[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Posted by Ralph Wood on December 10, 2025, 13:54:18, in reply to "Meaning"
If they stick to what is presented here, it looks okay. But, if they start making major changes to the thing, it is doomed. They claim they basically just want to "standardize all the parts" for production. Looks good. If we next read they're changing the propulsion system, adding survivability, altering dimensions, etc. (all things done with the frigates) then kiss the whole thing goodbye. "Off the shelf" has to be that, otherwise it is a meaningless term. And a meaningless waste.
Time will tell. 
Previous Message
Any changes from this point on must be approved by SecNav. Still not alot of confidence they have solved the problems. Previous Message
The Secretary of the Navy HAS approved the change...
https://www.twz.com/sea/this-will-be-the-navys-new-medium-landing-ship
"The Navy announced the LSM decision today in a video on social media that includes statements from Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle, and Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Eric Smith."
“As I announced last week, we are fundamentally reshaping how the Navy builds and fields its fleet. Today, I’m taking the second major step in that effort, selecting the design for our Medium Landing Ship, an operationally driven, fiscally disciplined choice that puts capability in the fleet on a responsible timeline,” Secretary Phelan says in today’s video.
If you read the whole thing, you find the Army design you mentioned was only ever considered as an interim, not the actual production product:
"The Navy has also talked in the past about acquiring some number of interim LSMs from Bollinger Shipyards, possibly utilizing a design the company developed for Israel called the Israeli Logistics Support Vessel (ILSV). The ILSV was itself derived from an open-ocean optimized subclass of the General Frank S. Besson class Logistics Support Vessel (LSV) that is in service now as part of the U.S. Army’s obscure watercraft fleet, which you can learn more about here."
We will see what happens. Both this LSM and unmanned surface vessels have been under consideration for several years now. Both are part of the move to a more distributed fleet, which has been shown (as an alternate choice) in the fleet structure since 2023, or so. It could be seen that we were moving this way, and that it was coming. What has surprised me is the speed it came at. One moment, the literature made it look years away. Then, suddenly, "we're doing it."
We need it. A distributed, networked force is the only solution to generating the needed numbers for a war in the Pacific. I doubt anyone is more hopeful than myself that this works. If it gets screwed up, I know of no alternatives, and we will go in with the existing force, which will not be adequate. There is a lot on the line. Previous Message
The US Army (Isreali version) of the LSM has been dropped and the Dutch version has been chosen. All the usual suspects are building the ships.
MAYBE the only saving grace is that any changes have to be approved by the Secretary of the Navy personally.
I think Bollinger is involved in the OPV debacle, but we'll see what happens.
Responses