tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post4447573406358760187..comments2024-03-28T07:56:09.239-07:00Comments on Navy Matters: DOT&E - LPD-17ComNavOpshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-25010679643691268942014-01-31T09:37:43.848-08:002014-01-31T09:37:43.848-08:00Make that 11x LPD-17s... Based on reflexive assum...Make that 11x LPD-17s... Based on reflexive assumptions from a while back. No change in the argument though !TwentyTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15935410307831357488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-47013604367857222192014-01-31T07:54:04.921-08:002014-01-31T07:54:04.921-08:00- Building Hulls should not be the challenge.
- Th...- Building Hulls should not be the challenge.<br />- The drive-train is a somewhat modernized current version of the 4-Diesels-on-2-shaft-to-variable-pitch-props geometry proven in the 1980-90s 12-vessel LSD-41/49 classes<br /><br />Self-defense systems, very important at 12-25nm inshore, would matter much less with the ARG protected by sheer distance at OTH-100-200.<br /><br />Still too big and expensive, with too many eggs in each basket.<br /><br />One alternative that has come up is that <br />- corrected for inflation,<br />- at 2012-14 SLEP-levels of modernization (e.g. all electric systems),<br />- even with modest radar-signature-reduction,<br />a re-run of the updated smaller LSD-41 class would come in at $650-700 million.<br /><br />Cheaper and smaller (16,800 vs. 25,000tons) LSD-41/21 would allow fewer eggs per basket, with more baskets greater forward-deployment flexibility.<br /><br />And most importantly, able to carry 6x preloaded LCU-F, ten LSD-41/21 would offer 60 LCU-Fs versus the current twelve LPD-17 offering just 24 LCU-Fs due to their 'shorty' well-deck.<br /><br />LPD-17 can carry a lot more into the theater than LSD-41 - BUT can not actually bring that assault-load to the shore in any tactically-effective fashion due to the 'shorty' well-deck, allowing for only 2 LCAC or 1x LCU-1610.<br /><br />Designers of LPD-17 had clearly dismissed <br />- the relevance of ship-to-shore heavy-lift capacity (astonishing, really !!);<br /><br />- assumed no further development in shore-defense capabilities (more astonishing !!) with the class's incapacity to field enough lift to allow the vessels to move further out to OTH-75/100/150/200;<br /><br />- clearly assumed the eternal presence of a Carrier-Group to somehow protect the ARG this close to shore, even though DDGs would really want to be further out... quite apart from the time-, logistics-, and political-issues of getting a CSG 'in time' (?) to where a rapid intervention may be called for pronto. That is, if you are willing to risk a Carrier in support of an under-evolved amphibious doctrine based on 12nm ship-to-shore distance...<br /><br />Good thing, that the ARG stand-off distances may be significantly moved upwards. <br /><br />But that would require matching Connector-capacity... which LPD-17 might offer a modest additional of with 2 LCU-Fs (versus 1x LCU-1610) with an LCAC perhaps on a cross-transom davit, making for 24 LCU-Fs plus 12 LCACs for that LPD-class of 12 vessels. <br /><br />Better than nothing, like some well-deck-free or eternally dry well-deck flavors on offer...<br /><br />Considering the strategic and tactical opportunities in at least 1.5-1.8 long-well-deck LSD-41/21 per single 'shorty' LPD-17 building again that late 1970s-early '80s design seems quite attractive indeed. After all, offering 6x go-fast heavy-lift Connectors versus 1x or 2x would seem to reflect the USMC's needs more than fewer bigger 'comfy' baskets at mega-cost.<br /><br />Connectors matter as they structure the amphib.-ship design and life-time cost-effectiveness in so many ways.<br /><br />What is comforting is that no other navy is even remotely as coherent at the USN/USMC team despite these dissonances in vessel-conceptualization such as in LPD-17 or well-deck-'free' 'amphibs'... TwentyTwentyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15935410307831357488noreply@blogger.com