Large Amphibious Assault Vessels

How do they fix that? I am curious, like you mentioned - the F-35B's tremendous exhaust of heat and pressure on the deck is like having a giant blow torch on the same spot day-in-day-out, wouldn't the steel eventually just deform and crack under these condition?


BTW, good essay, was reading about this last night.
Maybe already posted before:




What is interesting in the article is this:

"Even when it isn’t launching and landing vertically or being shot at, the Harrier is delicate and hard to fly owing to the complex vertical-flight controls and the minimal lift and maneuverability of the tiny wings. By the early 2000s a full third of all Harriers had been

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, killing 45 Marines."


That is incredible assertion - one third of the Harrier fleet crashed and destroyed and 45 marines killed and more maimed and injured. It makes you wonder why marines still insist on having VTOL. Looking at the flight profile, with Harrier being flying slow (~around 1000 km/h) with extremely short range and small payload, I thought making Osprey into a "fighter"/ground support may be even better option (than Harrier) and safer too and Osprey can loiter in the theater of operation longer too. Its just one of my outrageous idea!

Ultra said:

That is incredible assertion - one third of the Harrier fleet crashed and destroyed and 45 marines killed and more maimed and injured. It makes you wonder why marines still insist on having VTOL. Looking at the flight profile, with Harrier being flying slow (~around 1000 km/h) with extremely short range and small payload, I thought making Osprey into a "fighter"/ground support may be even better option (than Harrier) and safer too and Osprey can loiter in the theater of operation longer too. Its just one of my outrageous idea!

Click to expand...

Because ...

The toll has been little noted by the public and the media because the Harrier tends to kill pilots one at a time. In contrast, the V-22 Osprey, a problem-plagued troop transport plane, has killed as many as 19 Marines in a single crash.

The Harrier and the Osprey are the first two planes the Marine Corps has acquired in pursuing its long-range vertical vision. A third plane is under active development and several others are being conceived.

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

Point two is about the well deck and simply providing more room for air ops.

Point one is your real issue I believe.

...

Click to expand...

not really, Jeff:

Jura said:

...

1. "The second America-class big-deck amphib, the USS Tripoli, is now being built with the F-35B modifications built in from the start."
2. "Unlike previous amphibious assault ships, the first two America-class big deck amphibs are being built without a well deck in order to optimize the platform for aviation assets such as the MV-22 Osprey and F-35B."

...

Click to expand...

to me, point 2 suggests the USS America "is optimized for F-35B", but according to point 1, it is not

as for the word "sustained" I used ... shortly before posting, I read the article
SNA 2014: Heat From F-35, MV-22 Continue to Plague Big Deck Amphibs

where

Capt. Chris Mercer, head of Navy’s amphibious warfare

Click to expand...

said

Since the LHA is not designed to support a sustained air campaign,

Click to expand...

etc. (the last paragraph)

now, since I'm a non-native English speaker, I'm not going to go into any play of words ... I'm just curious about the USS America: commissioned in Fall of 2014 but spending time in a dry dock

Jura said:

not really, Jeff:

to me, point 2 suggests the USS America "is optimized for F-35B", but according to point 1, it is not

Click to expand...

Jura, the America has been built to allow for more F-35B and V-22 Operations than the LHDs, therefore "optimized for it." There is no mistake in that, there is no conflict in that.

They have more room to accommodate them in the hanger, and space for their equipment and stores. Therefore, it has no well deck...the Tripoli will be the same.

The America was also about finished with construction before the F-35B was tested aboard the Wasp. They have found things they need to do (as the other article stated) to provide a couple of landing spots on deck to allow for higher cycle rates of operations. As stated (and I believe as you now agree) those are not the "only" two spots that the F-35B can land...they are the ones they will conduct the high cyclical operations from.

That is what is happening. There is no big mistake or error.

There are however, and probably always will be, people (in and out of the military) who have issues with the F-35B and will look for any reason to naysay it. You will be able to find quotes probably from now on to back that type of thing up.

But there is no big issue here as far as I am concerned.

A new class ship is going through normal learning and growth, and it is doing so at the same time they are introducing a completely new aircraft to it...which itself is going through the same.

Jura said:

SNA 2014: Heat From F-35, MV-22 Continue to Plague Big Deck Amphiba

Click to expand...

Jura said:

now, since I'm a non-native English speaker, I'm not going to go into any play of words ... I'm just curious about the USS America: commissioned in Fall of 2014 but spending time in a dry dock

Click to expand...

The LHDs have been built (as will the LHAs after the America and Tripoli) to provide for Air Assault and for Amphibious assault. They have Attack helos and strike fighters to help in CAS of the troops ashore, but not as much room or stores as the American and Tripoli will have for that type of thing.

