I had a look at Ocean when fitting out in Barrow in Furness her hull construction was less strengthened than the carriers hulls The equipment on board was to a enhanced merchant build specification. It was no were near military specifications. In effect she was more like a cheap R.F.A. ship than a amphibious L.H.P.shark bait wrote:She was built cheaply.She wasn't built to last.
seaspear wrote:Going slightly off the topic , shouldnt air-lift capability be assessed as part of any package on needs particularly heavy lift .
shark bait wrote:
- Their only ever going to attempt an uncontested lsnding, so are big specialist LPD's the most effective?
- Same for big slow specialist LCU's, are they suitable for non contested landing?
- I would ask the same question about moving landings over the horizon? Are they equipped to do that effectively?
- Is it more effective to leverage modified commercial design's?
- How does carrier strike and vertical manoeuvre's from the carrier's fit in?
- Are their vehicles still for for purpose?
- should they be exploring self deploying vehicles?
- expeditionary ports to leverage civilian shipping?
shark bait wrote:
- She was built cheaply.
- She wasn't built to last.
- Her crew is needed for Prince of Wales.
- Retirement is reasonable
I hope cooperation with France strengthen, you are the most similar nation to ours.
Repulse wrote:I like the current UK amphibious model which involves a larger number of less sophisticated ships. Sure, it's not as sexy as having LHDs, but unlike the French the UK has depth for operating beyond a short term raid scenario.
marktigger wrote:I do to repulse, But LHD offers much greater flexibility than a pure LPD (or pure LPH)
marktigger wrote:army commando assets like 29's guns, OP's etc? or the assualt engineers of 59?
so landing independently troop sized groups from frigates........are you being serious? the coordination, planning and briefing for that would make fiasco seam like a success!
marktigger wrote:what's wrong with uncontested landings using brains saves on Blood! contested landings are to costly now
I actually think having dedicated LPHs allows for a much simpler design which reduces cost both in terms of the build and ongoing operating effort. One problem with the hybrid LHD is that it tends to share a common deck for aviation and amphibious vehicles, meaning that space compromises need to be made.
shark bait wrote:marktigger wrote:what's wrong with uncontested landings using brains saves on Blood! contested landings are to costly now
I'm not suggesting there is anything wrong with uncontested landings, it's the only feasible option, otherwise everything thing is just a sitting duck.
Accepting that as the baseline, I believe it changes quite a few things.
If the marines are only doing uncontested landings, they need the ability to move rapidly, over a large distance to the contested area. That's something they can't do at present. It's going to be a lot harder to find a permissable environment, so landing far away, and supporting operations at distance will become critical. It that something that needs to be addressed?
For an uncontested environment are specialist platform's really needed? Would it be more efficient to leverage more commercially derived shipping for example? They are highly effective at moving volume, key to sustaining a high intensity operation.
Opinion3 wrote:The frigates can host Chinooks and the embarked force should be able to join the party so to speak. In the new world of combining sensors and advanced communications I would hope we can organise a force of 5,000 without messing things up.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests