My choice would be the HNLMS Rotterdam class. Stats via Wikipedia...
| General characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Type: | Landing platform dock |
| Displacement: | 12,750t (Rotterdam), 16,800t (Johan de Witt) |
| Length: | 166m (Rotterdam), 176.35m (Johan de Witt) |
| Beam: | 25.0 m |
| Draft: | 5.8 m |
| Propulsion: | Diesel-electric system
|
| Speed: | 19 knots (35 km/h) |
| Range: | 6,000 nautical miles (11,000 km) at 12-knot (22 km/h) |
| Endurance: | 6 weeks |
| Boats and landing craft carried: | 6 x LCU or 4 x LCVP (HNLMS Johan de Witt can accommodate 2 LCACs) |
| Capacity: | 170 armoured personnel carriers or 33 main battle tanks |
| Troops: | 611 marines |
| Crew: | 128 |
| Sensors and processing systems: | DA08 air / surface search IRSCAN SATCOM, Link 11, JMCIS |
| Electronic warfare and decoys: | 4 x Sippican Hycor SRBOC MK36 launcher 1 x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie torpedo decoy |
| Armament: | 2 x Goalkeeper CIWS guns 4 x Oerlikon Contraves 20 mm machine guns |
| Aviation facilities: | Hangar for 6 x AgustaWestland Lynx or NH-90 helicopter and stern helicopter flight deck |
By US Navy standards this ship is light, simple and mass production shouldn't be an issue. In my scheme of things this ship could even be specialized to act as mothership in roles in which the LCS would be too small.
Imagine switching out its normal compliment of landing craft for small boats and instead of NH-90's you replace them with AH-1Z's or MH-60S for sea control and attack missions.
You'd have a formidable ship with a battalion of Marines or Special Ops ready to act against pirates. Drugs become a problem (well they already are but if a President ever gets serious about killing the importation of the poison) then you could replace them with Riverines and Master at Arms types and have a Joint Task Force 6 at sea.
My whole point (no insult to our allies that operate these ships...its a selling point) is that these ships are relatively modular, have great load capacity/troop berthing and should be cheap enough to build in large enough number to make a difference.
In my plan LHD's and LPD's would form the capital ships of our amphib forces with these LSD replacements acting as a jack of all trades to be ridden hard.
I like it.
i dont think your critique would be an insult to our allies even if they were reading it, sometimes our wealth can be an issue in that we dont look for the best bargain, we think we have all this money we can make fancy ships or many specialized ships, most nations dont have the flexibility so they get creative and create ships like the one above that can do alot depending on the mission, truly modular as you pointed out if it had to it could do alot of things with little time to change missions. i am not saying in any way this is justification for cutting defense spending, just sometimes we dont look for the best bargain.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with extra USN Gators but frankly the main concern should be maintaining enough ships for the ARG's. That said the Navy does periodically use older Gator's for other tasks such as supporting mine warfare command.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm not sure about is operating a MEU in another ship(s) instead of the ARG. While there are times the entire MEU is overkill I'd rather split up the existing ARG which we do normally.
Don't get me wrong as an adjunct additional Gator's sound great for whatever purpose. I just don't want Congress getting the idea we don't need as many ARG+MEU and can get away with fewer and single ships carrying a BLT with minimal aviation and logistical support.
Now all this aside sending a single medium sized amphib with aviation and reinforced company for things like anti piracy would be a great use for a smaller ship than what we currently have. It just doesn't seem to make sense within the budget realities and if it did eventually Congress would cut it or cut the number of amphib squadrons.
Moreover, the ancient and tested method to deal with piracy is to go ashore and burn the boats. Until the world has the will to deal with the problem properly I'm not overly excited about bothering with specialized ships in what is only going to be a band aid approach. Certainly a large failed state like Somalia makes the whole problem much worse but piracy exists when the players don't have a realistic appreciation of losing their boat and their life.
i didn't go into great detail but we're under the number of hulls that the Marine Corps requires. i think we're at 30 and the number needed is 38.
ReplyDeleteadditionally with these type ships the other big users of amphibs would have there own hulls and there wouldn't be a dog and cat fight over what gets prioritized on pumps. Riverines could go out and do there thing...SOCOM could and our mine hunting efforts would be strengthened with a base ship type thing.
heck if this plan were to go forward it would even help solve the module problem for the LCS. instead of having to burn gas to get back to port and then steam back to the action area, you could assign one of these to each squadron and have them act as module carriers. you'd still have to work out how you'd swap them at sea but it could still be a game changer and money saver.
additionally the Corps gets the benefit of having one of its primary ship act as the foundation for a range of missions which should help out in case that Tarawa situation ever is needed again and we need to push an entire division ashore in a forcible entry type situation.
Lee likes the Singapore solution but i haven't had time to check it out fully yet but i fear its too small and this is a pretty small amphib by USN standards anyway.
long story short the price should be right...we should be able to put a bunch of hulls in the water and i see it performing a myriad of missions.
No. Your required ship is a modified Karel Doormen support ship which is basically an Enforcer (Rotterdam, Bay) on steroids. Bigger than San Antonio and heck of a lot cheaper.
ReplyDeletebut we have enough oilers and replenshment ships. i don't need that additional capability and that would be bulk that i don't need in my ship. yeah steel is cheap but being cheaper than San Antonio isn't hard to do and the Rotterdam accomplishes that mission. additionally Canada was looking at this concept and its costs were ballooning.
ReplyDeleteis this ship cheaper than a Rotterdam? if it is then it might be a consideration ... if not then i'll stick with my pick.
Karel Doormen is enlarged redesigned variant of the class you are proposing. It is more in line with the size of the LPD25. The complicated thing about amphibians is the dock which this.
ReplyDeleteSOL your are getting better at this for a Marine - LOL Your point about using a less capable and/or smaller ship to perform OTHER missions is RIGHT ON! We all know that currently amphibs are over-tasked in missions, under-sized when it come to cargo, and far too expensive resulting in force cuts.
ReplyDeleteMy mantra is pick the right ship type first. Define the cargo second. Marry the two.
So what the USN has done wrong is specifically define capabilities which turned out to be too small, etc. And then bought too few expensive ships to fufill them.
Think about all the articles & posts written recently about smaller i.e. company sized ops. Doest the USMC need less big Gators to conduct those, or more smaller ships?
Think about all the high weight and cube cargo i.e. tactical equipment currently in TOEs? Does the USN propose to lift all of that in limited amphib warship hulls, or are there more naval auxiliaries or sealift ships in the ARG future? Answer: MSC MPS ships are already lifting AE cargo and will be riding along with the ARG before very long.