The transfer of the first airborne transport ship type MLP to the US Navy.

14 in May 2013 of the United States Shipyard General Dynamics NASSCO (National Steel and Shipbuilding Company) in San Diego (California) held the ceremony of transferring the first naval transport vehicle of the new type - Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) T-MLP 1 Montford Point. The ship was transferred to the US Navy Military Sealift Command. After an extensive testing program based on Portland, the ship is expected to reach operational readiness status in 2015.

MLP type ships are in fact a floating base for accommodating amphibious assault boats of the LCAC type, each ship is capable of carrying three such boats and performing the tasks of both an independent amphibious assault ship and an intermediate base for transferring cargo and amphibious assault ships from larger amphibious assault ships unequipped coast. The ship project was developed by General Dynamics based on the hull of the commercial Alaska type tankers previously built by NASSCO.

In August 2010, the US Navy issued General Dynamics NASSCO a contract in 115 million dollars to build the lead ship T-MLP 1 Montford Point. Its construction was launched in July 2011, and the official bookmark ceremony took place on 23 in January 2012. The ship was named in honor of the Montford Point Camp (North Carolina) marines training camp, where 1942 to 1949 spent years training around 20 thousands of US black infantry recruits. The ship was launched (removed from the construction dock) 13 November 2012 of the year in the overall technical readiness 91 percentage and transferred to the factory running tests at the beginning of the 2013 year. In April, the construction of sections of the second T-MLP 2012 John Glenn, officially laid in December, began in San Diego in April, and in 2, the construction of the third T-MLP 2013 ship Lewis B. Puller began (with the commissioning of 3 year). In August, the United States Navy 2018 announced its intention to order a fourth ship of the MLP type.

New amphibious transport ship - "floating amphibious platform" US Navy T-MLP 1 Montford Point

Comments

[patline]

Something like a container ship is very similar ...

[Ruslan_F38]

Exactly, some kind of barge.

[tlauicol]

floating base. useful thing

[Refund_SSSR]

So the container ship with the marines is a useful thing, but the ferry (mistral) with helicopters is not ?!
What is it that turns out - all that and the neighbor is more beautiful and more useful, and what is rubbish at home?
This barge is only useful against bananostans.

[svp67]

This "barge", it is worth adding "self-propelled, ocean-going, high-speed" is intended only for fast transportation of cargo from point "A" to point "B", which it will do with full efficiency. "Mistral" is a combat ship, created by Western engineers, according to their standards, for their control systems and weapons, so the issue with "Mistrals" is more a question of how what was created in the West can be integrated into our Armed Forces, without losing your qualities?

[Refund_SSSR]

I'm not saying that the Mistral is good, but the Mistral is a floating base for helicopters, making graying almost unlimited in the radius of combat use.
What is the possibility of helicopter patrolling our fairly long borders?
Protection of the same Kuril Islands from the attacks of poachers, And these are natural attacks with the export of billions of profits from the fishing of marine animals annually! And this is done with the expectation that there is not enough radius for the helicopter, and high-speed vessels are not able to get fast enough.
And imagine how, because of the nearest sea bump, all of a sudden, where can the Aligator come up on you? Fearfully? So estimate how poachers and other violators will clean up :)
Or, for example, in Syria, suddenly out of nowhere, there will immediately be a dozen rotorcraft to counter the same hovercraft, on which a potential enemy landing party may try to land.
Yes, only one rotary-wing aircraft forces the enemy to change combat plans, but here are a dozen!
So it’s not the mistral that is terrible, but the fact that it’s on board.
But you are right, there are not many such Pasudins needed, and it would be good if such Pasudins were faster and at least armed to a minimum.

[Gluxar_]

Quote: svp67

This "barge", it is worth adding "self-propelled, ocean-going, high-speed" is intended only for fast transportation of cargo from point "A" to point "B", which it will do with full efficiency. "Mistral" is a combat ship, created by Western engineers, according to their standards, for their control systems and weapons, so the issue with "Mistrals" is more a question of how what was created in the West can be integrated into our Armed Forces, without losing your qualities?

