Sunday, February 13, 2011

Let's get serious about Littoral Combat.



Mike over at New Wars first proposed this ... and now that he no longer blogs it up to me to carry out his cause.  The LCS isn't about getting serious about Littoral Combat (LC).

Mission modules aren't about getting serious about LC.

Fire Scouts aren't about getting serious about LC.

Putting enough boats in the water with trained personnel is getting serious about LC...the CB-90, along with detachments of Marines...operating with attack helicopters ---all deployed from mission specific LPD-17's or LHD's is getting serious about LC.

Yes, the above video is promotional.

Yes its a fanciful demonstration of the CB-90's capabilities...but a look at the island chains in the Pacific...along with the current threat of piracy points to one direction.

Our efforts at LC are woefully inadequate, improperly resourced and missing what's needed to win the future.  The CB-90, with a Marine Corps with one foot in the water is exactly whats needed.

If we can't win the Piracy "war" against rag tag fleets of boats operated by criminals then how are we going to defeat an enemy that uses this tactic in asymmetric warfare against us?

20 comments :

  1. There are 2 CB-90Hs (H being the export variant) in US service, bought for either SOCOM or the USNs riverine force (can't remember which service exactly).

    There's substantial interest in the CB-90, especially that GPS-autopilot is cool; allows you to race up and down estuaries at high speed during darkness.
    Sweden, Norway and Denmark with their fjords and rocky coasts just love these boats. Britain and the Netherlands leased a few as well for compatibility tests, but no confirmed orders yet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UK eval -
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHmUvI1-R0U&feature=related

    CB-90 with Hellfire -
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYXBvCrzbHo&feature=related

    SWCC "US Navy's Best Kept Secret" -
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7Bctymq4bE&feature=related

    Amazon tests -
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzfqxmHpxfU&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Whatever happened to the Navy's riverine forces we used in Vietnam? Just modify a few of those with GPS, new engines and new weapons systems and bingo.

    ReplyDelete
  5. the current riverine force in my opinion is too small...the Vietnam era force has been dismantled.

    did you know that they had their own detachments of helicopters..Sea Wolves....armed UH-1's....they worked closely with Navy SEALs...

    i don't know if we could duplicate that effort but it would be nice if we could.

    ReplyDelete
  6. i think LCS is bullshit and TBH theres no real survivable ship that can get close without air superiority and being able to pummel the land forces down first. We barely made a toe hold on Normandy with absolute air superiority and that was before satellites, missiles etc. All someone has to do to hit an LCS is have shoulder fired missiles (javelines arent only for tanks) or other systems that can defeat landing forces. Along with rocket artillery that can be guided, unmanned drones that can be packed with explosives, conventional artilerlly well masked, we are better off keeping our blue water navy strong and having better stand off capabilities and if we do have to take a beach make sure nothing is living within a few dozen miles of that beach before our forces move in. if our burkes cant survive in littorals who thinks the LCS can.

    ReplyDelete
  7. hey Joe...i say look at the Japanese scenario...the S. Korean actions...the Taiwanese worries and you see the future of naval warfare.

    islands were attacked off the coast of S. Korea...why? because they were avenues of approach...if we were attacking then you'd need to have small raiding parties to make sure that no missile crews were hiding to put a couple of TOWs or Hellfires into the sides of our ships.

    the Japanese are putting Naval Infantry on its islands as tripwires and to secure the area against possible attack/infiltration...

    Taiwan is facing the same issues.

    countering infantry weapons of the type you discuss is best done with small teams of infantry rooting out the bad guys.

    sounds like a Marine mission to me.

    ReplyDelete
  8. well that i definitely agree, but i also think we agree those bigass LCS ships we have wont put in small units of marine infantry. i rather have a virginia class submarine deploy a special ops team in, or have smaller rigid hull inflatables from over the horizon boats get there. Small combat teams are effective force multipliers as you definately say (hence our paratroopers on D Day securing bridges) but the big boats the navy wants wont cut it.

    your right about taiwan, and thats the problem with china, it can strangle taiwan until our navy gets there (will be bloody but we can win), but once their ships come close to the shores taiwan (even with opposition planes in the air because i dont think taiwan can hold air superiority, but will still challenge china from the ground), then taiwan will pummel with small missiles and such. If china can land small forces it will help but with our satellites any major military maneuvers preceding it would be noticed.

    Also the S. Korea sinking of its frigate should be a dire warning, and possibly showing us the utility of smaller subs, we already use our nukes to get seal teams in, why not a contingent of marines? why not have our own small diesel subs that can run in littorals, will be more survivable and can collect intel and insert/retrieve special ops. hell drug runners have mini subs, yet we dont?

    ReplyDelete
  9. ok so i was slightly wrong, we do have minisubs for seals, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASDS, why not form a marine force capable of using them?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sol you need to research the new riverines on NECC's website for starts.

