Military Review

US Navy ordered the construction of two more giant ship type ESB

52
The American fleet will soon be replenished with two more giant supply ships. As transmits "Warspot" citing the portal navaltoday.com, the US Navy command signed a contract with General Dynamics for the construction of two more expeditionary ships of the ESB type (Expeditionary Sea Base).


US Navy ordered the construction of two more giant ship type ESB


According to available information, the construction of ships will begin in the 2020 year, delivery to the customer is scheduled for the 2023 year. In this case, the contract takes into account the option to build another additional ship of this type. For General Dynamics, the contract for the construction of expeditionary naval bases is not the first. Previously, she transferred four ships of this type to the US Navy and is already completing the fifth.

The first two marine expeditionary bases became part of the auxiliary fleet, however, later became part of the combat fleet. This decision was made due to the fact that, according to the laws of the United States, only ships and vessels included in the combat fleet can participate in combat missions. For example, the USNS Lewis B. Puller (T-ESB-3) expeditionary naval base, which was part of the auxiliary fleet, in August 2018 became part of the fleet's warships, becoming the USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB-3). The captain of the U.S. Navy Adan Cruz became the commander of the ship, and the whole team received the status of military personnel.

ESB (Expeditionary Sea Base or expeditionary naval bases) are the largest non-nuclear ships in the US Navy. The total displacement is 78 000 tons, and in this parameter the ship loses only to nuclear carriers such as Nimitz and Gerald R. Ford, the displacement of which is on the order of 100 000 t. The length of the ship is 233 m, the maximum width is 50 m. There is a flight deck and helicopter hangars .

Ships of this type are designed to provide combat operations of the U.S. Armed Forces in low-intensity conflicts, and are an actual military base that has all the necessary infrastructure - ammunition depots, fuel and lubricants, and other resources, premises for a relatively comfortable deployment of the military contingent. Four heavy transport helicopters, the CH-53, and an amphibious barge capable of taking on board about 300 armed fighters, are envisioned for delivering military personnel ashore. The takeoff and landing platform of the marine base is capable of receiving the Osprey MV-22 convertiplanes used by the US Marine Corps as well.
Photos used:
usni.org
52 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. bubalik
    bubalik 27 August 2019 15: 23
    -12
    stockpiles of ammunition, fuel and lubricants, and other resources, premises for a relatively comfortable deployment of military contingent
    ,,, what a "tasty" target laughing
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 27 August 2019 15: 29
      +8
      The target is mobile. It cannot be hit by an astro-inertial or GPS / GLONAS.
      1. yehat
        yehat 27 August 2019 15: 31
        -20
        a pair of dexterous boats with guns equipped with Somali biogeads of guidance is capable of this vessel, if not to navigate, then strongly convince to surrender.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 27 August 2019 15: 34
          +23
          Uhh ... Somali pirates boarded only those who immediately surrendered and did not start firing. They take on show-offs with their machine gun on the turrets and bursts of Kalash into the air.
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 27 August 2019 18: 36
            +2
            Pirates are by definition looking for easy prey. So Somalis are not an indicator.
            But a suicide squad (the same Yemen will easily provide such) on motor boats filled with a couple of tons of TNT may be successful. But the attack should not be in "potentially dangerous waters", where the military, at the slightest suspicion, open fire - a pair of rapid-fire cannons will multiply the motorboats to zero long before they come close. If they don't find a way to sneak up close
          2. tihonmarine
            tihonmarine 27 August 2019 19: 55
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Somali pirates boarded

            The question is, at whose direction did they work?
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 27 August 2019 15: 54
          +11
          Quote: yehat
          a pair of dexterous boats with guns equipped with Somali biogeads of guidance is capable of this vessel, if not to navigate, then strongly convince to surrender.