The answer is very simple. Under the terms of the deal with the French, along with the Mistrals, Russia receives all the related technologies, including their SENIT-9. Mistral are some of the most modern ships in the world, and being also command ships in the NATO structure, they carry advanced troop control systems. By receiving these technologies, Russia not only reduces its gap from NATO by a decade in the management systems, but also receives certain answers on how to oppose NATO itself.
The recent positive changes in the Russian army in the modernization of the structure and command and control of the troops are largely tied to that experience and analysis of the capabilities of the obtained systems. This deal saved Russia many years of work in this direction. Moreover, this deal spurred domestic shipbuilders to work more efficiently and not to raise prices.

As for the ships themselves, it makes no sense to compare them with these floating barges, even in terms of demand in the fleet. Mistrals are command ships in the first place. These are the flagships of the Russian fleet until the advent of full-fledged aircraft carriers. Mistral is a command and staff ship for testing the interactions of various ships in a fleet or group. This is a floating headquarters, large enough to carry out various headquarters exercises. This is a hospital, and this is a floating dock. In the conditions of pre-war time, it can completely replace a full-fledged AUG and is able to solve military tasks of mirono time, and, if necessary, to take part in military operations in countries of the third world. The presence of such a ship is justified and necessary, at least for training personnel for future AUGs.

[Pimply]

Very good comment very

[Santa Fe]

Quote: Gluxar_

The answer is very simple.

All myths and urban legends in one heap

Quote: Gluxar_

Under the terms of the deal with the French, along with the Mistrals, Russia receives all related technologies, including their SENIT-9

Let's see how she refuses at the most important moment

Quote: Gluxar_

and receives certain answers on how to oppose NATO itself.

Develop your own industry, build a fleet - how does China

Quote: Gluxar_

Moreover, this deal spurred domestic shipbuilders to work more efficiently and not to raise prices.

You invented it yourself

Quote: Gluxar_

Mistrals are command ships in the first place. These are the flagships of the Russian fleet until the advent of full-fledged aircraft carriers.

Yes, of course, for this you definitely need an aircraft carrier
Have you heard the USS Mount Whitney?

Quote: Gluxar_

This is a floating headquarters, large enough to carry out various headquarters exercises.

Yes, of course, headquarters exercises need to be conducted on the high seas. (after all, we don’t have radio and satellite communications - you need to adjust the aircraft carrier and semaphore flags)
Gaeta's Navy and NATO Navy's Strategic Underground Command Post?

Quote: Gluxar_

This is a hospital, and this is a floating dock. In pre-war conditions, it can completely replace a full-fledged AUG

Are you seriously?
The slow-moving and unarmed Mistral will replace Aegis destroyers capable of smashing targets on water, under water, in the air and in low Earth orbit ... or will they replace atomic submarines with 154 Tomahawks?

[Army1]

Quote: Gluxar_

The answer is very simple. Under the terms of the deal with the French, along with the Mistrals, Russia receives all the related technologies, including their SENIT-9. Mistral are some of the most modern ships in the world, and being also command ships in the NATO structure, they carry advanced troop control systems. By receiving these technologies, Russia not only reduces its gap from NATO by a decade in the management systems, but also receives certain answers on how to oppose NATO itself.

Yes, but it doesn’t turn out that we got the technology, we’re glad to the ears, and at that time they will do something even cooler 100 years ahead, not to mention the Americans, the technologies are developing exponentially, we’ll be behind our whole lives or the situation will change, after all, God forbid, in the event of a modern war, to have a technological lag, it’s more likely ............
And do not say that all the electronics will be cut down and we are doing Yankee cards, they are not fools either. Yes, and the Pentagon has probably come up with opposition to this system, I do not believe them all.

[танк]

carry advanced troop control systems

You greatly exaggerate the possibilities of Mistral, but over the decades?!? In my opinion have gone too far.
And in the end: we buy sausages and household chemicals from the Poles, ships from the French, armored vehicles from the Italians, everything else from the Chinese. And we will do what we will do in the future. Bad things to the campaign.

