I was making a swing around the internet this morning and ran across this story from Defense News.
With that being said a couple of ships that can sail together carrying a Brigade Combat Team (-) might be just what the Army needs to get back in the "relevancy" game. For war you would link up with the Navy but for operations other than they could ferry the US Army around the region.
With that being said wouldn't the SNR Tank Landing Ship be a better fit than an LCM? More info on the LST is here.
The impetus to find scant dollars in budgets that have already squeezed out once-critical programs like the Ground Combat Vehicle is, of course, Washington’s strategic rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region.Read the entire story but my question is this. Is the US Army thinking too small? Some believe that for the near term, the US is going to mainly build relationships, conduct tons of exercises, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
The Army operates several varieties of watercraft and logistics ships from tugboats to large Logistics Support Vessels, but at issue are the four-decade-old Landing Craft Mechanized (LCM) ships that can operate from ship to shore, carrying troops and equipment up to the weight of five Abrams tanks.
The service issued a request for information to industry for the program in early 2013 that it is calling the Maneuver Support Vessel-Light.
With that being said a couple of ships that can sail together carrying a Brigade Combat Team (-) might be just what the Army needs to get back in the "relevancy" game. For war you would link up with the Navy but for operations other than they could ferry the US Army around the region.
With that being said wouldn't the SNR Tank Landing Ship be a better fit than an LCM? More info on the LST is here.
And if the Army is just stuck on a LCM type vessel then how about something with a bit of speed behind it like the TCG C-155 also from a Turkish Shipyard? Read about this vessel here (make sure to take a look at their proposal for a LST under naval projects).
