Happy New Years everyone!
What do you think is the best way to use LCIs and LST's?
Their capacity is very low compared to APs. APs seem to work fine for invasions so how do LCIs and LSTs help?
thanks!
Best use for LCI's and LST's
Moderators: Joel Billings, Tankerace, siRkid
-
BigJoe417
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2002 3:34 am
- Location: Somewhere over downtown Tokyo
- Contact:
Best use for LCI's and LST's
Fly High and Drop a big load,
BigJoe
420th Bomber Sqdn
BigJoe
420th Bomber Sqdn
LST & LCI
BigJoe417,
Since the LCI only has a capcity of 190 which means it usually unloads overnight I use as a large barge, I set up Irau as the hub/supply depot and make runs from there with a few SC for escort.
The LST has a capacity of 1000 but a cruising speed of only 9 Kts. I use them when I'm really short of AP's or for small amphibious operations.
BTW the LST crews believed LST stood for Large Slow Target and CVE crews believed CVE stood for Combustible, Vulnerable and Expendable.
Since the LCI only has a capcity of 190 which means it usually unloads overnight I use as a large barge, I set up Irau as the hub/supply depot and make runs from there with a few SC for escort.
The LST has a capacity of 1000 but a cruising speed of only 9 Kts. I use them when I'm really short of AP's or for small amphibious operations.
BTW the LST crews believed LST stood for Large Slow Target and CVE crews believed CVE stood for Combustible, Vulnerable and Expendable.
Gunner's Mate: A Boatswain's Mate with a hunting license.
-
Fallschirmjager
- Posts: 3555
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
- Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
LST and LSI
FWIW,
According to my copy of "US Warships of World War II", the "LST" (Tank Landing Ship) and "LCI" (Infantry Landing Craft) were sea-going vessels that loaded and dropped troops off through catwalks and ramps to shore (in early LCIs) or through large doors in the front of the ship (LSTs and later LCIs). These vessels were loaded in port, not at sea.
By the way, an LST was about 450 feet long, and an LCI was about 150 feet long, so don't confuse them with the little LCAs you saw in Saving Private Ryan : the little ones were loaded by climbing over the side of the transport and down to the LCA
This source also notes that LSTs were used to move supplies between bases without port facilities or harbors - you just beached the ship and moves the supplies through the front doors.
As a tactical consideration, I prefer to use LSTs and LCIs in opposed invasions - the loss of one or two of them won't hurt your landing force as badly as the loss of one or two transports, which could mean the loss of an entire regiment. They also tend to empty out more quickly, which gets more troops on the beach more quickly.
Just my $0.02.
According to my copy of "US Warships of World War II", the "LST" (Tank Landing Ship) and "LCI" (Infantry Landing Craft) were sea-going vessels that loaded and dropped troops off through catwalks and ramps to shore (in early LCIs) or through large doors in the front of the ship (LSTs and later LCIs). These vessels were loaded in port, not at sea.
By the way, an LST was about 450 feet long, and an LCI was about 150 feet long, so don't confuse them with the little LCAs you saw in Saving Private Ryan : the little ones were loaded by climbing over the side of the transport and down to the LCA
This source also notes that LSTs were used to move supplies between bases without port facilities or harbors - you just beached the ship and moves the supplies through the front doors.
As a tactical consideration, I prefer to use LSTs and LCIs in opposed invasions - the loss of one or two of them won't hurt your landing force as badly as the loss of one or two transports, which could mean the loss of an entire regiment. They also tend to empty out more quickly, which gets more troops on the beach more quickly.
Just my $0.02.
LST's where designed to be able to load/unload AAV (Amphibious Assault Vehicles) during transport. Whenever a large scale Amphib assault would take place (Iwo jima, Guadalcanal) The LST's would be the main transport for the landing vehicles. And are designed flathull'ed to ride Tanks/Troops in.
Sgt Braverman, USMC
Was honored to be one of the last person to Ride the U.S.S Bellowoods, LST
Sgt Braverman, USMC
Was honored to be one of the last person to Ride the U.S.S Bellowoods, LST
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
My Grandfather served on the LST 807, and later had command at one of the Training centers on the East Coast.
