You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Science & Technology
Army to form it's own Navy?
2008-05-15
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#9  BH6, until the Repubs back away fromt he trough, as a group and a matter of default policy, they will remain in the minority.
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-05-15 16:55  

#8  True, and the Army actually did perform more amphib landings then we did in the Pacific during WWII. Luckily, our propaganda is pretty damn good.

If Hunter is forcing or trying to stuff unwanted gear down the navy's throat then he's an asshole like Trent Lott. BTW - I do like Hunter's stance on immigration. I work in a joint command for a couple of senior navy officers - I have been able to hear first hand how much of this actually goes on - depressing - Repub politicians jumping on the pork bandwagon.
Posted by: Broadhead6   2008-05-15 16:17  

#7  When I was in the Army (1970's and 80's) it was said the Army had more vessels than the Navy and more aircraft than the Air Force.
Posted by: crosspatch   2008-05-15 13:37  

#6  The Army already has its own Navy.

MOS 88K (watercraft operator) and the associated warrant officer grades, and look up the LSVs and Tugs they operate.

In Vietnam, they operated a lot of "Mike" boats.

Watercraft Operators are primarily responsible for navigation, cargo operations and supervising other Soldiers on Army watercraft. Some of your duties as a Watercraft Operator may include:

* Navigating watercraft
* Consulting maps, charts, weather reports and navigation equipment
* Operating amphibious craft during troop landings
* Docking and undocking vessels
* Sending and receiving messages with radios, beacons and signal flags
* Operating and maintaining lifeboats and vessel fire equipment
* Securing all types of cargo using capstans, winches, hoists and davits
* Reporting navigational hazards to the vessel master while underway
* Identifying and interpreting single-letter international code signal flags
* Maintaining boats and deck equipment
* Dropping and weighing anchors
* Keeping ship logs

* Navigating watercraft to complete a variety of missions
* Voyage planning
* Beaching and retracting landing craft
* Towing vessels and barges in harbors and inter-coastal waterways
* Maintaining vessel charts, publications and orders
* Keeping the vessel logbook

Army 88K actually get the Merchant "Able Seaman" rating as part of their job.

And the LSV Besson class is one of the usual boats they crew - these can fit a big bunch of supplies, or armored vehicles, and deliver them on the beach, or even up the river if its big/deep enough.








here is one packed full of Tanks



For a very high res of the back end, the well, hit the link below

USAV MG Robert Smalls, Sail ARMY!
Posted by: OldSpook   2008-05-15 12:51  

#5  Austal USA To Build Catamaran For Naval Research

Feb 2004

Austal has provided four other high-speed catamarans to the U.S. military for experimental use: the HSV-1X Joint Venture, now in Army service; the TSV-1X Spearhead, also in Army use; HSV-2 Swift, delivered last summer to the Navy; and the Westpac Express, leased by the Military Sealift Command for use by the Marine Corps
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2008-05-15 12:39  

#4  Before everyone does the you-ain't-pulling-yer-load-hoopla-routine, three services have been experimenting with high-speed vessels for over half a decade.

The Army's Spearhead TSV-1X has been around since 2001. It's leased from Austal (Australia) and is a converted version of a commercial high-speed ferry.

The Navy's version is called the Swift(HSV-2).

The Marines are leasing a commercial high-speed vessel and operating it from Okinawa. It's a different hull design than the other two.

As for the Sea Fighter, there are some... performance limitations. Also, since it was designed as an experimental craft, there's going to have to be some modifications and improvements made to make it fleet-worthy vessel.
Posted by: Pappy   2008-05-15 12:34  

#3  Good call Al.

Lawmaker pressures Navy to use unwanted catamaran


June 15, 2007

In a move sure to upset the admirals, House Armed Services ranking member Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., is pushing the Navy to transform an experimental catamaran developed in San Diego and long opposed by the service into an integral part of the fleet with a defined mission.

Link Here
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2008-05-15 12:31  

#2  Don't forget that, in WWII, the Army actually had more vessels that the Navy. The Army has maintained a "naval" capability for over 150 years (most recently carrying out an attack during operation Just Cause).

This ship looks like a successor to the LST, the last of which was retired by Bill Clinton. This vessel carries the same number of troop and vehicles as the LST. It is funny how old concepts keep reappearing with new technology.

I suspect this vessel is too large for the Army to "get away with". This may be an attempt to force the Navy's hand to provide support that they haven't been willing to give. Kind of like talk in the 90's of the Army taking over the A-10 sqns. This forced the Air Force to keep planes they were thinking of retiring.

Al
Posted by: Frozen Al   2008-05-15 12:16  

#1  I guess you could think of it as a bigger, badder LST. And it's not like the Navy kills itself to help out the Army.
Posted by: Jonathan   2008-05-15 12:13  

00:00