Mobile Landing Platform or Mexeflote?

[t68]

Old news for a lot of people here, General Dynamics has been awarded the contract for watered down version of the new Mobile Landing Platform Ships (MLP).

In WWII Normandy invasion they had they Mulberry harbours, problems with the design was that they were liable to harassment by enemy gunfire, reduced unloading times until the outer breakwaters were in place for inclement weather would disrupt supplies to the beach, how much they could carry and manpower intensive.

The British came up with Mexeflote in the 1960's and still remain in service till this day, being available in three different payload capacities of between 60,000kg up to 198,000kg and can be put end to end to create a floating roadway. But without breakwaters would suffer the same problems as the Mulberry in rough weather.

What is a Mexeflote | Think Defence
A Trip Down Mexeflote Lane | Think Defence

Enter the MLP it can stand off out of enemy harassment fire, but limited to the sea state 3 when offloading it has the same limitations to the others in rough weather, large sealift ship can offload their cargo safely beyond the horizon and once off loaded the MLP can either distribute the cargo or hold on to it for longer periods of time (it doesn’t have to hit the beach then and their) or move to another location lots of benefits for 744millon US.

General Dynamics NASSCO: News Releases: 2011 - General Dynamics NASSCO Awarded $744 Million Contract to Build Mobile Landing Platform Ships
http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_MLP_Concept_NASSCO_lg.jpg

The RAN bought two Mexeflote for $?? For HMAS Choules, out of the different ways of moving store to the beach which would be the more efficient way double handling the store’s or direct offload via a temporary pier.

 

[Belesari]

How stable is it in rough conditions?

[Mod edit]
Please don't quote the entire preceding post unless you're replying to it point by point. Everyone will know you're replying to the previous post without you quoting it in full.

This is covered by the posting guidelines.

PJI

 

[t68]

How stable is it in rough conditions?

According to the site for the Mexeflote, 1.5 meter waves which are Sea state level 3, according to this site MLP can only off load with ship with side port ramps up to Sea state level 3.

The US Navy’s Mobile Landing Platform Ships (MLP)

once the beachhead is secure without port facilities would the MLP be needed?

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Mexeflote-03.jpg

 

[StingrayOZ]

In exploring some of those links I notice the US seems to have a maxi-mexe system

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/NAVY_INLS_RRDF_and_HSV_Swift_Liberia_lg.jpg

Looks like you could build a much larger port at sea, or handle rougher conditions if not as flexable. Large non dock ships could pull up, unload, pick up and smaller ships could then ferry to and from the port at sea.

The MLP seems to just be a more formalised version of that as a ship.Which seems a bit odd but I suppose would free up LHD's and such from performing this type of mission. I would have thought they might cover where the LCAC are stored providing double the deck area (further elevated handy for helis etc) while also protecting the LCAC while on open/rough seas.

 

[swerve]

This thread is based on a false premise. MLP & Mexeflotes aren't alternatives.

The MLP is a large ship (larger than the RAN's new LHDs), costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

Mexeflotes are floating pontoons with an optional power pack, which can be carried on ships a fraction of the tonnage of an MLP.

If you bought an MLP, you might put Mexeflotes or the US equivalent on board it.

 

[B.Smitty]

The USN has a Mexeflote equivalent called the Improved Navy Lighterage System.

Whatever Floats Your Tank: USN’s Improved Navy Lighterage System

 

[t68]

Yes they are very different beast when looking at them side by side, but the function are the same at the end of the day, once a safe harbour has been created to bring in supplies not brought in by the Amphibious group (LHD/LSD) but by auxiliary sealift where no port facility are available

Once the beach head has been established both will have the same function, the obvious difference are that Mexeflote will operate closer to the beach head than the MLP which will provide over the horizon port facility and brought in by other means (LCAC) but with the MLP having the option being able to be pressed into service quicker and the auxiliary sealift standing off over the horizion, both systems have the same limitations in regards to the ability to off load their store’s in sea states higher than level 3.Auxillary sealift ships can also bring in the Mexeflote to work in co-junction with assets brought in by the Amphibious group.

For large Navy like the USN it has the luxury of being able to dedicated assets in regards to large ship for a defined purpose, but for medium Navy like the RN or smaller navy like the RAN with smaller budgets is it a luxury that they should be thinking of in the future or stay with the tried and true method?
http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_MLP_Concept_NASSCO_lg.jpg
File:US Navy 080722-N-1424C-509 The Military Sealift Command large, medium roll-on-roll-off ship USNS Pililaau (T-AKR 304) is anchored off the coast of Red Beach.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
File:Aust. Army LCM-8.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[swerve]

Same function as a Mexeflote? How so? One is basically an offshore floating wharf, for the transfer of materials from transport ships. It will carry landing craft, Mexeflote equivalents & the like. It's a pretty big ship.

