Amphibious Ready Group (ARG), light carriers CVL als basis ipv LHD

Gestart door Harald, 13/02/2017 | 14:49 uur

Ace1


Ace1

Citaat van: Umbert op 23/09/2020 | 11:03 uur
Ze willen dus een schip dat op de JSS lijkt maar dan met een well deck en/of flatdeck. En dat ook nog eens een behoorlijke bewapening heeft. Wordt een duur schip

Dit is het concept wat ze willen.










Umbert

Citaat van: Harald op 23/09/2020 | 11:12 uur
Nee,
Ik dacht ook eerst in die richting of een eigenlijk meer een XO achtig ontwerp, maar ... lengte is maar 200 voet = ca. 60 meter
Zie onderstaand voor de specificaties van LAW



OK dank U

Ace1


Sparkplug

Citaat van: Umbert op 23/09/2020 | 11:03 uur
Ze willen dus een schip dat op de JSS lijkt maar dan met een well deck en/of flatdeck. En dat ook nog eens een behoorlijke bewapening heeft. Wordt een duur schip

Citaat van: Harald op 23/09/2020 | 11:12 uur
Nee,
Ik dacht ook eerst in die richting of een eigenlijk meer een XO achtig ontwerp, maar ... lengte is maar 200 voet = ca. 60 meter
.../...

Zie reactie #141 voor artikel en rapport over Light Amphibious Warship (LAW).
A fighter without a gun . . . is like an airplane without a wing.

-- Brigadier General Robin Olds, USAF.

Harald

Citaat van: Umbert op 23/09/2020 | 11:03 uur
Ze willen dus een schip dat op de JSS lijkt maar dan met een well deck en/of flatdeck.

Nee,
Ik dacht ook eerst in die richting of een eigenlijk meer een XO achtig ontwerp, maar ... lengte is maar 200 voet = ca. 60 meter
Zie onderstaand voor de specificaties van LAW


Umbert

Citaat van: Harald op 23/09/2020 | 10:28 uur
Marine Corps' Builds New Littoral Regiment, Eye On Fake Chinese Islands

The Corps is looking for a unit that is "very low signature and that give us the firepower that we need to be a relevant force that provides consequences, should we get past the deterrence phase,"  Maj. Gen. Kevin Iiams, assistant deputy commandant of Combat Development, said.

The Marine Corps is moving quickly to develop a new kind of infantry unit to challenge Chinese claims on small islands in the Pacific, while the Navy is developing new and smaller ships to move and supply them once they deploy.

The new Littoral Regiments won't be fully fleshed out for several years, but Marine Corps leaders said today they will be bolstered by logistics and air defense battalions once they're ready to go.

The Corps is wargaming "what assets would we be able to place in that battle space that are very low signature and that give us the firepower that we need to be a relevant force that provides consequences, should we get past the deterrence phase,"  Maj. Gen. Kevin Iiams, assistant deputy commandant of Combat Development, told reporters at the virtual Modern Day Marine event today.

The Corps envisions three new regiments, with two based in Japan and one in Guam.

Plans call for the regiment to undergo wargames and experimentation for about three years until a unit is fleshed out and ready to actually deploy.

"Much like our [Marine air-ground task forces] that we have now, there are support elements to it," Iiams said. "So, we'll have a littoral combat team; we'll have a littoral logistics battalion; and we'll have an anti-air battalion," Iiams added.

The units are part of the Corps' effort to move toward building a fast-moving, hard to detect "inside force" that can operate within range of Chinese and Russian weapons ranges while packing a potent offensive punch.

Over the summer, the Navy met with shipbuilders to talk about plans for a new class of logistics ship that can operate under fire and resupply Marines deep within the range of enemy precision weapons. The Next Generation Medium Logistics Ship would resupply both ships at sea, as well as small, ad hoc bases ashore.

There is also the Light Amphibious Warship, or LAW, which the Navy is working to define, which will be able to carry Marines as well as fuel and supplies — but also have the capability to share information with other parts of the fleet hundreds of miles away. "I see these LAWs as part of Marine organizations," Marine Maj. Gen. Tracy King said last month, adding, "and those larger Marine organizations being part of an Expeditionary Strike Group — that's a little bit new. We're evolving not only the stuff that we're acquiring, but the way in which we're going to use it and the way in which we're going to fight it."

The Navy and Marines eventually hope to build over twenty LAWs, if the designs and cost per ship works out.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/marine-corps-builds-new-littoral-regiment-eye-on-fake-chinese-islands/?_ga=2.81554258.472312592.1600848183-855280167.1506406488

Ze willen dus een schip dat op de JSS lijkt maar dan met een well deck en/of flatdeck. En dat ook nog eens een behoorlijke bewapening heeft. Wordt een duur schip

Harald

Marine Corps' Builds New Littoral Regiment, Eye On Fake Chinese Islands

The Corps is looking for a unit that is "very low signature and that give us the firepower that we need to be a relevant force that provides consequences, should we get past the deterrence phase,"  Maj. Gen. Kevin Iiams, assistant deputy commandant of Combat Development, said.

The Marine Corps is moving quickly to develop a new kind of infantry unit to challenge Chinese claims on small islands in the Pacific, while the Navy is developing new and smaller ships to move and supply them once they deploy.

The new Littoral Regiments won't be fully fleshed out for several years, but Marine Corps leaders said today they will be bolstered by logistics and air defense battalions once they're ready to go.

The Corps is wargaming "what assets would we be able to place in that battle space that are very low signature and that give us the firepower that we need to be a relevant force that provides consequences, should we get past the deterrence phase,"  Maj. Gen. Kevin Iiams, assistant deputy commandant of Combat Development, told reporters at the virtual Modern Day Marine event today.

The Corps envisions three new regiments, with two based in Japan and one in Guam.

Plans call for the regiment to undergo wargames and experimentation for about three years until a unit is fleshed out and ready to actually deploy.

"Much like our [Marine air-ground task forces] that we have now, there are support elements to it," Iiams said. "So, we'll have a littoral combat team; we'll have a littoral logistics battalion; and we'll have an anti-air battalion," Iiams added.

The units are part of the Corps' effort to move toward building a fast-moving, hard to detect "inside force" that can operate within range of Chinese and Russian weapons ranges while packing a potent offensive punch.

Over the summer, the Navy met with shipbuilders to talk about plans for a new class of logistics ship that can operate under fire and resupply Marines deep within the range of enemy precision weapons. The Next Generation Medium Logistics Ship would resupply both ships at sea, as well as small, ad hoc bases ashore.

There is also the Light Amphibious Warship, or LAW, which the Navy is working to define, which will be able to carry Marines as well as fuel and supplies — but also have the capability to share information with other parts of the fleet hundreds of miles away. "I see these LAWs as part of Marine organizations," Marine Maj. Gen. Tracy King said last month, adding, "and those larger Marine organizations being part of an Expeditionary Strike Group — that's a little bit new. We're evolving not only the stuff that we're acquiring, but the way in which we're going to use it and the way in which we're going to fight it."

The Navy and Marines eventually hope to build over twenty LAWs, if the designs and cost per ship works out.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/marine-corps-builds-new-littoral-regiment-eye-on-fake-chinese-islands/?_ga=2.81554258.472312592.1600848183-855280167.1506406488

Sparkplug

A fighter without a gun . . . is like an airplane without a wing.

-- Brigadier General Robin Olds, USAF.

Huzaar1

Precies. Dit soort initiatieven zijn nodig. Grote carrierschepen zijn echt veel te kwetsbaar. Te hoge concentratie. High value targets.
"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion" US secmindef - Jed Babbin"

Harald

'If It Floats, It Fights:' Navy's New Small Ship Strategy

Existing amphibious ships might be the "Swiss Army Knife of the fleet," but the Navy and Marines want an enemy who "jumps on it in the opening gambit...they're gonna have the shock of their life."

We're getting the first glimpses of the Navy's new force structure plan, as officials begin dropping clues about the Pentagon's months-long effort to war game new plans for modernizing the Navy and Marine Corps.

Previous comments from the reform-minded Marine Commandant have suggested that those plans will include moving Marines from large, big-deck amphibious ships to smaller, faster and harder to track ships that can move Marines around contested areas in the western Pacific or the crowded Baltic Sea quickly.

And it's become clear that one way to do that is to buy dozens of what's being dubbed the light amphibious warship, or LAW.

"I think we're late to need with building the Light Amphibious Warship, which is why we're trying to go so quickly," Marine Maj. Gen. Tracy King told the virtual Surface Navy conference Thursday. The Navy is looking to replicate what it did with the recent frigate award, which moved quickly to identify and buy an existing design to start building as soon as possible.

The small amphibs are being considered primarily for moving troops around faster than the big decks can, while providing presence in the littorals and operating among archipelagos while offering Chinese missiles and aircraft a smaller target. The Marines also want to make sure that the ships can defend themselves.

The emerging motto is, "if it floats, it fights," King said. That also applies to the Navy's existing amphibious ships, which outside of the Harrier jets, and increasingly, F-35s, have little offensive punch. The existing amphibious ships are the "Swiss Army Knife of the fleet," he said, but "we need to increase the lethality on this ship. So, we want, when somebody jumps on it in the opening gambit, they're gonna get surprised. And they're gonna have the shock of their life."

The idea is that the LAW will be able to carry excess fuel and supplies, but can also share information with other parts of the fleet hundreds of miles away. "I see these LAWs as part of Marine organizations," King said. "And those larger Marine organizations being part of an Expeditionary Strike Group — that's a little bit new. So, we're evolving not only the stuff that we're acquiring, but the way in which we're going to use it and the way in which we're going to fight it."

Early plans suggest the Navy and Marines will buy as many as 30 of these ships between 2023 and 2026. In briefing slides presented to the defense industry this spring, the Navy said the 200- 400 ft. LAWs should be based on mature commercial designs that can carry a crew of 30 and travel 3,500 nautical miles.

With defense budgets expected to remain flat for the next several years at least, the new ships will have to fit within a constrained budget. And since they'll be small, with only so much defensive capability, "she really needs to know what's going on," King said, "and she needs to have a sheepdog watching out for her. That might be an LPD-17, it might be a DDG Flight III, it might be an LCS, depending on what the fleet commander sees is the situation."

The Navy isn't only looking to go smaller in its new force structure plan. It also wants to build a new large surface combatant, with its requirements due to the Chief of Naval Operations by the end of the year.

Appearing alongside King, the navy's director of surface warfare, Rear Adm. Paul Schlise, said the bigger ship is being envisioned as joining with Flight III Arleigh Burke destroyers "as the future high-end of our force mix in the surface combatant force."

It's not clear what the ship will look like, as the Navy has pushed back the start of the effort to 2026.

I asked the Navy's top acquisition official, James Geurts, for details on how the service is moving out on plans for these new classes of ships before the Pentagon wraps up its wargaming and delivers the final shipbuilding and force structure plan this fall.

Geurts said the broad strokes of what the navy and Marine Corps are looking for is already clear, and planners need "to start dialing in and refining requirements" now. "And from that we'll then be able to craft the acquisition strategy and work programmatic detail — I would say where everybody's aligned on where we're trying to go, we're in the refinement process there, which will then lead to the acquisition strategy."

Pentagon officials have said the force structure plan, originally slated to be released in February, remains on track for this fall. It's unclear how much of it will be made public.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/if-it-floats-it-fights-navys-new-small-ship-strategy/?_ga=2.202980753.1457071532.1598858947-855280167.1506406488


Sparkplug

Link naar het complete rapport Navy Light Amphibious Warship (LAW), Program: Background and Issues for Congress van 27-05-2020.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6932710/Navy-Light-Amphibious-Warship-LAW-Program.pdf
A fighter without a gun . . . is like an airplane without a wing.

-- Brigadier General Robin Olds, USAF.

Harald

Report to Congress on US Navy Light Amphibious Warship

The Navy's new Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) program envisions procuring a class of 28 to 30 new amphibious ships to support the Marine Corps, particularly in implementing a new Marine Corps operational concept called Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO).

From the report

The Navy's proposed FY2021 budget requests $30 million in research and development funding for initial industry studies and concept design work on the ship. The Navy envisions procuring the ships on an expedited schedule, with the first LAWs potentially being procured in FY2023 and a total of 28 notionally being procured by FY2026.

The EABO concept was developed with an eye toward potential conflict scenarios with China in the Western Pacific. Under the concept, the Marine Corps envisions, among other things, having reinforced-platoon-sized Marine Corps units maneuver around the theater, moving from island to island, to fire anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) and perform other missions so as to contribute, alongside Navy and other U.S. military forces, to U.S operations to counter and deny sea control to Chinese forces. The LAW ships would be instrumental to these operations, with LAWs embarking, transporting, landing, and subsequently reembarking these small Marine Corps units.

As conceived by the Navy and Marine Corps, LAWs would be much smaller and individually much less expensive to procure and operate than the Navy's current amphibious ships. The Navy wants LAWs to be 200 to 400 feet in length, and to have a unit procurement cost to be "several digit millions not triple-digit millions," a phrase that might be interpreted to mean a unit procurement cost of less than $100 million, or perhaps one that is closer to $100 million than to several hundred million dollars.

The LAW as outlined by the Navy is small enough that it could be built by any of several U.S. shipyards. The Navy states that in response to an initial request for information (RFI) about the LAW, it received responses from 13 firms, including nine shipyards. The Navy's baseline preference is to have a single shipyard build all 28 to 30 ships, but the Navy is open to having them built-in multiple yards to the same design if doing so could permit the program to be implemented more quickly and/or less expensively.

The LAW program poses a number of potential oversight matters for Congress, including the merits of the EABO concept, how LAWs would fit into the Navy's future fleet architecture, the Navy's preliminary unit procurement cost target for the ship, and the industrial-base implications of the program.

The issue for Congress is whether to approve, reject, or modify the Navy's FY2021 funding request and envisioned an acquisition strategy for the program. Congress's decisions regarding the program could affect Navy and Marine Corps capabilities and funding requirements and the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base.

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2020/june/8516-report-to-congress-on-us-navy-light-amphibious-warship.html

Harald

Citaat van: Ace1 op 23/02/2020 | 20:05 uur
Turning Amphibious Ships Into 'Lightning' Aircraft Carriers

The concept would transform amphibious ships into aircraft carriers.

The U.S. Marines claim that their ability to turn amphibious ships into aircraft carriers is a major advantage on the battlefield.

Amphibious ships, though not full-fledged aircraft carriers, can carry up to 20 F-35Bs.

The ability to mount different types of attacks on an adversary using the same ship platform complicates the enemy's ability to mount an effective defense.

.../...

Eigenlijk net zoiets als dat de Marine's hun LPD 17 willen upgunnen.

Outfit LPD-17 San Antonio class of amphibious transport docks with Mark 41 vertical launch systems.

The San Antonio class (LPD-17) has proven to be an incredibly effective "micro military in a box." These ships can be deployed off the coasts of low-intensity conflicts where they can execute a wide spectrum of missions. These include everything from humanitarian relief to special operations to embassy evacuation to close air support to strike missions, and many others in between. The USS San Antonio's recent deployment to Libya proved this model to an unprecedented degree.