[Papakiko]

Quote: Gluxar_

Under the terms of the deal with the French, along with the Mistrals, Russia receives all the related technologies, including their SENIT-9.

Technologies in shipbuilding, machine tool park, systems-design programs and much more .... but for ZENIT-9 Doubts-Doubts-Doubts.
Now let's take a closer look at how we are "rubbed in" by the "dark-stupid" for the appointment of semi-submersible ships:Vessels of the MLP project are supposed to be used as floating bases for landings. They are designed to receive cargo and MP equipment from heavy-duty transport of rollers, container ships, etc. with their subsequent transportation directly to the shore by LCAC-1 type air cushion landing craft (DKVP).
Semi-submersible vessels are used for transportation of:

The struggle for the division of Antarctica enters the finish line.
Still have doubts about the purpose of these vessels?

[tlauicol]

This thing could be useful to us in the Sr.more, for example, in the Kuril Islands, in the north.

[Gluxar_]

Quote: We refund_SSSR

So the container ship with the marines is a useful thing, but the ferry (mistral) with helicopters is not ?! What is it that turns out - all that and the neighbor is more beautiful and more useful, and what is rubbish at home? This barge is useful only against bananostans.

A typical picture for spiteful critics.

[Santa Fe]

Quote: We refund_SSSR

So the container ship with the marines is a useful thing, but the ferry (mistral) with helicopters is not ?!

The comrade is simply not familiar with the situation ... marines ... helicopters

MLP is the 116 ship of the Shipping Command. By itself, Monford Point is a slow-moving clumsy stub of a tanker, but it is an element of the SYSTEM (a hundred of rockers, container ships, platforms and tankers of the Military Sealift Command, under the guise of US Navy ships) - this is exactly the purpose of the Monford Point ship

The text says this in black and white:

each ship is capable of carrying three such boats and perform the tasks of both an independent landing ship and intermediate base for the transfer of cargo and landing by these boats from larger landing ships to the unequipped coast.

As for the Mistral ... make a conclusion yourself

MLP platform at work. Their task is to quickly unload tank-landing rokers, in case the giant transport cannot approach the coast (after all, in / and the "Bob Hope" (pictured) - 60 thousand tons, like the aircraft carrier "Kuznetsov" - not every harbor has suitable depths)

[Phantom Revolution]

You also seem to be off topic, the Mistrals also do not go alone.

[Santa Fe]

Quote: Phantom Revolution

Mistrals also do not go alone.

Another connoisseur inserted his "five cents"))

Dear Phantom Revolution,
I would like to know how 2000 T-72 (or T-90) will get to the enemy shore. They need to deliver a million tons of diesel fuel, spare parts, equipment and ammunition
Who will carry the important cargo?

The 2000 figure was not taken for nothing - that is how many MBT Abrams were delivered to Saudi Arabia in the autumn of 1991. In total, the Coalition had about 7000 BTT units

Spoiler

[Phantom Revolution]

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

Another connoisseur inserted his "five cents"))

You went into the wilds, where does the 2000 t-72, and the ship escort group?
I did not compare Mistral with a crude container ship. They have different tasks, but the similarities are the same and that requires an escort team.

[Santa Fe]

Quote: Phantom Revolution

I did not compare Mistral with a crude container ship. They have different tasks.

Their tasks are the same.
Delivery of expeditionary forces to foreign shores.

At the same time, dozens of container ships are required. Tell tales about "force projection" and "landing" with the help of 4 Mistrals to schoolchildren up to grade 8 inclusive. In the 9th, the study of the history of WWII begins and the schoolchildren will laugh at you - they probably heard about Dieppe and how the landing ends with a small amount of forces. After 3 hours everyone will be thrown into the sea.

Just possession of "Misral" is a cheap show-off and a waste of money. Such ships are needed in a COMPLEX with container carriers, ro-ro rokers, MLP platforms and other special equipment.

Quote: Phantom Revolution

both require an escort team.

naturally, both are not suitable for naval combat
moreover, no one solves the issue with the escort of Mistral

the command post they wanted ... the foundation of future AUGs ... a step forward for 10 years

[Phantom Revolution]

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

Their tasks are the same.
Delivery of expeditionary forces to foreign shores.

