U.S. Marine Corps Is Getting Back to Its Amphibious Roots

After more than a decade fighting land wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Marine Corps wants to regain its role as America's middleweight expeditionary force

By Otto Kreisher - November 8, 2012

Marines assigned to Amphibious Assault Vehicle Platoon, Combat Assault Company, 3rd Marine Regiment, make their way to the amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) during Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2012. The world’s largest international maritime exercise, the biennial RIMPAC provides a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships that are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world’s oceans. The Marine Corps, after more than a decade as a de facto second land army, is working to return to its amphibious roots. U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Mike Meares

The two naval services agree that 38 amphibious ships would be needed to provide the two MEB lift that the current national security strategy says is required to meet possible challenges. In light of budget limitations, they have agreed on a compromise goal of 33 “gators.”

But the long-range shipbuilding plan would provide only 29 or 30 for the next few years, slowly building toward 33. And that plan is considered fragile, given the expected limits of the future shipbuilding budgets, the rising cost of new ships, and the competing demands for those funds.

A landing craft air cushion departs the well deck aboard the amphibious transport dock ship USS New York (LPD 21). New York and the embarked 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit (24th MEU) are part of the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group deployed supporting maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility. A compromise goal of 33 amphibious ships in the long-range shipbuilding plan may be difficult to reach. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Zane Ecklund

Most of the current amphibious ships are produced by the new Huntington-Ingalls or by its predecessor, Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding.

Each of the three-ship ARGs are built around a “big deck” amphibious assault ship, which can carry more than 40 aircraft, usually a mixture of helicopters, Ospreys and Harriers, and more than 1,600 Marines – and much of their vehicles, equipment, and supplies. Most also can hold three LCACs or a mixture of other landing craft and AAV7 amphibious assault vehicles (AAVs) in a “well deck” that can be flooded for amphibious operations.

The 33-ship gator fleet would have 11 of the big decks. But currently there are eight Wasp-class LHDs and the last of the old Tarawa-class LHAs, the Peleliu, which will be retired soon. Two new LHAs of the America class are under construction, with a third planned. The America (LHA 6) and the second ship are “aviation centric” and do not have well decks to host landing craft. At the Marines’ insistence, the third ship will restore the well deck.

The fleet also is to have at least 11 amphibious transport docks (LPDs). The old Austin-class ships are being replaced by 12 new, larger LPD-17 San Antonio-class ships, of which 11 are built or under construction. They can carry up to four helicopters or Ospreys, two LCACs or 14 AAVs, and up to 800 Marines, plus vehicles and supplies.

The first Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) USNS Montford Point, rapidly takes shape at General Dynamics’ NASSCO shipyard. The MLP is a key part of Seabasing. NASSCO photo

The third type in each ARG usually is a dock landing ship (LSD), which primarily transports heavy equipment to be carried ashore by either two or four LCACs. They also can host two helicopters and up to 500 Marines. Currently there are 12 in two classes. Construction of a planned replacement, called LSD(X), has been delayed for budgetary reasons.

The Lewis and Clark-class T-AKEs are classified as dry cargo and ammunition ships but also can carry fuel or bulk water supplies. The 14 planned T-AKEs will be part of the MSC’s support fleet, servicing the carrier or amphibious battle groups, or will be put into the Maritime Prepositioning Fleet, ready to support an operation ashore. They also might play an important role in revitalized amphibious capabilities, if Goulding has his way.

The last of the 14 is under construction at General Dynamics’ NASSCO shipyard.

A new asset for amphibious operations will be the Mobile Landing Platforms (MLPs), which will provide a long-sought means of getting heavy equipment and supplies from MSC’s larger supply ships to the shore without use of dedicated port facilities.

Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) 73 approaches Bellows Beach at Marine Corps Training Area Bellows during the biennial Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2012 exercise. The Ship to Shore Connector (SSC) program is underway to replace the LCACs with a more capable hovercraft. Canadian Forces photo by MCpl Marc-Andre Gaudreault, Canadian Forces Combat Camera

The MLPs are intended to nest alongside a supply ship to receive the cargo. They then can lower themselves in the sea to allow LCACs or other landing craft to enter docking slots where they can take on cargo for transport to the beach. The MLPs also can host heavy-lift helicopters to transport some loads.

NASSCO received a contract to build the first two of three planned MLPs last year. The first is to be delivered in 2015.

The three ships will have names rich in Marine Corps history – Montford Point, where the first black Marines were trained for World War II; John Glenn, for the Marine fighter pilot, astronaut, and U.S. senator; and Lewis B. Puller, for the legendary Marine officer who fought in the Banana Wars, World War II, and Korea.

The means to get the Marines and their gear ashore from the gators are slated for improvements, although one of the key modernization programs suffered a major setback with the cancellation last year of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV).

The EFV was to have replaced the Vietnam-vintage AAV7s with a high-tech wonder that could race toward the beach at 30 knots, nearly four times the speed of the existing amtracks. But after two decades and billions of dollars were expended, the soaring cost, schedule delays, and technology problems forced its termination.