Current & Future Amphibious Capability - General Discussion

[ArmChairCivvy]

The expanded Bay class would each need to carry 2 x LCU

- may be for the Ebola ambulance service (the 1st of the new class)
- when under fire, there is more of a hurry - bad joke, I know, both situations are serious - and this one http://www.defenseworld.net/news/11955/ ... ZdkfemQzIU
should let the LCUs finally retire in the 2030's... what happened to our own prototype, btw? The one that was too noisy and expensive, but otherwise(?) good. We use Chinooks for air assault - you sure hear them coming, and you know it is a Chinook, too

[Repulse]

In the short term it makes no sense to build completely new. Keep Argus and build another Enforcer Bay carrying LCUs (if they are really needed over LCMs).

[Repulse]

A good idea; but hospital ships cannot carry combat kit

I'm thinking that the PCRS role is diminished into enhanced hospital facilities on a LHD.

Good point on the CASD, wanted to illustrate a difference if priorities- to me the MH(P)C replacement is as big as the T26.

[Aethulwulf]

I believe the UK doesn't go in for 'hospital ships' as such ships are prohibited from carrying any military equipment - even military comms. Hence why RFA Argus is a nice grey colour and so will any replacement.

While Argus is a fine ship, she does have a number of issues (aside from just her age) that any replacement plan will need to address. The most fundamental is she is a single ship class and the UK's only maritime Role 3 capability. If for any reason she is damaged or unavailable then the UK could either have to stop military ops or rely upon R3 facilities from a nearby friendly nation.

Also, her design only allows for stretcher cases to be brought onboard by helicopter. There is no way that stretcher cases can be safely transfered aboard from a landing craft or other work boat and neither, when she is alongside, can ambulances drive onboard.

By fitting R3 medical facilities to two enhanced Bay class ships you solve these problems. Such a ship would also be much larger (and more stable) than a dedicated R3 ship. Once the Enhanced Bay had off loaded her RMs in any amphibious op, a large number of other bunks would become available for low dependency patients.

Aside from the military use, such a ship would also be excellent from HADR missions.

[ArmChairCivvy]

By fitting R3 medical facilities to two enhanced Bay class ships you solve these problems. Such a ship would also be much larger (and more stable) than a dedicated R3 ship.

The new Trieste in Italy will have quite extensive facilities fitted. I guess it is that size argument, plus the fact that the aviation facilities "come paid for".

[Jake1992]

A couple of large LHDs like Italy's Trieste would be perfect to replace the Albions and argus in the amphibious aviation training and hospital facilities but is no good for the forward repair.

A pair of large LHDs to replace the Albions, argus and ocean ( lusty aswell since she did LPH ) would works well 2 for 5
You could then add 2 modified bay style vessels to replace Diligance and argus 2 for 2
This in the long run would replace 6 for 4 and give us over better capablities in each area, greater amphibious, far greater aviation training, far greater hospital facilities and a great forward repair ( able to stabilise larger vessels easier as well as giving a 100% capablity )

[Aethulwulf]

By fitting R3 medical facilities to two enhanced Bay class ships you solve these problems. Such a ship would also be much larger (and more stable) than a dedicated R3 ship.

The new Trieste in Italy will have quite extensive facilities fitted. I guess it is that size argument, plus the fact that the aviation facilities "come paid for".

I'm not sure if the new Trieste will have R2 or R3 medical facilities, it's difficult to tell from the information I have seen as it is not as simple as counting the number of beds. (QNLZ has a R2 medical facility). The difference between R2 and R3 is the medical capability and team. R2 can undertake immediate life saving surgery whereas R3 has more complex capabilities. An example is with burns injuries: a R2 facility should be able to carry out the interventions needed to keep the patient alive; a R3 facility will have a plastic surgeon and be able to start the patient on the road to recovery.

Before any military op, an intelligence assessment will be made of the likely number and type of casualties to be expected. Unless there is a plan and the facilities to cope with these casualties, the op can not go ahead. Medical facilities are a critical but often overlooked part of military ops and there is a lot of interdependency between NATO partners.

[Aethulwulf]

The expanded Bay class would each need to carry 2 x LCU

- may be for the Ebola ambulance service (the 1st of the new class)
- when under fire, there is more of a hurry - bad joke, I know, both situations are serious - and this one http://www.defenseworld.net/news/11955/ ... ZdkfemQzIU
should let the LCUs finally retire in the 2030's... what happened to our own prototype, btw? The one that was too noisy and expensive, but otherwise(?) good. We use Chinooks for air assault - you sure hear them coming, and you know it is a Chinook, too

Regarding LCUs or LCMs, there is no hard and fast definition, with countries differing in the use of the term.

