Are large amphibious assaults obsolete

Discussion in 'Naval' started by Pathfinder, Apr 10, 2016.

Share This Page

  1. Pathfinder

    Pathfinder Lieutenant Colonel

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Likes Received:
    2,479
    Location:
    United-States
    AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: ARE THE COSTS AND RISKS TOO HIGH?
    ANDREW M. TURNER

    "The rise in cost of developing and maintaining an amphibious force in readiness and the risk associated with amphibious operations, in terms of lives, ships, and equipment that could potentially be lost, have raised concerns specifically over the utility of conducting amphibious assaults in the 21st century. Furthermore, the proliferation and development of sea denial weapon systems combined with a reduced naval capability to counter anti-access, area-denial threats have forced military leaders to reconsider the use of amphibious assaults to achieve operational objectives. "

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a546082.pdf

    Amphibious Assaults: Obligatory Or Obsolete?
    AUTHOR LCdr James J. Bird, USN

    "Conducting an amphibious assault against a well defended beach, defended by precision guided munitions and being continuously provided with real-time satellite reconnaissance is probably impossible. Just as an Allied cross channel invasion would have been 50
    years ago at the most heavily defended positions along the French coast. The position the United States found itself during World War II was not whether or not amphibious operations were desirable but that they were absolutely necessary."


    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1990/BJJ.htm

    I think smaller scale amphibious landings and inserting special forces are definitely not obsolete however massive beach assaults could be if we look at it from a cost perspective. An adversary can cause a lot of damage with naval mines, and anti ship missiles before you even get men on the beach. I also don't think that a lot of navy's are not prepared to provide adequate amounts of fire support to a landing force. You can't alway rely on having air superiority and in that case you need sea based big guns to pound the enemies defenses, this doesn't really exist in our navy anymore after the Iowa Class ships were retired. The Zumwalt isn't ready to replace it yet and its capability to provide fire support for extended periods is not know and is even being doubted by some.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2016
  2. Atilla

    Atilla Major

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2015
    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    1,323
    Location:
    Turkey
    I do not believe that a D-Day or Gallipoli style amphibious operation will ever be possible again, the technology does not allow it to be successful. The risks are extremely high. The attacker will have too many casualties by the time he gets enough soldiers on the beech.

    Modern and future amphibious ops must be carried out in smaller scale and must be very swift. If a larger amphibious operation is conducted the amphibious force must spam CIWS and RIM-116 RAM's, a new ship needs to be built that can do that. It needs to be a ship that is good enough to sail rough oceans and carry many RIM-166's. There need to be several of them accompanying an amphibious operation. This can help keep the main LHD force safe. Landing craft will need protection against incoming missiles, mini guns or lasers are needed to do this. They also need an electronic protection suit to jam these missiles.

    In future amphibious forces need to be smaller but have more protection.
     
Loading...