Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

[Ron5]

CB90 = lousy sea boat

[jedibeeftrix]

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)

So, we have 6x LCU, and 10 Merlins, and possibly a brace of chinook.

What does this permit by way of a combined arms force?

[shark bait]

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.

Where can you fit a CB90 on the T26?

[Lord Jim]

I was referring to the Watercat Mk2 which may "Question Mark", fit in the mission bay.

[ArmChairCivvy]

The "sweet spot" in size seems to be steadily moving upwards as there is more emphasis on OTH (rotary aviation supported) ops.

JC designs are not the only game in town: "As a 25,000-ton hull form, LX(R) will possess greater
troop and flight deck, fuel, medical and command-and-
control capabilities than the smaller 16,000-ton LSD 41/49 class ships."

Should we build one/ some on license; pretty much what happened with the Bays?

[Gabriele]

Important video on the future of amphibious capability. The Littoral Strike Group in its new form is planned to be tested in 2022 (second major deployment for the carrier) and the group must have LPDs and "RFAs", according to Colonel Lenny Brown Royal Marines, who mentions how important the landing craft remain. Thankfully not every mind is lost.

With the carrier, the aim is to go from 1 to 2 companies inserted simultaneously by air at "up to 81 nautical miles" distances. Guess that's the most you can do with the Merlin and supporting assets (Wildcat, Apache, Chinook) according to the profile of this particular mission.

https://www.janes.com/article/83138/chf ... rike-group

[ArmChairCivvy]

The above vid: a lot of relevant stuff, with a good structure and anchoring it all with broader references
... all of that in under 10 mins

[Tempest414]

Good to see CHF has a working plan for the way forward top stuff very good very punchy

[Keithdwat579]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I really don't like that our carriers are also taking on the role of the LPH, in my opinion it simply cannot happen, of course aircraft from the carrier can support groups, with ground attack, maybe helos, but it can/should never do the job. Also it seems that the RAF are beginning to see these carriers as of less importance than their operations, no big surprise there I suppose but that's for a different thread. We need an ocean replacement asap, or live without the capability until the Albions can be replaced with LHDs. The carriers are strike carriers and that's what they should be.

[Jake1992]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I really don't like that our carriers are also taking on the role of the LPH, in my opinion it simply cannot happen, of course aircraft from the carrier can support groups, with ground attack, maybe helos, but it can/should never do the job. Also it seems that the RAF are beginning to see these carriers as of less importance than their operations, no big surprise there I suppose but that's for a different thread. We need an ocean replacement asap, or live without the capability until the Albions can be replaced with LHDs. The carriers are strike carriers and that's what they should be.

I agree we need a 3rd flat and that the carriers shouldn't be used in the LPH role, I am not surprised by the RAF and this is where HMG should make clear the carrier take priority when it comes to the F35s.
But I don't really see them as just dedicated strike carriers now, to me the QE are what a child of a Nimitz class and US America class would be like ( or a supersized Cavour )

[Poiuytrewq]

JC designs are not the only game in town: "As a 25,000-ton hull form, LX(R) will possess greater
troop and flight deck, fuel, medical and command-and-
control capabilities than the smaller 16,000-ton LSD 41/49 class ships."

Should we build one/ some on license; pretty much what happened with the Bays?

Its an interesting option.

The current preferred LX(R) design appears to be a modified and simplified version of the San Antonio LPD.

San Antonio LPD

image.jpg

image.jpg

This is the modified version (LSD Flight iia) which would eventually replace the Whidbey Island and Harpers Ferry Class LSD's. Its clear that the design is still evolving as all of the renders have slight differences.

image.jpg

image.jpg

image.jpg

The overall configuration with amidships working deck is very similar to Tempest414's proposed adapted Bay design.

@ArmChairCivvy, are you proposing replacing the 2 Albions with 2 UK built San Antonio's and the 3 Bay's with a simpler version along the lines of the LSD Flight iia?

