Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New proposed LPD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New proposed LPD

    The LPD Flight II, a proposed multi-purpose LPD, based off of the San Antonio Class.
    LPD Flight II: The Next Generation Amphibious Transport Dock

  • #2
    ... does that page actually say anything except "hey, you should really buy more of our LPD17 hulls - we don't know into what we should rebuild it, but we could do it"?

    Comment


    • #3
      It is a commercial, but I believe it is the most likely contender to replace the LSD's.

      Comment


      • #4
        "LPD Flight II takes advantage of a proven design, hot production line, stable vendor base and a skilled Ingalls workforce."

        Are they really just gonna softball it in like that? :pop:

        I do like the idea of a LPD-style hospital ship though.
        “Never let yourself be persuaded that any one Great Man, any one leader, is necessary to the salvation of America. When America consists of one leader and 158 million followers, it will no longer be America.”
        ― Dwight D. Eisenhower

        Comment


        • #5
          It seems to me that they are making the ship do less than what it is capable of doing. The ship can no longer carry and store helos onboard which means that they will have to come from another ship such as an LHD. If the helos have to come from another ship this means that the other ships now has less capablities to handel what it may need to do. I also notice a total number less of the numbers of Marines that can be onboard the ship for any givin situation that may them. Just some of my thoughts on this.

          Duane

          Comment


          • #6
            Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus has signed an internal memo recommending the service base its next generation amphibious warship (LX(R)) on the existing San Antonio-class (LPD-17) warship design, first reported by the Inside the Navy newsletter on Monday.

            Mabus’ approval of the memo, which he signed last week, validates more than a year of Marine Corps lobbying for a new amphibious ship based on the existing 25,000-ton San Antonio design.

            “Through a focused and disciplined process that analyzed required capabilities and capacities, as well as cost parameters, it has been determined that a derivative of the Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD-17) hull form is the preferred alternative to meet LX(R) operational requirements,” read the document.

            The lead ship of a San Antonio derived LX(R) would cost about $1.64 billion with follow-ons costing about $1.4 billion for a total of 11 ships, according to information from the service.

            Navy officials would not comment to USNI News on the memo saying the service typically doesn’t comment or confirm details on internal memoranda.

            San Antonio builder Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII) told USNI News the shipbuilder was, “encouraged that the Navy has selected a variant of the LPD amphibious warship to satisfy the requirements for LX(R), recognizing the LPD’s proven capability, flexibility and affordability,” in a Monday afternoon statement.

            Affordability has been the primary driver of the Navy’s quest for the replacement to the service’s aging Whidbey Island and Harpers Ferry 16,000-ton landing ship docks (LSD-41/49).

            The service has taken at least three separate tries at the analysis of alternatives for the ship examining a LX(R) build on a San Antonio hull, a foreign variant or an entirely new ship design, Sean Stackley, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development & Acquisition (RDA), told the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces in July.

            The head of Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) — Vice Adm. William Hilarides — told reporters in May the internal conversation around LX(R), “the best ship design conversation we’ve had in a long time inside the government.”

            The memo from Mabus comes as little surprise to industry watchers. Marines from recently retired commandant Gen. James Amos to a group of retired generals have long stumped for the LPD-17 as the basis for LX(R).

            “The opportunity to continue that hull form or something similar to it has great operational advantage to us. It gives us the ship-to-shore, sovereign launch and recovery capability that we need,” assistant commandant Gen. John M. Paxton told the July congressional panel.

            “It gives us maintenance capability that we need. It gives us command and control capability for disaggregated operations in case we have to split up that Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) in two or three different locations.”

            Despite the internal memo recommending the LPD-17 hull form, the final answer of the LX(R) question is far from certain. The next major step for the program is the so-called Milestone A review in which the final outline for a major defense acquisition program is settled.

            Also, just because the LPD-17 hull form is the preferred option for the Navy, it doesn’t mean that HII will be the prime contractor for the LX(R). Though HII’s Ingalls Shipbuilding in Pascagoula, Miss. is the only hot production line for San Antonio hulls, the Navy will likely introduce some element of competition with other U.S. naval shipbuilders for LX(R).

            Memo: Hull Based on San Antonio Design is Navy's Preferred Option for Next Generation Amphib - USNI News

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by surfgun View Post
              Affordability has been the primary driver of the Navy’s quest for the replacement to the service’s aging Whidbey Island and Harpers Ferry 16,000-ton landing ship docks (LSD-41/49).
              Damn I feel old now. I remember when these ships hit the fleet. And hoping that I could ride one of these instead of the P-Cola again.

