United States Marine Corps

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
As of last week the intent was to still deploy
Initial elements arriving in April, full task force closing by July
Marines headed to Australia will have to undergo quarantine for two weeks - via Marine Times
Better late than never, the first 200 Marines of the 9th rotation arrived in Darwin on 4 June. They have to spend 14 days in isolation before they can begin any activities.
 

stevenyeadon

New Member
This article by USNI confirms that the Light Amphibious Warship (LAW) will not function in current ARGs. It will be forward stationed in places like the Baltic Sea or the South China Sea. It will be for archipelagic warfare, setting up EABs with anti-ship missiles and SAMs, and will attempt to hide among civilian ships of similar size in a conflict. It will have little in the way of defenses, using autocannons and heavy machineguns only.

In addition, the LPD Flight II program may see its ships altered to make them multi-mission capable, and the San Antonio-class Flight I's may be upgraded to be multi-mission capable. The problem is the cost of this. If it is too expensive to upgrade Flight I vessels and change flight II vessels, a new, small amphib able to work in an ARG may be pursued instead.


I like making the LPDs multi-mission capable given their almost 2 billion dollar unit cost. I also like they are open to a small risk-worthy amphib coming into service in ARGs.

The main problem I have, which I hope someone can speak to, is whether this would ever work against Russia in the Black, Baltic, and Barents Seas? It seems much harder to hide in those environments than, say, the South China Sea. Another issue is that Russian naval, land, and airborne assets may simply overwhelm small groups of 75 Marines with vehicle-based missile launchers early in a war. The sheer size of the Russian airborne forces and the number of nearby planes and surface based launchers gives me great pause. I also think it may prove consequential to have an "invasion fleet" (according to the Chinese) stationed in the South China Sea.
 

Blackshoe

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
The main problem I have, which I hope someone can speak to, is whether this would ever work against Russia in the Black, Baltic, and Barents Seas? It seems much harder to hide in those environments than, say, the South China Sea. Another issue is that Russian naval, land, and airborne assets may simply overwhelm small groups of 75 Marines with vehicle-based missile launchers early in a war. The sheer size of the Russian airborne forces and the number of nearby planes and surface based launchers gives me great pause. I also think it may prove consequential to have an "invasion fleet" (according to the Chinese) stationed in the South China Sea.
Short answer, IMHO, is no. Frankly, even more so than my complaints against China, trying to project power ashore (especially actual manpower) against Russia is a supremely dumb idea.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A US Marine is dead and 8 are missing following a AAV accident off the California coast yesterday. The AAV was reported as taking water on at the time and had 15 marines and 1 sailor onboard. SAR efforts are continuing.



 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Strictly speaking a navy program but very relevant to the US Marines.

Textron Systems announced the delivery of the 2nd Ship to Shore Connector (SSC) to the US Navy on 27 Aug 2020. In Apr 2020, Textron Systems was awarded a US$386 million, for the construction of 15 landing craft, air cushion (LCAC) 100 Class Craft — the SSC Program is the functional replacement of the existing fleet of LCAC vehicles. It is an air cushion vehicle designed for a 30-year service life. The SSC mission is to land surface assault elements from the sea at over-the-horizon distances while operating from amphibious ships and mobile landing platforms. These craft also will incorporate an advanced skirt, a cargo deck capable of carrying a 74-ton payload (up to M1A1 Tank). With an enclosed personnel transport module loaded, it can carry up to 145 combat-equipped Marines or 108 casualty personnel.

Payload74 t/ 163,142 lbs.
Speed35 knots/40 mph/65 km/h at Sea State 3
Deck Area67 × 24 feet (1,608 sq feet)/20.42 × 7.32 m (149.39 sq m)
Operating CrewFour (pilot, co-pilot, load master and deck engineer)
Overall Height5 feet/1.52 m
Overall Length92 feet/28.04 m
Overall Beam48 feet/14.63 m
PropulsionFour gas turbine engines
Service Life30 years

This 27 Aug 2020 delivery follows the successful completion of Acceptance Trials with the US Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey. During these at sea trials, the craft underwent testing to demonstrate the capability of the platform and installed systems across all mission areas to effectively meet its requirements.

Captain Cedric McNeal, amphibious warfare program manager, Program Executive Office (PEO) Ships said: “We have 12 additional craft in production with another 10 on contract, positioning us to steadily deliver increased capability to our fleet over the coming years”.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
Ah, the delights of spurious precision!

"74 t/ 163,142 lbs" - from two decimal places to six. Doh! That reminds me of travelling by rail in a country that had converted from imperial to metric measures & where the height above sea level of each station was given on its name board: in metres, to the nearest centimetre, all of of which converted back to multiples of 10 feet. ;)
 
Top