    Let's be correct about the CB-90. They are good very FLAT water boats, not so much for offshore work i.e. canyon running. There are six boats assigned to Navy RivGruOne at LCRK now. The Navy classifies them as Riverine Command Boats (I don't know why). The Navy already has personnel trained to operate them. At least one of three rons will be operating them shortly.

    Why do we need Marines to conduct naval raids when there are threee RivRons who can do that? The Marine Raiding Force is ONLY one unit and comes from a large amphib which may or may not be where MIO, anti-piracy ops are to be conducted. In point of fact the amphibs should be used for higher order warfare IMHO.

    The same thing applies to those who only think of Naval Special Warfare untis for attacks/raiding. There just are not enough SEAL/SWCCs to go around now and you want to assign more missions to them, why?

    Next littoral warfare takes a spectrum of ships far larger than any CB-90 force. More than Cyclone PC replacements, more than what the LCS may be around to do (only 24 worldwide is what I would plan on).

    One type boat in any numbers is not a good plan.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Suggestion: a mix of Absalom, CB90 --they already carry a couple, I believe-- or some kind of RHIB, patrols like the Turkish ones you posted [Ares, I believe].

    Also, the French have a littoral combat... sub planned.

    http://en.dcnsgroup.com/naval/produits/andrasta/

    I have a PDF brochure I seem to be unable to find on site. Ping me if you want it.

    Take care. Ferran.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I will admit that the "littoral combat ship," is neither littoral, nor combat, the name "littoral combat ship," is entirely misleading. Because we already have the single most capable amphib force on the planet, the US Marine Corp, we don't really need to get any more truly littoral than we are. 'Littoral' isn't even the real gap.

    Galrahn at info.diss. has pointed out, the role of the LCS as originally intended was specifically to do a lot of not fighting in the not littorals. it's supposedly replacing 9 ship classes which are retired, or retiring, only one of which has even a tacit combat role, and that is the frigate. Mine clearing, Sub-hunting, and cargo transport in non combat environments is really not sexy at all but that's not what it's built for.

    comparing the LCS to any of those patrol boats or corvettes is about as valid as comparing a C-130 hercules with an f-15. What's the point. Yes, technically the MC, AC, and CJ models do have combat credentials, but only as an afterthought, and only as a secondary system. it still doesn't compare to any true combat aircraft.

    ReplyDelete
  13. what do you suggest then Leesea?

    not throwing stones but have Riverines been bloodied yet? they came online when the conflict/major fighting was over in Iraq...and to be honest i mostly see photo sets of them training in Mississippi....

    how will they operate overseas without amphibs?

    if they use Rhibs/CB-90s and whatever what will be their mothership?

    ReplyDelete
  14. The new riverines took over the mission the USMC Small Craft Unit had in Iraq and operated there and two other AOs for about two years. Does someone have to die before their role is considered significant? You need to look harder, I will send photos of new CB90/RCB.

    The riverines can operate off any navy ship and have off some MSC ships as has NSW boats.

    The new riverines (at least 2 rons) went throught the School of Infantry at LeJuene too. The training in Miss is for NSW and foreign navies.

    But your point is valid for extended operations, a mothership would be needed. Just like the MSC chartered ships which have been supporting NSW boats for more than 15 years now~ NPS study called them Maritime Security Ships.

    Amphibs are not the only vessels that float and carry boats.

    ReplyDelete
  15. in the US Navy amphibs are the only vessels that float and carry boats.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sol you are wrong, MSC has had ships which lift on boats and float on boats for years. I had 22 pieces of Army watercraft, up to a 150 ton crane, on the MV American Cormorant starting in 1985. Those were lifted on the MV Strong Virginian later. The photos and links I sent show PM2 ships which support boats.

    And floating in/out of a wet well is NOT the only way to operate. The Brits and Danes launch their CB90s by davits (RFA Bay and Absalon class respectively).

    I know that a lot of Marines scoff at using anything other than a warship, but for a naval raid vice full blown assault why do you need (a sledge when a ballpeen will do?

    Not to mention the amphibs may well be needed elsewhere for something much more major.

    BTW I forgot to mention that the riverines where using USMC SURCs in Iraq, and those boats would do satisfactorily for naval raids. They may be worn out or turned over by now though?

    ReplyDelete
  17. leesea - "The Navy classifies them as Riverine Command Boats (I don't know why)..."

    It might be that they are used in the way the Swedes use some of their CB-90s as command boats. These are platoon/company leaders stuffed with radios and room for a Coy staff (the Swedes call their waterborne units platoon/company instead of the more common squadron).
    As befitting brass, they're all dry, warm and cozy. :)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Marcase sounds right to me. I would also note that both the RN and Dutch operate LCVPs which are covered and faster than similar USN landing craft. I had 12 Papas on Francis Marion launched from Welin davits.

    ReplyDelete
  19. M80 Stilleto is a plastic POS - funky boat looking for a mission. There are already plenty of good fast landing craft in service with many navies. The USN just has to look past its nose and beyond the congressional ear marks

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.