Interesting news appeared in my e-mail this morning.
I got a note from a reader in the Pacific and after taking me to task for not appreciating the qualities of the "technologically advanced, mine resistant, fully networked and completely amphibious" Terrex MPC...he went on to state that the Terrex MPC had conducted swim tests with the Endurance class LPD and swam from ship to shore and back again.
I'm trying to verify this using open source materials since proof was not forthcoming but this would be interesting...and a bit stunning.
Just to be clear.
The current Marine Corps administration (sic) does not have enough time to put into place a program of record...all it can do is basically alert industry that ANOTHER competition is about to take place.
Quite honestly I don't believe that the ACV/MPC/AAV Upgrade programs will go forward for the balance of the current President's term. But the technological expertise displayed by these companies has been impressive.
Indecision is why this program did not succeed. Not technological over reach. Industry delivered on this one in spades. Any of the vehicles presented (with the exception of the General Dynamics offering...they hid that one from the sunlight) would have fulfilled the requirements originally set out for a Marine Personnel Carrier.
Emerging Connector-Options are the reason why ACV/MPC/AAV Upgrade programs are moving slowly.
ReplyDeleteWith the new Doctrine pushing ARG/MEU's out to sea towards 70nm+, Connectors are the vital link to shore. And this directly affects what type of wheeled/tracked APCs you'll need - or already have (!) - before you push the button on a large-scale new-type acquisition-program.
Furthermore, should 'fording' APCs gain further weight, then they may not even be able to 'swim' much anyway. Back to scouting the fording area, sounding it, bolting on snorkels, ducts etc. and then take a 'ride on the wild-side' holding your breath that the APC and MBT reemerges on the other side.
Isn't the need to tie down and then untie vehicles a major delaying factor in the use of such "shore connector" options? At least that's the argument I always hear when somebody brings up the idea of using the LCAC's successor in such a role.
DeleteTightly-scheduled car/bus/truck-ferries seem to manage just fine...
ReplyDeleteAmphibious operations tend to not take place in gales due to the sea-state limits for well-deck operations.
LCU-(x) would have a much easier motion than any go-fast planing/hovering type.
And chocking vehicles into place plus a few fast-acting tie-downs would not slow Marines down.