well, at least a pair of outstanding issues are around, one ironically
in the most "old way" of thinking.
one is that a ship whose crew should conduct and not maintain the ship,
whose depend to a network for maintenance is a sure-fire way to be
looked down from Mediterranean admiralties, from, poignantly, Gibraltar
to Alexandria and Dardanelles, because, the major full regional power
has a renowned penchant for targeting and wreaking havoc on hostile
ports, and not necessarily by airpower.
the issue linked to the very core of "old way" of thinking lies in the
"vulcanization" of the 3" OTO, whose briefly, gives to nearby every
medium and small warship in the world the gunnery range of a B* (that
is, ~40km) and this in a littoral context, is tantamount to a
"dreadnought revolution" and half of the LCS get the same short stick of
the predreadnoughts of yore (I think that is feasible to upguning the
Freedoms, but is obvious at glance that for the Independences there's no
hopes for upgunning)
of course, in few years, after designing three shells (3", 5", and land
6.1") around pre-existing guns, OTO can felt confident in designing new
guns incorporating the Vulcano concept and things will start to be
*really* interesting and surely the debate on "old" and "new" Naval
thinking will be rather heated (larger Vulcano shells imply that these
will start to reach, and fly more time inside, the external, thinner
layer of atmosphere, and there's not much brain needed in assessing the
dreadful (pun intended) impact of broadside ranges comparable to IRBMs
and perhaps even ICBMs (with the much shorter reload time typical of a
Naval gun...)