HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding division has been selected by the US Navy to design and build its future small surface combatant, using a derivative of the Legend-class National Security Cutter, after issues with the FREMM design.
The U.S. Navy has officially cancelled the majority of the Constellation-class frigate program, which was based on the Franco-Italian FREMM design.
The new ship will draw directly on the Ingalls-built cutter programme, which saw 10 vessels delivered to the US Coast Guard over nearly two decades, with the final ship handed over in October 2023. HII says the choice of a mature design is intended to reduce risk, accelerate delivery and provide predictable build schedules.
Announcing the selection, HII president and chief executive Chris Kastner said speed and producibility were central to the Navy’s decision. “Speed matters, and the NSC ship design is stable and produceable and will lead to predictable schedules. I have great confidence in the Ingalls team to execute this program, and in our ongoing efforts with our partners to successfully expand the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base to meet the Navy’s needs.”
I have directed a new Frigate class as part of @POTUS Golden Fleet. Built on a proven American design, in American shipyards, with an American supply chain, this effort is focused on one outcome: delivering combat power to the Fleet fast. pic.twitter.com/ovnASiHYaF
— Secretary of the Navy John C. Phelan (@SECNAV) December 19, 2025
Ingalls Shipbuilding will construct the vessels alongside its existing destroyer and amphibious ship programmes in Pascagoula, Mississippi, using the same build sequence previously employed for the National Security Cutter line. The yard is currently building three major classes of warship for the US Navy, including Arleigh Burke-class Flight III destroyers, America-class amphibious assault ships and San Antonio-class Flight II amphibious transport docks. In parallel, Ingalls is also carrying out modernisation work on the Zumwalt-class destroyers, including integration of the Conventional Prompt Strike hypersonic weapon system, underlining the yard’s role across both new build and advanced upgrade programmes.
HII has invested more than $1 billion in infrastructure, facilities and tooling at Ingalls Shipbuilding in recent years, positioning the yard to support next-generation platforms and increased production rates. As part of its capacity expansion efforts, the company has distributed shipbuilding work to 23 outsourcing partners this year and has established partnerships with international manufacturers. HII has also confirmed it is evaluating options to add an additional shipyard in the United States.
No expert here but this Cutter design seems rather less ambitious than the Consternation ?
Also not sure but Is the USCG still more tonnage than the entire RN ?
It is. Smaller, less armed, lower manning requirements (100 vs 150).
It’s a slightly smaller Type-31. Gunboat diplomacy and missile sponge in combat. For some reason both the RN and USN are vying for this attributable design.
design concept*
Yes, this NSC frigate concept is much more like the first few (pre MK-41) Type-31s will be than the Constellations.
Well we still haven’t got mk41 so….
I think the words of the Secretary for the Navy sums it up. America first even if it’s inferior.
Equally it’s almost Trumpist to make a claim without a hint of a laugh that the choice of a mature, predictable and proven design will solve the problems of the fleet in quality, capability and numbers. If I remember correctly isn’t that pretty much identical to what was said about using the mature, established and proven Fremm design? It will be interesting to see how a relatively old school coastguard cutter design (previously rejected) can likely do better than the Fremm design in any regard (other than cost perhaps) unless it’s fiddled with to a fraction of the degree that the Fremm design was, in which case it would be leaving it a inherently low end solution. Sounds like a decidedly political and nationalistic decision done (expectantly) on the cheap so as to preserve funds for the Golden Ballroom. The Chinese will be quaking no doubt. Can’t wait to see the finished design.
It is half the cost, 895m vs 1.4bn for the connie.
It’s still questionable if the connie will ultimately reach USN damage control requirements of a first rate combatant.
Let’s see how they make a dogs dinner out of this.
The Cutter is a good strong design .
Yes, so I read but It’s going to surely need a lot of re-designing to be a credible Frgate along the lines of the Cancelation class wish list ? Can they get this to work any better ?
