MwRYum
Major
Thing is, even back then LSTs don't come to the shore until the beachhead is secured.
075 LHD thread
- Thread starter nosh
- Start date
... that statement directly contradicts what totoro said about LSTs being known to do beach assaults in WWII.
In the case of china's most important amphibious assault requirement (i.e. Taiwan), I imagine they will seek to operate a combination of LPD, future LHD, LST and large LCU units along with Zubrs (of which they will likely end up with at least 8 units), and some helicopter/airborne assault, but all heavily supported by air to ground, SRBM and many long range rocket systems for suppression of beach defences to allow LSTs and LCUs to traverse the strait into softened beach heads and assault them, while Zubrs and Type 726 LCACs assault less well defended/non-beach areas to outmaneuver defences.
Of course, the scale of such an operation would be quite immense, and there will likely be significant casualties, but the key point IMO is that sending in only LCACs and only helicopters against the defences of an enemy is simply not tenable for the kind of amphibious assault that China is looking to do and the enemy they are looking to conduct it against. It will require coordination of air support, naval support, rocket artillery and SRBMs on an operational and tactical level in conjunction with LSTs and large LCUs to soften the defences enough to allow them to bring the bulk of the tanks and IFVs in the opening stages of assaulting a beach.
The LCACs and helicopters will be additional supporting elements to land in less or even non-defended areas, rather than being sent straight into the maws of an enemy's defences.
I believe the Royal Navy's falklands task force involved a number of ships similar to LSTs and similar in size to the 072s, in the form of the Round Table class LSLs.
The later Type 072 LSTs can open those bow doors while at sea and digorge their amphibious assault tanks without having to go onto the beach.
They cans till go ontop the beach if necessary, but they can also allow their amphibious vehicles to leave the vessel while well off shore, either out the front doors, or the back door which operates like a well deck.
so the PLAN LSTs can easily be used as a part of an ARG and deploy forces while well out to sea. The LPDs can do the same of course with either Amphibious vehicles or the LCACs, which are much faster.
I could see a PLAN ARG two LPDs deploying 6-8 LCACs per wave while four Type 072s deploy a masive number of Amphibious assault tanks and personnel carriers per wave. And all of that would be deployed while well off shore.
And, the PLAN ould always add more LPDs or more LST (particulalry) to any assault force.
So, it is simply not true that the PLAN LSTs have to have flat, sandy beaches to be able to perorm an amphibious assault...in fact, far from it.
Well if we are talking amphibs as the payload, then all bets are off. Any ship with a suitable well deck could be part of an ARG. A larger-sized LCU could be part of an ARG in that case. OTOH amphibs are not the primary intended cargo of an LST. They are mainly used to transport non-swimmers like tanks, troops, cargo, trucks, etc. (after all they are called Landing Ship Tank). Even if they are loaded up with amphibs, they are still not a good fit for an ARG, which is supposed to consist of larger vessels like LHDs, LPDs, and LSDs, all usually in the 15,000+ tonnage range whereas LSTs are in the 4,000 to 7,000 ton range, meaning less seaworthiness, less range, and less capacity; in other words they would serve to restrict the overall effectiveness and flexibility of an ARG that includes them in its lineup. I think these reasons are the ones why the USN doesn't put LSTs in their ARGs.
I think the USN is a bit spoiled for choice as they were able to build an amphibious fleet of only larger ships like LHDs, LPDs and LSDs over the past half century, meaning they were able to form ARGs around those vessels primarily. I imagine if the Chinese Navy had a large fleet of those sort of ships they would probably form ARGs around them as well and leave LSTs for other roles.
However, given the Chinese Navy won't have that large of an LHD, LPD and LSD fleet (relative to the USN!) in the foreseeable future (let's say early 2020s), I think it may be sensible to consider LSTs as a potential component in whatever their ARG equivalent of the foreseeable future may look like.
And that I think leads us to the question of what capabilities a Chinese Navy ARG will seek to have, what kind of endurance, presence, persistence should it have, and how often the Chinese Navy wants to have an ARG actually "ready" and out at sea.
I personally can't see the Chinese Navy of the near future seeking to field an ARG in as permanent a way as the USN does or having them out at sea as often as the USN does, however I do think LHDs, LPDs and LSTs will often train and operate together for certain types of amphibious assault contingencies and may occasionally deploy together as sort of a pseudo USN style ARG for temporary periods in certain regions either as part of training or due to an actual contingency, but then after that's done they'll return back to their own units.
The greatest "limitation" of an LST, IMO, for being part of any sort of permanent ARG that is deployed in the USN fashion, is its relatively smaller size and its accompanying small endurance, compared to say an LHD or LPD.
