Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

[ArmChairCivvy]

I guess those fine refinements to Bays are on a different thread, but to me they would do the trick as the current set-up is a fudge: The 2010 SDSR mandated landing a 1800-strong commando force, but actually of that number about a quarter is of the kind that will stay on the ships, ie. not landed.

Looking at the numbers, and this is generous (costing in vehicles and other support that cannot be carried at the same time):


Platform Dock
(LPDs), 2, giving a 405-strong contribution, but only one at a time
2x LCU

LSD(A)s , AKA Bays,3
<400 X 3, but really max. 2 as one is in the Gulf
1 x LCU (each)

QEC, one at a time (max) in Littoral/ amph. mode
A 250-strong contribution, all by helicopter
Notably Apaches with F35 (ie. both interdiction and CAS)

So, without those enhancements and the modifications to PoW we get
405+ 800+ 250 = 1455 (i.e that mandated 1800, when you count in support that is not landed)
- however, the Bays ideally deliver the 2 vehicle-mounted Coys of a Cdo, so doing that halves the manpower landed from them... now we are down to just over a thousand
- the 4 LCUs on the scene being fully busy just doing this part of the Op; so any artillery and the supply of rounds needed would burden the (available) Chinook lift

So one can say that the CEPP concept falls short by the landed component of power projection being scaled (in the above calculation we had none of the shipping in dock... which does happen) to doing a NEO, more or less
- when it should be ONE Cdo dedicated to NATO tasks and the other (part of it?) standing ready to do "a NEO" somewhere else

[ArmChairCivvy]

should be ONE Cdo dedicated to NATO tasks and the other (part of it?) standing ready to do "a NEO" somewhere else

I keep forgetting this one, from January
" at a joint press conference following Mr Macron’s visit to Sandhurst Military Academy [...] Mrs May said that the UK and France were "Europe's two foremost military powers" and it was "incumbent on us to demonstrate leadership in meeting the great challenges of our time and upholding the international rules-based system".

She said the UK-France combined joint expeditionary force would be ready to deploy up to 10,000 troops "quickly and effectively to face any threat" by 2020."
- looks like everyone else keeps forgetting it, too
- why else did the force, already declared operational, need to be "reconfirmed"?
- and ,if anything, the land component of it seems to be going down in size (from 13k)

Why post this here? From the exercises in this context it would seem that the RM is not involved in any major role... so they avoid the "new normal" of being triple-hatted and have to cope with just double (saying this as one of the three Cdos now has a more specialised/ permanent tasking; so really talking about the two remaining ones, with "heavy" weapons)

[Lord Jim]

Classic case of aspiration over substance.

[Lord Jim]

[Tempest414]

with one week and 2 weekends training and that mount of ground cover I could get 15 year old cadets to do that to that standard it is a poor video for fire and maneuver plus I they need to learn to get out of the CB-90s

[ArmChairCivvy]

they need to learn to get out of the CB-90s

There's a ramp... but no one told them!

[SW1]

ACC

You could argue that saif sareea 3 is exercising the uk half of the uk/fr force about 4500 personnel.

[ArmChairCivvy]

saif sareea 3 is exercising the uk half of the uk/fr force about 4500 personnel.

I'd happily go along with that... but where is the other (joint!) half?

[SW1]

Acc

Retreating??

[benny14]

You could argue that saif sareea 3 is exercising the uk half of the uk/fr force about 4500 personnel.

I'd happily go along with that... but where is the other (joint!) half?

Its actually almost 5,500 from all three services going to Saif Sareea 3. Including 900 from the RAF.

Another 2,000-2,800 going to Trident Juncture at the same time.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Retreating??

Or holding the flank... very far to the West

[Benny, I meant the French half of the joint intervention force]

[benny14]

[Benny, I meant the French half of the joint intervention force]

My bad, forgot about the French... So Oman is our CJEF contribution, could you say our participation in Trident Juncture is our JEF contribution?

[Luke jones]

Deary me....
What a load of shite

[Opinion3]

or after sufficient preparation by another force
(naval fires, air power, or pre-landing force operations) to sufficiently degrade the
opposition such that the landing is unopposed."

I suppose my question / comment is that an unopposed landing can become opposed if a secure beachhead is not created, so the deployed or should I say landed force needs to have sufficient capabilities and stores to achieve this.

I know a number of you believe the opposed capability is 'cloud cuckoo land', but I hope we never loose the capability to use the element of surprise to our advantage, and loose this by being too slow or ineffective.

[jedibeeftrix]

I guess those fine refinements to Bays are on a different thread, but to me they would do the trick as the current set-up is a fudge: The 2010 SDSR mandated landing a 1800-strong commando force, but actually of that number about a quarter is of the kind that will stay on the ships, ie. not landed.

Looking at the numbers, and this is generous (costing in vehicles and other support that cannot be carried at the same time):


Platform Dock
(LPDs), 2, giving a 405-strong contribution, but only one at a time
2x LCU

LSD(A)s , AKA Bays,3
<400 X 3, but really max. 2 as one is in the Gulf
1 x LCU (each)

QEC, one at a time (max) in Littoral/ amph. mode
A 250-strong contribution, all by helicopter
Notably Apaches with F35 (ie. both interdiction and CAS)

LPD (wiki) -
Boats & landing craft carried:
4 × LCU MK10
4 × LCVP MK5

[ArmChairCivvy]

LPD (wiki) -
Boats & landing craft carried:
4 × LCU MK10

Thanks, that now jogs my memory... the photos where loading in the dock is done in two parallel "lanes" from both sides

So, from our puny number of LCUs there won't be any special offers for some "with one careful previous owner" coming out any time soon

Let's count the other type of "connectors" as well - more like per wave than the total carried, as the latter will depend on the overall airwing:
QEC - 10 Merlins (Apaches are slower than Chinooks but can catch up with Merlins? Taking off later)
LPD(A) - trials have shown that two Chinooks can be "prepositioned" for use from their deck... so 4 in the first round trip
plus whatever is loaded onto the LPD (being a C&C vessel may dictate that)

[Lord Jim]

they need to learn to get out of the CB-90s

There's a ramp... but no one told them!

They didn't have a service manual telling them how to do it.

[ArmChairCivvy]

a service manual telling them how to do it.

101 of "inter-operability"

[Lord Jim]

Deary me....
What a load of shite

ars whole

[Lord Jim]

May be a better video of the CB-90 being used.

[ArmChairCivvy]

You can get out (and back into the boat)

when you design it properly; see the ramp (and the hatches that go with it)

[Lord Jim]

Now that does like a bit of kit we should look into to replace the LVCPs or at least a few to possibly put on the T-26s for "Special" jobs.

[Tempest414]

As an EX field skills instructor I have to say there is some work needed. where to start great use of the CB-90 though

[Poiuytrewq]

You can get out (and back into the boat)when you design it properly; see the ramp (and the hatches that go with it)

Interesting option

[SW1]

You can get out (and back into the boat)

when you design it properly; see the ramp (and the hatches that go with it)

And a patria nemo option I see also. If only the army had bought amv!