I’m just curious at the whole thing.
Looks like the Gibbs & Cox(?) light frigate proposal for the RAN here in Aus a little while back so the design might be more ready to go. Could be “cheap as ships” for the USN. Good luck to them. Might be a competitor for exports.
It’s much less equipped than the FREMM. It will be like an American type-31, a few guns, underarmed, basically a missile sponge in actual combat.
So was the FREMM. We know what happened with that. More gold plating than even our own RN.
It has already needed strengthening with added bit of steel to pass muster for Storm and Hurricane conditions. My guess is they will add bigness of 20% or so to meet warship standards.
We’ll see. USN looks though.
Not sure this is a great idea. The rate the Arleigh Burkes are being built at, the large surface combatants numbers are going to fall way behind projected targets. Thought the plan was when Ingalls was finished with the cutters, resources would be reutilised for destroyer production. Now it looks like that will not happening, where is that boost to destroyer production going to come from?
Burkes are built across 3 yards, Mississippi, Virginia and Maine. They will continue as planned.
Mississippi has some room, thats where these will be built.
The best solution would be to build the same Americanised version of the Type 26 that the Canadians have come up with. But no doubt the foreign heritage was an issue with the MAGAtrons.
I believe they wanted a proven design that was already at sea so T26 was never in the running.
On what planet is a coast guard cutter a warship at sea?
T26 will be at sea quite shortly.
More the issue is the NIH approach which means that the ‘mericanisation process turned it into an unbuildable mess of add ons.
It’s not the best solution if you go by what they want which is a vessel in service quickly
Exactly, this should have been an ideal opportunity to forge a cooperative program w/ either the RN, RAN or RCN, re respectively, the City Class, Hunter Class or River Class. Would presume Hunter or River Class would be the USN preference due to greater US content incorporated in the design. However, not certain the Canadians would be entirely cooperative, due to unintended carryover from the overarching political relationship over the past year. Perhaps HII will be enlightened enough to include Babcock and/or BAES as subs on the program, because fairly soon the restriction re utilization of a proven design will be NA for both PLCs. 🤔🤞
Hi M8. I’m actually going to swim against the current on this one and say this is a very sensible derision. It always amazes me that the USCG build solid, roomy ships that do the job reliably without any “Bells and Whistles” attached ! Contrast that to the USN who have managed to build the Zumwalts (to expensive to actually buy), the LCS1 which are an engineers nightmare, the Fords which just went a step to far in one go and the Constellation Class which is an unmitigated disaster.
HII suggested doing this and tendered for the original contract but USN picked a very good European design instead and proceeded to change just about everything !
Stretch this design add a decent sensor suite, reduce the acoustic signature and add a couple of MK41’s / NSMs and you have a small patrol Frigate that can be built in large numbers.
The latter is the killer factor, the early ABs are about to start going out of service (AB is 34 years old), they will have to be replaced by new ABs until the DDGX comes on stream in about 10 years. The problem is the USN needs more surface ships so building these does exactly what the Navy needs right now Numbers !
I’d love the USN to build a T26 version but fact is it will take years to get any hulls in the sea whereas HII can just rank these PFs out PDQ and give the Navy time to design a future frigate.
Third time lucky – and the USN is really playing safe!!! An ultra safe ultra low risk solution – the NSC design is bit old but it already meets US naval standards so adopting it as the basis for FF(X) certainly won’t result in a 85% change like FREMM to Constellation. But does the Pascagoula shipyard really have the capacity to get the first of class “in the water” (whatever that means) by 2028, and all 20 in service by the mid-2030’s? It seems very ambitious given the long list of other major programmes that HII is involved with.
I don’t think the NSC meets American damage control standards at all.
It’s currently level 1, with plans to go to level 2+. The LCS is a Level 1+ and the connie has failed to meet level 1 yet. The Burkes and carriers are level 3.
Dare i say,this could be the Constipation Class Frigate !.