A Comparison of French and U.S. Amphibious Ships

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

ABSTRACT Amphibious and littoral operations have become the prime naval focus for many countries, and have elevated the level of interest in the ships and technologies concerned. This paper explores the effects of differing national approaches to amphibious warfare by comparing the capabilities and systems of two amphibious ships, the French TCD (equivalent to LSD in English) Foudre and the U.S. LSD 41 Whidbey Island class. Both classes of ships have broadly similar roles and capabilities, but differing operational doctrines, military requirements and design standards have led to quite different approaches in ship design.The French Navy is similar in function and composition to the U.S. Navy, but about one‐fifth the size. French amphibious assault is carried out by an Army division, while the U.S. assault force is a branch of the Navy, the Marines. The French amphibious fleet is sized to carry a proportionally smaller landing force than that of the U.S.: but the Foudre would be the centerpiece of the French assault group, while the LSD 41 would normally operate with big‐deck ships like LHDs and LHAs. Current French assault doctrine calls for conventional landing craft, while the U.S. uses air‐cushion vehicles. Finally, the ground assault forces differ in size and composition.These operational differences, as well as other technical ones, have led to outwardly similar but in fact rather different ships. This paper describes the technical differences between the ships in the context of differing operational requirements, and illustrates how these larger factors greatly influence the outcome of the design process.