Independence's first sister will be called Coronado (the more conventional-looking - and half-steel -  Freedom's first sister ship will be Fort Worth).  I've been thinking about the Independence name - it is fitting of an important ship and I guess LCS-2 is quite a significant vessel in terms of new direction, capability in one hull etc etc ... and she's lead ship in class.

Dragon's new kit listing shows a 1:700 scale LCS-2 Independence

http://www.dragon-models.com/2010ca/2010ca09.htm

They're also showing a plastic Long Beach and a RN Type 45

Photo of the LCS-2 USS Independence at the Nuremburg Toy Shop - from IPMS Deutchland

Does this mean that the1/350  WWII light carrier Independence (referred to in another Forum thread)  won't be coming?  (I'm not a 1/350 enthusiast, but I confess I think the latter would fill a bigger hole in the market.)

No.   It means that Dragon is doing two Independences (Independencii ?).  Two eras,  two scales

I sure hope CVL-22 is coming with as much time as I've put on it!

I'm sorry, I guess I'm just too much of an old stick in the mud, but that think doesn't look like a warship.