title: Holocene extinction

text: Millions of bats in the US have been dying off since 2012 due to a fungal infection known as white-nose syndrome that spread from European bats, who appear to be immune. Population drops have been as great as 90% within five years, and extinction of at least one bat species is predicted. There is currently no form of treatment, and such declines have been described as "unprecedented" in bat evolutionary history by Alan Hicks of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Between 2007 and 2013, over ten million beehives were abandoned due to colony collapse disorder, which causes worker bees to abandon the queen. Though no single cause has gained widespread acceptance by the scientific community, proposals include infections with "Varroa" and "Acarapis" mites; malnutrition; various pathogens; genetic factors; immunodeficiencies; loss of habitat; changing beekeeping practices; or a combination of factors.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Megafauna were once found on every continent of the world, but are now almost exclusively found on the continent of Africa. In some regions, megafauna experienced population crashes and trophic cascades shortly after the earliest human settlers. Worldwide, 178 species of the world's largest mammals died out between 52,000 and 9,000 BC; it has been suggested that a higher proportion of African megafauna survived because they evolved alongside humans. The timing of South American megafaunal extinction appears to precede human arrival, although the possibility that human activity at the time impacted the global climate enough to cause such an extinction has been suggested.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Africa experienced the smallest decline in megafauna compared to the other continents. This is presumably due to the idea that Afroeurasian megafauna evolved alongside humans, and thus developed a healthy fear of them, unlike the comparatively tame animals of other continents. Unlike other continents, the megafauna of Eurasia went extinct over a relatively long period of time, possibly due to climate fluctuations fragmenting and decreasing populations, leaving them vulnerable to over-exploitation, as with the steppe bison ("Bison priscus"). The warming of the arctic region caused the rapid decline of grasslands, which had a negative effect on the grazing megafauna of Eurasia. Most of what once was mammoth steppe was converted to mire, rendering the environment incapable of supporting them, notably the woolly mammoth.


title: Holocene extinction

text: There has been a debate as to the extent to which the disappearance of megafauna at the end of the last glacial period can be attributed to human activities by hunting, or even by slaughter of prey populations. Discoveries at Monte Verde in South America and at Meadowcroft Rock Shelter in Pennsylvania have caused a controversy regarding the Clovis culture. There likely would have been human settlements prior to the Clovis culture, and the history of humans in the Americas may extend back many thousands of years before the Clovis culture. The amount of correlation between human arrival and megafauna extinction is still being debated: for example, in Wrangel Island in Siberia the extinction of dwarf woolly mammoths (approximately 2000 BCE) did not coincide with the arrival of humans, nor did megafaunal mass extinction on the South American continent, although it has been suggested climate changes induced by anthropogenic effects elsewhere in the world may have contributed.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Comparisons are sometimes made between recent extinctions (approximately since the industrial revolution) and the Pleistocene extinction near the end of the last glacial period. The latter is exemplified by the extinction of large herbivores such as the woolly mammoth and the carnivores that preyed on them. Humans of this era actively hunted the mammoth and the mastodon, but it is not known if this hunting was the cause of the subsequent massive ecological changes, widespread extinctions and climate changes.


title: Holocene extinction

text: The ecosystems encountered by the first Americans had not been exposed to human interaction, and may have been far less resilient to human made changes than the ecosystems encountered by industrial era humans. Therefore, the actions of the Clovis people, despite seeming insignificant by today's standards could indeed have had a profound effect on the ecosystems and wild life which was entirely unused to human influence.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Australia was once home to a large assemblage of megafauna, with many parallels to those found on the African continent today. Australia's fauna is characterised by primarily marsupial mammals, and many reptiles and birds, all existing as giant forms until recently. Humans arrived on the continent very early, about 50,000 years ago. The extent human arrival contributed is controversial; climatic drying of Australia 40,000–60,000 years ago was an unlikely cause, as it was less severe in speed or magnitude than previous regional climate change which failed to kill off megafauna. Extinctions in Australia continued from original settlement until today in both plants and animals, whilst many more animals and plants have declined or are endangered.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Due to the older timeframe and the soil chemistry on the continent, very little subfossil preservation evidence exists relative to elsewhere. However, continent-wide extinction of all genera weighing over 100 kilograms, and six of seven genera weighing between 45 and 100 kilograms occurred around 46,400 years ago (4,000 years after human arrival) and the fact that megafauna survived until a later date on the island of Tasmania following the establishment of a land bridge suggest direct hunting or anthropogenic ecosystem disruption such as fire-stick farming as likely causes. The first evidence of direct human predation leading to extinction in Australia was published in 2016.


title: Holocene extinction

text: A 2021 study found that the rate of extinction of Australia's megafauna is rather unusual, with some generalistic species having gone extinct earlier while highly specialised ones having become extinct later or even still surviving today. A mosaic cause of extinction with different anthropogenic and environmental pressures has been proposed.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Human arrival in the Caribbean around 6,000 years ago is correlated with the extinction of many species. These include many different genera of ground and arboreal sloths across all islands. These sloths were generally smaller than those found on the South American continent. "Megalocnus" were the largest genus at up to , "Acratocnus" were medium-sized relatives of modern two-toed sloths endemic to Cuba, "Imagocnus" also of Cuba, "Neocnus" and many others.


title: Holocene extinction

text: The arrival of the first human settlers in the Azores saw the introduction of invasive plants and livestock to the archipelago, resulting in the extinction of at least two plant species on Pico Island. Lacustrine ecosystems were ravaged by human colonisation, as evidenced by hydrogen isotopes from C fatty acids recording hypoxic bottom waters caused by eutrophication in Lake Funda on Flores Island beginning between 1500 and 1600 AD.


title: Holocene extinction

text: In the Canary Islands, native thermophilous woodlands were decimated and two tree taxa were driven extinct following the arrival of its first humans, primarily as a result of increased fire clearance and soil erosion and the introduction of invasive pigs, goats, and rats. Invasive species introductions accelerated during the Age of Discovery when Europeans first settled the Macaronesian archipelago. The archipelago's laurel forests, though still negatively impacted, fared better due to being less suitable for human economic use.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Cabo Verde, like the Canary Islands, witnessed precipitous deforestation upon the arrival of European settlers and various invasive species brought by them in the archipelago, with the archipelago's thermophilous woodlands suffering the greatest destruction. Introduced species, overgrazing, increased fire incidence, and soil degradation have been attributed as the chief causes of Cabo Verde's ecological devastation.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Archaeological and paleontological digs on 70 different Pacific islands suggested that numerous species became extinct as people moved across the Pacific, starting 30,000 years ago in the Bismarck Archipelago and Solomon Islands. It is currently estimated that among the bird species of the Pacific, some 2000 species have gone extinct since the arrival of humans, representing a 20% drop in the biodiversity of birds worldwide.


title: Holocene extinction

text: The first human settlers of the Hawaiian islands are thought to have arrived between 300 and 800 CE, with European arrival in the 16th century. Hawaii is notable for its endemism of plants, birds, insects, mollusks and fish; 30% of its organisms are endemic. Many of its species are endangered or have gone extinct, primarily due to accidentally introduced species and livestock grazing. Over 40% of its bird species have gone extinct, and it is the location of 75% of extinctions in the United States. Extinction has increased in Hawaii over the last 200 years and is relatively well documented, with extinctions among native snails used as estimates for global extinction rates.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Within 500 years of the arrival of humans between 2,500 and 2,000 years ago, nearly all of Madagascar's distinct, endemic and geographically isolated megafauna became extinct. The largest animals, of more than , were extinct very shortly after the first human arrival, with large and medium-sized species dying out after prolonged hunting pressure from an expanding human population moving into more remote regions of the island around 1000 years ago. The eight or more species of elephant birds, giant flightless ratites in the genera "Aepyornis", "Vorombe", and "Mullerornis", are extinct from over-hunting, as well as 17 species of lemur, known as giant, subfossil lemurs. Some of these lemurs typically weighed over , and their fossils have provided evidence of human butchery on many species. Smaller fauna experienced initial increases due to decreased competition, and then subsequent declines over the last 500 years. All fauna weighing over died out. The primary reasons for the decline of Madagascar's biota, which at the time was already stressed by natural aridification, were human hunting, herding, farming, and forest clearing, all of which persist and threaten Madagascar's remaining taxa today. The natural ecosystems of Madagascar as a whole were further impacted by the much greater incidence of fire as a result of anthropogenic fire production; evidence from Lake Amparihibe on the island of Nosy Be indicates a shift in local vegetation from intact rainforest to a fire-disturbed patchwork of grassland and woodland between 1300 and 1000 BP.


title: Holocene extinction

text: New Zealand is characterised by its geographic isolation and island biogeography, and had been isolated from mainland Australia for 80 million years. It was the last large land mass to be colonised by humans. The arrival of Polynesian settlers circa 12th century resulted in the extinction of all of the islands' megafaunal birds within several hundred years. The moa, large flightless ratites, became extinct within 200 years of the arrival of human settlers. The Polynesians also introduced the Polynesian rat. This may have put some pressure on other birds but at the time of early European contact (18th century) and colonisation (19th century) the bird life was prolific. With them, the Europeans brought various invasive species including ship rats, possums, cats and mustelids which devastated native bird life, some of which had adapted flightlessness and ground nesting habits, and had no defensive behavior as a result of having no native mammalian predators. The kakapo, the world's biggest parrot, which is flightless, now only exists in managed breeding sanctuaries. New Zealand's national emblem, the kiwi, is on the endangered bird list.


title: Holocene extinction

text: Stabilizing human populations, reining in capitalism and decreasing economic demands, transitioning to plant-based diets, and increasing the number and size of terrestrial and marine protected areas are the keys to avoiding or limiting biodiversity loss and a possible sixth mass extinction. Rodolfo Dirzo and Paul R. Ehrlich suggest that "the one fundamental, necessary, 'simple' cure, ... is reducing the scale of the human enterprise."