When I said I'd like the Enhanced Bays to each have 2 LCUs, what I really meant was that across 3 such ships I'd like the capability to launch a RM protected mobility company ashore by sea in a single wave. At the moment, this requires 6 LCU Mk10s.

What the future LCU Mk11 looks like is a matter for debate - except everyone wants it to be faster so that it can operate further from shore. I think Japan are studying the BMT Caimen-90 tri-bow monohull design, which looks quite good.

A LCM could also have some uses (Caimen-60?). It is possible that a ship with a large mission bay would be able to launch 2 or 4 such LCMs by crane. If such a ship could carry a company of RM, they could be part of the initial phase of any landing and help to 'shape' or sanitise the area prior the arrival of the main force in LCUs - allowing the LCUs to be launched from closer to shore.

[Timmymagic]

what happened to our own prototype, btw?

PACSCAT? It was up for sale for a while for £600k (offers were invited though). Then they sold off the engines, which were then removed. Not sure where it is now, probably scrapped, can't imagine a one off prototype landing ship has any value sans engines.

[ArmChairCivvy]

, what I really meant was that across 3 such ships I'd like the capability to launch a RM protected mobility company ashore by sea in a single wave. At the moment, this requires 6 LCU Mk10s.

We are after the same thing. But those are v big ships (not too fast either?) and would not come too close to shore (initially). The problem with the American "Hawaii super-ferries" is that even though they do 43 knots, the vehicles would need to swim ashore. Hence my earlier
" What I see coming is: stealthy ships, smaller than the Albions, able to come close to shore and carry the French type fast ship-to-shore "connectors"... which are not small (*), so to be able to load one with vehicles and , simultaneously, two more with troops only using side loading would make the ships' shape fairly longish, which in its turn would help with a stealthy, low form"
- still, if you load all internally, rather than taking turns, each company would initially come ashore with just two vehicles
- so for two vessels, make it: 1 command, 1 ambulance, 2 fire support

[ArmChairCivvy]

Something like this (smaller, though) where you don't need a well bay nor craning over the sides; rather, lower both the "LCUs" and then their load onto them (to manage one-off weight) through the deck http://www.hydrolance.net/RO-RO-container-FastShips.htm

[R686]

One option is to replace the 2 x Albion and 3 x Bay with 4 ships based on an enhanced Bay design.

The expanded Bay class would each need to carry 2 x LCU, have a two-spot (Chinook) flight deck, 1100 LIM, 700-750 PAX and a hanger for 2 Merlins.

3 of these expanded Bays, together with PoW as the LPH and a couple of Point RoRo, would have the capacity for a Lead Cdo Group.

In addition, 2 out of the 4 Enhanced Bays can be fitted with a R3 hospital to replace Argus. The other 2 could have an enhanced C&C fit.

would it not be easier to just build a couple of Galicia class lpd and with a plug perhaps?

[Aethulwulf]

Yes, the Galicia class LPD and the Bay class are from the same basic Enforcer design. The Galicia class only has 360 LIM and 600 Pax capacity, so it would need to be a bit bigger - perhaps increasing the length, the beam and adding a mezzanine vehicle deck.

Galicia class has a 1000 sq m vehicle deck (approx 50 m x 20 m). Expand this to 65 m x 25 m and add a similar sized mezzanine level for light vehicles will give the required LIM space. The current Galicia is 166m long x 25 m beam. So the revised ship might be about 181m x 30 m (ish).

[ArmChairCivvy]

The expanded Bay class would each need to carry 2 x LCU, have a two-spot (Chinook) flight deck, 1100 LIM, 700-750 PAX and a hanger for 2 Merlins.

3 of these expanded Bays, together with PoW as the LPH

That would be a third of a bde, sustaining itself over 30 days (even though vehicles and supplies tend to be direct substitutes for each other as for eating up available LIM).
- as it is generally accepted that (at a pinch) a bde can generate 3 BGs, we do get to "tick" the check sum
- a fairly light unit, but well endowed as for helicopters (Merlins, Chinook, Apache, even the Wildcats seem to be counted in on the carrier)

So, we are down to a third from the old target (that all the shipping, save for the carriers, was built for). You can add the Albions (if they can both be made available, they would bring "the other" Cdo - and the Points that really only become useful when a harbour has been taken/ made available close enough, so be they for sustaining or bringing in "an army bde"... that all depends.