Lol what?) Oh, understandably, if these ships are of the same classes, then I think the discussion here is simply superfluous.) There are more suitable ships for landing, I think you’re off by yourself. There is an article and everything is told there.

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

Tell schoolchildren about "force projection" and "landing" with the help of 4 Mistrals

Pour out friend) Where did I say that?) The storyteller of you is one more) You again went to flood, re-read what was discussed once more above.)

[Santa Fe]

Quote: Phantom Revolution

Oh it’s clear if these ships are of the same class

Their class is different. Tasks are the same

Quote: Phantom Revolution

There are more suitable ships for landing, I think

So you think or for sure?

Quote: Phantom Revolution

Oh, I think the discussion here is simply superfluous.

That's your business

[Phantom Revolution]

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

Their class is different. Tasks are the same

Here is an excerpt "As part of the Russian Navy, it will be primarily used as a command ship. As reported by RIA Novosti, citing a source in the Russian Ministry of Defense, the landing function of the ship is regarded as secondary, inherent in universal ships.

Among other tasks for which the Mistral can be used in Russia is the fight against submarines, rescue operations in emergency situations, transportation of people and goods. "
Those. if the ship has a secondary landing function, can it be compared with a cargo ship? You can compare Mistral with an aircraft carrier, because there is such a function too.)

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

So you think or for sure?

Dear, the point is not that we do not need such a container ship, we do not need so many military bases abroad and on other continents. The Russian Federation has other landing craft, which if necessary will cope with the task. We are not going to do an intervention in South America when we are planning to build such container ships. To transport large parties, to maintain their group abroad. And do not tell tales here that the Russian Federation urgently needs such ships. There are BDKs that can completely cope with the banana country, and with stronger ones there is nuclear weapons.

[old man54]

Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN

Dear Phantom Revolution,
I would like to know how 2000 T-72 (or T-90) will get to the enemy shore. They need to deliver a million tons of diesel fuel, spare parts, equipment and ammunition
Who will carry the important cargo?

The 2000 figure was not taken for nothing - that is how many MBT Abrams were delivered to Saudi Arabia in the autumn of 1991. In total, the Coalition had about 7000 BTT units

Dear, and you did not play too much by chance? Where are you going to land the whole army then gathered, huh? What, Russia has reached the geopolitical power of the USSR 80's or what? We would have fought off our guests sitting at home, and you are raving about transatlantic mega-airborne assaults! It would be time to land on the ground and cease to lead the Amer landing operations as an argument. That would have been with alien civilizations in the forum would have competed, that would have been scream! :))
It would be better if the mind were directed in the direction of why the Amers would need such a smallest landing fleet of all stripes and what should we, Russia, expect from this! What do they want in total and what can we oppose to them in our current reality ?! :(

[Santa Fe]

Quote: old man54

Dear, and you did not play too much by chance? Where are you going to land the whole army then gathered, huh? What, Russia has reached the geopolitical power of the USSR 80's or what? We would have fought off our guests sitting at home, and you are raving about transatlantic mega-airborne assaults!

This is a question for those who made a deal on the Mistrals

Quote: old man54

rave about transatlantic mega-paratroopers!

Just Operation Tempest in a Glass, a petty mess in Iraq and Kuwait, winter 1991
7000 units BTT, 2600 aircraft, 1 million people

Compare this with the capacity of the Mistral))

Quote: old man54

What does Amer need with such a smallest landing fleet of all stripes and what can we, Russia, expect from this!

of the entire giant US Navy, only Ohio boats with Trident SLBMs are dangerous for Russia

Quote: old man54

What can we oppose to them in today's reality?

Only SNF.
In tactical weapons, we lose with a crushing score

[Mitek]

Note the construction time frame. Laid down in 2011 !!! year. Therefore, we are building the Mistrals over the hill. We need modular shipbuilding technologies .. Otherwise, we will build small ships for 11 years.

[Retx]

In fact, this is it.

