The LCM concept always struck me as not one thing or the other.
Too small to carry a meaningful payload.
Load weight or lane meters.
Too big for a true riverine asset
Too short ranged for our needs
Coastal or OS
The LCM with a slight increase in size up to the French offering ticks the box
Cheers S
Yup, by the numbers (if true)
55mx10.5m vs 70mx10.6m
2,800nm vs 2150nm
+14knts vs 16knts top speed
90-100 ton max load vs 200 ton max load
26 crew vs 18 crew
72 troops vs 260 troops
6 20ft TEU containers vs 12
namjet waterjet vs prop driven
1 M1A2 vs 2
2 Redback or Boxer vs 4
4 HIMARS or Bushmaster vs 8+
not only that but the French vessel could potentially carry the typhon missile system?
Where the French craft may fail…
‘They’re not specifying the size of the vessel although maximum draft is set at 1.6 metres and there’s an air draft limitation of six metres so the vessel can pass under a traffic bridge to reach the Ross Island barracks in Townsville.”
Maybe move the barracks forward of the bridge…
The Request for Tender (RFT) for a new landing craft to replace the Army’s venerable LCM-8 closes in mid-June, and industry comments on what is being requested range from ‘very ambitious’ and ‘incredi...
www.australiandefence.com.au