[shark bait]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I really don't like that our carriers are also taking on the role of the LPH, in my opinion it simply cannot happen,

Its acceptable as an interim bodge job, the carriers wont be operating near capacity for a long time. At some point it will become a hindrance so would be good to see an official acknowledgement this is only an interim measure before a new flattop is procured as part of the amphibious renewal in a decade.

[Tempest414]

I think I would still go with 4 of my enlarged Bays and a LPH at 35,000 ton 235 meters long with a 38 meter width flight deck with up to 8 spots able to carry 30 aircraft

[Aethulwulf]

With the carrier, the aim is to go from 1 to 2 companies inserted simultaneously by air at "up to 81 nautical miles" distances. Guess that's the most you can do with the Merlin and supporting assets (Wildcat, Apache, Chinook) according to the profile of this particular mission.

https://www.janes.com/article/83138/chf ... rike-group

While going up from 1 to 2 companies, they won't be inserted simultaneously by air. As stated in the video, both companies will be inserted within 6 hours.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Its acceptable as an interim bodge job, the carriers wont be operating near capacity for a long time.

This is where I (too) am coming from.

a LPH at 35,000 ton 235 meters long with a 38 meter width flight deck with up to 8 spots able to carry 30 aircraft

Too many eggs in one basket?
- I would put my vote on that 23.5 kt design that will carry 500 troops (as 2 Bays will carry, each, a Coy with their vehicles... that is what A Cdo has)
- 2 Bays + one of the new... job done
- should we happen to have the second carrier available, then add 1 Coy for recce/ screening (RM?), going in first and another (1 RGR?), to re-enforce any flank that needs it, quickly, through vertical insertation
qv.

won't be inserted simultaneously by air. As stated in the video, both companies will be inserted within 6 hours.

[donald_of_tokyo]

I'm sure it's been said before, but I really don't like that our carriers are also taking on the role of the LPH, in my opinion it simply cannot happen, of course aircraft from the carrier can support groups, with ground attack, maybe helos, but it can/should never do the job. ...

I think using CVF "some times" as a LPH has little problem. USN is operating 45000t LHD America class. 65000t QNLZ is not much different from it. Of course, it is better to have Ocean replacement. But, it will cost RN to ban another few escorts (in addition to the MDP "possible cut" of 2-3 T23s). Comparing big reduction in escort fleet and small problem of using CVF as LPH, I think the latter is very very minor issue.

I even think "2ndary LPH role" could be vital to keep 2 CVFs active. If it is only strike, I'm afraid one may go into mathball, because anyway number of F35B is not that much for a moment = until Albion replacements, and most of the time the 2nd carrier will be almost empty. Very reasonable to take her into reserve, or even sold exported.

[Repulse]

donald_of_tokyo, would reluctantly agree, having the CVFs with secondary amphibious LPH roles is a good use of money already spent. Personally I’d add a smaller CVS as primarily an ASW Carrier (with secondary HADR, PCRS and LPH roles) and the ultimately replace the 2 LPDs and 3 Bays with say 3 larger RFAs with better capacity to operate ship to shore connectors. When you look even at the Garcia class it is a shame that we didn’t go down that route rather than aspire for USMC level amphibious capability only to half complete it due to lack of funds to match the words...

[Lord Jim]

Future improvements to the ARG, if we still have one, will probably have to wait until the 2035-2045 equipment plan at the earliest, with the ships entering service at the back end of the programme but maybe even later.

[Repulse]

Ignoring the WW3 bluster, a number of the papers reporting that a RM Cdo will be deployed to the Artic on an annual basis for at least the next 10 years.

Nothing really unusual as the RMs are the UKs cold weather force, but two points:
- I expect this would take up one of the two Cdos
- there is talk of a setting up a permanent base, forward based have also been mentioned for other regions.

How does this impact the amphibious force? If down to one Cdo for global deployment it means either the UK will go to a part time capability or a move away from a 1,800 man deployable force.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/10247 ... tic-Russia

[jedibeeftrix]

If you believe maintaining 3Cdo as more than a raiding force is necessary (and I appreciate that not all do), what is the most effective minimum force that can achieve 1900 Lead Commando Group?
And do you believe LCVP's have any place in the calculation of surging and sustaining material across a beach as part of the LCG deployment?

