Are we doing ship to ship replenishment correctly or perhaps better said are we doing it cost effectively?
Considering the high cost per flight hour of all our helos...Navy and Marine. Considering the fact that these are finite resources that we should be guarding...should we be using our aircraft for these simple supply missions?
LCAC's are a no go because they are also a precious resource with high operating costs. So perhaps a step down in technology...a bit of a reduction in speed but maybe we can get greater loads per trip would be to purchase fast Landing craft for this mission. We could simply sail them into the well deck for most of our ships in the Gator Navy and for the rest we could still use the tried and true.
Its not a perfect solution but it should reduce costs, we should be able to get as much gear in two trips with a fast landing craft as we can with a series of helo flights and we should be able to save a ton of money.
Just wondering.
So what about the desire to have MV-22 replace the COD aircraft on CVN? More Ospreys the better plus less work on dedicated assault aircraft.
ReplyDeletebut the Osprey is a dedicated assault craft. i don't know. i'd rather see a purpose built COD with greater lifting ability thant the V-22. besides, it needs to be able to carry a F-35 engine internally and the V-22 can't.
Deletethe REAL cost effective solution which teh USN refuses to use is skin-to-skin. While many naval auxilaries and sealift ships have "slick sides", many warships to not. LPD could go alongside another ship but have NO real means to move supplies/materials. Their one crane is all wrong for that.
ReplyDeleteYou know I like FLC but their issue is "landing spots". MLP could have helped IF it was a clear deck Flo/Flo, but guess what the wizbang navy types did NOT do~~
yeah but i've seen work on a hi tech crane that can be subsituted for the ones we currently have. time to find it and repost.
DeleteI have installed/tested cranes on MSC ships and the USN already has tested several. BUT the real problem is that amphib deck arrangements do not readily support Lift-on/Lift-off operations. The principal reason for the MLP i.e. cargo transfer btwn ships and connectors could be offset by rearranging current amphibs (take the Billion bucks the USN is going to spend on corporate welfare aka MLP).
ReplyDelete