He said that after landing, they would do a lot of Medical Evacs, transporting of Prisoners, and after the war, they ran a lot of Japanese back home.
One of the more famous "beach" pictures at Iwo Jima had his boat in the background. That island changed his life forever, he still can't talk about it without crying. I can't imagine what it was like for the Marines.
He said that after landing, they would do a lot of Medical Evacs, transporting of Prisoners, and after the war, they ran a lot of Japanese back home.
One of the more famous "beach" pictures at Iwo Jima had his boat in the background. That island changed his life forever, he still can't talk about it without crying. I can't imagine what it was like for the Marines.
Amphibious TF composition
Originally posted by BigJoe417
Thanks for the input guys!
Do you usually put a few DDs or a CA with your invasion TF to cover the shore batteries?
The way I do it is like this:
TF 2XX Air Combat TF with whatever CV's & CVL's I can scrape up and at least 8 DDs. If >15 ships split it into two TFs. This TF covers Amphibious Assault by standing off at least two hexs from the target moving every turn to avoid subs.
TF 2XX Air Combat TF with whatever CVE's I can scrape up and at least 6 DDs. This TF follows the Amphibious Assault TF.
TF 2XX Surface Combat with the most modern BB's CA's CL's & DD's. If >15 ships split it into two TFs. This TF follows the Amphibious Assault TF.
TF 2XX Bombarment TF with any obsolete BB's CA's and DDs. If >15 ships split it into two TFs. This TF will shuttle back and forth to the nearest base to refuel and rearm then bombard again.
TF 2XX Mine Sweeping TF with every available MSW. If >6 ships split it into two TFs. This TF follows the Amphibious Assault TF.
TF 2XX Transport (Amphibious Assault) TF with enough transports (APD, LSD, AP & LST nothing with more than 1,500 capacity) to lift a division. For escorts i use DD, DMS & SC. If >24 ships split it into two TFs.
TF 2XX Transport (Service & Supply) TF with enough lift to (APD, AK, AP & LST nothing with more than 1,500 capacity) transport any LCU's needed that don't have an assault value. For escorts i use DD, DMS & SC. If >24 ships split it into two TFs. This TF follows the Amphibious Assault TF.
TF 2XX UnRep TF to refuel TF's as needed. I station it outside of enemy LBA range if possible if not I have it follow the CVE TF.
Hope this helps. Gunner's Mate: A Boatswain's Mate with a hunting license.
The U.S.S Bellowoods was decommitioned on 1997, it was on of the last LST's left in the fleet. I was honored to have met some pacific WWII vets that served on her. I know what you mean when it comes to talking about Iwo Jima, some of those men wept tears like a baby, i couldnt help but weap with them.
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
Gen Nimitz quote in regards to the Marines assault on IwoJima.
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
Gen Nimitz quote in regards to the Marines assault on IwoJima.
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-
Cap Mandrake
- Posts: 20737
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
- Location: Southern California
Originally posted by exedeus
The U.S.S Bellowoods was decommitioned on 1997, it was on of the last LST's left in the fleet. I was honored to have met some pacific WWII vets that served on her. I know what you mean when it comes to talking about Iwo Jima, some of those men wept tears like a baby, i couldnt help but weap with them.
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
Gen Nimitz quote in regards to the Marines assault on IwoJima.
Wow exedeus...I didn't know that was Nimitz' quote, surely it must be the source for the game title.
BTW, if I'm not mistaken, the Battle of Bellau Woods was fought by US Marines in WWI, perhaps explaining the choice of the name for an LST.
heres the exact quote
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1918/belleau.html
btw.. lil history reading bout belleau woodsAdmiral Chester Nimitz, who directed much of World War II's Pacific Theater, believed in his men and in their abilities. No where is this better illustrated in the way he trusted his admirals and commanders during the battles of the Pacific. One famous quote from Nimitz is his observation of the men who fought at Iwo Jima: "Among the men who fought on Iwo Jima, uncommon valor was a common virtue."