title: Holocene extinction

text: A 2018 article in "Science" advocated for the global community to designate 30 percent of the planet by 2030, and 50 percent by 2050, as protected areas in order to mitigate the contemporary extinction crisis. It highlighted that the human population is projected to grow to 10 billion by the middle of the century, and consumption of food and water resources is projected to double by this time.


title: Holocene extinction

text: In November 2018, the UN's biodiversity chief Cristiana Pașca Palmer urged people around the world to put pressure on governments to implement significant protections for wildlife by 2020. She called biodiversity loss a "silent killer" as dangerous as global warming, but said it had received little attention by comparison. "It’s different from climate change, where people feel the impact in everyday life. With biodiversity, it is not so clear but by the time you feel what is happening, it may be too late." In January 2020, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity drafted a Paris-style plan to stop biodiversity and ecosystem collapse by setting the deadline of 2030 to protect 30% of the earth's land and oceans and to reduce pollution by 50%, with the goal of allowing for the restoration of ecosystems by 2050. The world failed to meet the Aichi Biodiversity targets for 2020 set by the convention during a summit in Japan in 2010. Of the 20 biodiversity targets proposed, only six were "partially achieved" by the deadline. It was called a global failure by Inger Andersen, head of the United Nations Environment Programme:


title: Holocene extinction

text: Some scientists have proposed keeping extinctions below 20 per year for the next century as a global target to reduce species loss, which is the biodiversity equivalent of the 2 °C climate target, although it is still much higher than the normal background rate of two per year prior to anthropogenic impacts on the natural world.


title: Holocene extinction

text: An October 2020 report on the "era of pandemics" from IPBES found that many of the same human activities that contribute to biodiversity loss and climate change, including deforestation and the wildlife trade, have also increased the risk of future pandemics. The report offers several policy options to reduce such risk, such as taxing meat production and consumption, cracking down on the illegal wildlife trade, removing high disease-risk species from the legal wildlife trade, and eliminating subsidies to businesses which are harmful to the environment. According to marine zoologist John Spicer, "the COVID-19 crisis is not just another crisis alongside the biodiversity crisis and the climate change crisis. Make no mistake, this is one big crisis – the greatest that humans have ever faced."


title: Holocene extinction

text: According to a 2021 paper published in "Frontiers in Conservation Science", humanity almost certainly faces a "ghastly future" of mass extinction, biodiversity collapse, climate change and their impacts unless major efforts to change human industry and activity are rapidly undertaken.


title: Holocene extinction

text: A 2022 report published in "Science" warned that 44% of earth's terrestrial surface, or 24.7 million square miles, must to be conserved and made "ecologically sound" in order to prevent further biodiversity loss.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The littoral combat ship (LCS) is either of two classes of relatively small surface vessels designed for operations near shore by the United States Navy. It was "envisioned to be a networked, agile, stealthy surface combatant capable of defeating anti-access and asymmetric threats in the littorals." Littoral combat ships are comparable to corvettes found in other navies.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The and the are the first two LCS variants. Each is slightly smaller than the U.S. Navy's but larger than "Cyclone"-class patrol ships. Each has the capabilities of a small assault transport, including a flight deck and hangar for housing two SH-60 or MH-60 Seahawk helicopters, a stern ramp for operating small boats, and the cargo volume and payload to deliver a small assault force with fighting vehicles to a roll-on/roll-off port facility. Standard armaments include Mk 110 57 mm guns and RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles. They are also equipped with autonomous air, surface, and underwater vehicles. Possessing lower air defense and surface warfare capabilities than destroyers, the LCS concept emphasizes speed, flexible mission modules and a shallow draft.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The first littoral combat ship, , was commissioned on 8 November 2008 in Veteran's Park, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The second ship, the trimaran , was commissioned on 16 January 2010, in Mobile, Alabama. In 2012, ADM Jonathan W. Greenert stated that the LCS would be deployed to Africa in place of destroyers and cruisers. In 2013 and 2014, the Navy's requirement for LCS ships was progressively cut from 55 to 32 vessels in favor of a newly proposed frigate more capable of high-intensity combat. In late 2014, the Navy proceeded with a procurement plan for enhanced versions of the LCS and upgraded older ships to meet the program's 52-ship requirement; the modified LCS will be redesignated as FF or frigate. In December 2015, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered the Navy to reduce planned LCS and FF procurement from 52 to 40, and downselect to one variant by FY 2019.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In July 2017, the Navy released a request for information for a new multi-mission guided-missile frigate that can perform the same roles as the LCS while having better offensive and defensive capabilities. Almost any existing design that can be adapted to FFG(X) requirements can be considered, extending beyond versions of the two LCS hulls. In April 2020, it was announced that Fincantieri Marinette Marine had won the contract with its FREMM multipurpose frigate-based design.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The concept behind the littoral combat ship, as described by former Secretary of the Navy Gordon R. England, is to "create a small, fast, maneuverable and relatively inexpensive member of the DD(X) family of ships." The ship is easy to reconfigure for different roles, including anti-submarine warfare, mine countermeasures, anti-surface warfare, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, homeland defense, maritime intercept, special operations, and logistics. Due to its modular design, the LCS will be able to replace slower, more specialized ships such as minesweepers and larger amphibious-type assault ships.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Most of the mission modules' functions are performed by carried vehicles such as helicopters or unmanned vehicles such as the Spartan Scout, AN/WLD-1 RMS Remote Minehunting System and MQ-8B Fire Scout as part of the Navy's goal to "unman the front lines". Performing functions such as sonar sweeps for mines or submarines as well as launching torpedoes against hostile submarines at a distance from the ship is less risky. Placing sensors on remote vehicles allows the LCS to exploit concepts such as bistatic sonar. DARPA's Tactically Exploited Reconnaissance Node (TERN) program aims to build a medium-altitude long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (MALE UAV) that can operate from LCS-2 and can carry a payload of out to an operational radius of .


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A 2010 report by the Pentagon's director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E) found that neither design was expected to "be survivable in a hostile combat environment" and that neither ship could withstand the Navy's full ship shock trials. The Navy responded that the LCS is built to a Level 1+ survivability standard and that the ships will rely on warnings from networks and speed to avoid being hit, or if hit be able to limp to safety. ADM Jonathan Greenert said that the crew would "conduct an orderly abandon ship" if their ship was struck by enemy fire, an action that might not be necessary on other vessels in the same circumstances. The ships were designed to minimize vulnerability with modern automated damage control systems to perform its mission, then withdraw from the area under its own power.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The combat abilities of the LCS were said to be "very modest" even before the cancellation of the XM501 Non-Line-of-Sight Launch System. The "Independence" variant reportedly has better helicopter facilities and more internal space while the "Freedom" variant is said to be better able to launch and recover boats in high seas. Admiral Gary Roughead said that a mix of both types would be "operationally advantageous".


