![]() to undergo an expensive and time-consuming refit-at least that was the theory.Ī series of design problems proved major shortcomings. One ship, forward deployed in the South China Sea for example, could swap modules to fulfill different roles without having to return to the U.S. This gradually morphed into a much larger ship, lightly armed, and equipped with interchangeable, self-contained “mission modules” that allowed it to become a submarine hunter, minesweeper, ship-killer, or commando transport within hours. LCS was originally inspired by the concept of a small (500 ton), nimble, heavily armed “Streetfighter” of a ship capable of duking it out with large ships while operating in coastal regions and island chains. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program has been fraught with problems since its conception in the early 2000s. USS Coronado was just commissioned in 2014, making it less than six years old. USS Independence, the lead ship in the class, was commissioned in 2010. It also wants to retire the first two ships of the Independence-class. The Navy wants to retire the first two ships from the Freedom class of Littoral Combat Ships, USS Freedom (above) and Fort Worth, commissioned into the fleet in 20, respectively. ![]() ![]() It’s unclear why the Navy wants to dump them when at the same time it is trying to reach a fleet of 355 ships by 2030. The four ships all have at least 10, if not 20 years of service in them but are currently non-deployable test ships not rated for combat. ![]() Navy wants to retire four ships of the controversial Littoral Combat Ship class, including one ship that is just six years old. The entire LCS fleet could eventually go on the chopping block as a new class of frigates comes online in the mid 2020s.The LCS program has been problematic for more than a decade, with the lightly armed ships coming in over budget and with technical problems.Navy has unveiled plans to retire the first four Littoral Combat Ships, the youngest of which is only six years old. ![]()
0 Comments
![]() ![]() ![]() Namely, her tendency to call nonwhite characters stereotypical and offensive names, the most egregious being Cho Chang, whose name is actually two last names of completely separate ethnic origins, and the Black character Kingsley Shacklebolt. But the attention on Rowling’s beliefs about trans people has also reignited conversations around her portrayal of other marginalized groups within the book series. Much of Harry Potter’s enormous fan base has spent the intervening years reeling from the realization that its beloved author could harbor such abhorrent views, particularly one whose books explicitly championed progressive values (so much so that terms from the series became synonymous with the anti-Trump “resistance”). This logic has no basis in reality, and as Katelyn Burns previously noted for Vox, TERFism effectively functions as a hate group targeting one of society’s most vulnerable communities. Rowling has, over the past several years, proudly aligned herself with trans-exclusionary radical feminism, or TERFism, which maintains that trans women are actually men who seek to invade women-only spaces and oppress them further. Since the first rumblings of its existence, all the way back in 2017, to its official announcement in 2020, the game has sparked intense fury and speculation over how it would distance itself - or not - from the hateful rhetoric of Harry Potter author J.K. Sign up here.īut whether it is a good, a bad, or even a solidly fine video game is not really what people are talking about when they talk about Hogwarts Legacy. Each week we’ll send you the very best from the Vox Culture team, plus a special internet culture edition by Rebecca Jennings on Wednesdays. ![]() |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |