Simple question. Has the Marine Corps been fed a bill of goods? Why is the Cavour considered an aircraft carrier with a secondary amphibious assault capability and the USS America not? Stats are again from JeffHead.com
Designation: CVL
Length: 800 ft
Width: 128 ft
Beam: 108 ft
Displacement: 26,000 tons
Propulsion: 4 LM2500 gas turbines (COGAG),
2 shafts
Speed: 28 knots
Crew: 1,210
Airwing: 20 VSTOL, rotary
- 32 VLS Aster SAM
- 3 X 25mm OtaBreda CIWS
- 2 X 76mm guns
Elevators: 2
Ships in class: 1
Length: 800 ft
Width: 128 ft
Beam: 108 ft
Displacement: 26,000 tons
Propulsion: 4 LM2500 gas turbines (COGAG),
2 shafts
Speed: 28 knots
Crew: 1,210
Airwing: 20 VSTOL, rotary
- 32 VLS Aster SAM
- 3 X 25mm OtaBreda CIWS
- 2 X 76mm guns
Elevators: 2
Ships in class: 1
Designation: LHA(R)
Length: 844 ft
Width: 200 ft
Beam: 106 ft
Displacement: 45,000 tons
Propulsion: 2 GE LM 2500+ gas turbines, 2 shafts
Speed: 24 knots
Crew: 1,060
Troops: 1,700
Airwing: 38 rotary, vstol
Armament:
- 2 × RAM launchers (42 missiles)
- 2 × NATO ESSM launchers (16 missiles)
- 2 × 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
- 3 × 25 mm Mk 38 cannons
- 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns
Elevators: 2
Ships in class: 1
Length: 844 ft
Width: 200 ft
Beam: 106 ft
Displacement: 45,000 tons
Propulsion: 2 GE LM 2500+ gas turbines, 2 shafts
Speed: 24 knots
Crew: 1,060
Troops: 1,700
Airwing: 38 rotary, vstol
Armament:
- 2 × RAM launchers (42 missiles)
- 2 × NATO ESSM launchers (16 missiles)
- 2 × 20 mm Phalanx CIWS
- 3 × 25 mm Mk 38 cannons
- 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns
Elevators: 2
Ships in class: 1
Ladies and Gents, either we have a disconnect in the classification of naval ships and reality or we have a purposeful deception being hoisted on the Marine Corps. According to the above mentioned website, in a sea control mission organization, the USS America will rival the Elizabeth class carriers being built by the UK.
With the hesitation that is being shown by the Dept of the Navy when it comes to adding a well deck, the question must be asked...is this a ship that will sail away with the big deck carriers when times get hard---taking its compliment of F-35B's with it to perform the sea control mission?
A simple recommendation.
Stop building the USS America class after the first ship is commissioned.
Go back to the drawing board, simply build enlarged versions of the existing LHD's (with appropriate updates) and be done with.
Unlike the Cavour, the America has the accomodation for over a thousand embarked marines. This includes bunks, armories, C3 spaces, wider passageways for troop movements, large(r) medical facilites, galleys and what not.
ReplyDeletekinda missing my point.
ReplyDeletethe Cavour is classified as an aircraft carrier. but it also has room for troops, medical facilities etc...
the number and size of them is of course smaller especially since its almost 20,000 tons smaller than the America.
but the point remains. the Cavour is classed as an aircraft carrier, the America as an amphib. something's wrong here.
again, my contention is this. the US Navy has gotten another aircraft carrier in under the wire and the Marine Corps was the vehicle for it to happen.
i'll be very interested in seeing how small a ship it takes for UAVs to operate from. if the X-47 can be made to work off the America class then watch the effort it will take to get these tasked to Marine Corps missions.
Well, we can classify any "through deck" ship carrier aircraft as an aircraft carrier ofcourse!
ReplyDeleteI agree it's just semantics. Perhaps it's also (assigned) role definition.
Heck, the LHAs and LHDs also had the secondary role of "Sea Control Ship" when loaded with 20 Harriers - and that's pure aircraft carrier.
Some time ago an old LPH was re-roled as mine warfare support ship embarked with MH-53s and UDT teams - another testament of their flexibility - and that too was more (helo) carrier than troop or MIW ship.
Then there is that LH-class ships fall under ESG command which is still run by a USN staff untill the embarked troops are feet dry, then the MEU/MEB staff takes over IIRC.
Then there's the question does the USN really WANT these LHA(R) as aircraft carriers? The USN has no aircraft (planned) able to operate from small decks (except helos of course), as even the F-35B is USMC only.
What tips the balance for me is that apparently the USMC (staff) itself requested the dock to be cut and turn America into an aviation centric role.
I can understand the reasoning: pushing the LHA(R) to the MPF force (as an aircraft carrier!) as the rest of the MPF would carry the necessary vehicles, but the LHA(R) is now fitted into regular ESG/MEU structures.
It would be really cool if the LH-class could operate as UCAV carriers (would be a dynamite force multiplier for smaller navies) but I think it will still need a cat as it's quite heavy (or so I'm told).
Hum... IF my memory serves me right and IF the guy was right, I used to play D&D with a former draftee, Spanish Navy, who was in service, IIRC, during Gulf I on board Principe de Asturias [R11]. He remembers refueling F18s[*].
ReplyDeleteConsidering there's a video out there of a C130 landing on a big deck and stopping BEFORE the island... Are we sure you can only use VSTOL on those? Specially the ramped ones.
[For the record, Spanish navy is actively avoiding to label L61 --Juan Carlos I-- a carrier]
Take care.
Ferran.
[*] His thoughts on pilot jocks are non-printable.
Ferran...
ReplyDeletehey guy.
why are they refusing to label it an aircraft carrier? i can understand his feelings about pilots. its common in the grunt community...i even felt the same way until i actually talked to some.
mostly pretty cool guys...but i digress, what gives with the not wanting to label the Juan Carlos an aircraft carrier???
Role and mission. Juan Carlos I is part of their amphib force. Their Galicia/Rotterdam class LPDs lack the (large) C2 spaces (which is why the Dutch built the improved De Witt class) and the Spanish needed a flagship able to house a large battlestaff plus to augment (not just replace) the Asturias.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course the Juan Carlos I has that huge dock, vehicle decks, Ro/Ro ramps...
I'm not sure there isn't a certain political angle to it. L52 Castilla [sister to L51 Galicia] is supposed to have C2 space --in exchange for some 200 marines--. I have the feeling there's a certain impulse to downplay it. And "Spain has two carriers" would get people into asking "why do we have more of them than France or England?", as biased as the question is.
ReplyDeleteOTOH, the big problem in the Spanish navy seems to be maintenance. And the same lust for tech other navies have, of course. Coast patrols have plummeted. I'm not aware of any replacements beyond the corvette-like BAM, which is way too big for some things. Some of the work is being passed onto law enforcement, but...
I'm also unaware of any sort of plan to replace the Harriers. L61 is supposed to be V-22 and F-35-able. Meanwhile, P11 is supposed to go into SLEP as soon as L61 gets into service. Current financial crisis might delay it. No replacement planned, AFAIK.
Think about the same attitude that gave us SDSR but not so in the open and there for longer. And extremely poor didactics of the work of the Forces nowadays [*].
Take care, and my data with a grain of salt [+].
Ferran.
[*] A Western trend? And not only regarding this subject, but political decisions in general
[+] Just to remind you: only a former army draftee with some curiosity and a couple of fuzzy links to the forces.
Why? Politics, perspective and mission.
ReplyDeleteJustifying having 22 aircraft carriers is a tall order. Saying you have 11 aircraft carriers and 11 amphibious assualt ships, well that's an easier sell. Aircraft carriers are also a prestige item, thus a nation such as spain will wish to call its vessels an aircraft carrier even if they don't match the capabilities or size of a US carrier.
As a matter of perspective, the US calls its 100,000ton+ Nimitz class to be aircraft carriers. To everyone else they are supercarriers. Therefore a 26,000ton vessel is an aircraft carrier to spain, whilst a 45,000ton vessel is merely an amphibous assault ship to the US.
Also in terms of it's mission, the America is designed specifically to support amphibious operations, whilst the Cavour is designed for a sea control mission.
LHAs can do some of the things a CVN can do, but not everything, and not as well. LHAs aren't optimized to generate sorties, carry a third of the fuel of a CVN, far fewer munitions, and don't have the force multipliers (e.g. AEW, jamming, tanking) and rely on subsonic fighters (until the F-35B arrives).
ReplyDeleteX-47 is a CTOL-only aircraft, so doubtful one will ever fly off of an America class.
The Marines needed something like the America to house the huge V-22 and CH-53K.
The ship type designation is a game that countries play. The Japanese people don't like aircraft carriers but what is their DDH but a small one. Some countries try to slant a ship as having dual role to include HA/DR (Italy). I don't think we should get too hung up on the ship designation? I am more concerned about capability, capacityh and connectors. When one has all those Marines onbaord a big deck, how do they all go ashore promplty? What gear do they take with them and will there be enough a/c to do that?
ReplyDeleteAs a former SWO I really worry that ALL USN amphibs are seriously under-gunned. Not enought defensive weapons (layers) and surely nothing for NSFS. Put a major caliber weapon on the LPD17 and fire it from whateved standoff distance. For we all know in the end the amphibs WILL move in close to the beach, it's inevitable regardless of plans/dreams.
if you're a SWO then maybe you can explain to me how the LHA's lost their 5 inch guns!
ReplyDeletei was looking at the commissioning brochure for the old Tarawa and its sporting 5 inchers.
The first time this administration starts thinking LHAs are carriers we'll be hearing how we should cancel the Ford class. An LHA is in no way, shape, or form a substitute for a CVN.
ReplyDelete-sferrin
but sferrin,
ReplyDeletethe USS America is something else entirely. my point is that its a bit more than just a big deck amphib...it might be less than a full size aircraft carrier but at the very least this ship is really a Sea Control Ship (SCS).
my point is that it appears to be more optimized to that role than to the traditional amphibious assault one.
The LHA is a large amphibious ship that is used to deploy Marines to secure a beachhead and move inland. LHAs differ significantly from LHDs as they lack a well deck. A well deck is used to conduct amphibious operations allowing the use of LCACs and other smaller assault craft/ vehicles to bring equipment and Marines ashore.
ReplyDeleteSo image the newest LHAs not having a well deck. Instead, the Marines want to build eleven of these ships for purposes of.... ... Get this... deploying thirty or forty F-35s in a sea control posture or up to 42 helicopters or 22 V22 Osprey to only be able to move troops inland by air.
If this isn't bad enough now you have ships that don't have well decks to land Marines ashore or the other necessary support equipment such as battle tanks or other vehicles. In essence, the USMC wants to use these ships as small aircraft carriers to deploy the truly inferior/ useless F-35 fighter/attack jets.
My recommendation is that the future America Class ships should be fitted out with the appropriate well decks, a full length hanger deck, a nine degree angled flight deck, three deck elevators, either two, three of four catapults, arresting gear and be potentially powered by two small nuclear reactors.
Converting the present blueprints to the new specifications for a ship of between 48,000 and 54,000 tons would allow for the best of both worlds, providing the navy with a small, angled deck nuclear carrier that doubles as an LHD (designation changes with the adding of a well deck). The Marines would have both aviation and amphibious capabilities. The ships would be able to carry two to three squadrons of F/A18 Super Hornets, four EA18s, two E2C Hawkeyes, two C2s, as well as the necessary mixed complement of helicopters such as CH-46, CH-53s, SH-60s and AH1 Sea Cobras and V22 Osprey; for a total complement of up to fifty to sixty aircraft.
The reality is that the world has far more hot spots than ever before and we only have 10 Nimitz Class Carriers.The new Ford class carriers are almost $13B a piece and are far too expensive to God forbid lose in a crisis.
Most recently the navy used a Wasp Class LHD (has a well deck) and its twenty harriers to serve as a small carrier in a sea control posture in support of operations in Libya. The reality is that if the situation got hot twenty harriers would not, I repeat twenty harriers would not have been enough aircraft to provide sufficient air power to obtain air superiority.
In addition Harriers do not have supersonic dog fighting capabilities nor are they able to carry the same heavy loads of ordnance as an F/A18 Super Hornet.
However, having a CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take Off Barrier Assisted Recovery) small aircraft carrier would be able to deploy multi-mission aircraft cable of providing air superiority as well as the ability to launch and sustain strike missions. With control of the skies the marines would be able to launch amphibious forces inland to include 1,800 men, eight M1A1 MBTs and supporting vehicles.
For approximately $16 Billion the Marine Corps could have 11 brand new hybrid CATOBAR/LHDs with more than 550 aircraft operating on board to support their mission while the navy would have their 10 carriers with a combined air wing of an additional 900 aircraft or more..
The cold hard reality is that in the 21st Century we have made some very bad decisions and even worse purchases that have hurt the safety of our nation and our allies. Taking this approach is a very simple and cost effective methodology of bringing back the global presence of our Navy's and Marine Corps ability to project air power in a region at a moments notice and have a Marine Expeditionary Unit accompany the task force.