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In April 2012, Chief of Naval Operations Greenert said, "You won't send it into an anti-access area," rather groups of two or three ships are intended to be sent into areas where access is jeopardized to perform missions like minesweeping while under the cover of a destroyer. The LCS main purpose is to take up operations such as patrolling, port visits, anti-piracy, and partnership-building exercises to free up high-end surface combatants for increased combat availability. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus clarified that the ship could operate in combat areas while under the protection of other warships. The LCS's utility against high-tech enemies would be when working with and being covered by destroyers, like they do with aircraft carriers. With destroyers providing extended air and missile defense, the cheaper (one-fourth the cost of a destroyer) and more numerous LCS can sweep for mines and deploy more sophisticated submarine detecting sonar. Following the decision to arm the LCS with anti-ship missiles, Navy wargames showed the adversary's risk calculus was radically changed, devoting more reconnaissance assets to trying to locate the smaller ships and sustaining heavier losses.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The ships are planned to have a 3:2:1 manning concept. That is three ship crews, and two hulls for each ship that is on station at any time. The other ship and other two crews who are not on deployment will either be preparing for deployment or in rotation in or out of theater. The result is a 50% reduction in ships and a 25% reduction in crews (and smaller crew sizes) than traditional deployment practices. The ships were predicted to fall short in manning. The Navy has deployed ships with berthing modules in the mission bays in order to carry the crew required for operations. However the ships are designed with sufficient headroom to change from 2-high bunking to 3-high bunking, which would allow crew sizes of 100 if needed.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The LCS is the first USN surface combatant class in a generation to not use the Aegis Combat System, though Aegis-equipped variants have been offered to foreign customers. They have suffered from problems in their communications and radars and will require refits in these areas. Neither LCS class is able to defend itself effectively against anti-ship cruise missiles, which are commonly employed in the littorals, but does have survivability via its ability to disperse in shallow waters better than larger warships.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The LCS is reconfigured for various roles by changing mission packages, each of which includes mission module equipment (weapon systems, sensors, etc.), carried craft and mission crews. Modules include Anti-submarine warfare (ASW), mine countermeasures (MCM), surface warfare (SUW), and special warfare missions. The MCM and SUW modules are planned to reach initial operating capability in Fiscal year 2014, and the ASW module in FY2016. Module changes were envisioned to allow a single LCS to change roles in a matter of hours at any commercial port allowing it to rapidly optimize effectiveness against a threat. A report from the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) on a January 2012 sustainment wargame reportedly stated that, possibly for logistics reasons, the mission module changes may take as long as weeks, and that in the future the navy plans to use LCS ships with a single module, with module changes being a rare occurrence. In 2014, "Independence" switched from mine to surface warfare modes in 96 hours on short notice.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In an 8 September 2016 announcement, the Navy revealed a radical change in operations and organization plans for the LCS. Of the 28 Flight 0 ships built or on order, the first four, two of each class, will be turned into training ships and the remaining 24 will be divided into six divisions of four ships each; three divisions of the "Freedom"-class based at Naval Station Mayport, Florida and three divisions of the "Independence"-class based at Naval Station San Diego, California. The new organization does away with the LCS's signature interchangeable mission module concept, with each division being tasked to fulfill one of the three mission sets. Crewing is also changed into a more simplified two-crew "blue/gold" model, like that used on submarines and minesweepers, where ships cycle to forward deployed locations with the two crews swapping roles every 4–5 months; aviation detachments will also deploy with the same LCS crew, creating an arrangement of a core 70-sailor crew to conduct the warfare mission and a 23-person air detachment.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In addition to the ships' organic weapons systems, the surface warfare package includes two 30 mm gun systems, a counter-boat missile system, two 11-meter rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIBs), and weapons deployed from MH-60 helicopters and MQ-8 Fire Scout UAVs. The surface warfare mission module is intended to deal only with small boats and is called the "best swarm killer in the surface fleet". It includes two 30 mm gun mission modules manufactured by Teledyne Brown Engineering, Inc. The Navy's proposed budget for FY 2015 includes funding for the Surface-to-Surface Missile Module (SSMM) for the first time.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In January 2011, the U.S. Navy recommended the selection of Raytheon's Griffin missile to replace the NLOS-LS missile, lowering the LCS's missile range from to . The packages were to be deployed in sets of three, with 15 per set for a total of 45 missiles. Initial deployment of the Griffin was set for 2015, a longer-ranged version was to enter service around 2017; however, procurement was canceled after the missiles were judged to be "too lightweight". An enhanced Griffin and the Sea Spear were considered likely competitors for the increment 2 missile. The Navy chose to integrate the millimeter wave radar-guided AGM-114L Hellfire missile to increase the LCS's standoff firepower, and defense against swarming fast attack craft. Navy use of the Hellfire gives access to the U.S. Army's existing stockpile of 10,000 missiles. The Hellfire is an interim decision, the Navy is interested in developing a longer-range version. An LCS can carry 24 Hellfire missiles in its Surface-to-surface Missile Module (SSMM), using M299 vertical launchers mounted within a gas containment system; the SSMM design does not facilitate at-sea reloading. The Hellfire is slated to be operational aboard the LCS by 2017. A longer-range missile with an over-the-horizon engagement capability is planned to defend against fast attack craft, ships, and patrol boats by 2020 as part of the surface warfare package Increment 4.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Norwegian company Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace proposed equipping LCSs with their radar-evading Naval Strike Missile, presenting scale models of the "Freedom"-class with 12 NSMs and the "Independence"-class with 18 NSMs. In July 2014, the Navy confirmed that it would test-launch the NSM from to evaluate feasibility, the first time an LCS fired a surface-to-surface missile. The NSM has a range of , greater than the Harpoon anti-ship missile, but LCSs lack long-range fire control systems to detect targets at this distance. On 24 September 2014, the NSM was successfully fired at a mobile target. The LCS's modular design makes it possible to add weapons and sensors as part of the warfare suite. This could mitigate lethality criticism of the LCS, which is oriented toward asymmetric swarm boat threats rather than comparable surface combatants.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In September 2015, the Navy issued a directive to install an OTH missile on "Freedom" and "Coronado" for their next deployments in early and mid-2016. The exact missile was not specified, but sources say it will be both the Harpoon and NSM, each ship equipped with only one model of missile. The directive calls for up to eight missiles, likely in two quad packs, to be installed on box launchers as a standalone system without requiring full integration into the LCS combat system. On 19 July 2016, "Coronado" conducted a live-fire missile test of a Block 1C Harpoon missile; although the missile missed the target, the test validated the ability to launch Harpoon missiles from the forward deck of an LCS. In May 2018, the Navy selected the NSM as the LCS's OTH missile.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In January 2020, the Navy reported that a Lockheed Martin 150 kW High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) would be put on for her upcoming deployment. The laser is part of a risk reduction effort to contribute to a layered laser defense effort, as well as boost the LCS's lethality to counter fast-attack craft and UAS.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The anti-submarine module had its focus changed from stationary to en-stride systems (while the ship is moving) that are useful in the open ocean as well as in coastal areas. One of the items to be added is a "torpedo detection capability" so that the ship can know when it is under attack. Thales has sold one CAPTAS 4 low-frequency active sonar to the U.S. Navy to be towed behind the LCS, with a potential order of 25 units. The USN will test a combination of this unit, derived from the Sonar 2087 on British Type 23 frigates, with the TB-37 multifunction towed array found on U.S. warships. , deployment of the ASW module is planned for 2016, but the 2013 sequestration cuts could push this back to 2017.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Thales 2087-towed sonar will give the LCS an ability to detect diesel-electric submarines while on the move, even better than destroyers and cruisers; because submarines can hide based on how sound is refracted through the temperature, salinity and pressure profile, the variable depth sonar can pierce that layer better than a hull-mounted sonar. The sonar is paired with a torpedo decoy under development. To destroy submarines, an MH-60S helicopter will deploy the Mark 54 Lightweight Torpedo. Submarine detection is achieved by using an active VDS and passive Multi-Function Towed Array (MFTA); the active sonar sends out an acoustic signal to analyze the return, while the passive sonar simply listens through the water for noise signatures.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A wargame held by the Naval War College demonstrated the possibility of using the LCS in open water operations to assist carrier battle groups and guided missile destroyers. The LCS was found to be more useful in open water operations than previously considered. The wargame found that an LCS operating the ASW package could perform the mission, which freed up a destroyer that would normally perform the mission to contribute to the lethality of the strike group. Submarine hunting ability is increased by the combination of a destroyer's towed array and hull-mounted sonar and an LCS's variable depth sonar.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In July 2015, the Navy awarded three contracts to reduce the weight of the package elements down to or below 105 metric tons total to meet mission package weight requirements. Since both elements are mature and fielded (the VDS on Royal Navy Type 23 frigates and MFTA on and s), the systems cannot be overhauled and other weight reduction ideas need to be implemented like lightening sensors and using composites in the handling system. Plans for the package shifted dramatically in 2011 when it was decided not to use the RMMV, used in the MCM package, in favor of an "in stride" capability. The ASW elements were chosen as cost-effective COTS sensors, so weight reduction needs by between 15 and 25 percent have been planned for since their selection for integration onto the LCS.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Mine Counter-Measure (MCM) module is designed to provide minesweeping, remotely detecting and bypassing mines, as well as minehunting, detecting and then disabling. It was envisioned to perform "influence" minehunting via acoustic and magnetic signatures rather than contact or mechanical minehunting. The MCM module includes the Airborne Laser Mine Detection system, the Airborne mine neutralization system, the AN/AQS-20A underwater towed sonar, the remote minehunting system, the Coastal Battlefield Reconnaissance and Analysis system, and the Knifefish, a Surface mine counter-measure unmanned undersea vehicle. Cancelled module features include the Organic Airborne and Surface Influence Sweep System, and the Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance System. The final increment IV MCM module will not have an EOD team or an in-stride capability to neutralize discovered mines; neutralization is preceded by post-detection mission analysis.