--- title: "Navy’s New Frigate Will Not Have A Vertical Launch System For Missiles" description: "FF(X) will initially have the same armament installed as the Littoral Combat Ships, relying on uncrewed platforms and modular payloads for expanded capability." date: "2025-12-22" modified: "2025-12-22" authors: - name: "Joseph Trevithick" job_title: "Deputy Editor" link: "https://www.twz.com/authors/joseph-trevithick" - name: "Howard Altman" job_title: "Senior Staff Writer" link: "https://www.twz.com/authors/howard-altman" url: "https://www.twz.com/sea/navys-new-frigate-will-not-have-vertical-launch-systems-for-missiles" categories: - "Frigates" - "Navies" - "News & Features" - "Sea" - "U.S. Navy" --- # Navy’s New Frigate Will Not Have A Vertical Launch System For Missiles ![The U.S. Navy has confirmed to TWZ that the armament package for its first "flight" of its new FF(X) frigates will not include a built-in Vertical Launch System (VLS).]() *Navy capture* The U.S. Navy has confirmed to *TWZ* that the armament package for its first "flight" of its [new FF(X) frigates]() will not include a built-in Vertical Launch System (VLS). There had been widespread questions about whether the ships would include a VLS array [after renderings were released]() with no such feature readily apparent. A lack of any type of VLS on the FF(X) design is a glaring omission that can only raise questions about the operational utility and flexibility of the ships. At the same time, the new frigates will be able to carry modular payloads, including containerized missile launchers, on their sterns. The Navy also has an explicit plan to employ the FF(X)s as "motherships" for [uncrewed surface vessels (USV)](), likely offering a distributed arsenal, as well as additional sensors, for the frigates to leverage during operations. ![]() *One of the renderings the Navy released last week of the FF(X) design. *USN via USNI News** The Navy [announced its plan]() to acquire a fleet of new FF(X) frigates last Friday, which followed the [cancellation of the abortive *Constellation* class program]() earlier in the month. The service previously confirmed that the FF(X)s will be based on [the *Legend* class National Security Cutter]() (NSC), which [Huntington Ingalls Industries]() (HII) first developed for the U.S. Coast Guard. https://twitter.com/SECNAV/status/2001991255211807129 "The initial flight of FF(X) will have a 57mm gun, 2 x 30mm guns, a [Mk 49 Rolling Airframe Missile]() \[launcher\], various countermeasures, and a flight deck from which to launch helicopters and unmanned systems. Aft of the flight deck, there will be a flexible weapons system, which can accommodate containerized payloads (Counter-UAS, other missiles)," a Navy spokesperson told *TWZ* today. "Much like the successful DDG-51 \[Arleigh Burke class destroyer\] program, we are building this in flights. The frigate will be upgraded over successive flights to evolve and has the space reservations needed to improve capability over time." "The goal is to get \[FF(X)\] hulls in the water ASAP," another Navy official told *TWZ*. "Minimal design changes will be incorporated into the first flight so that we can get hulls into the water as soon as possible." "The \[FF(X)\] design changes are in the process of being finalized and we are confident that our extensive experience and collaboration with the U.S. Navy will lead to a successful approval process," a HII spokesperson also told us. "Specific and targeted changes will be implemented to meet unique mission requirements. The process will be similar to a baseline upgrade on the DDG program, which has been successfully used to introduce new capabilities multiple times over the class’ history. Design work is ongoing and we understand the Navy’s intent is to minimize changes in order to expedite procurement." ![]() *One of the US Coast Guard's existing *Legend* class National Security Cutters. *USCG** As we mentioned in our initial reporting on FF(X), the size of the Mk 41 VLS array on the previously planned *Constellation* class frigates was a hot topic of debate. Questions had been raised whether the 32-cell VLSs on those ships would be sufficient to meet their expected operational taskings, as you can read about more in this [past *TWZ* feature](). ![]() *A rendering of a *Constellation* class frigate. *USN** Overall, the [Mk 41 VLS requirement was central]() to the FFG(X) program that led to the *Constellation* class design. This was viewed as a key element of righting the wrongs of the Navy's [chronically underperforming Littoral Combat Ship]() (LCS) program. The *Independence* class and *Freedom* class LCSs both lack a VLS array. In addition, it's worth remembering here that HII's losing FFG(X) bid was [notably a Patrol Frigate concept derived from]() the National Security Cutter that featured a VLS. The company had also pitched other VLS-equipped Patrol Frigate variations to the Navy before then, as seen in the video below. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_wusP9gBvs Integrating a VLS into future flights of FF(X) frigates is certainly an option, but one that could be complex and costly if the design is not configured to accommodate one to begin with. As [*TWZ* previously highlighted](), the FF(X) configuration, as it has been seen so far, has a significantly redesigned main superstructure compared to the Coast Guard's *Legend* class and previous Patrol Frigate concepts. This includes a prominent 'shelf' that extends forward into the space on the bow utilized for VLSs on previously seen Patriot Frigate configurations. With what we know now, that extension seems more likely to be utilized in the future as a mounting place for some type of point defense system, possibly even a [laser directed energy weapon](). It's possible it could be adapted to accommodate a small VLS array