These are incredibly versatile ships, and they don't necessarily need to be locked within the standard "Gator Navy" concept of operations. The fact that a single ship has a voluminous flight deck and hangar space that can embark a "pocket air force" of AH-1Zs, UH-1Ys, MV-22s and unmanned vehicles, carries an embarked Marine contingent of roughly 700 grunts and their gear, retains a well deck that can accommodate a large variety of water craft ranging from RHIBs to LCACs, and has mission planning and command and control spaces and capabilities, makes the San Antonio class unique.

What they lack is the ability to defend themselves from a credible aerial threat and the ability to strike deep into contested territory. They have RIM-116 Rolling Airframe missile launchers fore and aft for point defense, but like the LCS, they lack the ability to provide area air defense for themselves or other ships nearby for that matter.

Luckily the San Antonio's designers weren't nearsighted when it came to the ship's potential, as they actually designed these ships with an area for two eight-cell Mark 41 vertical launch systems to be installed. These cells are capable of packing four Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSMs) each, for a total loadout of 64 highly capable anti-air missiles. Or a mix of ESSMs and other missiles could be carried. For instance, eight of those cells could house BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles, giving the ship an independent penetrating strike capability. Or, upgrade dependent, even the very capable SM-6 could be adapted for the ship's use.

SM-6 has the ability to hit air breathing and some types of ballistic missile targets, as well as possessing a secondary medium-range surface-to-surface/ground capability. In recent months, Lockheed has pushed to get the Navy to fund the installation of the Aegis combat system on LPD-17 class ships, which would allow them to employ the SM-6.

Even without Aegis or the SM-6, the ability to lug around 36 ESSMs and eight Tomahawks would usher in a whole new dynamic when it comes to the ship's mission capabilities. The Tomahawks could also be sidelined by bolt-on canisters of Norway's much touted medium-range Naval Strike Missile—which is likely to show up on many other Navy surface vessels in the not so distant future.

With these additions, a single San Antonio class ship alone could provide a hardened and capable presence in low and medium threat environments, and would be especially capable of supporting contingency operations in "hot spot" regions around the globe. If they were paired with an LCS or frigate for anti-submarine warfare, they could venture into the high-threat realm as well.

The same concept can be ported over to the upcoming LX(R) ships that will replace the Harpers Ferry and Whidbey Island classes of dock landing ships. These vessels will very likely leverage the existing LPD-17 hull design, although their overall capabilities will be degraded compared to their San Antonio class cousins to save money and to better emulate the more basic ships they replace.

But providing room for a VLS on these vessels as well may be prudent, even to work just as a remote magazine for Aegis equipped cruisers and destroyers, and especially for their LPD-17 sister ships that will accompany them during most operations. But if not, an LPD-17 class could protect them with their own anti-air capabilities alone, all without the need for a nearby destroyer or cruiser. This would allow for new pairings of ships for various operations.

For instance, an single LPD-17 class ship could be accompanied by a single LX(R) for additional war fighting capacity. Basically, in doing so the LPD-17 could double its combat power, without the need of another costly LPD-17. All the high-end combat capability, including air defense capabilities, and the small flotilla's "brains" are deployed aboard the LPD-17 with the LX(R) working as something of a subordinate force.

A VLS equipped LPD-17 could also be useful for sea basing operations, by being able to provide air defense for the assets around it. Once again, this would free up destroyers and cruisers for other tasks.

Basically, by giving the San Antonio class its VLS system, it will be able to operate more independently in many more scenarios than it can today. This gets back to the whole arbitrary 350 ship navy mandate. It is better to have a few less ships, but ones that are far less rigidly dependent on others for protection under most circumstances. It allows the US Navy as a whole to be in more places, with more capabilities, at one time than simply demanding "more ships."

Currently 12 LPD-17 ships are planned, a 13th could be ordered to bridge the gap between LPD-17 and LX(R) production if the LX(R)s end up being built based on the LPD-17 hull.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/9224/7-revolutionary-hardware-changes-the-us-navy-should-make-in-the-trump-era