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The first increment of the MCM module included three systems: the helicopter-deployed airborne laser mine detection system (ALMDS); the airborne mine neutralization system (AMNS); and the remote minehunting system (RMS) composed of the remote multi-mission vehicle (RMMV) paired with the AQS-20A sonar. The ALMDS detects mines near the top of the water, and the RMS will detect them below the waterline. To destroy mines, the AMNS is lowered by the helicopter and guided by an operator on board to neutralize it. Increment two will be the coastal battlefield reconnaissance and analysis system (COBRA) mounted on the MQ-8B to search beaches and surf zones.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Increment three will involve adding the Fleet-class unmanned surface vessel (USV) with the unmanned surface sweep system (USSS), a cable towed behind the boat. Each LCS will carry two, and they will be used for both MCM and ASW. It will mimic the acoustic and magnetic signature of a ship to fool magnetic and influence mines into detonating; introduction is expected in 2017. The final increment will be the Knifefish unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) to find and detect buried mines in 2019.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In February 2016, the Navy announced they were halting procurement of the RMMV due to reliability issues, with the existing ten RMMVs to be upgraded to increase reliability. The upgraded RMMVs will be fielded in 2018, and testing will be conducted to see if the Fleet class common unmanned surface vessel (CUSV) can tow the AQS-20A, and if successful will be used for minehunting by 2020. If the Knifefish UUV can have its endurance increased, the vessel will take over the mission from both systems.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Californian congressman Duncan D. Hunter wrote that the purchase of 55 LCS units was made at the cost of 10 fewer amphibious vessels. Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Joseph Dunford said in 2011 that the LCS is one of the platforms under consideration to help close the gap in amphibious shipping. In August 2014, USS "Coronado" demonstrated the ability to rapidly stage and deploy Marine Corps ground units, including operations by two Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadrons (HMLA) that conducted day and night deck-landing qualifications. The "Independence"-class LCS's features of high speed, a large flight deck to support UH-1Y Venom and AH-1W Super Cobra helicopters, and reconfigurable mission bay can support air and small-boat employment and delivery of ground and air forces; a small Marine ground unit can be carried within an embarked mission module. In 2014, Marine Corps General John M. Paxton, Jr. claimed several deficiencies in using an LCS for amphibious operations as a substitute platform for an amphibious assault ship, including the ability to operate in difficult sea states, survivability in contested waters, limited flight deck and berthing space, and command and control limitations.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In 2014, the U.S. Coast Guard began advocating the LCS as a tailor-made platform for drug interdiction missions. Under pressure from Navy vessels retiring, the Coast Guard will suffer a surface vessel shortage for intercepting smuggling ships in the Caribbean area, forcing the Navy to examine other platforms for drug interdiction. The Coast Guard noted that the LCS has previously performed this task, and pointed towards its high speed and embarked helicopters to run down fast smuggling boats; the Navy plans to base 10 "Freedom"-class ships at Naval Station Mayport, Florida which could be tasked to conduct interdiction missions.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: During the late 1990s, the U.S. Navy realized its Cold War-era cruisers and destroyers had been designed for open-ocean warfare and would be vulnerable in shallow coastal waters, where they would face dangers from high-speed boats, missile-firing fast-attack craft, small submarines, sea mines, and land and air-launched anti-ship missiles. The Navy's official solution was the DD-21, a large coastal warship that could absorb hits. Two Navy strategists, retired Captain Wayne Hughes and Vice Admiral Art Cebrowski, refined an opposing "Streetfighter" concept for a 1,000-ton small, specialized, and heavily armed vessel costing just $90 million (2001 dollars). Being small, light and numerous, the "Streetfighter" was envisioned as a "single-serving" ship to be abandoned once it suffered battle damage deemed "fatal" to the ship, made possible by its low cost. The concept of a manned expendable warship was contentious and the idea was not picked up. When Donald Rumsfeld was made Secretary of Defense in early 2001, he promised transformational approaches and doing jobs with fewer people. In October 2001, Cebrowski was assigned to head the Pentagon's new Office of Force Transformation, shortly after which Admiral Vernon Clark cancelled the DD-21 and replaced it with a "family" of ships, including the littoral combat ship, being motivated to produce ships cheaper and faster to increase fleet size. Clark declared the LCS was his "most transformational effort" and number-one budget priority in 2003.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Navy committed to the $15 billion (2003) program in advance of rigorous analysis or clearly defined purpose, appearance, or survivability. Proponents typically pointed to its speed, asymmetric littoral threats, and impact on the U.S. shipbuilding industry. The LCS suffered from requirements creep, adding more missions and equipment, potentially rendering it too complex and expensive to use. When it was decided the ship would not be expendable, the original concept of a small, cheap, simple coastal warship became bigger, more expensive, and more complicated, with a smaller crew due to automation. The task force assigned six different missions which had been previously performed by individual ships: submarine and mine hunting; combating small boats; intelligence gathering; transporting special forces; and counter-drug and piracy patrols. Each ship would be big enough to sail across the Pacific alone, embark a helicopter, have a minimum 40 knot top speed, and cost $220 million. The Navy was only willing to build one type of ship; the task force, realizing that it was virtually impossible for one vessel to fill all roles, advocated a large hull to cover the mission range through modularity, organic combat power, and unmanned systems. Empty space was left for weapon and sensor mission modules costing $150 million. When the first production contracts were awarded in 2004, no mission module worked outside of a laboratory. Fast, cheap construction was emphasized, solving problems with technology.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In 2003, the Navy launched its first experimental LCS, "Sea Fighter", designated as fast sea frame or FSF-1. In 2005, the SWATH-hulled "Sea Fighter" entered service as an experimental vessel using mission modules. As the "Oliver Hazard Perry", , and classes were reaching the end of their lives, the U.S. Navy released the LCS requirement. In 2004, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics and Raytheon submitted design proposals. It was decided to produce two vessels each (Flight 0) of the Lockheed Martin design (LCS-1 and LCS-3) and of the General Dynamics design (LCS-2 and LCS-4). After these are brought into service, and experience gathered on the design's usability and efficiency, the future design for the class would be chosen (Flight I). The ultimate decision was to fund both designs as two variants of the class. On 9 May 2005, Secretary of the Navy Gordon R. England announced that the first LCS would be named . Her keel was laid down on 2 June 2005 at Marinette Marine, Marinette, Wisconsin. The contract to build the ship was managed by Lockheed's Maritime Systems and Sensors (MS2) division, directed by Fred Moosally. On 23 September 2006, LCS-1 was christened and launched at the Marinette Marine shipyard. On 19 January 2006, the keel for the General Dynamics trimaran, , was laid at the Austal USA shipyards in Mobile, Alabama. LCS-2 was launched 30 April 2008.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In 2007, the U.S. Navy canceled contracts to build LCS-3 of Lockheed Martin and LCS-4 of General Dynamics and Austal USA, citing failure to control cost overruns. Subsequently, the Navy announced a new bidding process for the next three ships, the winner building two ships and the loser building one. In the 26 September 2008 U.S. presidential debate, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) cited the LCS as an example of botched contracting driving up costs unnecessarily. In March 2009, then-Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter announced that LCS-3 would be named after Fort Worth, Texas, and the fourth ship would be named after Coronado, California. The contracts for LCS-3 and LCS-4 were renewed in early 2009.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In April 2009, the Navy announced its revised procurement plan that three ships be funded in the FY 2010 budget; officials also hinted that the Navy may not down-select to one design for further orders, pointing out complementary features of the two designs. Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman called for fixed-price contracts to be adopted. Pressure mounted in Congress for the Navy to control the cost: in June 2009, during a hearing of the House Armed Services Seapower Subcommittee, Subcommittee Chairman Gene Taylor, D-Miss, said that other contractors would be keen to build LCS as the subcommittee added language requiring the Navy to open bidding if either lead contractor walked away from the offered $460 million fixed price contracts. In response, the Naval Sea Systems Command conducted a study on whether reducing the top speed requirement from 40 knots to 30 could help keep the ships under the price cap.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Congress asked the Navy to study improvement programs on existing ships in place of the LCS program. In June 2009, Vice Admiral Barry McCullough, USN testified in a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting that the "Oliver Hazard Perry"-class frigates and "Avenger"-class minesweepers were too worn out to cover the gap if the LCS suffered further delays. Retired Admiral James Lyons, USN called for a $220 million common design with the U.S. Coast Guard's National Security Cutter (NSC) program to save costs and meet "limited warfare requirements". A Huntington-Ingalls study found that the NSC would be a better match for the listed mission set while lacking the LCS's mission modules to perform many missions.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In May 2012, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems released a study that showed seven LCS can more efficiently perform anti-piracy patrols in the Western Indian Ocean than a fleet of 20 conventional ships for a quarter of the cost. To help reduce cost of each ships, in September 2009, Navy Acquisition Chief Sean Stackley and Vice Admiral Barry McCullough indicated that only one contractor would be offered a fixed price contract in 2010 for up to ten ships, followed by an offer to build five additional ships of the same design as the first contract to the secondary builder. The Congress agreed with the Navy on this plan. On 23 August 2010, the U.S. Navy announced a delay in awarding the contract for 10 ships until the year's end.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: FY2010 budget documents revealed that the total costs of the two lead ships had risen to $637 million for "Freedom" and $704 million for "Independence". On 16 January 2010, "Independence" was commissioned in Mobile, Alabama.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that deploying the first two ships will delay the overall program because these two ships were not available for testing and development so changes may have to be made in the second pair of ships during construction instead of in advance. The U.S. Navy responded that "Early deployment brought LCS operational issues to the forefront much sooner than under the original schedule, some of which would not have been learnt until two years on."


