Albion Class Amphibious Assault Ships (LPD) (RN)

[Repulse]

From what I can gather from your proposal it all depends on having all 5 T31s all 3 LSD and both carriers avalible at the same time. How often will that happen 5-10% of the time.

Which is a Hell of a lot more than the time we will spend doing amphibious ops. We need more than 5 T31es.

[Repulse]

For what? replay's of D-Day are not a game that we should get into. What of covert mobile LCU bases? you make no allowance for them

Agree it would be an extreme situation and only a Falklands 2 or dust up over another remote BOT springs to mind.

What is a mobile LUV base?

[Jake1992]

From what I can gather from your proposal it all depends on having all 5 T31s all 3 LSD and both carriers avalible at the same time. How often will that happen 5-10% of the time.

Which is a Hell of a lot more than the time we will spend doing amphibious ops. We need more than 5 T31es.

I think you've completly missed what my statment was saying.

Sitting there saying we will only do amphibious ops less than 5% of the time so we only need the equipment and vessels 5% of the times is complete folly.

What happens when that 5% of the time we need them doesn't coincide with the 5% of time we have them avalible ? What happens is we get screwed.

It may only ever be needed or used 5% of the time but to make sure we can do it at that time the vessels and equipment need to be avalible 100% of the time, and unfortunately your proposal doesn't allow that so there is a hight chance we'd get screwed

[Repulse]

I’d say the danger is increased with the current LPD / LSD mix. Overall, I’d like to see a balanced fleet of 15 T45/T26s, 15 T31s and 15 MHPCs. It’s really not that far from what is planned anyway and well within the current UK budget.

[james k]

Mobile LCU base. An LCU which lays up in an isolated covert position(s) acting as a floating base from which commando operations can be mounted. They often act in conjunction with LCVP's or ORC's and deliver commando's up and down the enemy coast. In doing so they can tie down many thousands of enemy troops, put the enemy on a defensive footing and act as a disincentive to their taking the initiative.

For what? replay's of D-Day are not a game that we should get into. What of covert mobile LCU bases? you make no allowance for them

Agree it would be an extreme situation and only a Falklands 2 or dust up over another remote BOT springs to mind.

What is a mobile LUV base?

[Repulse]

RFA "LCU" mobile bases sound pretty much what I have in mind to support a first wave attack also. I'd see it as carrying @250 RMs with a flight deck, hangar for 2-3 Helos and davits & well deck to operate LCACs, LCUs, LCVPs, CB90s, and SF fast craft and sub submersibles.

[james k]

RFA LCU? The RFA don't operate LCU. On the rare occasions that LCU do operate from the Bay's it is done by a detachment from the Royal Marines, and then only one. I'm sorry but your outline is so far removed from anything I've seen, taken part in, read about or even heard discussed that I can only assume that you misunderstand the whole concept.

The mobile and covert LCU forward operating base operates from small inlets and areas of natural cover on the coastline; the LCU is the mobile forward operating base, not the ship operating over the horizon. The LPD controls the operations of several FOB's.

LCAC have only the most limited utility because of their noise which cannot be disguised or hidden. What is the obsession with the CB90? it is good but does not fill a capability gap or replace existing capability.

1st wave, 2nd wave? Sounds like a D-Day Normandy invasion scenario and that is firmly a thing of the past, we don't do that and any other nation that tries will soon find out why.

RFA "LCU" mobile bases sound pretty much what I have in mind to support a first wave attack also. I'd see it as carrying @250 RMs with a flight deck, hangar for 2-3 Helos and davits & well deck to operate LCACs, LCUs, LCVPs, CB90s, and SF fast craft and sub submersibles.

[marktigger]

and how do you plan to transport the LCU's to an operational theatre?

the LPD is probably the most efficient way of moving LCU's over open ocean's

[james k]

It's the only way to move LCU's and control the operations. No LPD then no amphibious ops.

and how do you plan to transport the LCU's to an operational theatre?

the LPD is probably the most efficient way of moving LCU's over open ocean's

[marktigger]

It's the only way to move LCU's and control the operations. No LPD then no amphibious ops.

and how do you plan to transport the LCU's to an operational theatre?

the LPD is probably the most efficient way of moving LCU's over open ocean's

or an LHD or LHA

[ArmChairCivvy]

1st wave, 2nd wave? Sounds like a D-Day Normandy invasion scenario

Don't know what your thinking is, but the separator is most likely speed rather than anything else. Is there any more capacity than a Coy by chopper and another in the faster LCVPs, simultaneously as the 1st wave, but most likely to different objectives.
- then, tug-tug-tug, LCUs with not only men but also with vehicles (2nd wave)

Still not much of a force. Hence I quote Hutch from the comments to one of TD's posts:
" a full spectrum Port Enabling Capability, with ends defined as being able to project over a bear beach, through austere ports to off loading at a well-found one. We have survey capability (STRE), ship-to-shore capability, EOD and dive experts, plant and lighterage. What’s new, and not covered in your article, is that we have harnessed a wider array of commercial options with the requirement and partnership we have with Solent Gateway Ltd. There is a Whole Force aspect to this new contract that enables us to supplement existing military means."

