Unveiled weapons: This new frigate boasts 16 Naval Strike Missiles, filling capability gaps and boosting maritime security with speed and affordability.
By Kris Osborn, Warrior
The cancelled Constellation-class and the Navy’s fast-arriving FF(X) may both be referred to as “Frigates” in U.S. Navy vernacular, yet they are worlds apart in concepts of operation, mission intent, weaponry and maritime warfare orientation. The service’s Constellation class, which encountered insurmountable design and cost problems, was intended to support cruisers and destroyers in a Carrier Strike Group as heavier warships with Vertical Launch Systems for Tomahawks, interceptor missiles and even Aegis Combat System radar.
The Constellation class was envisioned as a full-spectrum surface combatant with advanced sensors, weapons, and integration into high-end fleet operations. Its proposed architecture included the Baseline 10 Aegis Combat System, the Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR), and a 32-cell Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) capable of fielding surface-to-air and other mission payloads.
In contrast, the FF(X) frigate is being designed for speed, affordability, and production stability. Announced in late 2025 and early 2026, the FF(X) program was initiated in direct response to the delays and rising costs of the Constellation effort. Instead of attempting to build an 8,000-ton multimission warship through extensive redesigns, the Navy adopted a proven U.S. hull form—the Coast Guard’s Legend-class National Security Cutter (NSC)—as the basis of the new frigate. By relying on a stable, domestically built design already in service, the Navy seeks to reduce cost and technological risk and field new ships faster to fill capability gaps in escort, patrol, and maritime security missions.
Speaking at the Surface Navy Symposium, senior U.S. Navy weapons developers detailed many of the weapons and performance parameters intended for the FF(X), according to an interesting essay in Naval News.
“The new Frigate’s armament will consist of a 57mm main cannon, a 30mm auxilary cannon, a Mk-49 launcher with 21 Rolling Airframe Missiles, and a payload space at the stern of the ship capable of carrying 16 Naval Strike Missiles, 48 Hellfires, or other containerized weapons. Electronic warfare is handled by two SLQ-32 (V)6 suites, with 2 soft-kill Nulka decoy launchers present,” Naval News writes.
Initial Navy plans call for a 50-to-65-ship strong fleet of multi-role FF(X) ships, and some of the exact weapons configurations are still very much under consideration. The Navy may indeed add VLS to its lighter, faster new FF(X) in an effort to combine some heavy firepower into a smaller, faster ship.
U.S. Coast Guard Cutter “Hull”
When compared with the Constellation class, the FF(X) embraces a smaller and lighter design informed by a U.S. domestic patrol cutter. With a displacement around 4,600–4,750 tons—significantly smaller than the 7,300–7,500+ ton Constellation design—the FF(X) fits a different operational niche. Its baseline armament emphasizes a 57 mm main gun, auxiliary 30 mm guns, a Mk 49 Rolling Airframe Missile launcher, and smaller anti-surface weapons such as Naval Strike Missiles (NSMs), with no integrated VLS in initial configurations. The relatively limited armament reflects an acceptance that early FF(X) hulls will focus on presence, patrol, and self-defense missions without the robust high-end strike and area air defense capability originally planned for Constellation.
Because the Constellation-class design emphasized high-end combat capability, its mission set was broader. It was to serve alongside Arleigh Burke-class destroyers in carrier strike group escort and expeditionary roles while contributing substantively to fleet air defense and anti-submarine warfare. Its sophisticated sensors and VLS made it a force multiplier in contested environments where advanced threat systems could challenge U.S. naval power projection.
Conversely, the FF(X) is optimized for persistent presence, maritime security, and lower-risk escort duties, freeing up higher-end assets for contested operations. Its design includes containerized payload spaces that allow for modular mission packages, including counter-unmanned systems, additional weapons cells, and sensors without major hull redesigns. In many respects, the vision for FF(X) seems to resemble the embattled Littoral Combat Ship program as it is intended to be a lighter, faster, more shallow-water, lower-risk areas less likely to engage in massive, open, blue-water maritime warfare.
Strategic Navy Shift?
This emphasis on adaptability over raw firepower reflects a deliberate philosophical shift: instead of a single highly capable but expensive multimission ship, the Navy now seeks numbers and flexibility. The FF(X) is intended to function as part of a broader distributed force, operating with unmanned assets and adjustable mission modules that can be tailored to tasking. The mention of the term “mission modules” closely resembles the “mission packages” philosophy advanced for the LCS, so it may not seem entirely clear how the FF(X) would be different from the LCS.
Kris Osborn is the President of Warrior Maven – Center for Military Modernization. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a highly qualified expert in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Masters Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University