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1918/belleau.html
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-
LargeSlowTarget
- Posts: 5083
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
You talk LST, you talk my language... If you are not familiar with landing ships and craft, here is some info:
In WWII the Allies used two types of vessels designed to beach themselves and quickly discharge troops, vehicles and cargo directly onto a landing beach. The larger variety were the landing ships, the smaller ones were the landing craft.
Landing ships were oceangoing vessels, seaworthy enough to cross open waters. They could be loaded with assault troops at a rear base, move to the objective under their own power, and discharge their cargo directly onto the beach. The main types were the LST (Landing Ship Tank, 300 feet long, full displacement 4000 tons, max speed 12 knots, capacity 20 tanks) and the LSM (Landing Ship Medium, 200 feet long, 1000 tons, 12 knots max, 4-6 tanks).
Landing craft were much smaller and lacked oceangoing qualities. They were used to transfer troops and equipment from AP/AK transports to the beach and for short hops along the coast.
The larger types were the LCT (Landing Craft Tank, 115 feet, 290 tons, 10 knots, 3-4 tanks) and the LCI (Landing Craft Infantry, 150 feet, 390 tons, 200-250 men). These craft were capable of short-range assaults in coastal waters from a friendly port to an objective up to 100 miles away.
The smaller landing craft are the well-known (seen in many films) LCVP (Landing Craft Vehicles and Personnel, 36 feet, 10 tons empty, 36 men or a Jeep) and LCM (Landing Craft Medium, 50 feet, 23 tons empty, 60 men or a tank).
The smallest landing 'craft' were the LVT (Landing Vehicle Tracked, an amphibious APC) and the DUKW (an amphibious truck), which were truly amphibious vehicles capable of swimming and driving.
These smaller craft were carried on the deck of transports (lowered into the water like life-boats) or inside the LSD (Landing Ship Dock, 450 feet, 4500 tons, 15 knots, 3 preloaded LCT or 14 preloaded LCVP or 41 LVT in the dock inside the stern).
Landing ships and craft were armed with 40mm and 20mm AA guns, quite a few were converted into fire support vessels with 5-inch guns, mortars, more AA and rocket launchers. The wear, tear and hull stress during the run up onto the beach reduced the life span of a landing ship to a dozen landings at most.
The main benefit of these vessels was that they could beach themselves to land troops, tanks, jeeps, trucks, trailers (in most cases already loaded with supplies), bulldozers, artillery etc. directly onto the beach, often sending them straight into battle. Their cargo could be discharged in a few hours or even minutes, which was also important for a quick turn-around-and-get-away. In comparison, AP/AK types required a transfer of their cargo into barges and landing craft for the run to the beach, a rather slow and labor-intense process. Transports often took days to unload - even if combat-loaded, which was a bad thing in face of possible enemy reactions by air, surface and submarine counter-attacks.
The main drawback of the beaching vessels was their small cargo capacity - hull stress upon beaching puts limits on the size of beaching vessels - and their slow speed.
The designs of landing ships and landing craft corresponded with the basic types of amphibious operations - shore-to-shore and ship-to-shore.
Shore-to-shore operations embarked and disembarked the landing force in/from the same vessels, usually landing ships and craft of the LST, LSM, LCT and LCI types. Since landing craft had little oceangoing ability, shore-to-shore operations usually covered relatively short distances in coastal waters. Many operations in the Solomons and PNG areas were shore-to-shore movements.
Amphib assaults against more distant targets across open waters required ship-to-shore operations. Many operations in the Central Pacific area were of this type. The landing force was embarked in transports (AP/AK) and landing ships. Upon arrival at the objective troops and equipment were tranferred from the transports into the landing craft for the run to the beach, usually LCT, LCI, LCM, LCVP and LVT types. As mentioned, LST and LSM types were a special case, since they didn't require a transfer but carried troops and equipment from the staging area directly to the landing beach - a kind of long-distance-shore-to-shore rather than ship-to-shore operation.