          Mwa ha ha ... actually, one of the tasks of the ESB is the fight against piracy. Moreover, in addition to supplying anti-piracy forces and basing helicopters, the ESB provides accommodation for a military team of up to 250 people (100 sailors and 150 pilots and marines).
          So each of the 44 civilian sailors from the ESB team has five soldiers behind him. smile
        3. Cyrus
          Cyrus 27 August 2019 22: 16
          +2
          How many such vessels have you sunk or forced to surrender in person or as part of something? that not one, then you are just a balabol.
      2. bubalik
        bubalik 27 August 2019 15: 34
        0
        It cannot be hit by an astro-inertial or GPS / GLONAS.
        ,,, out on the next branch, discuss for two days, an aircraft carrier can be drowned with one missile feel supply ship winked
        1. yehat
          yehat 27 August 2019 15: 47
          +3
          Quote: bubalik
          an aircraft carrier can be drowned with a single missile

          do not squander the good, such need to requisition, and not drown
          the good uncle Sam cared, collected painstakingly equipment for your army, and you barbarously drown ??? Spanish corsairs rolled over in coffins.
          1. bubalik
            bubalik 27 August 2019 15: 49
            0
            yehat (Sergey)
            don't squander good
            ,, really, something I did not think recourse why drown if you can grab yes
            1. Greenwood
              Greenwood 27 August 2019 17: 07
              +14
              Finish fantasizing. Silenok you do not have enough to capture anything, especially from the States.
              1. bubalik
                bubalik 27 August 2019 17: 14
                0
                Finish fantasizing
                ,,, to dream, you can laughing
                1. Greenwood
                  Greenwood 27 August 2019 17: 15
                  +8
                  While we dream, they are building.
                  1. DMB_95
                    DMB_95 27 August 2019 20: 03
                    +1
                    Quote: Greenwood
                    While we dream, they are building.

                    They must build and maintain their huge fleet, because they are cut off from the rest of the world by oceans and seas. And our geographical location implies a completely different strategy, in which the navy is needed not as much as they have in terms of quantity and composition. Our Navy and their Navy are completely different in their tasks.
        2. Cyrus
          Cyrus 27 August 2019 22: 19
          -1
          Well, under mushrooms and cocaine everything is possible and not only with a rocket, but with anything, even a sofa cushion)).
      3. lucul
        lucul 27 August 2019 16: 39
        -3
        The target is mobile. It cannot be hit by astro-inertial or GPS / GLONAS

        Helicopters, how moving targets hit? ))))
    2. den3080
      den3080 27 August 2019 16: 03
      +6
      Powerful live! Her fate is predicted in the science-fiction film "Water World" with Kevin Costner in the title role :)
      Who watched will understand.
      1. Greenwood
        Greenwood 27 August 2019 17: 10
        +3
        In the film, it was like an ordinary tanker.
        1. den3080
          den3080 27 August 2019 19: 37
          0
          Quote: Greenwood
          In the film, it was like an ordinary tanker.

          well it was a science fiction movie smile life is more diverse :)
      2. Mikhail Drabkin
        Mikhail Drabkin 27 August 2019 22: 31
        -1
        You den3080 write:
        Powerful live!

        I will add "Speetsiyiga live, wai her?" Riga man?
    3. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 27 August 2019 20: 00
      +7
      Quote: voyaka uh
      stockpiles of ammunition, fuel and lubricants, and other resources, premises for a relatively comfortable deployment of military contingent

      I am a patriot, but as a sailor I will say that American shipbuilders make beautiful ships. Nobody has such yet. Be offended, minus, but it's true. And in three years they’ll bury such a colossus.
  2. elai
    elai 27 August 2019 15: 26
    +15
    A good ship, I wonder how many tanks it can carry at a time?
    Very suitable, we would like this in the Syrian express :)
    1. Chaldon48
      Chaldon48 27 August 2019 15: 33
      +18
      They will never build them with us; there are not enough forces and means for the corvette.
      1. Dimonk
        Dimonk 29 August 2019 04: 58
        0
        And there are forces, and means. There is no desire, and there are many thieves and embezzlers sad
  3. kapitan92
    kapitan92 27 August 2019 15: 32
    +18
    . Total displacement - 78 tons

    ship construction will begin in 2020, delivery to the customer is scheduled for 2023.

    Yeah! My opponent in the dispute over the timing of the construction of an interregional missile with a displacement of 978tn (5 years), argued that this is very good !!!
    Serious tonnage, serious deadlines! I will not hide, envy is present!
    1. yehat
      yehat 27 August 2019 15: 47
      +14
      the most annoying thing is that this is not just a barn ship, but a vessel fully equipped inside
      and its Americans are building 2 times faster than we corvette.
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 27 August 2019 20: 08
      +4
      Quote: kapitan92
      Yeah! My opponent in the dispute over the timing of the construction of an interregional missile with a displacement of 978tn (5 years), argued that this is very good !!!

