New U.S. Navy Sea Base Plan Includes Assault Ships

Status
Not open for further replies.

280PLUS

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Messages
3,349
Location
gunnecticut
DefenseNews.com
July 14, 2005
New U.S. Navy Sea Base Plan Includes Assault Ships
By Christopher P. Cavas
The future makeup of the U.S. Navy’s new Sea Base squadrons has been dramatically changed, moving from a collection of modified prepositioning ships based on commercial designs to include three large-deck assault ships per squadron and modified versions of Navy supply ships.

Up to nine LHD or LHA(R) big-deck assault ships are included in the plan — three per squadron. Those ships would be beyond current fleet requirements, which call for about nine to 11 assault ships to deploy Marine Expeditionary Units.

How many squadrons are needed for the plan is not yet clear, according to the Navy, but the number is “between one and three,” service spokesman Capt. Tom Van Leunen said July 14. He called the new plan a “significant” change from previous ideas.

The revision could be a boon for shipbuilders, particularly Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, which has built all 13 of the Navy’s assault ships, and General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding (NASSCO) in San Diego, which is building the new T-AKE dry cargo ammunition ships and has built a number of T-AKR roll-on/roll-off ships for the current pre-positioning forces.

Details of the new plan were provided to Congress June 6, when Navy acquisition chief John Young sent a report to the chairmen of the House and Senate defense committees. Further details appeared in a briefing for Congress prepared by the Marine Corps. Copies of each report were obtained by Defense News.

As now envisioned by the Navy, the plan includes:
• Two LHA(R) large-deck amphibious ships fitted with Marine Expeditionary Brigade command-and-control facilities.
• One LHD amphibious ship, fitted for aviation command and control.
• Three modified LMSR roll-on/roll-off ships, similar to those now in service with joint prepositioning forces.
• Three Combat Logistic Force ships, variants of the T-AKE dry cargo ammunition ships now under construction at NASSCO.
• Three Mobile Landing Platform ships, a new type able to embark 1,112 Marines.
• Two “dense packed” ships, using prepositioning ships already in service.
Van Leunen emphasized that although Navy and Marine Corps leaders have signed off on the new plan, no official proposals have been released to industry to build the new ships. Initial briefings on the plan to top Pentagon leaders have been “received positively,” he said, but the scheme is still “awaiting formal approval.”
 
The Navy is really going to try to get us the money?

I guess they are really buying into littoral warfare and letting slip their dreams of fleet action with another major power.

Whoda thunk it. :eek:
 
I just wonder who the Navy is invisioning as their future opponent?

Possibly an Asian campaign? Support in Taiwan or Korea?


That is alot of iron that they can carry....speaking of which, have the Marines started following the Army as far as the Stryker ACV?

I am guessing they will want to because its lighter and can fit more into the RO-RO's....
 
The Navy is getting too dangerous.
These ocean going vehicles have no sporting purpose.

I think Congress should approve an Assault Ship Ban immediately!

It's For The Children.
 
That is alot of iron that they can carry....speaking of which, have the Marines started following the Army as far as the Stryker ACV?

Correction there highspeed. ;)

The ARMY is the one realigning their heavy divisions to mirror Marine combined arms battalions (MEU) and brigades (MEB). And the Striker ACV bears a surprising resemblence to the Marine LAV (in use for over a decade at least) does it not?

They can "Follow" my 4th point of contact. :evil:
 
And the Striker ACV bears a surprising resemblence to the Marine LAV (in use for over a decade at least) does it not?
General Dynamics (builder of the Stryker and LAV) dropped the LAV's swim equipment and upped the armor to arrive at the Stryker design, along with making it larger.
 
I guess when Navy saw the Army buy their own developmental ship for concept work they saw the world in whole different light.

We will always have a need for blue water navies, perhaps now more than ever. What we need is more brown water capabilities.
 
I have heard a lot of talk about riverine forces being stood up in the near future. If so, I would expect the Navy to make a formal proposal soon. I believe ADM Clark is a proponent of the idea as is his sucessor, ADM Mullen. Having served on Destroyers, Cruisers and Frigates, I have been exceptionally impressed by the capabilitites of the LHD class. They are definitely capable ships.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top