Your quote..."That means any addition of ship- or land-based anti-ship missiles to the threat would make the anti-access mission of the LCS impossible."
The expression currently in circulation in the Navy is, "Shoot the Indian, not the arrow." Meaning, focus on destroying the launching platforms, not shooting down the incoming missiles. LCS already have point defense systems to deal with incoming air threats. They need--and can be fitted with--long range missiles which can fire at missile boats and land launchers. We are developing those.
The air defense package I was referring to was for "limited area air defense." (Itself a new concept in our Navy.) Our area air defense has been dominated by AEGIS, and focused on defending airspace for hundreds of miles around. There is a new concept, requiring ESSM-ranged missiles, which aims to simply defend the more local space for perhaps tens of miles around. It is in between the point defense of RAM, and the wide area coverage of Standard.
With RAM and long range surface to surface missiles, we can deal with the threats you list. With an ESSM package, we can also use an LCS to cover other ships within its local area. That would free up AEGIS ships.
Sorry for the confusion. I was thinking offense, while you were thinking defense. I did not see that at first.
: Ok, that was my question, but apparently
: nothing is developed for these weapon
: stations. The new frigate is a DIFFERENT
: design, the existing ships would have to be
: converted. Is such an conversion possible?
: Or would that add too much weight?
: A true modular design would have plenty of
: stations to which easy new weapon systems
: can be added or replaced by newer ones. See
: the MEKO or StanFlex concepts. The existing
: LCS are too specialised and apparently not
: very flexible - perhaps similar to the
: British Type 21 and Type 42, which had no
: real potential for upgrades.
: Regarding the sensors: you wrote that in
: case of a different threat the sensors would
: be not sufficient, e.g. if they would
: require anti-air defence. But anyway such an
: defence can be only added on the expense of
: another capability. That means any addition
: of ship- or land-based anti-ship missiles to
: the threat would make the anti-access
: mission of the LCS impossible, actually that
: would prevent the access of the LCS and a
: much larger fleet to handle a combination of
: threats. And I am do not see what kind of
: advantage the LCS would provide in such
: As I had written before: the concept of the
: swarms of small boats as a threat is based
: on a single scenario: war with Iran. And
: even Iran could deploy swarms of boats,
: diesel submarines, mines, aircraft, FAC with
: anti-ship missiles and land-based anti-ship
: missiles at the same time.