Navy Officials Reveal Details of New $100M Light Amphibious Warship Concept

[nittany03]

Tying this back to the other conversation about what happens in the next large peer conflict, not just initially but after the first couple rounds, when ability to ramp up scale of industrial production, is a $100-130MM design going to be sustainable?

I’ve long thought that with the ongoing deep water oil downturn, one could do some noodling about how you nationalize the dozens of privately owned 150-300ft OSVs currently tied up across South Louisiana. They’re geared almost exclusively toward just equipment, not berthing, but the iron is there.

I'm not sure the price is as big of a deal as our utter lack of shipyard capacity. I'm not sure any peer conflict is going to resemble WWII in any sense of massive mobilization of the industrial base, because where is the industrial base to mobilize?

 

[Mos]

I legitimately cracked up laughing when I saw this. This was just such a perfect response. Just... perfect.

Should probably just be the default response whenever HW posts anything on this board.

 

[AllAmerican75]

I'm not sure the price is as big of a deal as our utter lack of shipyard capacity. I'm not sure any peer conflict is going to resemble WWII in any sense of massive mobilization of the industrial base, because where is the industrial base to mobilize?

This is the big lynch pin in any future conflict. We lack the number and capacity of shipyards needed to sustain a long term fight. The shipyards and ship repair facilities in San Diego, Oakland, Alameda, and Long Beach did the majority of the heavy lifting for overhauls for the ships fighting in the Pacific. We now only have one yard on the West Coast and that's all the way up on Washington. We also lack the tenders and repair ships that allowed ships to be refitted and repair under expeditionary conditions close to the fight.

We could not fight WW2 again, the way it is now.

 

[Hair Warrior]

Should probably just be the default response whenever HW posts anything on this board.

 

[Griz882]

I also see WWII LST in the concept. It is not a bad idea and could be as impressive as the LST was in WWII. As Churchill noted (maybe)

The destinies of two great empires ... seemed to be tied by some god-damned things called LST's.

 

[wink]

I am aware the Army has many vessels, and some of really decent size, but am not familiar with the current "fleet". What does the Army have in this class, if anything? What is closest. Even some folks in the Army and Navy have no idea how significant the Army flotilla is (was?).

 

[Griz882]

I am aware the Army has many vessels, and some of really decent size, but am not familiar with the current "fleet". What does the Army have in this class, if anything? What is closest. Even some folks in the Army and Navy have no idea how significant the Army flotilla is (was?).

The closest is the Runnymede Class of Large Landing Craft. They are 174 feet long and can hit a rapid 11.5 knots. Overall, the Army has about 50 ships that can cross an ocean and about 500 vessels that are on the scale of harbor craft.

 

[nittany03]

The closest is the Runnymede Class of Large Landing Craft. They are 174 feet long and can hit a rapid 11.5 knots. Overall, the Army has about 50 ships that can cross an ocean and about 500 vessels that are on the scale of harbor craft.

Once worked with an Army guy who teased me about Navy ships being commanded by O-5s and O-6s, and Army ships being commanded by CW5s.

 

[Griz882]

Once worked with an Army guy who teased me about Navy ships being commanded by O-5s and O-6s, and Army ships being commanded by CW5s.

The MOS (watercraft operator) is hard to get in the army. Most guys stick with it a long time.

 

[Pags]

The closest is the Runnymede Class of Large Landing Craft. They are 174 feet long and can hit a rapid 11.5 knots. Overall, the Army has about 50 ships that can cross an ocean and about 500 vessels that are on the scale of harbor craft.


View attachment 28055

Army LSVs are ~300' long and make 11.5kts, so similar to what is being proposed.

General Frank S. Besson-class support vessel - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[wink]

Once worked with an Army guy who teased me about Navy ships being commanded by O-5s and O-6s, and Army ships being commanded by CW5s.

I thought the larger ocean going vessels had civilian masters, similar to our USNS.

 

[squorch2]

Some day the navy will stop trying to fight WW2.

Today is not that day.

 

[Griz882]

Some day the navy will stop trying to fight WW2.

Today is not that day.

This is interesting. What war should they plan for? I sometimes get the idea that the Navy is kind of lost when looking for a next-century mission but what else is there? Flying is flying, SWOing is SWOing, and subbing is subbing. Certainly there are emerging technologies that enable each in of those missions and the hundreds of sub-missions that support them, but all that still means that the hammer changes but the nail stays the same.

Boiled down to the basics A.T. Mahan is “Navy + Ocean + Navy = War.” The ultimate purpose of amphibious warfare isn’t to create media advantages for the Marines, it is to secure advance bases. If the fundamental idea is to keep the enemies fleet away from our shores then demanding that every damaged warship travel all the way back to the US for repair or that your nearest supply base in San Diego is not the best option.

The only natural predator in the jungle right now is China so automatically we are dealing with the Pacific. China has numerous advantages over Japan and many unique disadvantages. Both sides have to project power over the world’s largest ocean to win and to project power both sides need an array of ships to complete the job. Carriers are cool but they can’t secure bases. CRUDES are the heart of the navy, but they are needed to protect the carriers, so who secures existing bases while advancing to new tactical and strategic zones? Amphibians is my guess.

In short, I don’t understand what the navy is supposed to be looking for?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

This is interesting. What war should they plan for? I sometimes get the idea that the Navy is kind of lost when looking for a next-century mission but what else is there? Flying is flying, SWOing is SWOing, and subbing is subbing. Certainly there are emerging technologies that enable each in of those missions and the hundreds of sub-missions that support them, but all that still means that the hammer changes but the nail stays the same.

Boiled down to the basics A.T. Mahan is “Navy + Ocean + Navy = War.” The ultimate purpose of amphibious warfare isn’t to create media advantages for the Marines, it is to secure advance bases. If the fundamental idea is to keep the enemies fleet away from our shores then demanding that every damaged warship travel all the way back to the US for repair or that your nearest supply base in San Diego is not the best option.

The only natural predator in the jungle right now is China so automatically we are dealing with the Pacific. China has numerous advantages over Japan and many unique disadvantages. Both sides have to project power over the world’s largest ocean to win and to project power both sides need an array of ships to complete the job. Carriers are cool but they can’t secure bases. CRUDES are the heart of the navy, but they are needed to protect the carriers, so who secures existing bases while advancing to new tactical and strategic zones? Amphibians is my guess.

In short, I don’t understand what the navy is supposed to be looking for?

I doubt you’ll get an answer here. He’s just doing his usual drive-by without an actual solution or deeper understanding