Mexeflotes could, in theory, be locked together into a big enough platform to be used as an offshore floating transfer station (i.e. what an MLP is for), but in practice, they're used as either lighters, or pontoons in a floating roadway. An MLP can't be used in either of those ways. It's a specialised ship for doing one thing that Mexeflotes can do, but in practice rarely if ever do, and doing that particular thing much better than would be possible with Mexeflotes. It's completely unsuitable for the main roles of Mexeflotes..

Mexeflotes & an MLP would work very well together, with the Mexeflotes acting as lighters between the MLP & shore.

 

[StevoJH]

T68,

Think of the MLP as a larger equivalent of a Bay Class LSD.

A Bay class carries Mexeflotes, which it uses to transport vehicles and equipment from ship-to-shore.

The MLP just does this on a MUCH grander scale.

 

[t68]

From my understanding of the MLP concept is that it cannot carry store’s over large distance (open deck) and is designed as a transfer station at sea (floating pier).Yes Mexeflote will be carried on the side of the LHD but will not be used in the primary assault on the beach head but will be used when the beach head is secure.

What I am trying to get to is when Auxiliary sea lift ships are arriving in the AO, when the beach and surrounding maritime area is secure instead of double handling from the Auxiliary ship to the MLP then down to the LCAC, would it make more sense to move store directly from the Auxiliary ship to the Mexeflote or equivalent US type directly to the beach. They both have the same limitation to off loading stores in high sea states. Yes I can see that the MLP will have the higher turnaround for the Auxiliary sea lift ship once it has unloaded it store and then next ship can move into take its position whist still moving stores from the MLP to the shore, I never said it does not have its benefits. But considering how many Mexeflote or equivalent could be purchased with the 744million USD for 3 vessels.

Cargotec’s innovative ‘Test Article Vehicle Transfer System’ (TAVTS) can transfer battle tanks between ships at sea

 

[swerve]

What is the purpose of an MLP? It's for when you are handling large volumes of materials, & don't have a port. You use it to facilitate the transfer of cargo between ships & lighters (landing craft, Mexeflotes), which then transfer materials to shore.

If you're operating on the scale of the RAN, I don't see the point of an MLP. The RAN won't be handling enough stuff to make it worthwhile. There won't be multiple cargo ships offloading onto the MLP, then heading off again while the MLP keeps offloading onto the smaller craft which take stuff ashore.

 

[StevoJH]

What I am trying to get to is when Auxiliary sea lift ships are arriving in the AO, when the beach and surrounding maritime area is secure instead of double handling from the Auxiliary ship to the MLP then down to the LCAC, would it make more sense to move store directly from the Auxiliary ship to the Mexeflote or equivalent US type directly to the beach. They both have the same limitation to off loading stores in high sea states. Yes I can see that the MLP will have the higher turnaround for the Auxiliary sea lift ship once it has unloaded it store and then next ship can move into take its position whist still moving stores from the MLP to the shore, I never said it does not have its benefits. But considering how many Mexeflote or equivalent could be purchased with the 744million USD for 3 vessels.

Here is the difference. Offloading directly from ship to Mexeflote would most likely require a dedicated amphib. The MLP may allow you to use non specialised shipping?

 

[t68]

Here is the difference. Offloading directly from ship to Mexeflote would most likely require a dedicated amphib. The MLP may allow you to use non specialised shipping?

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Mexeflote-03.jpg

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/NAVY_Lighterage_USS_Seay_Bradleys_lg.jpg

A Trip Down Mexeflote Lane Sir Tristram - L3505b (naval history.net) – Think Defence

Not sure if a conventional RO-RO would be able to marry up with either the MLP or Mexeflote unless it has side opening ramp for which the MLP has been designed for, but obviously container ship with there own crane could in theory.

 

[Anixtu]

Not sure if a conventional RO-RO would be able to marry up with either the MLP or Mexeflote unless it has side opening ramp for which the MLP has been designed for, but obviously container ship with there own crane could in theory.

http://www.rafnews.co.uk/stories/732/500_akrotiriweb8.jpg

The Point class ROROs which are fairly conventional (with a few military adaptations) and operate in the civilian charter sector, are Mexe compatible, but that was designed in from the beginning.

 

[alexsa]

http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Mexeflote-03.jpg

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/NAVY_Lighterage_USS_Seay_Bradleys_lg.jpg

A Trip Down Mexeflote Lane Sir Tristram - L3505b (naval history.net) – Think Defence

Not sure if a conventional RO-RO would be able to marry up with either the MLP or Mexeflote unless it has side opening ramp for which the MLP has been designed for, but obviously container ship with there own crane could in theory.

Only a heave compensated crane,............ very specialised item of kit and generally not carried on geared cargo ships. Other cranes are only inteded for use in benign conditions.