in the future, as well. The lack of an integrated VLS could explain the lack of a more advanced radar in the renderings of the FF(X) that have been shown so far. ![]() *A rendering showing the FF(X) design from the top down with the 'shelf' extending forward of the main superstructure clearly visible. *USN capture** Installing missile launchers on the FF(X)'s fantail would give the ships a boost in firepower in the absence of an integrated VLS array. Renderings so far have shown what look to be launchers for up to 16 [Naval Strike Missiles]() (NSM) installed in that position. NSM is an anti-ship cruise missile with secondary land-attack capability that the Navy has already [integrated onto a portion of its LCSs]() and at least [one *Arleigh Burke* class destroyer](), and that the Marine Corps is fielding [now in a ground-based configuration](). There also looks to be space there for a least one containerized [Mk 70 Payload Delivery Systems]() (PDS), another capability the Navy is already acquiring. Each Mk 70 contains a four-cell launcher derived from the Mk 41 VLS, and similarly capable of firing a variety of weapons, including SM-6 multi-purpose missiles and Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. FF(X)s could also leverage sensors on larger crewed warships for targeting purposes when operating as part of a surface action group. ![]() *An SM-6 missile seen being fired from a Mk 70 containerized launcher mounted on the stern flight deck of a US Navy *Independence* class LCS. *USN** "The FF(X) will be designed to command groups of unmanned vessels, acting as a sort of 'mothership,' providing the commander tailored force packages based upon the weapons and sensors fielded on those unmanned craft," a Navy spokesperson also told *TWZ* today. In this way, an FF(X) could still call upon a deeper and more flexible array of weapon options without having to have a VLS integrated directly onto the ship. The uncrewed platforms would also be able to operate across a much broader area than any single crewed frigate and present a different risk calculus for operating in higher-risk environments. All of this would expand the overall reach of the combined force and present targeting challenges for opponents. But there are also substantial development and operational risks with this kind of arrangement. As it sits, this kind of autonomous vessel and manned vessel teaming is still in development. Operationally, leaving the ship without, or with very limited, area defense capability is at odds with many future threat scenarios. The Navy is already separately pursuing a family of larger uncrewed surface vessels (USV) able to carry an array of containerized payloads to bolster the capability and operational capacity of its crewed surface fleets as part of a program called Modular Surface Attack Craft (MASC), which you can read more about [here](). Even with all this in mind, the lack of a VLS still raises significant questions about the FF(X) plans, especially about the ability of the ships to operate more independently. This has been a key issue for the Navy's existing LCS fleets, and one that the *Constellation* class was supposed to help address. ![]() *The USS *Freedom*, seen at the rear, sails alongside the USS *Independence*. *USN* The USS *Freedom*, at rear, sails alongside the USS *Independence*, in the foreground. The lead ships in both of their classes of Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), these vessels were both been decommissioned in 2021. *USN** Omitting a VLS capable of at least employing [Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles]() (ESSM) imposes particular limitations on the ship's ability to defend itself against aerial threats. Navy experiences during recent [operations in and around the Red Sea]() have served to put a notable spotlight on the ever-growing dangers posed by anti-ship missiles and drones, which would be far more severe in any future high-end fight in the Pacific. All of this also means FF(X)s will not be able to provide area defense for [convoy operations]() without a modular containerized payload, and that would only offer a very limited supply of munitions compared to a highly efficient VLS array. The Navy is also clearly focused on just trying to get more hulls into service as quickly as it reasonably can. The service has major operational demands for more surface warships, in general, and [now has an additional gap to fill]() following the collapse of the *Constellation* class program. The goal is for the FF(X) to be launched in 2028. "We will start as soon as a funding contract and material are available," the HII spokesperson told *TWZ* today. "We are confident in our ability to launch the first ship into the water in 2028, then conduct final outfitting, systems activation, and testing before delivering to the Fleet." HII also plans to leverage materials already acquired under the Coast Guard's *Legend* class National Security Cutter program to help accelerate work on the first FF(X) hull. The current timeline for that ship to enter operational service remains unknown. Overall, just how aggressively the Navy is moving to get these new frigates into the fleet as fast and cheaply as possible is now clear with today's news. While expanded variants in the future with VLS arrays and more exquisite combat systems seem like a real possibility, when it comes to installed armament, America's next frigate is set to be just as lightly armed as the LCS that came before it. *Contact the author: joe@twz.com* ## Author Joseph is *TWZ’s* Deputy Editor, helping to oversee the site’s highly experienced and dedicated team, while also writing informative and impactful defense and national security content. He lives right in the thick of it in the Washington, D.C. area. ### Author social links [Twitter]() [Bluesky]()