[Santa Fe]

Quote: patline

Something like a container ship is very similar ...

Naturally, Monford Point is a rebuilt Alaska-class naval tanker

Hence - extremely short deadlines and low cost of construction.

[Captain Vrungel]

Far from being a container ship. This is a dock vessel for the transportation of heavy, oversized cargo. Here the main indicator is the carrying capacity. A container ship has a cargo capacity. From the landing boat to the oil rig will lift. These floating platforms and more powerful ones, the merchant fleet has been operating for more than a dozen years. And successfully. It is easier to adapt what has already been created than to invent something new for these tasks. As proposals with the Mistral, convert into a hospital ship. It's not easy to take a ready-made hospital, a comfortable passenger ", where everything is already provided for a large number of untrained, one might say random people (passengers) from life jackets to lifeboats, boats and rafts. Amers and we took RO-RO type" Engineer Smirnov " as supply and armament ships for the US Marines There is no sensation in this news, and we can do as well if we want.

[Dinver]

Quote: patline

Something like a container ship is very similar ...

It contains 3 hovercraft, a bridge (for quick unloading of equipment on its own, not requiring port cranes) and many other usefulnesses. It should be considered as a transport ship, and not as a military one.

[APASUS]

Quote: Dinver

It contains 3 hovercraft, a bridge (for quick unloading of equipment on its own, not requiring port cranes) and many other usefulnesses. It should be considered as a transport ship, and not as a military one.

It’s definitely more like a transport ship from a series of semi-submersible ships. There are loaded LCAC-type air cushion landing boats on the deck. The ship without entering the combat zone just lowers a little and the ships go to the coast on their own.
Something like that principle.

[il grand casino]

Another method to convey democracy to oppressed peoples. But essentially: an interesting development. Who knows if there are any analogues?

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

We don’t have to build expensive BDKS with smaller dimensions, and the Americans solved the problem cheaply and cheerfully. Well, we need to do the same thing, unless of course we have a normal marine infantry, and if, as of now, there is 1 brigade per fleet, then we need nafik.

[svp67]

Quote: Alexey Prikazchikov

Well, we need to do the same thing, if of course we have a normal marine infantry, and if, as now, according to the 1 brigade to the fleet, then we need nafik.

Such a ship is not intended to deliver the forces of the "first wave of the landing", the DCVP and BDK should cope with this task, but the delivery of the main forces is just within their reach. And for the main forces, not the marines are already needed, but ordinary ones, with all the means of strengthening ...

[Alexey Prikazchikov]

Specifically, this is not. But amers such ships adapted for transportation of large groups of infantry, equipment and equipment. BdK they are less likely to use they are too expensive. And with us, the marines are of the elite type and the few here are ruined by the BDK. One ultra modern and all kinds of electronics stuffed by Ivan Grenn is worth anything. You look at its cost and displacement. No, I don’t argue, he’s cool, but damn expensive. Vopschem we went along the most difficult path yet we are not a maritime, but a continental power. And for us, the marines are not alpha and omega as for amers.

[itkul]

Quote: il grand casino

But essentially: an interesting development. Who knows if there are any analogues?

At the expense of the analogues, do we need them with such a tonnage that we should carry it on them. And if it was smaller, then until recently they were, now the truth was cut mainly. We left a couple of such vessels in the IMF. Here it is, my former trough , photo taken in 2006 in Abidjan

[itkul]

And here are the gifts, in addition to the top photo

[Scandinavian]

They could have made the gates in the bow as in Russian ships. And so practically everything is clear that they will be covered with awnings, as we covered nuclear missiles with awnings during the Cuban crisis, when transporters transported them to Cuba.

[il grand casino]

Can containers like planes on the folklands

[tlauicol]

and whom are they afraid of?

[il grand casino]

World public. Joke. They are really afraid of no one, in this case.

[Armata]

Quote: Scandinavian

They could have made the gates in the bow as in Russian ships.

What for? It is primarily intended for over-the-air landing; the ramp is only for approaching a busy bridgehead and landing heavy equipment.

