But that refers to what my main point was. ADF talks over and over about acquiring complementary capabilities, but you see time and time again that the left hand clearly doesn't talk to the right.
If we are acquiring a future amphibious capability why would we acquire connectors designed for a previous generation of vehicles? I really don't think it takes any great intellectual leap to assume that capabilities needs will grow in future rather than lessen and plan accordingly...
It appears unfortunately your correct in that the current LCM1e may not be able to carry either our current MBT or alternatively two future land 400 IFV's.Time and practise may secure a limited capacity in very calm conditions but still probably not the best or desired outcome.
My understanding is that back in the day the LCM 2000 landing craft where proving not fit for purpose during it's early days of operation off the old Kanimbla and would have been to wide for the soon to be acquired Canberra Classes docking well.
Back then a seemingly safe bet was to acquire the same landing craft that Spain had designed for it's Juan Carlos LHD.
This is seemingly both hands talking to each other after all Spain had a similar weighted MBT in the Leo 11 Mk 6 to our new Abram's and my understanding was all the appropriate questions were asked and assurances given that this new connector would do as advertised.
Our refurbished M113a4 were not in the weight category of current 25t + IFV such as your Bradley / Marder / Warrior vehicles so the immediate future looked a good mix of armoured vehicles and LHD with appropriate landing craft.
The sad current reality is that our LCM'1e may not be sufficiently future proofed to provide the weight carrying capacity for future loads. The Docking well of the Canberra class is a constant that may be a challenge in width to fit Two future LCM sized craft side by side. Our M113a4 provide no realistic deployable capacity as they are out classed for about all in harms way operations. The ASLAV are old, tired and are a light weight in this age.
To make things worse the out come of land 400 that being an in service phase 2 and 3 vehicle is still a long way away.
What puzzles me is that there is an acceptance that this is OK and there is no need for an immediate fix. If a commensurate situation was within the RAAF I would guess that they would have the Sales, diplomatic and professional skills to make government understand the gravity of the situation.
Army seem to have a generational culture of acceptance that our current situation is adequate which of course is fine if you aspire to just send light infantry / special forces type of groups to your Afghanistan type of mission.
But then again didn't the Dutch send MBT's, self propelled artillery and attack helicopters to Uruzgan?
I feel Army needs to provide government more options and much sooner than the fulfilment of Land 4000
Maybe we need to look at a quick armoured upgrade to the M113's, fast track phase 2 of land 400,up the numbers of Abrams and put a lot of energy into making the LCM1e work or find a quick alternative.
Regards S