Aa-hah: a Cdo to secure the area, through which a Strike brigade can flow... err: to strike to objective

Well, Strike Bde (the first one) is still embryonic in its SEG form and also the above referenced "instant port" to support the opening of a lodgement capability also still seems to be in its formative stages, just looking at the recruitment add:
"people we are looking for will be Sponsored Reserves who will be employed as civilian port operators and supervisors but will have a joint Army Reserve role.
- As Sponsored Reserves you will be part of 165 Port and Maritime Regiment, Royal Logistics Corp based at Marchwood and may be required to deploy overseas as required."

[Repulse]

RFA LCU? The RFA don't operate LCU. On the rare occasions that LCU do operate from the Bay's it is done by a detachment from the Royal Marines, and then only one. I'm sorry but your outline is so far removed from anything I've seen, taken part in, read about or even heard discussed that I can only assume that you misunderstand the whole concept.

Sorry, you are right that I misunderstood the concept. For me though a forward base T31 with RMs & ORCs/LCVPs would be a better solution.

[donald_of_tokyo]

Sorry, you are right that I misunderstood the concept. For me though a forward base T31 with RMs & ORCs/LCVPs would be a better solution.

I have 2 comments here.

1: By distributing the landing force to "platoon" level (in T31e case), we are losing scale merit, significantly. So, if RN is to go for "many T31e with LCVP for landing", it MUST be associated with NEW doctrine, such as landing 3-6 RM platoons in very distributed area, maybe 10 km away each = 20-50 km wide landing beach. Is this practical? On the other hand, if RM is landing in a single beach, losing the scale merit will kill all the merit of having T31e equipped with LCVP than a single LPD, I'm afraid.

Another idea will be, RN/RM stop company-level (or more) landing operation and just focus on SF operations world-wide. Using SBS/SAS and SF-trained-RM platoons there, supported by ORCs and LCVP makes sense. I also think this approach will be nice to destroy some enemy firepower/watch to SUPPORT the main landing force. But in the latter case, still the main landing force is needed.

2: Anyway, the new concept must be tested. We do not need to wait for T31e for this. River B1 and B2 vessels can imitate T31e in most part. Regarding the "landing" operation, Rivers (especially B2s) are only lacking hangar and LCVP, and have everything other. For hangar, no need in exercise, for LCVP just use River B1 or call a PSV.

[shark bait]

It's the only way to move LCU's and control the operations. No LPD then no amphibious ops.

How do you reach that conclusion? There a handful of other platforms used to transport landing craft.

[james k]

LHA can't carry LCU's. Aviation isn't a replacement for landing craft

It's the only way to move LCU's and control the operations. No LPD then no amphibious ops.

and how do you plan to transport the LCU's to an operational theatre?

the LPD is probably the most efficient way of moving LCU's over open ocean's

or an LHD or LHA

[james k]

1st wave, 2nd wave? Sounds like a D-Day Normandy invasion scenario! Helicopters have no stealth, they are noisy and easily seen by radar. Why do you keep going back to a D-Day - Normandy invasion scenario? 1st wave, 2nd wave it's as close to reality as my chances of getting off my behind and passing SAS selection in my mid 50's! Before a large scale landing force of that type came within striking distance the amphibious assets would be within range of enemy air power and we've experienced how dangerous that was with a second rate air force like Argentina! The only way to successfully carry out large scale amphibious landings is to control the air and with the choice of F35's operating in small numbers (even smaller if or when the RAF suddenly become unavailable because they don't have sufficient pilots trained to operate from carriers and support crew trained to survive on warships) against an advanced and well equipped air force, we can't do that.

Don't know what your thinking is, but the separator is most likely speed rather than anything else. Is there any more capacity than a Coy by chopper and another in the faster LCVPs, simultaneously as the 1st wave, but most likely to different objectives.
- then, tug-tug-tug, LCUs with not only men but also with vehicles (2nd wave)

17 Port and Maritime Regiment practice and plan for this along with the RE specialist port teams, they even have a Port Reconnaissance Team to assess damage; With their manpower available and the low level of training given to it it will take up to six weeks to get a port operating not least because SD have replaced RMAS and there is no tug or salvage capacity available during wartime operations. Ship to shore capability has been whittled away, with fewer Mexefloats available and only enough workboats to operate Marchwood SMC plus 1 deployed. There are few Combat Support Boats and the RPL's have gone! The dive team of 17 Regt is small and the support dive team from it's twinned reserve regiment does not exist because the MOD no longer have the funds to pay for reservist diving courses. The RNR have a diving branch again, providing that the divers have become PADI qualified at their own expense, but there is no money to pay for salvage/reclamation/EOD training so all they can do is search. It's a Damned Nonsense!

Still not much of a force. Hence I quote Hutch from the comments to one of TD's posts:
" a full spectrum Port Enabling Capability, with ends defined as being able to project over a bear beach, through austere ports to off loading at a well-found one. We have survey capability (STRE), ship-to-shore capability, EOD and dive experts, plant and lighterage. What’s new, and not covered in your article, is that we have harnessed a wider array of commercial options with the requirement and partnership we have with Solent Gateway Ltd. There is a Whole Force aspect to this new contract that enables us to supplement existing military means."