              Comment


              • #8
                Aging Whidbey Island class? These ships just came into service in the mid to late 80's and early 90's. If that makes them old, then that would mean I'm getting old as well and I just can't accept that hypothesis. Besides, these ships were intended to be upgraded and kept in service until 2038 or so. You can't beat them for payload- 4-5 LCAC's or 8 Mk VI pb's, generous flight deck, you can use these for far more than just assaulting the beach.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I fully comprehend the potential savings of a common hull design and think it is probably a good idea.

                  However, what is the increase in capability that a 50% increase in tonnage will get us beyond what the Whidbey Islands could do? Will there be much more storage for vehicles and cargo? Room for larger (MRAP/MATV/JTVL) vehicles than what can currently be carried?

                  This new vessel would have a 20 foot wider beam, 74 feet more length, etc. Will it carry a larger number of men? Without a hangar, it seems to be missing the advantages that USMC have been touting about the increased flexibility that the Osprey give them. It certainly couldn't operate on its own, as one might think that distributed operations might drive it to.

                  Do we need to rethink the utility of the LPD? It is very specifically focused on bringing a lot of men and equipment for a water-based assault. Yes, it has a large landing deck, but it doesn't have any aircraft to use that space - that has to come from the LHD or LPD. An amphibious landing, especially of the size that would be focused by an LPD, seems unlikely. Perhaps the whole MEU concept needs reconsideration, or at least how we host it. This potentially much bigger boat should change the equation somewhere.

                  Tankersteve

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'd be curious to see if anyone has an opinion regarding whether a LSD class is required beyond an LPD class. Is the extra well deck / amphibious capacity that the LSD provides required in this day of age? Currently the USN essentially has 8 LSD's as the 4 Harper's Ferry - class ships sacrifice well deck space for cargo capcity - essentially turning them into a LPD (cargo).

                    Does a mix of 1 LDP and one LSD for each amphibious assault group still make sense?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      :bang:

                      AAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGG(HHHHHHHHHH)...
                      "We are all special cases." - Camus

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This is one of those times in which I am profoundly happy that I never served in a "gator freighter." I'll shoot NGFS for them, and I inspected their engineering plants, but beyond that, I don't know fecal matter from Shinola about them, and never really cared to learn. Some Black Shoes specialize in the AMPHIB world, and others of us do it in the CRUDES world, and during my day, never the twain shall meet. It's like a whole other existence; besides which, I never cottoned to the idea of being a bus driver.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Squirrel,

                          Yeah, I fully understand what goes into the typical ARG. My question was whether a significantly bigger ship will change the composition, or whether there will be a relook of the capabilities or design of the MEU. When you get down to it, both the LPD and the LSD are much bigger than their predecessors. Perhaps the USMC needs to explain why that increased capacity is needed, what gap in capability it addresses, or whether there can be a decrease in numbers since the ships have increased capacity (I know this affects availability/total numbers).

                          Tankersteve

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by desertswo View Post
                            This is one of those times in which I am profoundly happy that I never served in a "gator freighter." I'll shoot NGFS for them, and I inspected their engineering plants, but beyond that, I don't know fecal matter from Shinola about them, and never really cared to learn. Some Black Shoes specialize in the AMPHIB world, and others of us do it in the CRUDES world, and during my day, never the twain shall meet. It's like a whole other existence; besides which, I never cottoned to the idea of being a bus driver.
                            having served on both, USS Essex LHD-2 (Apr 93-Apr 98) and USS Momsen DDG 92 (Apr 03-Aug 07) USS Halsey DDG 97 (May 08-Nov11) they are definitely different worlds, but a Sailor is a Sailor and can do both.. of course on the Amphib, we didn't seek out danger, on the Tin Can's we sure as hell did.

                            As for a follow on Hospital Ship, the LHD/LHA's would be awesome in that regard..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Tankersteve View Post
                              Squirrel,

                              Yeah, I fully understand what goes into the typical ARG. My question was whether a significantly bigger ship will change the composition, or whether there will be a relook of the capabilities or design of the MEU. When you get down to it, both the LPD and the LSD are much bigger than their predecessors. Perhaps the USMC needs to explain why that increased capacity is needed, what gap in capability it addresses, or whether there can be a decrease in numbers since the ships have increased capacity (I know this affects availability/total numbers).

                              Tankersteve
                              This new vessel would have a 20 foot wider beam, 74 feet more length, etc. Will it carry a larger number of men? Without a hangar, it seems to be missing the advantages that USMC have been touting about the increased flexibility that the Osprey give them. It certainly couldn't operate on its own, as one might think that distributed operations might drive it to.
                              “It gives us maintenance capability that we need. It gives us command and control capability for disaggregated operations in case we have to split up that Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) in two or three different locations.”


                              The LPD can carry 22's, 60's, 53's, and LCAC's. They also have a hangar and welldeck. Not to mention other cool stuff... The LPD's are pretty bad ass, that's why China stole the design.
                              Attached Files
                              "We are all special cases." - Camus

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X