[svp67]

the ceremony of handing over the first amphibious assault ship of a new type to the US Navy - the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) T-MLP 1 Montford Point. The ship was transferred to the United States Naval Shipping Command.

Bad, thanks to these ships, the United States is able to quickly transfer its troops anywhere in the world ...

[Evgeny_Lev]

Yeah, for example, you can transfer troops to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk, or directly to Moscow.

[Lopatov]

Or in Primorye. Have you heard about such a part of our country?

[svp67]

Quote: Evgeny_Lev

Yeah, for example, you can transfer troops to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk, or directly to Moscow.

You can only ship them to Europe or the Arctic coast, and from there they will go under their own power to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk or Moscow ...

[strannik595]

hard road will be hard labor

[SerAll]

And don't say, there are no roads, only directions! (Do not correspond to GPS data) -)), traffic police under each bush with a radar ... + bandits on the roads, cafes + "girls"! so you can ask for everything for a bullet floor ...
Although, if we have good roads will begin to build a signal! amers decided to save on equipment costs and give us money to build an infostructure ....-)))

[dmitreach]

hard road will be hard labor

classic :

[Gluxar_]

Quote: svp67

You can only ship them to Europe or the Arctic coast, and from there they will go under their own power to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk or Moscow ...

On their way from the Arctic coast ... The main thing for Susanin is not to forget to bring along ...

[Evgeny_Lev]

I just don’t understand how the construction of such ships fits with so actively exaggerated opinions about changing the concept of warfare in the new millennium?

My personal opinion, nifiga has not changed and, in the case of the beginning of the global pipets, we will still see the Kursk arc and Stalingrad and much more. Because impossible, mosquito bites to fill up the elephant.

As for your "delivered to Europe", well, let's see how it grit.

pysy. it is unclear what the cons. Like I should have hung a sign "SARKAZM"? Or does the majority here believe that this barge is, something cool new and supernatural?

How BE is asking itself the question: how is this bucket fundamentally different from the usual new bulk carrier? Or for example from a machine truck?

[Setrac]

Quote: Evgeny_Lev

Yeah, for example, you can transfer troops to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk, or directly to Moscow.

Dear Evgeni_lev, you are right, in vain you have set the cons! But for every Nizhnevartovsk there are ten Jakartas or Casablanoks. They just don’t need to Nizhnevartovsk, a rocket can suddenly fly from Nizhnevartovsk. So far, not a single nuclear missile has launched from Syria.

[avant-garde]

Quote: svp67

You can only ship them to Europe or the Arctic coast, and from there they will go under their own power to Nizhnevartovsk, Omsk or Moscow ...

It seems to me that they will get tired of going.

[dmitreach]

legs will be rubbed ... to ... tonsils ...

[Ragnarek]

something like a barge like "river-sea" looks like. We have such landing ships along the Volga heaps, we can sell them

[Manager]

I didn’t read it, but damn it’s just a barge and a barge in the photo ..... What to read ................

[Armata]

Greetings Maxim. Take a look at the pace it was built for all its flaws. By and large, our BDK is a delivery vehicle, nothing more.

[Manager]

Quote: Mechanic

. Take a look at the pace it was built.

Greetings!
My eye began to twitch ..

[leon-iv]

so what do you want take the Panamax tanker, put the system of flooding voila the boat is ready.
BUT the idea itself is good.

[pakfa-t-50]

This ship looks like a canteenerovoz, only this is a warship Patino

[Captain Vrungel]

It looks more like a fish processing floating base. There is nowhere to put the container. Only to the pipe.

[itkul]

Quote: pakfa-t-50

This ship looks like a canteenerovoz, only this is a warship Patino

By the way, on the Mumbai raid I saw here such a transport at the Indian Navy

[avt]

Quote: We refund_SSSR

So the container ship with the marines is a useful thing, but the ferry (mistral) with helicopters is not ?! laughing
What is it that turns out - all that and the neighbor is more beautiful and more useful, and what is rubbish at home?
This barge is only useful against bananostans.