[Caribbean]

One option is to replace the 2 x Albion and 3 x Bay with 4 ships based on an enhanced Bay design.

The expanded Bay class would each need to carry 2 x LCU, have a two-spot (Chinook) flight deck, 1100 LIM, 700-750 PAX and a hanger for 2 Merlins.

Sounds like the HNLMS Johan de Witt might be slightly closer - 10 metres longer than the Galicias, with 2 x LCU dock (plus 4 x LCVP/RHIBs on davits and a 2 x Chinook/ 6 x NH90 hangar). Only 555 PAX, though.

[ArmChairCivvy]

2 x Chinook/ 6 x NH90 hangar

Are you sure about that bit? The bigger JSS (KD) has 2 Chinooks (deck)/ 4 NH90 (hangar)

[Repulse]

A LCM could also have some uses (Caimen-60?). It is possible that a ship with a large mission bay would be able to launch 2 or 4 such LCMs by crane. If such a ship could carry a company of RM, they could be part of the initial phase of any landing and help to 'shape' or sanitise the area prior the arrival of the main force in LCUs - allowing the LCUs to be launched from closer to shore.

I'd argue you could convert the current Bay class to carry LCMs. With overload capability of 700. Assuming a couple of the Griffin hovercraft can operate from the well deck, this would give the ability to deploy a mixed force from 2 hovercraft, 2 LCVPs and 2 LCMs, per platform.

The Caiman 60 look good BTW.

An alternative future fleet could be 4 Bays (perhaps Oz will sell thier's back?) and keep Ocean and Argus in the short term to be replaced by a larger LHD as a third flattop / PCRS.

[ArmChairCivvy]

I'd argue you could convert the current Bay class to carry LCMs.

- but you didn't; have you looked at the detail?

Also, the trade of hovercraft for LCU is a bad one (if it is not an overnight raid... and then quickly out).

LCUs have unique capacity ( that is why they were left out of the brief of the review of ship-to-shore connectors... that we have not heard anything of since its launch), but they also have a known problem: speed. or more like "turnaround time given the distance to shore".

[marktigger]

log build up needs the LCU and mexefloat and without logistics in place an op is going nowhere

[shark bait]

there is the option of no logistics hub to build up, instead going straight from the store ship to where its needed.

[Repulse]

- but you didn't; have you looked at the detail?

Also, the trade of hovercraft for LCU is a bad one (if it is not an overnight raid... and then quickly out).

HMNZS Canterbury can carry two LCMs on deck deployed by crane, there is no reason why the Bays cannot do the same.



Yes, LCUs can carry approx 25% more, but could still be made to work if landing a Challenger 2 across the beach is taken out of the equation.

I never meant replace LCU with hovercraft, just a question if they could be launched via the vehicle deck and we'll dock.

[ArmChairCivvy]

just a question if they could be launched via the vehicle deck and we'll dock.

A good point; they could hover down the ramp, into the water... so they could be "extras"

That Cbury layout needs two cranes; that's what I meant by detail (they need the cranes anyway for HADR, so no harm done in their case; except that the "ferry" needed extra ballast anyway and top-heaviness must have only got worse... how many more tons of concrete did that take?)

[Repulse]

Canterbury is less than half that of a Bay, so would hope top weight would be less of an issue - maybe even able to keep the temporary hangar in the middle for a Wildcat or two for SFs.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Canterbury is less than half that of a Bay

Works both ways: how big would a single, centered crane need to be, to handle the desired craft over the side and into the water over either side?

I am of course only teasing (out the detail) as
"Cargo handling systems include two 30t upper deck cranes for freight and cargo handling. The cranes are used for the transfer of equipment to landing craft or to the Mexeflotes deployed alongside.

A floodable dock capable of operating one LCU mk10 utility landing craft is installed in the stern. A Mexeflote is secured to each side of the ship. The ship can also carry and operate two LCVP mk5 vehicle / personnel landing craft.

The Bay Class will support an embarked military force (EMF) of 350 fully equipped troops "

Does not do away with the problem that we started with: only one LCU (+33% more capacity than the "favoured" "deck alternative"), but which, in itself, is too slow for the evolved CONOPS.

[Caribbean]

2 x Chinook/ 6 x NH90 hangar

Are you sure about that bit? The bigger JSS (KD) has 2 Chinooks (deck)/ 4 NH90 (hangar)

Yes - I'm quoting wiki, so accept that it may be inaccurate, however I have have seen it said elsewhere . I think the JSS is more focussed on the re-supply role and may have given up some hangar space to accommodate the RAS rigs.