Consider this an adjustment to things as they are, not as I would like them to be.
Where once I thought that the MPC/ACV would provide enough organic firepower to deal with enemy infantry and most armored threats, its obvious that we're probably 20 or more years away from a replacement.
I've already made the reversal in thinking on Tanks. From once suggesting that a Fire Support Version of the MPC could replace them, I'm now of the mind that each MEU needs to increase the numbers carried from 4 to as many as 8.
Now to complete those thoughts...we need to add another essential vehicle. The Assault Breacher Vehicle. Each MEU needs at least one, preferably two assigned. Route clearing will be essential since we're going to be using AAVs and MTVRs to transport our Infantry for the foreseeable future.
Leadership is choosing new toys over the needs of the Marines on the ground. That's nothing new. We simply need to adjust to make the best out of a bad situation.
the question is will 8 tanks be enough? why not fuse it with the Light armoured reconnaissance company go for about a 6 platoon strength formation with 12 MBTs and 12 Light Armoured vehicles? that way a commander could have a platoon of armour with the infantry, a platoon supporting the reconnaissance element and reserve platoon for when the sh*t hits the fan.
ReplyDeletethe Breacher vehicles look like they could do the dozer's job so perhaps less of them could be carried and the Breacher in place (it could at least be made 2:2 and whilst yes the blade on the Breacher might have to be changed to allow it to do the role, that would still be fairly cheap and they would give a capability boost).
someone talked about the ARG being weighted out. and that was my concern. quite honestly i was going to leave the LAVs on the beach to get the augmented Tank force aboard. they generally operate as calvary so in their place i'd just depend more on UAVs from the Army or Navy. an additional problem is the LSTs are no more so carrying heavy vehicles is almost a non-starter until we get new LPDs into service. thats really the lifesaver that the MEU needs...not new LHDs but new LPDs.
DeleteIn times of austerity, the most affordable way to get M1A2-correct heavy-lift capability is to recycle the LSD-41 plans and just significantly updated for the SLEP. Her shape, structural engineering and 4x diesels are all proven and solid; LPD-17 has the same drivetrain.
ReplyDeleteBut you'd build 2-3 LSD-41s for the cost of 1x LPD-17 type.
You want more MEU MBTs, then you need enough long well-decks to carrying heavy-lift Connectors (LCU-F) to deliver that load from OTH-far-enough-away...
Short well-deck ships are a sad joke on the MEU's need to carry GCE in One First Wave. Why folks celebrate LPD-17 'shorties' is an odd one to figure.
Here are some hard well-deck length realities:
- LSD-49 - 180 feet = 2 LCAC (= 2 MBTs) or 1 LCU (= 2 MBTs) or 2 LCU-F (= 6 MBTs)
- LPD-17 - 188.7 feet = ditto
- LHD - 267 feet = 3 LCAC (3 MBTs)or 1 LCU (= 2 MBTs) + 1 LCAC (= 1 MBT) or 2 LCU-F (= 6 MBTs)
- LSD-41 - 440 feet = 4 LCAC or 3 LCU or 6 LCU-F (= 12 MBTs)
You want more tanks, you've got to lift them worldwide and onto the beach.
'nough said !
We also need a common, affordable, HE-only round for the M-1.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that if Congress is worried about the Lima plant, they could have a bunch of Assault Breacher vehicles built from older hulls.
ReplyDeleteAnd while they're at it, resurrect the Grizzly Combat Mobility Vehicle.
from your lips to God's ears. the Grizzly is what's actually needed. the Assault Breacher Vehicle is really just interim at best.
Delete