• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

In the Market - Landing Ship/Platform Dock

These ships have played a major role in HADR (Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief) missions during natural calamities like tsunami. On 26 December 2004, an undersea earthquake occurred in the Indian Ocean off the western coast of Sumatra, Indonesia. The earthquake's magnitude was estimated at 9.15 and lasted nearly ten minutes, whereas most major earthquakes last no more than a few seconds. The earthquake created a 750 mile rupture in the sea bed, displaced an estimated 20 square miles of water and triggered a devastating tsunami. A tsunami is a series of waves generated when water is rapidly displaced on a massive scale-earthquakes, landslides, volcanoes and large meteorite impacts all have the potential to generate a tsunami. The 2004 tsunami was the single worst in recorded history, killing over 300,000 people.

One of the major lessons learned from the 2004 tsunami was the requirement to augment sea-lift capability. This called for acquiring large amphibious vessels. The Singaporean Navy's experience off Sumatra showed that the Endurance-class ships were more versatile than the former East German Navy Frosch-class LSTs operated by the Indonesian Navy. The Frosch-class LSTs were designed to discharge vehicles, personnel and deck cargo by direct beach assault in the Baltic area and European coastlines, and did not carry their own landing craft. The deployment of American vessels to assist in the wake of cyclones, the vital roles that amphibious support ships played in the wake of the Tsunami, and the age of existing amphibious vessels and acute regional security concerns has prompted several navies around Asia to look afresh at their amphibious capabilities, and invest in these assets accordingly.

The US Newport class LST are much larger and faster than earlier LSTs, and represent a complete departure from the previous concept of amphibious Tank Landing Ships. The traditional bow doors, which have characterized LST's construction since the first vessels of this type were built during World War II, were replaced by a 40-ton bow ramp supported by two distinctive derrick arms. The hull form necessary for the attainment of the 20-knot speeds of contemporary amphibious squadrons would not permit bow doors. The Newport-class Tank Landing Ships offer reduced capabilities relative to later LSDs and LPDs. Accommodating up to 400 troops and lacking a well deck, the ships can still load Landing Craft Utility (LCU) vessels from a stern gate and they do have a good speed, up to 20 kt. LCU are used by amphibious forces to transport equipment and troops to the shore. They are capable of transporting tracked or wheeled vehicles and troops from amphibious assault ships to beachheads or piers.

During the 1990s the US sold 20 of their old Newport class LSTs abroad. Many navies bought them at a very low price and fulfilled their sea lift for the first time in years. Morocco, Malaysia and Chile all run their Newports as "lead" of a flotilla with other, smaller LSM/LST (four for Morocco, two for the others). The Newport LSTs went to:

• Spain (2) - to be replaced by (1) BPE
• Australia (2) - to be replaced by (2) BPE
• Malaysia (1) - LST "lead" of a flotilla, burned in 2009 and deleted in 2010
• Taiwan (2) - no replacement plan, could be in the market for bigger ships - Taiwan could build her own amphibious ships.
• Mexico (2) - no replacement plan, could be in the market for bigger ships
• Brazil (1) - no replacement plan, could be in the market for bigger ships
• Morocco (1) - no replacement plan, LST "lead" of a flotilla
• Chile (1) - no replacement plan, LST "lead" of a flotilla

Now many of these navies are looking to replace the old Newport class LSTs with new builds, each having different specifications. Today the US is selling their old larger Austin class LPDs off for a very good price. Some navies that didn't get Newports are buying the Austins. The Austin LPDs are much bigger than the Newport. An Austin has a crew of 420, sans the air component, about twice the 225 crew of the Newport LST. The small navies of South Africa, Peru or Chile might be pressed to finding the personnel, though the larger Mexican navy has enough personnel. The main difference would be in the complexity of machinery (steam engines) and the degree of automatisation, which is pretty low in US 1960s-era LPDs. Building the same nowadays with CODAG and higher automatization for cargo handling could probably design it with less than 250 men crew. So in the near future, many shipyards are offering new builds to replace them.

1. Argentina bought the American LSD-5 GUNSTON HALL, a World War II era LSD-1 Ashland-class ship, in 1970, and operated it until 1975. Argentina sought to acquire its first LPD-type ships, following the completion of the two Mistral-class ships in France. Two French Navy Ouragan-class LPDs dating from the 1960s have been retired and were slated for transfer to the South American country, but the transfer was cancelled because of concern about asbestos contamination.
2. Australia's Defence White Paper 2009 stated that "A new strategic sealift ship, based on a proven design, will be acquired."
3. Brazil has an LST, plus two Ceará class LSDs (ex-USN, built in the 1950s) that are probably falling apart. Brazil will probably be in the market for something rather bigger.
4. Chile ordered in late 2009 their ex-US Newport LST replacement, a Damen Schelde Enforcer 8000, which will cost 93 million Euros. The vessel would be the largest ship ever built in Chilean shipyards.
5. Germany's plans remain in flux.
6. Greece acquired LSD-9, a World War II era LSD-13 Casa Grande class ship, in 1953; renamed NAFKRATOUSSA, the ship was scrapped in 1971. LSD 21 FORT MANDAN, another World War II era LSD-13 Casa Grande class ship, was transferred to Hellenic Navy under the Security Assistance Program 23 January 1971. Renamed Nafkratousa (L-153), she was decommisioned in February 2000. Greece continues to operate a number of smaller LSTs, and might be expected to respond to Turkey's LPD plans with an LPD of her own, but no such plans have been discussed publicly, nor are any such plans likely to be taken seriously until the Greek financial crisis is resolved later in the decade.
7. India is planning on buying three or four Multi-Role Support Ship (MRSS), for which a variety of international designs have been proposed.
8. Israel briefly considered an Aegis-equipped LPD before the idea was dropped as too expensive.
9. Italy is planning to build three LPDs, similar to the Rotterdam.
10. Malaysia is interested in buying two 18,000-ton amphibious ships.
11. Mexico might be a market for ex-US LPDs, or the cheaper end of the new LPD market.
12. South Africa considered buying LPDs in 2007, decided the extra capability provided by LHDs was worth the expense, and has done nothing.
13. Pakistan would seem likely to follow India's lead in developing an expanded amphbious capability, but no plans have been announced.
14. The Philippines are apparently in the market for an LSD, though details are lacking.
15. Portugal's NPL (Navio Polivalente Logístico) Landing Platform Dock (LPD) program has been confirmed by the MoD but a decision regarding the construction was to be cleared under the LPM (Lei de Programação Militar) procurement law revision planned for 2009, and remained on hold in early 2011.
16. Turkey has ambitious plans.
17. Vietnam would seem to be a leading candidate for an LPD, since it has the world's second largest marine corps, and a shipbuilding industry that ranks 5th in the world in terms of total annual tonnage production.