Back to Normandy then? can we all dress up in Battledress and fire Lee Enfields as well?

A

a-hah: a Cdo to secure the area, through which a Strike brigade can flow... err: to strike to objective

Strike Brigade or Infantry Brigade with minimal manpower and not enough equipment?

Well, Strike Bde (the first one) is still embryonic in its SEG form and also the above referenced "instant port" to support the opening of a lodgement capability also still seems to be in its formative stages, just looking at the recruitment add:

165 no longer has many Sponsored Reserves (Specialists) since it took over a number of other RLC units and moved down to the West Country. It's level of military training is at best inadequate with just one weekend a year given to basic military skills. 266 Squadron is the prime port operator but half it's port ops work at Southampton docks, so in the case of a serious military conflict 165 can only deploy at the expense of operating capacity in one of the nations major ports.

"people we are looking for will be Sponsored Reserves who will be employed as civilian port operators and supervisors but will have a joint Army Reserve role.
- As Sponsored Reserves you will be part of 165 Port and Maritime Regiment, Royal Logistics Corp based at Marchwood and may be required to deploy overseas as required."

[/quote]

[james k]

Your plan adds complexity and increases the movement of men and vessels, as well as increasing radio traffic, all adding to the chances of the enemy beating you to the landing spot or locating covert LUP's.
[/quote]

Sorry, you are right that I misunderstood the concept. For me though a forward base T31 with RMs & ORCs/LCVPs would be a better solution.[/quote]

[james k]

Bays carry 1 LCU each and LCVP on deck at the expense of stores and equipment. We have no other ships that carry LCU

It's the only way to move LCU's and control the operations. No LPD then no amphibious ops.

How do you reach that conclusion? There a handful of other platforms used to transport landing craft.

[shark bait]

.......and a mexeflote on the side.

There are alternatives for transporting landing craft, LPD's are not the only solution.

[james k]

Mexefloat are for stores and vehicles not men. What alternatives are there for carrying and operating LCU's? because we certainly don't have them

.......and a mexeflote on the side.

There are alternatives for transporting landing craft, LPD's are not the only solution.

[R686]

Mexefloat are for stores and vehicles not men. What alternatives are there for carrying and operating LCU's? because we certasinly don't have them

.......and a mexeflote on the side.

There are alternatives for transporting landing craft, LPD's are not the only solution.

Also in low sea state, ive never seen a mexe picture in the surf zone. look how calm the beachheads were in the Falkland's campaign

[S M H]

Also in low sea state, ive never seen a mexe picture in the surf zone. look how calm the beachheads were in the Falkland's campaign

That was one reason for the landing spot. Never liked going alongside with them in any swell you had to keep 30 deg bearing run-in from the hull when going along side. With your fingers crossed and swing out just before going astern to go along side on the sheltered side. Murder in any swell. Bob Brown who had years of experience as a coxswain lost a A. T. Land rover of a mexe float at Dourness bay(Cape Wrath). When the tie down eye came out of the land rover in the surf doing a beaching Using them in place of landing craft in any weather would be a none starter.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Sir Humphrey has already worked out a way forward:

" If the RN requirement is for a command platform, then working with the French is a great way to achieve it "
- RFA logistics ships tugging along, behind the C&C platform

[R686]

Sir Humphrey has already worked out a way forward:

" If the RN requirement is for a command platform, then working with the French is a great way to achieve it "
- RFA logistics ships tugging along, behind the C&C platform

What happens when the Frogs decide they don't want to do what you are doing and take their bat and ball and go home

[Caribbean]

providing that the divers have become PADI qualified at their own expense

PADI. Seriously? BSAC Sport Diver as a minimum, surely. BSAC standards were originally derived from UK military diving. I wouldn't trust the average PADI "diver" in anything deeper than a puddle. I had around 40 "practice" dives (all open-water) under my belt before I qualified as a BSAC third-class diver and a further 25 before I was classed as a Dive Leader (formerly experienced third class diver - they changed the terminology while I was qualifying). I seem to remember several rather tough written exams in the process, plus a lot of first-aid training - CPR, surface mouth-to-nose, treatment of drowning, hypothermia, bends, wounds and fractures etc), life-saving, deep rescue (controlled bouyant lift, buddy breathing), all tested practically), ditch and retrieve in 15m of water, memorising the dive tables so you could recalculate bottom time on your slate, while on the bottom (no dive computers back then) and also having to do stints in the compressor room. My daughter qualified as a PADI "Resort Diver" after two weekends, four dives and a multiple-choice exam. And she didn't have to carry her own gear.
I know that the upper levels of the PADI system have pretty decent standards, but the lower levels don't and they have a higher incidence of fatal accidents than BSAC. I live on a "US dive destination" island - we have plenty of accidents here. The hyperbaric chamber is in use about once a week, with about one fatal a month in high season (usually drowning or cardiac arrest, rather than the bends, to be fair). Different philosophies, I guess - BSAC is more focussed on safety in difficult waters, PADI is about getting in the water as fast as possible