In UV, the numerous types of landing ships and craft are represented by the LST and LCI which are modeled like the other ships (individually sent from Pearl), and by the LCM and LCVP, which like PT boats are created en masse using supplies from transport TFs and which are essentially the USN version of the IJN barges.
Since they unload and retire out of harm's way quickly, LST and LCI are useful if you don't want to risk APs under the nose of the enemy. This is important when you assault beach dots without a base, because AP/AK types take forever to unload without port facilities. LST and LCI can drop off their loads quickly and retire during the same turn, reducing exposure to enemy reactions. This works best with unoccupied hexes, since the number of assault troops carried by the few LST/LCI tends to be rather small and against opposition your few troops maybe pushed back into the sea.
Concerning the LCM and LCVP, it is obvious that the 'organic' craft carried by the AP and AK types for assault/transport purposes are not represented, while 'independent' vessels of these types can be generated as barges. They are useful to carry supplies to lightly held hexes or to hexes where enemy opposition is heavy and you don't want to risk larger ships. But their impact on the progress of the game will be rather small in most cases.
Btw, will there be fire support versions of the landing ships and craft in WITP?? A transport TF with assault troops including a couple of LCI(R) and gunboats for close support...
Well, enough ranting for tonight.
LST
If you are not familiar with landing ships and craft, here is some info: In WWII the Allies used two types of vessels designed to beach themselves and quickly discharge troops, vehicles and cargo directly onto a landing beach. The larger variety were the landing ships, the smaller ones were the landing craft.
Landing ships were oceangoing vessels, seaworthy enough to cross open waters. They could be loaded with assault troops at a rear base, move to the objective under their own power, and discharge their cargo directly onto the beach. The main types were the LST (Landing Ship Tank, 300 feet long, full displacement 4000 tons, max speed 12 knots, capacity 20 tanks) and the LSM (Landing Ship Medium, 200 feet long, 1000 tons, 12 knots max, 4-6 tanks).
Landing craft were much smaller and lacked oceangoing qualities. They were used to transfer troops and equipment from AP/AK transports to the beach and for short hops along the coast.
The larger types were the LCT (Landing Craft Tank, 115 feet, 290 tons, 10 knots, 3-4 tanks) and the LCI (Landing Craft Infantry, 150 feet, 390 tons, 200-250 men). These craft were capable of short-range assaults in coastal waters from a friendly port to an objective up to 100 miles away.
The smaller landing craft are the well-known (seen in many films) LCVP (Landing Craft Vehicles and Personnel, 36 feet, 10 tons empty, 36 men or a Jeep) and LCM (Landing Craft Medium, 50 feet, 23 tons empty, 60 men or a tank).
The smallest landing 'craft' were the LVT (Landing Vehicle Tracked, an amphibious APC) and the DUKW (an amphibious truck), which were truly amphibious vehicles capable of swimming and driving.
These smaller craft were carried on the deck of transports (lowered into the water like life-boats) or inside the LSD (Landing Ship Dock, 450 feet, 4500 tons, 15 knots, 3 preloaded LCT or 14 preloaded LCVP or 41 LVT in the dock inside the stern).
Landing ships and craft were armed with 40mm and 20mm AA guns, quite a few were converted into fire support vessels with 5-inch guns, mortars, more AA and rocket launchers. The wear, tear and hull stress during the run up onto the beach reduced the life span of a landing ship to a dozen landings at most.
The main benefit of these vessels was that they could beach themselves to land troops, tanks, jeeps, trucks, trailers (in most cases already loaded with supplies), bulldozers, artillery etc. directly onto the beach, often sending them straight into battle. Their cargo could be discharged in a few hours or even minutes, which was also important for a quick turn-around-and-get-away. In comparison, AP/AK types required a transfer of their cargo into barges and landing craft for the run to the beach, a rather slow and labor-intense process. Transports often took days to unload - even if combat-loaded, which was a bad thing in face of possible enemy reactions by air, surface and submarine counter-attacks.
The main drawback of the beaching vessels was their small cargo capacity - hull stress upon beaching puts limits on the size of beaching vessels - and their slow speed.