      I remember those comments. I also said unfinished, mined, but you won’t run away from the fact. Shipyards of course are cool, they build competently and quickly. But a shipyard of this scale is an overly expensive thing.
  4. Kerensky
    Kerensky 27 August 2019 15: 41
    0
    Then they could have done atomic. And then the expense of him, I think, is not childish. You don’t particularly resemble teachings.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 27 August 2019 20: 09
      0
      Quote: Kerensky
      Then they could have done atomic.

      There are more problems.
      1. Archivist Vasya
        Archivist Vasya 28 August 2019 09: 52
        0
        Why? There is more than enough space for the reactor.
        1. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 28 August 2019 10: 34
          +1
          [quote = Archivist Vasya] Why? There is more than enough room for a reactor there. [/ Quot
          Not everywhere you can find and call at ports with a working nuclear power plant. And it’s easier to operate a diesel engine. And you can have fuel everywhere, and the consumption is not so great (the commercial fleet considers a penny, and the navy receives from the dad the tsar). I worked all my life on diesels, so of course I am their adherent.
  5. yehat
    yehat 27 August 2019 15: 43
    -5
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Uhh ... Somali pirates boarded only those who immediately surrendered and did not start firing. They take on show-offs with their machine gun on the turrets and bursts of Kalash into the air.

    I think it’s not difficult to arm small cannons with bulletproof shields of the vessel
    if they manage to get close, the ship is doomed and there is not much risk.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 27 August 2019 16: 08
      +8
      Quote: yehat
      if they manage to get close, the ship is doomed and there is not much risk.

      Such bases do not go alone.
      And I wonder who else will be doomed if a battalion of marines fall out of the cubes at a meeting with the unfortunate pirates))).
    2. Greenwood
      Greenwood 27 August 2019 17: 12
      +3
      Quote: yehat
      the ship is doomed and there is not much risk
      Fleet supply base, with a bunch of weapons on board and professional military. Do you really think that some brainless pirates will be able to do something for them ?! lol
      1. yehat
        yehat 27 August 2019 17: 44
        -3
        you know, the English galleons robbed - there were also not college girls in the crews
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 27 August 2019 18: 55
          0
          Quote: yehat
          you know, the English galleons robbed - there were also not college girls in the crews

          The problem is that an ESB in the Somalia region is likely to have a resting change of marines from the anti-piracy forces on board.
          Well, it's just some kind of holiday - you don’t have to go anywhere, they themselves have come to us. laughing
    3. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 27 August 2019 20: 14
      +1
      Quote: yehat
      it will not be difficult to arm small cannons with bulletproof shields of the vessel

      Will not work. Commercial vessels, not ships. Arm and move to the "non-combatant" class. You even take PMCs outside of the Tervod and follow them to the Tervod (you can't go to the port). The Indian epic with PMCs must have been heard.
  6. yehat
    yehat 27 August 2019 15: 45
    +2
    Quote: Kerensky
    Then they could have done atomic. And then the expense of him, I think, is not childish. You don’t particularly resemble teachings.

    he does not need to swim much or quickly. nodes 9-11 if it gives, water resistance will be moderate
    and expense too. The Deutschlands swam far, but they were not small.
  7. E.S.
    E.S. 27 August 2019 16: 23
    -9
    Quote: yehat
    the most annoying thing is that this is not just a barn ship, but a vessel fully equipped inside
    and its Americans are building 2 times faster than we corvette.

    Nobody is building anything like this, 2020 is only after the New Year. Let them start, finish, and then see what happened on the dates
  8. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 27 August 2019 16: 31
    -10
    The big ship is a big shipwreck.
  9. Victor March 47
    Victor March 47 27 August 2019 16: 34
    -4
    Quote: yehat
    Quote: Kerensky
    Then they could have done atomic. And then the expense of him, I think, is not childish. You don’t particularly resemble teachings.

    he does not need to swim much or quickly. nodes 9-11 if it gives, water resistance will be moderate
    and expense too. The Deutschlands swam far, but they were not small.