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In 2013, Under Secretary of the Navy Robert O. Work explained that cost overruns were partly due to the shipbuilders' bidding to American Bureau of Shipping commercial standards, the Navy changed this to Level I survivability standards for greater crew survivability, although the ships were not expected to operate after being hit. The Navy acknowledged that their failure to communicate clearly that the experimental and developmental nature of the first two ships caused a perception that the overall LCS program was in worse shape. A GAO report in July 2014 found that the annual cost to operate an LCS was $79 million, compared to $54 million to operate a larger frigate. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus pointed out that new vessels traditionally start off costing more to operate because of difficulties with building and testing ships simultaneously; GAO reports of new warships since the 1960s support this claim. As more littoral combat ships are built and enter service, Mabus said operational costs will decline to acceptable limits. On 2 November 2016 the Pentagon blocked publication of cost overruns on both designs.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 2 December 2016, it was reported that the GAO was critical of the LCS's ability to complete a navy requirement of 30 consecutive days underway without a critical failure of one or more essential subsystems. DOT&E Michael Gilmore states that the current LCS fleet "have a near-zero chance" of meeting this requirement.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Instead of declaring a winner out of the two competing designs, the U.S. Navy in November 2010 asked the Congress to allow for the order of ten of each design. U.S. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) said that the change was made because both bids were under the Congressional price cap. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said that unlike the possibility of splitting orders for projects like KC-X or the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136, the Pentagon had already paid the development cost for both designs so there was no further development required for both designs and have them compete for future orders.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In December 2010, the Government Accountability Office identified some problems with the designs including extremely long crew training time, unrealistic maintenance plans, and the lack of comprehensive risk assessment. On 13 December 2010, both production teams extended their contract offers until 30 December in order to give more time for the Navy to push through the plan. The Navy would be forced to award the contract to only one team if it failed to secure Congressional approval. The Navy budgeted $490 million for each ship while the Congressional Budget Office projected a cost of $591 million for each ship. Navy acquisition chief Sean Stackley testified to a Senate panel that the actual price range was $440 to $460 million.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A day before the offer's expiration, both Lockheed Martin and Austal USA received Navy contracts for an additional ten ships of their designs; two ships of each design being built each year between 2011 and 2015. Lockheed Martin's LCS-5 had a contractual price of $437 million, Austal USA's contractual price for LCS-6 was $432 million. On 29 December 2010, Department of Navy Undersecretary Sean Stackley noted that the program was well within the Congressional cost cap of $480 million per ship. The average per-ship target price for Lockheed ships is $362 million, Stackley said, with a goal of $352 million for each Austal USA ships. Government-furnished equipment (GFE), such as weapons, add about $25 million per ship; another $20 million for change orders, and "management reserve" is also included. Stackley declared the average cost to buy an LCS should be between $430 million and $440 million. In the fiscal year 2011, the unit cost was $1.8 billion and the program cost $3.7 billion.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In May 2012, Robert Work said that the two designs may each be best suited to different theaters, the LCS-1 design being better suited for the enclosed waters of the Middle East, while the LCS-2 design for the Pacific Ocean's open waters. In order to increase commonality, the Navy will force both types to use the same combat system electronics.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The handoff from General Dynamics to Austal of management for the "Independence"-class led to a 13-month schedule slip as the company struggled with building the JHSV ships at the same facilities. In May 2013, the GAO called for a pause in ship construction until issues with the sea frames and modules were resolved. In August 2013, the USN revealed plans to reduce the procurement rate in 2016.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A 2012 report by Rear Admiral Samuel Perez, USN, found that the ships lacked the manpower and firepower to complete the missions required by regional combatant commanders. The report found that the LCS is "ill-suited for combat operations against anything but" small, fast boats not armed with anti-ship missiles. It also found that the excessive beam (width) of the trimaran "Independence"-class ships may pose a "navigational challenge in narrow waterways and tight harbors". The report also found that the contractor-based maintenance scheme for the ships had led to poorly supervised and unaccountable contractors leaving problems unresolved. As contract workers are required to be American, they must be flown out to any foreign ports visited by an LCS. A special panel was appointed to investigate "challenges identified". Twenty more bunks were installed to allow for a larger crew.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In 2013, Captain Kenneth Coleman, the U.S. Navy's requirements officer for the program, identified the LCS as being especially vulnerable to tactical aircraft armed with standoff anti-ship missiles. Vice Admiral Thomas H. Copeman III is reported to be considering an upsized "Super" LCS, with space to install needed firepower, because he noted that the 57 mm main gun was more suitable to a patrol boat than a frigate. Austal's vice president for sales, Craig Hooper, suggested that the ships should instead be used for UAV operations. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus has called the lack of identified missions for the LCS "one of its greatest strengths". The various modules all use the same Internet Protocol formats. In 2013 Congressional auditors found that the ships lacked robust communications systems and a USN review "uncovered classified deficiencies" in the ship's cyberdefenses.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: At a hearing on 25 July 2013, the House Armed Services Committee's seapower subcommittee argued with Vice Admiral Richard W. Hunt on how the LCS would be employed if tensions with North Korea or China led to a confrontation in the Western Pacific. Hunt said the ships are designed in accordance with the Navy's survivability standards, and that the LCS would be used during the initial phase in the theatre and sense the environment before hostilities occur. Detractors claim the LCS is not survivable enough for long-range threats that China possesses; LCS ships are built to the Navy's survivability category Level I+, higher than Level I patrol craft and mine warfare ships, but lower than the Level II "Oliver Hazard Perry"-class frigate they are replacing. The Navy has said the LCS was designed to pull out of combat upon sustaining damage. The baseline LCS seaframe designs, however, boast a better air and missile defense capability than the partially disarmed and now retired Perry class, which somewhat counters claims that LCS is "unsurvivable." The deployment of USS "Freedom" was seen by the Navy as an opportunity to test the ship and operational concepts in the real-world. The Navy was about to conclude a war game at the Naval War College to examine ways of exploiting LCS capabilities in Western Pacific and other scenarios. Hunt added that the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) mission package would play an important role in protecting aircraft carriers and amphibious ships, and the mine countermeasures (MCMs) mission package would also provide necessary port security and waterway patrol capability following combat operations.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A Government Accountability Office report in April 2014 found that several U.S. 7th Fleet officials thought the LCS was more useful in the Persian Gulf, but not suitable in the Pacific theater as they lacked the speed, range, and electronic warfare capabilities. The first two vessels from each maker were found to be overweight and not meeting performance requirements for endurance or sprinting over 40 knots. Navy leaders contend that the LCS's shallow draft is well suited for Pacific operations due to the many shallow-water ports, typically difficult for larger warships to access. The GAO report recommended the Navy consider buying fewer ships of the type if its limitations prevent effective use in the Pacific theater. The GAO also found that both designs were overweight and underperforming.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 24 February 2014, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel directed the Navy to submit alternative proposals for a new surface combatant comparable to a frigate that can operate in all regions under conflict conditions. In response to Pentagon direction to halt LCS purchases at 32 ships, the Navy is re-examining the vessels' role, such as whether they have enough protection and firepower to survive against advanced adversaries, and alternate proposals which included a modified LCS or a new platform. The Navy requires the class' roles of counter-mine, anti-submarine, and surface warfare provided by modules. Proponents point out that the LCS was not designed to function like destroyers but for littoral tasks like high-speed patrols and counter-piracy missions, moving at 40 knots and within shallow water where other ships cannot.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Hagel was concerned that the LCS would make up one-sixth of the Navy's 300-ship force. The 2013 DOT&E report on the two LCS ships questioned their survivability as their requirements did not include features for sustained combat operations unlike other Navy surface combatants. A new ship class would need built-in anti-submarine and surface warfare mission features, as opposed to swappable mission modules. On 27 March 2014, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert and Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus defended the LCS's survivability and the need for 52 small surface combatants before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Greenert explained that the LCS meets or exceeds survivability and recoverability standards, was as survivable as a frigate, and was more survivable than mine countermeasures and patrol craft; susceptibility has to be improved upon, and he would consider modifications to increase survivability and flexibility.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The navy continued to look into improvements for the last 20 ships of the 52-ship LCS procurement, that would increase the capabilities to that of a frigate. It was reported that the navy was considering four different options as "leading contenders" for the role of this new frigate. The first being the ("National Security Cutter"), in use by the U.S. Coast Guard. Another being the group of three variants of differing size, (both shorter and longer than the current "Freedom" class). The third was a once hinted at "international" version of the , that could be AEGIS-equipped, and lastly, an American-built version of the Spanish Navy's F-100-class frigate.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 30 April 2014, the Navy issued two requests for information (RFI) to industry to give the LCS task force follow-on designs to Flight 0 ship models. One RFI was for design concepts and information on cost and lethality, and the other was for specific systems and technologies. Mission areas consisting of anti-air, surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare, and mine countermeasure missions will offer a range of mission and capability options based on the threat environment that will drive design work and costs. Options for the proposed small surface combatant were a modified version of the LCS, an existing alternate ship design, or an entirely new design.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On the proposal's due date, ship designs were submitted by Lockheed Martin, Austal USA, Huntington Ingalls Industries, and General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, and separate combat systems proposals were submitted by Lockheed, Raytheon, and General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems (GD AIS); ship and combat systems responses were limited to 25 and 15 pages respectively. Lockheed's response was a variant of their "Freedom"-class LCS; different upgrades included an advised increase in length to , vertical launch systems for Standard Missile 2 missiles or the Standard Missile 6, and the SPY-1F Aegis radar or an Air Missile Defense Radar derivative. Austal USA submitted a modified "Independence"-class ship, adding permanently installed systems like a towed array sonar, torpedoes, vertical launch anti-submarine rockets, and aviation capability to support the MH-60 helicopter in place of mission modules. Like Lockheed's submission, it has a VLS for Standard missiles, a 76 mm gun in place of the 57 mm gun, and can take on an Aegis or ADMR radar. Huntington Ingalls submitted a larger, more heavily armed National Security Cutter. General Dynamics also made an unspecified response.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Results from the Navy task force on LCS upgrades, capabilities, costs, and alternative options were completed by 31 July 2014 for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to review. The Navy senior leadership briefed top Pentagon officials on proposals for the new SSC on 6 October 2014. A decision is to be made by February 2015 in advance of the 2016 budget submission. On 12 December 2014, a joint statement was issued by the Secretary of the Navy and Chief of Naval Operations endorsing SSCTF recommendations for a modified LCS to complement the planned 32 LCSs for a 52-strong Small Surface Combatant fleet.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 11 December 2014, Hagel accepted the Navy's recommendation to base the 20 SSCs on more powerful versions of both existing LCS designs. The SSC shall have an improved 3D air defense radar, air defense decoys, better electronic warfare system, over-the-horizon anti-ship missiles, multi-function towed array sonar, torpedo defenses, additional armor, and displace less than Flight 0 vessels. The SSC will focus on anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare; mine countermeasures will be handled by existing LCS ships. Although not designed for modularity, it will maintain the ability to carry mission modules and LCS mission package equipment, including 30 mm and 57 mm cannons (upgrading to a 76 mm gun would have had marginal benefits for increased costs), Hellfire missiles, RHIBs, and the ASW variable-depth sonar. Current plans lack vertical launchers for Standard missiles; the SSC is planned to be able to operate alone. The over-the-horizon surface-to-surface missile will likely be in the Harpoon Block II class. Other enhancements include spaced armor, installation of Mk 38 Mod 2 25 mm chain guns, improved decoy systems, the SeaRAM missile interceptor, a "lite" version of the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP), and improved signature management through degaussing. An SSC will cost $60–$75 million more than a Flight 0 LCS, with procurement to begin by 2019. Hagel also directed the Navy to study which improvements could be added to LCSs; completed ships cannot accommodate all changes, more can be added to incomplete ones, the final number and mix of each type has yet to be determined.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The decision was made on SSC upgrade features to prioritize over-the-horizon surface and ASW capabilities with a greater degree of self-defense, not anti-aircraft or missile defense, which will be left to large surface combatants. Although a 3D radar is included in the designs, a VLS was absent from the hulls, contrary to what naval experts suggested and industry submissions contained. Adding a vertical launch system was evaluated, but was determined to be too heavy and large and requiring long and costly changes; modular aspects of the ships may allow for the addition of the smaller Mk 56 VLS for the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile. When emphasized on ASW, the ships will combine the fixed multi-function towed sonar array with the mission package's variable depth sonar to have "the most effective ASW sensor platform in the Navy." For SUW, the key addition is the inclusion of an over-the-horizon anti-ship missile; the Navy is looking at potential systems that could compete with the Harpoon Block II. Aside from lethality changes, the service also intends to have a common combat management system for both variants.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In January 2015, the Navy announced that the up-gunned LCS will be reclassified as a frigate, since the requirements of the SSCTF was to upgrade the ships with frigate-like capabilities. Hull designations will be changed from LCS to FF; existing LCSs back-fitted with modifications may also retroactively earn the FF label. The Navy is hoping to start retrofitting technological upgrades onto existing and under construction LCSs before 2019. In order to free up weight to include the new systems, the frigates will remove certain items from the LCS that will no longer be needed, such as the crane and other handling equipment needed to launch and recover the RMMV for the MCM mission package, which the frigate upgrade does not have. In order to accommodate the changes while using the same hull designs, the original LCS high sprint speed has been dropped for the frigate to optimize it for survivability and lethality; it will also deploy two 7-meter RHIBs rather than the 11-meter RHIBs previously used.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: A report released in September 2015 indicated that the first 24 ships would retain the basic design principles of the LCS program, with upgrades where needed. This group would be considered "Block 0" and also retain the "LCS" designation, for the time being. Ships 25 through 32, "Block 1" would include significant upgrades and design changes, inline with the intended capabilities of the last 20 ships of the total 52-ship procurement, these being the new "Frigate" class. The new frigates will be larger, have increased defensive and survivability capabilities and more permanent missions packages, as opposed to the original modular design.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 14 December 2015, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered the Navy to reduce the planned procurement of LCS and FF ships from 52 to 40, and down-select to one variant by FY 2019. This cut is to reallocate funds to other priorities including buying more F-35C Lightning II and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighters, SM-6 missiles, accelerating Flight III DDG-51 acquisition, and expanding development of the Virginia Payload Module (VPM) for the Block V . Though fewer ships will be available in some instances, those needs will be met by higher-end ships to ensure forces in various fleets have the capabilities and posture to defeat potential advanced adversaries.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: In February 2020, media reports stated that the U.S. Navy, as part of its fiscal 2021 budget, has proposed to retire the first four LCS ships in 2021 as part of a cost-savings measure. If approved, these would be USS "Freedom" and USS "Fort Worth" from the "Freedom"-class, and USS "Independence" and USS "Coronado" from the "Independence"-class. This plan has yet to be approved by Congress.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: On 18 June 2021, "Naval News" reported that, in a report to Congress, the Navy planned to inactivate "Fort Worth", "Coronado", "Detroit" and "Little Rock" in Fiscal Year 2022 and put them on the Out of Commission in Reserve (OCIR) list. In the final budget Congress forbade the Navy from retiring the three "Freedom" class ships in Fiscal Year 2022. By May 2022, the Navy shifted its plans to decommission nine LCS warships in Fiscal Year 2023, citing their ineffective anti-submarine warfare system, their inability to perform any of the Navy's missions, constant breakdowns, and structural failures in high-stress areas of the ships.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Saudi Arabia and Israel both expressed an interest in a modified version of the "Freedom" variant, the LCS-I, but Israel dropped out of this project in favor of a new frigate design to be built in Israel. Interest by Saudi Arabia in LCS continues however. Media reports indicate that Saudi Arabia could buy two to four ships of Lockheed Martin's "Freedom"-class LCS variant as part of the Saudi Arabian Naval Expansion Program II—a program to modernize the nation's oldest warships operating in the Persian Gulf. On 22 May 2017, as part of an arms deal between the United States and Saudi Arabia, the acquisition of four Multi-Mission Surface Combatant (MMSC) ships based on the "Freedom"-class LCS was announced.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Taiwanese navy has also shown interest in procuring U.S. littoral combat ships, to replace aging s.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Japan will design its own version of the "Independence"-class. The warship concept was unveiled in the defense trade-show MAST Asia 2017.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: The Royal Malaysian Navy has also built its littoral combat ship based on the "Gowind"-class design, named "Maharaja Lela"-class frigate.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: , a total of 35 littoral combat ships are planned, including 16 "Freedom"-class ships and 19 "Independence"-class ships. Ships are assigned to either Littoral Combat Ship Squadron One, based in San Diego Ca., or Littoral Combat Ship Squadron Two, based in Mayport, Florida.