The designs of landing ships and landing craft corresponded with the basic types of amphibious operations - shore-to-shore and ship-to-shore.
Shore-to-shore operations embarked and disembarked the landing force in/from the same vessels, usually landing ships and craft of the LST, LSM, LCT and LCI types. Since landing craft had little oceangoing ability, shore-to-shore operations usually covered relatively short distances in coastal waters. Many operations in the Solomons and PNG areas were shore-to-shore movements.
Amphib assaults against more distant targets across open waters required ship-to-shore operations. Many operations in the Central Pacific area were of this type. The landing force was embarked in transports (AP/AK) and landing ships. Upon arrival at the objective troops and equipment were tranferred from the transports into the landing craft for the run to the beach, usually LCT, LCI, LCM, LCVP and LVT types. As mentioned, LST and LSM types were a special case, since they didn't require a transfer but carried troops and equipment from the staging area directly to the landing beach - a kind of long-distance-shore-to-shore rather than ship-to-shore operation.
In UV, the numerous types of landing ships and craft are represented by the LST and LCI which are modeled like the other ships (individually sent from Pearl), and by the LCM and LCVP, which like PT boats are created en masse using supplies from transport TFs and which are essentially the USN version of the IJN barges.
Since they unload and retire out of harm's way quickly, LST and LCI are useful if you don't want to risk APs under the nose of the enemy. This is important when you assault beach dots without a base, because AP/AK types take forever to unload without port facilities. LST and LCI can drop off their loads quickly and retire during the same turn, reducing exposure to enemy reactions. This works best with unoccupied hexes, since the number of assault troops carried by the few LST/LCI tends to be rather small and against opposition your few troops maybe pushed back into the sea.
Concerning the LCM and LCVP, it is obvious that the 'organic' craft carried by the AP and AK types for assault/transport purposes are not represented, while 'independent' vessels of these types can be generated as barges. They are useful to carry supplies to lightly held hexes or to hexes where enemy opposition is heavy and you don't want to risk larger ships. But their impact on the progress of the game will be rather small in most cases.
Btw, will there be fire support versions of the landing ships and craft in WITP?? A transport TF with assault troops including a couple of LCI(R) and gunboats for close support...
Well, enough ranting for tonight.
LST
Do you mean the USS Belleau Wood (LHA-3)...
Originally posted by exedeus
The U.S.S Bellowoods was decommitioned on 1997, it was on of the last LST's left in the fleet. I was honored to have met some pacific WWII vets that served on her. I know what you mean when it comes to talking about Iwo Jima, some of those men wept tears like a baby, i couldnt help but weap with them.
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
Gen Nimitz quote in regards to the Marines assault on IwoJima.
... if so she was commissioned 23/Sep/78 and is still in service. There was a Independence class CVL with that name (CVL-24) commissioned 31/Mar/43, withdrawn from service 13/Jan/47, loaned to France Jan/51 to 12/Sep/60 and scraped on 1/Oct/60.
AFAIK none of the WWII LSTs were name they just had pennant numbers
Gunner's Mate: A Boatswain's Mate with a hunting license.
hmm got me Tanj.. im not in the NAVY *grins*, but now you got me curious.. as far as i was told, she was an ole boat from WWII and was decommitioned before i was sent to Kosovo..
now ya got me doing some homework! =)~
now ya got me doing some homework! =)~
"Uncommon Valor, was their common Virtue"
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-Adm Nimitz in regards to U.S. Marines on Iwo Jima
-
BigJoe417
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2002 3:34 am
- Location: Somewhere over downtown Tokyo
- Contact:
Thanks TanJ and all.
Hey, any thoughts on how to silence shore batteries? Is it even possible? Shore Bombardments seem to focus on the airfields and produce small casualties in any event. I have never seen any damage done to shore defence units. Have you?
Hey, any thoughts on how to silence shore batteries? Is it even possible? Shore Bombardments seem to focus on the airfields and produce small casualties in any event. I have never seen any damage done to shore defence units. Have you?
Fly High and Drop a big load,
BigJoe
420th Bomber Sqdn
BigJoe
420th Bomber Sqdn