Update. Marine Corps messaging on the need for large amphibious ships has been muddled/confused at best.

 This post isn't for everyone.  I had a question earlier.  What is the justification for the Marine Corps request for 31 large amphibious ships?

The answer or rather the messaging from HQMC has been muddled/confused at best.  I found ONE article that attempts to answer that question.  

via Defense News.

The U.S. Marine Corps will update its concept for amphibious operations, even as it waits to see how many ships its U.S. Navy partner will provide for those operations.

Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. David Berger directed the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab to develop by the end of the year a Concept for 21st Century Amphibious Operations, as part of an ongoing campaign of learning to inform the Force Design 2030 modernization effort.

Maj. Gen. Benjamin Watson, who commands the lab, said during a May 10 media roundtable much of the early work in Force Design centered around a new formation called the Marine Littoral Regiment, which would send out small units to dispersed positions around island chains and shorelines to operate as stand-in forces. Amphibious operations remain important to the Navy-Marine team, he said, but were largely left out of the Force Design discussion.

How do you leave something important out of a discussion about the future of the Marine Corps?

How do you singularly focus on a pacing threat, yet leave discussion of the amphibious forces untouched?

It gets better and once again something that seems clear (and part of the 'campaign of learning') gets confusing. 

“That Navy-Marine Corps team employing unmanned underwater vessels from the ARG/MEU, dozens of unmanned undersea vessels. You can use them as sensors, perhaps for anti-submarine warfare; you can do counter-reconnaissance with that, and locate mines,” the commandant said.

“They could be weapons themselves,” he added. “We could also employ uncrewed surface vessels from the well deck, both for [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance] and for fires. You can do it for logistics.”

So in one part of the article they talk about worldwide commitments and the need to do traditional Marine Corps missions and later the Commandant takes it back to SIF/EABO.

The sad reality?

Heckl needs to take a beat.  Get his shit together and get the messaging on this whole little enterprise together.

It's a muddled mess right now.

Quite honestly its like they're pulling this shit outta their asses and are simply throwing a number out there.

I would not be surprised if 26 is the number with a reduced buy of LAWs (other ships in inventory will be used to reduce the number of new buys).

Unless the Marine Corps can actually justify the buy the Navy has a point.