title: Littoral combat ship

text: Note: The Navy has yet to place orders for 17th, 18th, and 19th "Freedom"-class variants. Should that occur, they will be entered on this list as "LCS-33", "LCS-35", and "LCS-37".


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The Shree Padmanabhaswamy Temple is a Hindu temple located in Thiruvananthapuram, the capital of the state of Kerala, India. The name of the city of 'Thiruvananthapuram' in Tamil and Malayalam translates to "The City of Lord Ananta" (The City Of the infinite Shesh Naag). The temple is built in an intricate fusion of the Chera style and the Dravidian style of architecture, featuring high walls, and a 16th-century gopura. While as per some traditions the Ananthapura temple in Kumbla in Kasaragod district in Kerala is considered as the original spiritual seat of the deity ("Moolasthanam"), architecturally to some extent, the temple is a replica of the Adikesava Perumal temple in Thiruvattar in Kanyakumari district in Tamil Nadu.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The principal deity Padmanabhaswamy (Vishnu) is enshrined in the "Anantha Shayana" posture, the eternal yogic sleep on the infinite serpent Adi Shesha. Padmanabhaswamy is the tutelary deity of the royal family of Travancore. The titular Maharaja of Travancore, Moolam Thirunal Rama Varma, is the current trustee of the temple.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Several extant Hindu texts including the Vishnu Purana, Brahma Purana, Matsya Purana, Varaha Purana, Skanda Purana, Padma Purana, Vayu Purana and Bhagavata Purana mention the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. The Temple has been referred to in the (only recorded) Sangam period of literature several times. Many conventional historians and scholars are of the opinion that one of the names that the Temple had, "The Golden Temple", was in cognisance of the Temple being already unimaginably wealthy by that point (early Sangam period). Many extant pieces of Sangam Tamil literature and poetry as well as later works of the 9th century of Tamil poet–saints like Nammalwar refer to the temple and the city as having walls of pure gold. Both the temple and the entire city are often eulogised as being made of gold, and the temple as heaven.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The temple is one of the 108 principal Divya Desams ("Holy Abodes") in Vaishnavism according to existing Tamil hymns from the seventh and eighth centuries C.E and is glorified in the "Divya Prabandha". The "Divya Prabandha" glorifies this shrine as being among the 13 Divya Desam in Malai Nadu (corresponding to present-day Kerala with Kanyakumari District). The 8th century Tamil poet Alvar Nammalvar sang the glories of Lord Padmanabha.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: It is believed that Parasurama purified and venerated the idol of Sree Padmanabhaswamy in "Dvapara Yuga". Parasurama entrusted 'Kshethra karyam' (Administration of the Temple) with seven Potti families – Koopakkara Potti, Vanchiyoor Athiyara Potti, Kollur Athiyara Potti, Muttavila Potti, Karuva Potti, Neythasseri Potti and Sreekaryathu Potti. King Adithya Vikrama of Vanchi (Venad) was directed by Parasurama to do 'Paripalanam' (Protection) of the Temple. Parasurama gave the Tantram of the Temple to Tharananallur Namboothiripad. This legend is narrated in detail in the Kerala Mahathmyam which forms part of the Brahmanda Puranam.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Another version regarding the consecration of the principal idol of the Temple relates to the legendary sage Vilvamangalathu Swamiyar. Swamiyar, who resided near Ananthapuram Temple in Kasaragod District, prayed to Lord Vishnu for his "darshan" or "auspicious sight". The Lord is believed to have come in the guise of a little boy who was mischievous. The boy defiled the idol which was kept for puja. The sage became enraged at this and chased away the boy who disappeared before him. Realising the boy was no ordinary mortal, the sage wept for forgiveness and asked for another darshan as a sign. He heard a voice say "If you want to see me come to the Anathavana (the unending forest or Ananthakadu). After a long search, when he was walking on the banks of the Laccadive Sea, he heard a "pulaya" lady warning her child that she would throw him in Ananthankadu. The moment the Swami heard the word Ananthankadu he was delighted. He proceeded to Ananthankadu based on the directions of the lady of whom he enquired. The sage reached Ananthankadu searching for the boy. There he saw the boy merging into an iluppa tree (Indian butter tree). The tree fell down and became Anantha Sayana Moorti (Vishnu reclining on the celestial snake Anantha). But the edifice that the Lord assumed was of an extraordinarily large size, with His head at Thiruvattar near Thuckalay, Tamil Nadu, body or "udal" at Thiruvananthapuram, and lotus-feet at Thrippadapuram near Kulathoor and Technopark (Thrippappur), making him some eight miles in length. The sage requested the Lord to shrink to a smaller proportion that would be thrice the length of his staff. Immediately the Lord shrank to the form of the idol that is seen at present in the Temple. But even then many iluppa trees obstructed a complete vision of the Lord. The sage saw the Lord in three parts – thirumukham, thiruvudal and thrippadam. The swami prayed to Padmanabha to be forgiven. He offered rice "kanji" and "uppumanga" (salted mango pieces) in a coconut shell to the Perumal which he obtained from the pulaya woman. The spot where the Sage had darsan of the Lord belonged to Koopakkara Potti and Karuva Potti. With the assistance of the reigning King and some Brahmin households a temple was constructed. The Ananthankadu Nagaraja Temple still exists to the north west of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. The samadhi (final resting place) of the "swamiyar" exists to the west of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. A Krishna temple was built over the samadhi. This temple, known as Vilvamangalam Sri Krishna Swami Temple, belongs to Thrissur Naduvil Madhom.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Mukilan, a Muslim marauder, invaded vast chunks of Venad in 1680 AD. He destroyed Budhapuram Bhaktadasa Perumal Temple owned by Neythasseri Potti. Mukilan had plans to plunder the vaults of Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple and destroy it. But he was dissuaded from doing so by local Muslims loyal to the royals of Venad. Padmanabhan Thampi, arch rival of Anizhom Thirunal Marthanda Varma, marched to Thiruvananthapuram with his forces and tried to loot the vaults of the Temple. Thampi stayed at Sri Varaham and sent his mercenaries to Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple. It is said that divine serpents materialised in hundreds and scared away Thampi's men. Emboldened by this heavenly intervention, Pallichal Pillai and local people opposed Padmanabhan Thampi and ensured that the mercenaries did not proceed with the misadventure.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In the first half of the 18th century, in line with matrilineal customs, Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma, succeeded his uncle Rama Varma as king at the age of 23. He successfully suppressed the 700-year-old stranglehold of the Ettuveetil Pillamar ("Lords of the Eight Houses") and his cousins following the discovery of conspiracies which the lords were involved in against the royal house of Travancore (There are various legends and disputes about these mostly apocryphal stories, but overall, he took control and centralised the rule). The last major renovation of the Padmanabhaswamy temple commenced immediately after Anizham Thirunal's accession to the throne and the idol was reconsecrated in 906 ME (1731 CE). On 17 January 1750, Anizham Thirunal surrendered the Kingdom of Travancore to Padmanabhaswamy, the main deity at the temple, and pledged that he and his descendants would be vassals or agents of the deity who would serve the kingdom as "Padmanabha Dasa". Since then, the name of every Travancore king was preceded by the title 'Sree Padmanabha Dasa'; the female members of the royal family were called 'Sree Padmanabha Sevinis' both meaning the servant to Padmanabhaswamy; . The donation of the king to Padmanabhaswamy was known as Thrippadi-danam. The final wishes of Anizham Thirunal on his passing at the age of 53 clearly delineated the historical relationship between the Maharaja and the temple: "That no deviation whatsoever should be made in regard to the dedication of the kingdom to Padmanabhaswamy and that all future territorial acquisitions should be made over to the Devaswom."