Mistral is a UDC, it’s quite a warship and the point is not whether it is needed or not, of course it is, the question is different. And the presented unit - military transport, as I already wrote - the main task is to quickly dump it, quickly dump it and quickly dump it yourself. It’s a necessary thing, it’s necessary to transport cargo to Syria than to drive the BDK.

[Havoc]

it is possible and so

[Manager]

2 submarines? Not bad ..... But the point? Can't they swim themselves?
That is for the evacuation of a wrecked ship VESK good. And so, the prodigy. Let it be quickly built.
And in terms of immersion, etc. "FLIP" is much more interesting as a ship.

[sedoj]

And it’s cool to launch rockets from such a ship. He went to the point, stern the stern, floated his nose to the side - the mine is open and let the rocket through the adversary. Gee ...

[Andrey57]

They also have Soviet container ships converted to their tasks as part of the command of shipping

[Dymkovsky]

Wow, what is the speed of construction, you need to think

[shurup]

Into the Bay of Biscay! Check for kink in housing.

[USNik]

The fact of the matter is that, most likely, it was not only adapted for the transport of LCAC, but also strengthened internal bulkheads, duplicated all systems, crammed the latest equipment, and maybe even booked the cabin ... HZ, the article has little information.

[Evgeny_Lev]

How can reinforcing internal bulkheads affect kink and torsion?
Why book a cabin?

I can't even imagine how, with such a "right" angle of the tank, the barge will withstand the waves. She apparently does not have holds either.

like to put on it three boats on an air cushion, if necessary, drown, giving them the opportunity to "get off" into the water?

In general, the appearance of galoshes clearly creates the impression of a cargo ship with cut out holds.

[waisson]

MLP (Mobile Landing Platform) project shipbuilding support program
Vessels of a new type were developed by General Dynamics. The purpose of the program of their construction is to give new capabilities to the MP and amphibious forces of the US Navy in the framework of the concept of "Sea basing."
Vessels of the MLP project are supposed to be used as floating bases for landings. They are designed to receive cargo and MP equipment from heavy-duty transport of rollers, container ships, etc. with their subsequent transportation directly to the shore by LCAC-1 type air cushion landing craft (DKVP).
According to the first preliminary design developed by General Dynamics, the MLP vessel is capable of receiving six LCAC-1 type DKVPs (three from each side) and deploying on-site for the convenience of carrying out operations of receiving and transferring goods to the sea. The construction cost of each was estimated at $ 1,5 billion.
In September 2005, the Navy conducted demonstration trials of vessels as part of the MLP concept. They included the Maitli Server-1 heavy cargo vessel, converted for this purpose and involved in trials as an MLP vessel, and the Ro-Ro class container ship T-AKR 315 Watkins, which is supposed to be used for transportation of goods and MP equipment from continental naval bases to the area of ​​the MAO. The first stage of the tests was the transfer of goods to each other.
The ships then proceeded to San Diego, where MP cargo was transferred from Watkins to Maitley Server-1. Then the DKVP delivered the cargo ashore directly from the side of this ship, which was sunk for the unhindered exit of the DKVP from the upper deck.
In mid-2009, the project was modernized in order to reduce the cost of construction, which was dictated by a significant excess of the planned appropriations for the procurement of arms and military equipment. In this regard, the company as the base has chosen a ready-made project of oil tankers of the Alaska type, being built for the civilian fleet. As a result, some of the features and characteristics inherent in the original MLP project were underestimated or eliminated. For example, the number of accepted DKVP was reduced by 2 times (up to three units).
On May 31, 2011, General Dynamics announced the receipt of a contract worth $ 744 million for the construction of two MLP project amphibious assault vessels. Until 2015, the Navy plans to allocate funds for the construction of three such vessels

[Vtel]

It would be time for us to think of something terrifying to think of a super-super-sub-stealth sea drone to build, trees in our country are heaps - what are we waiting for.

[Buran]

So you explain to me a simple boot, why build a huge container ship for three inflatable boats? It is clear that the speed, maneuverability, secrecy, but as they were, will remain so.
Any coastal system will make this container ship a free target.