    In a squadron, all components must be able to walk at the same speed. Him- what, special protection and escort should be allocated? Or the rest to reduce the course to these 9 catch? Stratech, mother of the child ....
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 27 August 2019 20: 26
      +3
      Quote: Victor March 47
      In a squadron, all components must be able to walk at the same speed

      No fools sit sorted out.
  10. yehat
    yehat 27 August 2019 16: 37
    -1
    Quote: Thunderbolt
    the battalion of marines will fall out))).

    I was not talking about guns for nothing
    Yes, even the infantry division, they will be powerless.
  11. Brylevsky
    Brylevsky 27 August 2019 17: 08
    +11
    In a squadron, all components must be able to walk at the same speed.

    Warships - yes. Support vessels - no. No support vessel goes faster than 18-20 knots, and even 15 knots for many of them is the limit ... what we have, what they have. The reason is trivial and underlies the theory of the ship's structure. A larger displacement vessel requires a larger main engine than a smaller tonnage vessel to achieve the same speed. The powerful motor carries more weight; consumes more fuel that needs to be stored on board ... and which takes away useful cargo capacity. A combat ship does not need cargo capacity, so their hulls in the profile resemble a "dagger", such a profile contributes to good propulsion. It's different with a cargo ship. There the main thing is deadweight and the lowest fuel consumption per mile. As someone rightly pointed out above, ships like this will not sail alone during a war. And the marching order will have to drag not even with the maximum speed for this vessel, but with the economic speed for this vessel. I think that 11-13 knots for this "hippopotamus" will be just that ... I had to work on container ships with a displacement of about 100 tons, at a speed of 000 knots we had a fuel oil consumption of 23 tons per day ... but judging by the shape of the stem this is unlikely to go faster than 150 knots.
    1. Vadmir
      Vadmir 27 August 2019 19: 30
      +4
      this one is unlikely to go faster than 18 knots
      It is 18 knots - the cruising speed of most American warships, so that he no longer needs.
      But our ships have a cruising speed of 14 knots, which in itself is worse than the United States, also go accompanied by tugboats with their speeds.
  12. Legionista
    Legionista 27 August 2019 17: 11
    +1
    “Ships of this type are designed to provide combat operations of the US Armed Forces in low-intensity conflicts, and are an actual military base with all the necessary infrastructure - ammunition depots, fuel and lubricants, and other resources, premises for a relatively comfortable deployment of the military contingent.” No one will shoot rockets at them. No one. But for a comfortable and safe accommodation l / s a ​​very suitable ship.
  13. CommanderDIVA
    CommanderDIVA 27 August 2019 20: 42
    +1
    A good thoughtful ship to ensure expeditionary actions of American troops is interesting for the Chinese have an analogue or something like that
  14. Kerensky
    Kerensky 27 August 2019 21: 11
    0
    Quote: tihonmarine
    Quote: Kerensky
    Then they could have done atomic.

    There are more problems.

    Not at all. And to direct excess energy to self-defense. Yes, and external electric motors are easier to change, the volumes will be released again ...
  15. Cyrus
    Cyrus 27 August 2019 22: 17
    0
    Getting ready ...
  16. Archivist Vasya
    Archivist Vasya 28 August 2019 09: 59
    0
    Powerful and cheerful, though expensive, but they can spend such money on similar floating cities. In general, we do not need such ships if you think about it. Although 1-2 pieces for show-offs, if only, it's like with battleships and dreadnoughts.
  17. unBEARable
    unBEARable 29 August 2019 13: 01
    0
    For General Dynamics, the contract for the construction of expeditionary naval bases is not the first. Previously, she transferred four ships of this type to the US Navy and is already completing the fifth.

    The first two marine expeditionary bases became part of the auxiliary fleet, but later became part of the combat fleet.

    Not certainly in that way. The first two ships were of a different type - the T-ESD, i.e. the Expeditionary Transfer Dock, previously designated as the T-MLP - Mobile Landing Platform. They remained part of the auxiliary fleet - Shipping Command. These are USNS Montford Point (T-ESD-1) and USNS John Glenn (T-ESD-2).
    But the USS Lewis B. Puller (ESB-3) and the following numbers are already Expeditionary Mobile Base.