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In the "Garbhagriha", Padmanabha reclines on the serpent "Anantha " or "Adi Sesha". The serpent has five hoods facing inwards, signifying contemplation. The Lord's right hand is placed over a Shiva lingam. Sridevi-Lakshmi, the Goddess of Prosperity and Bhudevi the Goddess of Earth, two consorts of Vishnu are by his side. Brahma emerges on a lotus, which emanates from the navel of the Lord. The deity is made from 12,008 saligramams. These saligrams are from the banks of the Gandaki River in Nepal, and to commemorate this, certain rituals used to be performed at the Pashupatinath Temple. The deity of Padmanabha is covered with, "Katusarkara yogam", a special ayurvedic mix which is made of 108 natural materials collected from all over India and forms a coat-like protection that keeps the deity clean. The daily worship is with flowers, and for the abhishekam, special deities are used.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The platforms in front of the vimanam and where the deity rests are both carved out of a single massive stone and hence called "Ottakkal-mandapam". On the orders of Marthanda Varma (1706–58), the Ottakkal-mandapam was cut out of a rock at Thirumala, about north of the temple. It measured in area by thick and was placed in front of the deity in the month of Edavom 906 M.E. (1731 CE). At the same time, Marthanda Varma also brought 12,000 shaligrams, aniconic representations of Vishnu, from the Gandaki River, north of Benares (now known as Varanasi) to the temple. These were used in the reconsecration of Lord Padmanabha.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In order to perform darshan and puja, one has to ascend to the mandapam. The deity is visible through three doors – the visage of the reclining Lord and Siva Linga underneath his hand is seen through the first door; Sridevi and Bhrigu Muni in Katusarkara, Brahma seated on a lotus emanating from the Lord's navel, hence the name, "Padmanabha", gold abhisheka moorthies of Padmanabha, Sridevi and Bhudevi, and silver utsava moorthi of Padmanabha through the second door; the Lord's feet, and Bhudevi and Markandeya Muni in Katusarkara through the third door. The idols of two goddesses holding chamaram, Garuda, Narada, Tumburu, the divine forms of the six weapons of Vishnu, Surya, Chandra, the Saptarshi, Madhu, and Kaitabha are also in the Sanctum. Only the King of Travancore may prostrate on the "Ottakkal Mandapam" It is traditionally held that anybody who prostrates on the mandapam has surrendered all that he possesses to the Deity. Since the ruler has already done that, he is permitted to prostrate on this mandapam.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Inside the Temple, there are two other important shrines, Thekkedom and Thiruvambadi, for the Deities, Ugra Narasimha and Krishna Swami respectively.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Centuries back, several families of Vrishni Kshatriyas travelled to the south, carrying with them idols of Lord Balarama and Lord Krishna. When they reached the hallowed land of Sree Padmanabha, they gave the idol of Balarama, also known as Bhaktadasa, to Neythasseri Potti. Neythasseri Potti built a Temple at Budhapuram in the present day Kanyakumari District and had this idol installed there. The Vrishnis gifted the idol of Krishna to Maharaja Udaya Marthanda Varma of Venad. The Maharaja constructed a separate shrine, known as Thiruvambadi, in the premises of Padmanabhaswamy Temple for this idol. The Thiruvambadi shrine enjoys an independent status. Thiruvambadi has its own namaskara mandapam, bali stones and flagmast. The Lord of Thiruvambadi is Parthasarathi, the Divine Charioteer of Arjuna, who is the warrior prince and one of the main protagonists that appear in the story of Mahabharata. The two-armed granite idol, with one hand holding the whip and the other resting on the left thigh holding the conch close to it, is in standing posture. On Ekadasi days, the Lord is dressed and decorated as Mohini. The Vrishnies who came to Venad and settled there are known as Krishnan Vakakkar as they belong to the lineage of Lord Krishna.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: There are also shrines for Lord Rama accompanied by his consort Sita, brother Lakshmana and Hanuman, Vishwaksena (the Nirmalyadhari of Vishnu and Remover of Obstacles), Vyasa and Ashwatthama the Chiranjivis, Ganapati, Sasta, and Kshetrapala (who guards the temple). Grand idols of Garuda and Hanuman stand with folded hands in the Valiya balikkal area. The thevara idols of Chithira Thirunal Balarama Varma and Uthradom Thirunal Marthanda Varma are housed in the south east part of the Temple.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The foundation of the present gopuram was laid in 1566. The temple has a high 7-tier gopuram built in the Pandyan style. The temple stands by the side of a tank, named "Padma Theertham" (meaning the lotus spring). The temple has a corridor with 365 and one-quarter sculptured granite-stone pillars with elaborate carvings which stands out to be an ultimate testimonial for the Vishwakarma sthapathis in sculpting this architectural masterpiece. This corridor extends from the eastern side into the sanctum sanctorum. An flagstaff stands in front of the main entry from the "prakaram"(closed precincts of a temple). The ground floor under the gopuram (main entrance in the eastern side) is known as the 'Nataka Sala' where the famous temple art Kathakali was staged in the night during the ten-day "uthsavam" (festival) conducted twice a year, during the Malayalam months of Meenam and Thulam.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: There are many festivals associated with this temple. The major festivals are bi-annual. The "Aipasi" festival and the "Panguni" festival in the Tamil month of aipasi (October/November) and Panguni (March/April) respectively, lasts for 10 days each. On the ninth day the Maharajah of the Travancore, in his capacity as Thrippappoor Mooppan, escorts the deities to the vettakkalam for Pallivetta. Centuries back, the Pallivetta procession was said to pass through Kaithamukku, Kuthiravattom (Kunnumpuram), Pazhaya Sreekanteswaram and Putharikkandam. The festivals culminate with the "Aarat" (holy bath) procession to the Shankumugham Beach. The word "Aarat" refers to the purificatory immersion of the deities of the temple in sea. This event takes place in the evening. The Maharajah of Travancore escorts the "Aarat" procession on foot. The festival idols "Utsava Vigrahas" of Padmanabhaswamy, Narasimha Moorthi and Krishna Swami are given a ritual bath in the sea, after the prescribed pujas. After this ceremony, the idols are taken back to the temple in a procession that is lit by traditional torches, marking the conclusion of the festival.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: A major annual festival related to Padmanabhaswamy temple is the "Navaratri" festival. The idols of Saraswati Amman, Mun Uditha Nangai (Parasakti, who appeared before Saraswati, Lakshmi and Parvati to help them identify their husbands who had been transformed into infants by the power of chastity of Anasuya) and Kumara Swami (Murugan) are brought from the Padmanabhapuram Palace, Suchindram, and Kumarakovil respectively to the "Kuthira malika" palace in front of Padmanabhaswamy temple as a procession. This festival lasts for 9 days. The famous Swathi Sangeethotsavam music festival is held every year during this festival in the "Navratri" mandapam and in some other surrounding temples. The festival was named in honour of the Maharajah of Travancore, Swathi Thirunal Rama Varma and is organized by his descendant in the Royal Family, Prince Rama Varma.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The biggest festival in this temple is "laksha deepam", which means hundred thousand (or one lakh) lamps. This festival is unique and commences once in 6 years. Prior to this festival, chanting of prayers and recitation of three vedas is done for 56 days (Murajapam). On the last day, hundred thousand oil lamps are lit in and around the temple premises.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Temples where 'Swamiyar Pushpanjali' is conducted are claimants to extra sanctity. Sannyasins from Naduvil Madhom and Munchira Madhom do pushpanjali (flower worship) daily to Padmanabha, Narasimha Moorthi and Krishna Swami. Tharananallur Nambuthiripads of Iranjalakkuda are the Tantris of the Temple. The Nambies, altogether four in number, are the Chief Priests of the Temple. Two Nambies – Periya Nambi and Panchagavyathu Nambi – are allotted to Padmanabha and one Nambi each to Narasimha Moorthi and Krishna Swami. The Nambies hail from either side of the Chandragiri River.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In line with the Temple Entry Proclamation, only those who profess the Hindu faith are permitted entry to the temple and devotees have to strictly follow the dress code. Men wear "vesti" with "angavastram" (the South Indian version of dhoti and shawl both of which are plain white in color) and women wear sari.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The Padmanabhaswamy Temple and its property were controlled by the Ettara Yogam (King and Council of Eight) with the assistance of Ettuveetil Pillamar ("Lords of the Eight Houses"). The Ettara Yogam consists of Pushpanjali Swamiyar, six member Thiruvananthapurathu Sabha, Sabhanjithan (Secretary) and Arachan (Maharaja of Travancore). Thiruvananthapurathu Sabha was primarily responsible for the administration of the Temple. Koopakkara Potti, Vanchiyoor Athiyara Potti, Kollur Athiyara Potti, Muttavila Potti, Karuva Potti and Neythasseri Potti are the members of the Sabha. The Pushpanjali Swamiyar presides over the meetings of the Sabha. Sreekaryathu Potti is the Sabhanjithan of the Sabha. Any decision taken by the Sabha can be implemented only if the Maharaja of Travancore approves of it. It is believed that eight members of Ettara Yogam (seven Potties and the Maharaja of Travancore) received their rights from Lord Parashurama Himself.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In the past, only the Swamiyars of the Naduvil Madhom were appointed as Pushpanjali Swamiyars by the Maharaja of Travancore. Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma curtailed the authority of Ettara Yogam and liquidated the powerful Ettuveetil Pillamar. Ettara Yogam became an advisory and assenting body thereafter. Besides the Naduvil Madhom, the Munchira Madhom got the right to appoint Pushpanjali Swamiyars during his reign. In the recent past, Uthradom Thirunal Marthanda Varma gave Pushpanjali rights to the Swamiyars of Thrikkaikattu Madhom and Thekke Madhom as well. Though the Maharaja is the appointing authority of the Pushpanjali Swamiyar, the former must do a Vechu Namaskaram when he sees the Swamiyar. With the passing away of Uthradom Thirunal Marthanda Varma in December 2013, his nephew Moolam Thirunal Rama Varma became the titular Maharaja of Travancore in January 2014. Like his predecessors, Moolam Thirunal also got concurrence from the Ettara Yogam before assuming the title 'Maharaja'. In the presence of the Maharaja designate, the Yogathil Pottimar and the Tantri, the Pushpanjali Swamiyar Maravanchery Thekkedathu Neelakanta Bharatikal signed on the Neettu (Order) of the Ettara Yogam accepting Moolam Thirunal as "Chirava Mootha Thiruvadi" (Maharaja of Travancore) and "Thrippappoor Mootha Thiruvadi" (Protector of the Temple). This ceremony took place at Kulasekhara Mandapam in Padmanabhaswamy Temple. Revathi Thirunal Balagopal Varma, grandson of Maharani Regent Pooradom Thirunal Sethu Lakshmi Bayi, is the titular Elayaraja of Travancore.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: A pertinent event in the long history of the temple was the construction of a "granta-pura" (record-room) within the temple compound itself around 1425 A.D. by the then Venad King Veera Iravi Iravi Varma, to store the "Mathilakam" (within-the-walls) records, as the then existing temple records were known. A major portion of those records (over 3000 'Cadjan' leaf-records) from the Mathikalam had been donated later to the Archives Department in 1867 at the time of the formation of the latter. Each of these Cadjan leaf-records, which have been compiled over thousands of years, contains 10,000 documentations according to R. Nagaswamy, noted archaeologist and historian, totalling over 30 crores of records. Despite their cultural value, only a minuscule portion of these grantas (bundles) of cadjan leaf records, written mostly in ancient scripts of proto-Tamil and archaic-Malayalam, have been deciphered. The translations of this section of manuscripts by some scholars serve as a rare though very inadequate primary source material on the temple and its rich traditions.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The rest of these Mathilakam documents – segregated under 70 "heads" – is still lying idle with the Archives Department. According to Aswathi Thirunal Gouri Lakshmi Bayi, a member of the Travancore Royal Family and author of a book on the temple, from a very early period in recorded history the temple had employed two kinds of 'record writers'. One group was to record the proceedings and transactions of the Ettarayogam, a council of temple administrators, that included the then king. The other was to write and preserve the records of the day-to-day functioning of the temple, maintain correct accounts of the temple-treasury, and of temple-revenue-collections and temple-expenditure and as well as to note down all the other records, connected with the functioning of the temple.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The temple and its assets belong to Lord Padmanabhaswamy and were for a long time controlled by a trust which was headed by the Travancore royal family. However, at present (since July 2020), the Supreme Court of India has divested the Travancore royal family from leading the management of the temple. T P Sundararajan's litigations changed the way the world looked at the Temple.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: In June 2011, the Supreme Court of India directed the authorities from the archaeology department and the fire services to open the secret chambers of the temple for inspection of the items kept inside. The temple has six hitherto known vaults (nilavaras), labelled as A to F, for bookkeeping purpose by the Court. (Since, however, an Amicus Curie Report by Justice Gopal Subramaniam, in April 2014, has reportedly found two more further subterranean vaults that have been named G and H.) While vault B has been unopened over centuries, A was possibly opened in the 1930s, and vaults C to F have been opened from time to time over recent years. The two priests of the temple, the 'Periya Nambi' and the 'Thekkedathu Nambi', are the custodians of the four vaults, C to F, which are opened periodically. The Supreme Court had directed that "the existing practices, procedures, and rituals" of the temple be followed while opening vaults C to F and using the articles inside, while Vaults A and B would be opened only for the purpose of making an inventory of the articles and then closed. The review of the temple's underground vaults was undertaken by a seven-member panel appointed by the Supreme Court to generate an inventory, leading to the enumeration of a vast collection of articles that are traditionally kept under lock and key. A detailed inventory of the temple assets, consisting of gold, jewels, and other valuables is yet to be made.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: While vault B remains unopened, vaults A, C, D, E, and F were opened along with some of their antechambers. Among the reported findings, are a three-and-a-half feet tall solid pure golden idol of Mahavishnu, studded with hundreds of diamonds and rubies and other precious stones. Also found were an 18-foot-long pure gold chain, a gold sheaf weighing , a golden veil, 1200 'Sarappalli' gold coin-chains that are encrusted with precious stones, and several sacks filled with golden artefacts, necklaces, diadems, diamonds, rubies, sapphires, emeralds, gemstones, and objects made of other precious metals. Ceremonial attire for adorning the deity in the form of 16-part gold anki weighing almost , gold "coconut shells" studded with rubies and emeralds, and several 18th century Napoleonic era coins were found amongst many other objects. In early 2012, an expert committee had been appointed to investigate these objects, which include lakhs of golden coins of the Roman Empire, that were found in Kottayam, in Kannur District. According to Vinod Rai, the former Comptroller-and-Auditor-General (CAG) of India, who had audited some of the Temple records from 1990, in August 2014, in the already opened vault A, there is an hoard of gold coins dating to around 200 BCE, each coin priced at over . Also found was a pure golden throne, studded with hundreds of diamonds and other precious stones, meant for the 18-foot-long deity. As per one of the men, who was among those that went inside this Vault A, several of the largest diamonds were as large as a full-grown man's thumb. According to varying reports, at least three, if not more, of solid gold crowns have been found, studded with diamonds and other precious stones. Some other media reports also mention hundreds of pure gold chairs, thousands of gold pots and jars, among the articles recovered from Vault A and its antechambers.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: This revelation has solidified the status of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple as the wealthiest place of worship in the world. If the antique and cultural value were taken into account these assets could be worth ten times the current market price.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: As a reference, the entire GDP (revenues in all forms) of the Mughal Empire at its very zenith under Aurangzeb (in 1690), was a comparatively meagre US$90 billion in modern-day terms. In fact, at its richest, the Mughal "treasury" (in Akbar's and Jahangir's and Shah Jahan's periods) consisted of seven tonnes of gold, along with eighty pounds of uncut diamonds, a hundred pounds each of rubies and emeralds and six hundred pounds of pearls.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: Even with only the five smaller of the reported eight vaults being opened (the larger three vaults and all their ante-chambers still remaining closed), the treasure found so far, is considered to be by far the largest collection of items of gold and fully precious stones in the recorded history of the world.