To deal with the second question first: I don't. The need to operate further off shore, requiring larger landing craft capable of higher transit speeds, seems to make them redundant. Not that they don't have utility, but that that utility is not directly applicable to the primary ambition. i.e. those davits might just as usefully hold CB90's and LCVP's.

Would 8x Caiman 90 be sufficient, along 10x heli spots?
DIstributed as:
1x LPD with four LCU's
2x Enhanced Bay with two LCU's

[Poiuytrewq]

How does this impact the amphibious force? If down to one Cdo for global deployment it means either the UK will go to a part time capability or a move away from a 1,800 man deployable force.

And therefore also negate the need for a costly Amphibious fleet to project it? Could this be a way of justifying cuts to the Amphibs in the longer term?

[SW1]

The moment the RN decided it wanted to operate 2 cvf above all else, the amphib fleet have been on borrowed time.

[Poiuytrewq]

If you believe maintaining 3Cdo as more than a raiding force is necessary (and I appreciate that not all do), what is the most effective minimum force that can achieve 1900 Lead Commando Group?

I suspect the 'minimum' has been or is being hotly debated within the MDP discussions.

And do you believe LCVP's have any place in the calculation of surging and sustaining material across a beach as part of the LCG deployment?

I think it's vital to maintain an LCVP capability but not in its current form. The CB90's are great for a multitude of tasks but also severely limited in other areas. As you know there are many things an LCVP can do that a CB90 can't. I think the answer is a mix of CB90's and a new generation of LCVP's that can be deployed via a deck crane if necessary. Maybe something approaching the size of an LCM, nudging the SWL of a 40t/50t deck crane.

The need to operate further off shore, requiring larger landing craft capable of higher transit speeds, seems to make them redundant. Not that they don't have utility, but that that utility is not directly applicable to the primary ambition.

I think the LCVP's in their current form are virtually redundant but the next generation could be far more capable. If the LCVP replacements were able to be deployed via a decent deck crane and had a payload capacity of 40t+ it would be a game changer for RN.

...those davits might just as usefully hold CB90's and LCVP's.

It would make sense to have davit deployed CB90's on the Albion's with the LCU's in the well dock and still retain the ability to carry LCVP's and/or LCAC's on deck if required.

Would 8x Caiman 90 be sufficient, along 10x heli spots?
DIstributed as:
1x LPD with four LCU's
2x Enhanced Bay with two LCU's

Sufficient , yes, but ideal? It seems marginal to me.

It appears your proposal is very much in line with current thinking, a mixture of Caimen 90's and CB90's replacing the LCU Mk10's and removing the LCVP capability altogether. I think there are many other options available which should be thoroughly considered before cutting the LCVP capability altogether.

I am also not convinced that 8x Caimen 90's are the fastest way to get 3 Cdo ashore when deploying from OTH.

[Repulse]

I’d argue that in the short term there is the place for the Griffin 8000TD in the mix with LCUs and CB90 type craft.



We need to really see the size of the U.K. ambition to see what is needed for the amphibious platforms. If it’s just raiding or ability to deploy 700 RMs, perhaps keep the 2 LPDs and ultimately ditch the LSDs... controversial though I know

[Tempest414]

Above all we are an Island nation and as such we will need to get our troops into the fight by air and sea and this means more than just the RMs. the Navy and the Airforce will need to get the Army into the fight and we can't always rely on ports and airfields being available and it is not always about putting troop onto a beech but sometimes about getting off it so I maintain that as a base line for the future we will need

1 x LPH
4 x 200m Batch 2 Bays
4 x Point class

I feel this can be achieved on a 2.5 billion pound budget

As for now I feel the 3 Bay class should be refitted with full width hangars as in option 1 on page 44 to allow them to properly operate up to 2 Merlins plus carry 2 LCVP or CB-90 on davits and what ever mix from the well dock also the new hangar block should house the embarked helicopter air and maintenance crews