Israel has a lot invested in doing littoral combat right. And, right now, the IDF is sending their Merkava Main Battle Tank to sea in LCTs.
Rather than call the LCTs mere landing craft, why not call them Littoral Combat Boats (LCBs)? That’s what they are.
Look. There’s plenty for IDF littoral combat forces to do. There’s plenty for smaller forces to do nearby–and given the constantly-increasing demands upon Israel’s “higher end” naval assets, the Israeli Navy seems to have decided to travel down a high-lo development path for littoral combat.
Thus the LCB.
Israel has hunted for a multi-mission littoral solution since about the nineties. After evaluating the really high (LPD-17) and high (LCS-1) end options, Israel threw in the towel on the littoral stuff, settling for a relatively conventional “small navy” supplement of MEKO-100 corvettes and some Dolphin Class subs.
But interestingly, to bulk up amphibious support and offshore fires, Israel is pursuing a decidedly low-end option–the LCB.
According to a September 22, 2009 Jerusalem Post article (no direct link available, sorry), Israel purchased several landing craft (the IDF has not mounted an amphibious assault since the early ’80s). Why? Well, the Post article gives a hint–it all goes back to Gaza:
“In both conflicts, the navy faced almost zero resistance at sea, and during Cast Lead it was able to provide close artillery support for the Paratroopers Brigade – which maneuvered along the coast.”
In Gaza, fire support was provided by Sa’ar boats, and those little ships used their tiny guns to great effect, hitting some 200 targets during Cast Lead.
{ 4 comments }
With the recent discovery of massive amounts of natural gas offshore, and threats from Hezbollah on any offshore infrastructure, Israel will need to beef up its navy in a big way, and the gas should help pay for it.
Sounds like a Carlton Meyer concept from G2mil.
http://www.g2mil.com/lcugunboats.htm
You’re quite right. Of course they add an amphibious element! I mean, they’re landing craft, right? I’m just trying to point out an alternative use for when the Sa’ars are, oh, employed elsewhere. Aside from engaging in traditional amphibious operations, this…well, It’s cheap firepower, an additional threat, and strong reinforcement if required ashore.
Adding a tank to a landing craft offers a lot more flexibility than most folks expect. Thinking of them as nifty little combat boats for the littoral might help shake a few rigid conceptual boxes, you know?
I wonder if the purpose of the whole LCT buy has been misunderstood. Israel has enough small boats with 25mm guns and anti-tank guided missiles to take care of the fire support mission along the shoreline, backed up by the Sa’ar boats with 76mm guns as used on Beirut in 2006 and a whole lot of air support. I might going out on a limb here, but suppose the LCTs are being acquired to be able to insert a tank or mechanised infantry company over the beach and attack from the flank rather than having to proceed up fairly predictable corridors into Southern Lebanon and Gaza.
Comments on this entry are closed.