title: Padmanabhaswamy Temple

text: The valuables are believed to have been accumulated in the temple over several thousand years, having been donated to the deity (and subsequently stored there), by various dynasties like the Cheras, the Pandyas, the Travancore Royal Family, the Kolathiris, the Pallavas, the Cholas and many other kings in the recorded history of both South India and beyond, and from the rulers and traders of Mesopotamia, Jerusalem, Greece, Rome, and later, the various colonial powers from Europe, and other countries as well. Some people have suggested that a part of the stored riches reached the Travancore kings in the later years in the form of tax as well as conquered wealth of other South Indian kingdoms. Most scholars however believe that this was accumulated over thousands of years, given the mention of the Deity and the Temple in several extant Hindu Texts, the Sangam Tamil literature (500 BC to 300 AD wherein it was referred to as the "Golden Temple" on account of its then unimaginable wealth), and the treasures consist of countless artefacts dating back to the Chera, Pandya, Greek, and Roman epochs. The ancient late-Tamil-Sangam epic Silappatikaram (c 100 AD to 300 AD at the latest) speaks of the then Chera King Cenkuttuvan receiving gifts of gold and precious stones from a certain 'Golden Temple' (Arituyil-Amardon) which is believed to be the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. Gold had been panned from rivers as well as mined in Thiruvananthapuram, Kannur, Wayanad, Kollam, Palakkad and Malappuram districts for thousands of years. The Malabar region (as a part of the "Tamilakam" region of recorded history) had several centers of trade and commerce since the Sumerian period ranging from Vizhinjam in the south to Mangalore in the north. Also, at times like the invasion by Mysore in the late 1700s, the other related royal families (of the Travancore Royal Family) in Kerala and the far south, like the Kolathiris, took refuge in Thiruvananthapuram and stored their temple-wealth for safekeeping in the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. Also, much of the treasures housed in the much larger and as-yet-unopened vaults, as well as in the much smaller cellars that have been opened, date back to long before the institution of the so-called Travancore Kingdom, e.g. the hoard of gold coins from 200 B.C that was mentioned by Vinod Rai. Noted archaeologist and historian R. Nagaswamy has also stated that several records exist in Kerala, of offerings made to the Deity, from several parts of Kerala. Lastly, it has to be remembered that in the Travancore Kingdom, a distinction was always made between the Government (State) Treasury (Karuvelam), the Royal Family Treasury (Chellam), and the Temple Treasury (Thiruvara Bhandaram or Sri Bhandaram). During the reign of Maharani Gowri Lakshmi Bayi, hundreds of temples that were mismanaged in the Kerala region, were brought under the Government. The excess ornaments in these temples were also transferred to the Vaults of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple. Instead the funds of the Padmanabhaswamy Temple were utilised for the daily upkeep of these temples.