Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
I must have read it in Proceedings; I'll look around and find the article. Basically it talks about how the Swift deployed from the west coast to the region, making a stop on the way to pick up a full load, in less than 10 days. In that crisis, Katrina, and Lebanon it was able to move back and forth over hundreds of nautical miles in slightly over a day with full loads, while other ships were making the trip one way in the same time period. The Swift can be loaded with 10 eighteen wheelers fully loaded in less than 20 minutes if necessary, and turn around from a dock in less than an hour.
The stories that really capture the capability of HSV Swift in its operations are very compelling, particularly when you compare them to the capabilities of a C-5 or C-17, because in the end there really is no comparison. Remember, while most ships max speed is 30 knots, the average cruise speed so far for the HSV Swift is around 28 knots, and that is over multiple years of operation all over every ocean with it fully loaded much of the time.
|
I agree it's a valuable capability. Maybe more so than the LCSs in a GFS deployment, especially considering the price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
Again, I don't see the same loading plan that you do. The LPD-17 has 3 V's (vehicle decks), the upper V and lower V of any traditional LPD, but additionally it has a 3rd V specifically for AAVs (and EFVs in the future). I don't foresee a lot of marine corps vehicles beyond the AAVs (or EFVs) for a Littoral Strike Group.
...
I understand what you are saying, and in some ways I agree with it, but for the LSG I see mobility as a main element of the mother ships and the air, sea, and ground forces it deploys. I think it is important to seek out lightweight, mobile assets that can be air lifted or self deployed to keep the mother ship nimble. If heavy ground equipment is required by sea, a dedicated marine ship will be needed for the task.
|
I suppose part of the difference here is the difference in focus between the LSG and the GFS.
The LSG appears to have a wartime focus, where the GFS looks more like an extension of a host nation's peacetime/GWOT Coast Guard duties.
Based on my reading of the CONOPS, I doubt there will ever be a need for an LCS's ASW modules in a GFS. MIW perhaps, but I imagine even this is less likely. UUVs also won't get a ton of use, other than survey perhaps. UAVs and USVs may, as with other ISR assets. SOF will be a primary focus.
Having a variety of non-combat capabilities is the key to GFS. Some combat capability is needed, of course, for force protection, and to assist in littoral COIN or to provide a mobile, local rapid reaction force. But i think much of the Marine's time would be spent escorting convoys of non-combatants, providing boarding parties for RHIBs or patrol craft, or acting as muscle for humanitarian operations.
With this in mind, I think the vehicle decks would be better filled with trucks, HMMWVs, Cougar/RG-31 Mine Protected Vehicles, various trailers, and so on. I might even throw in a platoon of M-1s to give some muscle to a rapid reaction force. Having them might permit a GFS group to undertake a Blackhawk Down style rescue operation. Not sure i'd want to try that with just AAVs, given the prevalent RPG threat around the world.
But all of this would require an LCM/LCU/LCAC capability. The British LCU Mk10 looks like an interesting fit here. It's around the same size as an LCM-8 but can carry an M-1. Being smaller than the normal LCU-1600 means you might fit additional patrol craft around it in the well deck.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
It is also important to remember, the billets on a LPD-17 will fill up quickly with these Navy missions. After a AAV platoon, the rifle company, and the aviation staff for MV-22s or CH-53s, you are left with ~400-450 billets for Navy, which would fill up quicker than you may realize. I figure around ~100 -120 for the modules aboard, which would include the 2 M-80 'type' vehicles, unmanned platforms, RHIBs with crews, and the machine shop. I also figure ~70 SOF and an additional ~30+ medical.
That leaves room for the for the additional Command Staff and NECC billets, which would easily consume the ~200 - 250 spaces for EOD, Mobile Construction, Salvage, and Riverine. When you stop to think of the number of smaller elements empowered by the mother ship, the 699 billets traditionally dedicated to marines fills up quickly. However, the smaller billet capacity of the LSD would reduce this even more.
|
I agree that a stretched LPD is a far better platform than an old LSD, but we have LSDs already and aren't they being pulled out of ARGs as LPDs are built? We don't have additional LPDs.
Can the additional billets be moved to the logistics ship or HSV?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
Since the Navy isn't even using a ship with a well deck, they must believe they don't need it.
|
Aren't they using an LSD for GFS experiments?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
Believe it or not, a heavily armed M80 Stiletto would still be about 30% cheaper than a LCAC, with more speed and nearly twice the range.
|
It may be cheaper than an LCAC, but I doubt it's cheaper than a conventional 25m patrol boat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galrahn
I agree it has limitations, and I don't want to claim it the exact right platform, I just think it could be. I think a sustainable large craft of 80/40 able to perform sustained MSO and UUV operations over 1 week period of time with a range of ~500 nautical miles is an important littoral capability in the LSG. I don't think smaller craft can provide that capability, but if they can I'm not stuck on any specific platform. I think the LSG theory works based on its capability and flexibility, not any specific platform.
Whatever the platform, if it can conduct MSO for a week (logistically supplied by air), at range and with speed, while launching and recovering manned and unmanned vehicles I think it works. That simple capability could relieve a LCS on a Maritime Domain Awareness assignment to free the LCS for other operations. I don't think the CB90 with its shorter range can deploy RHIBs, unmanned vehicles, or be logistically supplied by aircraft like the M80 Stiletto.
|
CB90s might be too small. I've thrown out the 25m Super Dvora in other threads for this mission. It can hit 48kts and has a 700nm range with typical missions lasting 4 days or so. And you can fit two in the same space as a Stiletto. Or, you might fit a Super Dvora and LCU Mk10 next to each other, and two Super Dvoras behind them in an LPD well deck. That gives you three patrol boats that can be in three different places at once, hundreds of miles away from the LPD, plus an LCU to move vehicles, people, and material.