I'm not sure what you mean by not "that large" but 3 LHDs and 6 LPDs is well within current expectations and can fully fill 3 ARGs in a 1 LHD + 2 LPD ORBAT. That would be 3 ARGs more than almost any other navy has. That said, even into the early 2020's the PLAN may not even form anything resembling an "ARG". They've had LPDs and LSTs already for many years and we've heard no whiff of any kind of PLAN ARG in the works involving these two types of ships together. This wouldn't preclude an ad hoc formation of these types into some kind of task force as needed for various contingencies, but that is not the same thing as an actual ARG with all the permanent command and logistics support that this would entail.
Note, I did say "relative to USN".
I expect we can see 3 LHDs by 2025, and at least 6 LPDs also sounds reasonable (I wouldn't be surprised if they went for a few more by then tbh)... but with those numbers it's still "only" about 1/4 of the USN's current (and likely projected) total fleet of LHDs and LPD/LSDs.
Given the Chinese military's likely demands for amphibious assault (i.e.: readiness for a Taiwan contingency, and offering a sort of fleet in being for ECS and SCS scenarios as well), if they really wanted to also deploy an ARG in a USN manner with a permanent basis in a distant region, it would likely greatly stress their projected LHD and LPD fleet.
In other words, when I say the 2020s LHD and LPD fleet is "not that large" it's in the context of their likely requirements of Taiwan/ECS/SCS as well as the idea of deploying a USN style ARG as well. That's why I think it's unlikely they'll seek to deploy ARGs in a USN style in the 2020s, and if they do, it may include an LST component to free up their other units, like maybe having 1 LHD, 1 LPD, and 3-4 LSTs or something, freeing up an extra LPD "per" ARG for other purposes.
Relative to the USN, the PLAN is not trying to play the world's policeman or desiring to win two wars at the same time, so having "only" 1/4 of the USN's ARG's is really not a meaningful comparison. Name me another navy in the world that has or plans to have 3 ARGs. TBH for all I know the PLAN may want to have even more than 3 ARGs in the future; we just don't know. Also, SCS or ECS contingencies are more than met by any preparation for a Taiwan contingency, unless you somehow think the PLAN is trying to plan for both or all three to occur at the same time, so there is no need to add Taiwan + ECS + SCS as if their requirements have to be summed separately into some kind of greater whole.
If you agree that the PLAN is not likely to form ARGs by the early 2020s and also that they will end up with more than 6 LPDs, then the obvious solution is to assign 6 LPDs to the 3 ARGs when they actually form and the other 2-3 (or 5-6 or whatever) to lead their own ad hoc non-permanent task forces, to include LSTs, large LCUs, Zubrs, etc., as the need arises. This size of amphibious forces is already literally unheard outside of the USN.
The other point is that (specifically) for a Taiwan contingency, we aren't talking about just needing 3 ARGs, or even 6 ARGs, or even 10 ARGs. We are talking about every available ship that can land troops/tanks/IFVs/trucks/cargo, including civilian ships, being employed to take a beachhead and expand from there. An ARG in the scope of a Taiwan contingency is just a minor player in a major invasion. Even 3 ARGs all tasked together would just merely constitute a flanking maneuver to complement the main landing force. For SCS contingencies, a single ARG would surely be enough to accomplish whatever the PLAN wanted in that region, however unlikely such a scenario would even occur. For an ECS contingency, somewhere in between these two scenarios. All of this speaks nothing of any need to form permanent "ARG" organizational structures that include LSTs (or any other smaller unit) on a routine basis.
Of course the PLAN's make-up and definition and use of a PLAN ARG is going to vary from what the US policy and goals are.
But it does not mean that the PLAN is not thinking in terms of using LPDs and LSTs together to form Amphibious groups.
I honestly believe that for the PLAN, two of their San Antonio Sixed LPDs, couplded with four of their larger LSTs, and with the escorts to go with it, would form an effective amphibious landing group for their purposes.
And they will be able to put three of those types of groups together...or make the group larger if necessary to achieve their goals.
They are already doing exercises with Type 071s, Type 072As (or IIIs), escroted by Type 054As and various types od DDGs...including more recently adding Type 056s to the mix in the South China Sea.
And since it is pretty clear to me that at some point they are going to bu7ild 2-4 LHA tye vessels, it akes the case evn strnger.
But for right now, they are already exercising with multiple LPDs and on occassion have added several LSTs to that mix...or whatever you care to call the Type 072A or Type 072III, of which they have about 25 of those right their, plus another 10 or so older model Type 072s still in commission.
In the 2020s when they add LHAs to their Amphibiuos mix, they will have even more capability...but we will worry about that when the time comes.
Right now, they are exercising fairly regularly with those other vessels, and there are very few Navies who coul field what they can field (in terms of over all numbers, both in terms of the individual grous, and in terms of the total number of groups), like they are doing.