The America and Tripoli give up the Amphibious assault in order to accommodate that. But they still have the air assault capability with helos and Opsreys.

It seems to me you are looking for quotes to dig into a notion that there was some kind of big mistake made regarding America and the F-35B.

As explained above...there is not.

As I said, the America was designed for it...but it had not been tested aboard ship while it was building. The America is also a new class LHA. it is in dry dock for multiple reasons associated with it having completed its trials, an initial cruise, and being commissioned.

One of those reasons is the F-35B adjustments they are making. There are many other reasons.

This is not abnormal for a new class vessel of this type.

All of the LHDs and the LHAs will accommodate and support sustained operations of Harriers or F-35Bs. Not a "campaign," like a carrier can do...but CAS missions for its troops.

If they need a large scale campaign, they will get more help from the carriers.

Jeff Head said:

...

It seems to me you are looking for quotes to dig into a notion that there was some kind of big mistake made regarding America and the F-35B.

...

Click to expand...

Jeff, there are numerous articles which mock the LHA-6 (plus the F-35 project) ... what I've been looking for instead is to find out what's really going on (hard to tell in a land-locked country LOL), and your answers were helpful to me!

Jura said:

Jeff, there are numerous articles which mock the LHA-6 (plus the F-35 project)

Click to expand...

Of course they do.

In a nation as large and populace as the US, with a free press, you will find that all day long if you want.

Jura said:

... what I've been looking for instead is to find out what's really going on (hard to tell in a land-locked country LOL), and your answers were helpful to me!

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I hope I have given you ample points on the other side of the conversation to allow you to reach your own conclusions considering all sides.

From my perspective, the salient point are:

1) The US Marines wanted their own "Jeep" carriers so they could conduct more air operations when needed. The America class LHA s that answer. They are building two of that class without a well deck. This is controversial...including with numerous hard core Marines who believe any Marine Assault ship needs a well deck. I have explained the reasons why they are doing this.

2) The F-35B is a part of a HUGE program that will restructure the bulk of US combat aircraft over the next 50+ years. It too is controversial...and will be the most expensive weapons program in US history. Since they wanted a common air frame, compromises in capabilities for each to accommodate this were made. since it was a "strike" aircraft from the beginning, this would not be as impactful as might otherwise be the case. The "B" variant for the US Marines, as a STOVL aircraft, has the most difficult engineering considerations. It will be far more effective and capable than the Harrier IIs...more range, supersonic capable, more stores, more stealth, much better sensors, sensor fusion...but it also brings with it some caveats, one of them being higher heat from the exhaust.

3) Since the America was almost completed before the F-35B did its flight tests on the Wasp, they found that the heat on the deck of the ship could pose a problem in certain high tempo high cyclical operations. Not in regular operations normally associated with the aircraft...but in times of very necessary, high tempo operations. So. they determined that they needed to make two landing spots on the deck that could handle these specific circumstances.

4) Since those conditions were not built into the America, they determined they would have to be retrofitted.

5) Since the America is the first of a new class, it needs other fixes and adjustments which they are doing as a part of a maintenance period for her. This is not abnormal for new class vessels. They intend to apply the F-35B fix at the same time.

6) They will build these same fixes into the Tripoli which is currently under constructions (both the F-35B fix and the others identified).

7) They will most likely retrofit two landing spots on the Wasp LHDs too, as they go through their normal maintenance rotations.

Jeff Head said:

...

Fair enough. I hope I have given you ample points on the other side of the conversation to allow you to reach your own conclusions considering all sides.

...

Click to expand...

thank you, Jeff, I appreciate this ... my main point was (which I should've formulated better, though) that it would not be that easy to integrate the F-35B into ships like the Japanese Helicopter Destroyers; the Italian Cavour; the Australian Canberra; the Korean Dokdo, and those ships would likely be nonoperational for months while back-fitted, as the USS America is ... but I suppose this will not be an issue for the QE-class (you know I'm a big fan of the Royal Navy and a Squadron of F-35Bs will be operated off their decks since the day one!

FORBIN said:

Click to expand...

The Spearhead class is really a fast, inter-theater transport. Can carry 600 tons and 315 troops and transport them.

But they are not meant to do any type of "assault."

I would not call them a "Large Deck Amphibious Assault" ship, which is what this thread was meant for.

Since they are a relatively small, unique class, we do not have a separate thread for them...so most of the reports have been going to the US Military News Thread, or the US Navy Photo page.

But they are not meant to do any type of "assault."

Click to expand...

That is why they depend of MSC