Development Landing craft tank

1 development

1.1 mark 1
1.2 mark 2
1.3 mark 3
1.4 mark 4
1.5 mark 5
1.6 mark 6
1.7 mark 7
1.8 mark 8
1.9 mark 9

development

although royal navy had built , used powered lighters land horses , men during unsuccessful gallipoli campaign of world war i, invention of tank meant specialized landing craft needed. in 1926, first motor landing craft (mlc1) built royal navy. weighed 16 tons, draught of 6 feet 6 inches (1.98 m), , capable of 6 knots (11 km/h; 6.9 mph). later developed landing craft mechanised.

however, @ insistence of british prime minister, winston churchill, lct created. in mid-1940, demanded amphibious vessel capable of landing @ least 3 36-ton heavy tanks directly onto beach, able sustain @ sea @ least week, , inexpensive , easy build. admiral maund, director of inter-service training , development centre (which had developed landing craft assault), gave job naval architect sir roland baker, within 3 days completed initial drawings 152-foot (46 m) landing craft 29-foot (8.8 m) beam , shallow draft. ship builders fairfields , john brown agreed work out details design under guidance of admiralty experimental works @ haslar. tank tests models determined characteristics of craft, indicating make 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph) on engines delivering 700 hp (520 kw). designated lct mark 1, 20 ordered in july 1940 , further 10 in october 1940.

mark 1

the first lct mark 1 launched hawthorn leslie in november 1940. all-welded 372-ton steel-hulled vessel drew 3 feet (0.91 m) of water @ bow. 12-foot (3.7 m) wide hinged ramp enabled tanks exit directly onto beaches, while second steel door behind ramp sealed bow area tank deck. on both sides, watertight bulwark coamings contained storage compartments, added buoyancy provided double bottom under tank deck. within double bottom ballast , fuel tanks, allowed fore , aft trim adjusted beaching. @ rear small bridge, beneath 2 350 hp (260 kw) hall-scott petrol engines, auxiliary generator, batteries , pumps. hull tanks contained enough fuel range of 900 nautical miles (1,700 km; 1,000 mi). aft of engine room quarters ten crewmen galley , storage. behind bridge wardroom 2 officers, , mounts port , starboard 2-pounder pom-pom machine guns. key lct s operation large stern-mounted kedge anchor dropped while inbound beach. anchor stopped lct slewing or broaching, and, powerful winch, enabled craft pull off beach once cargo unloaded. bow ramp raised , lowered hand cranks, in later versions powered winch installed. in each subsequent model, despite size differences, basic arrangement of power ramp, long tank , aft steering station retained.

sea trials proved mark 1 difficult handle , unmanageable in sea conditions. during tests on tyne, lct s shallow draft made steering helm alone impossible, , quick response engines essential. below, crew compartment damp , sound level deafening. engine spaces no better, being insufferably hot , cramped. however, despite many shortcomings, prototype lct delivered promise of putting tanks ashore on beach.

the mark 1 first saw action during british evacuation greece , crete in 1941. lcts played key role in saving of armoured equipment serve in north africa. though campaign in greece defeat, not disaster on scale of dunkirk, army forced abandon of vehicles, artillery, , armour. during evacuation, 17 mark 1s lost.

mark 2

the designers set correcting faults of mark 1 in lct mark 2. longer , wider, 3 paxman diesel or napier lion petrol engines replaced hall-scotts, , 15 , 20 lb. armoured shielding added wheelhouse , gun tubs. built in 4 sections, increased length , beam allowed loading of 2 rows of 25-ton tanks , enough fuel triple range 2,700 nautical miles (5,000 km; 3,100 mi). in handling , reliability, mk.2 vast improvement on predecessor. seventy-three mk.2s built.

lct mark 2



mark 3

the mark 3 had additional 32-foot (9.8 m) midsection gave length of 192 feet (59 m) , displacement of 640 tons. weight, vessel faster mark 1. mk.3 accepted on 8 april 1941, , prefabricated in 5 sections. increase in length allowed carry 5 40-ton tanks , related support equipment, or 300 tons of deck cargo. though royal navy appreciated higher load capacity of mk.3, discovered several construction deficiencies. craft had evidently been pressed service without sufficient testing; combat operations demonstrated need add longitudinal stiffeners mk.3s (and later mk.4s) in order avoid torsional stresses hull. 2 hundred , thirty-five mk.3s built.

mark 4

the mark 4 shorter , lighter mk.3, had wider beam (38 ft 9 in (11.81 m)) , intended cross channel operations opposed seagoing use. better accommodation tank crews made possible increased beam. had displacement of 586 tons , powered 2 460 hp paxman diesels. capacity of 350 tons, carry 9 m4 sherman or 6 churchill tanks. 8 hundred , sixty-five mk.4s built, largest lct production in british yards.

when tested in assault operations, unsuccessful canadian commando raid on dieppe in 1942, lack of manoeuvring ability led preference shorter overall length in future variants, of built in united states.

mark 5

when united states entered war in december 1941, u.s. navy had no amphibious vessels @ all, , found obliged consider british designs in existence. 1 of these, advanced k.c. barnaby of thornycroft, double-ended lct work landing ships. bureau of ships set drawing plans landing craft based on barnaby s suggestions, although 1 ramp. result, in 1942, lct mark 5, 117-foot craft beam of 32 feet accommodate 5 30-ton or 4 40-ton tanks or 150 tons of cargo. crew of twelve men , 1 officer, 286 ton landing craft had merit of being able shipped combat areas in 3 separate water-tight sections aboard cargo ship or carried pre-assembled on flat deck of lst. mk.5 launched heeling lst on beam let craft slide off chocks sea, or cargo ships lower each of 3 sections sea joined together.

an lct being loaded onto lst crane barge

powered 3 225 hp gray marine diesels, mk.5 had range of 700 nautical miles (1,300 km; 810 mi). capable of making 8 knots (15 km/h; 9.2 mph) @ best; speed slow independent passage across pacific. shipped aboard other vessels, mk.5s proved in operations. inland yards lead lct production , not long before yard workers boasted built them mile , cut them in feet . 4 hundred , seventy mk.5s built.

first used in invasion of north africa, mk.5 crews earned reputation efficiency under fire , in worst of weather or sea conditions. enjoying little priority in fleet maintenance schedules, lct crews gained reputation finding whatever needed. of lack of status within amphibious forces because lct smallest landing craft organized independent assault flotillas. entirely manned reservists , draftees, lct crews operated in free , easy manner horrified professional naval officers. late 1943, mk.5s relegated training or harbour duties in united states.

after world war ii, eleven used in 1950-1960 polish navy amphibious forces, bds, later ods prefixes..

mark 6

the lct mark 6 had same engines, equipment , crew mk.5, longer, @ 120-feet. main difference addition of stern gate allowed lct moor in front of larger lsts become bridge tanks , vehicles disembarking deeper draft vessel. in practice, method of use more difficult carry out vessel s designers anticipated. strong tidal currents in uncharted reef shoals of pacific limited employment of form of beaching heavy armoured vehicles. allow passage of traffic, small wheelhouse moved starboard side of fourteen-foot wide passageway. winch stern kedge anchor relocated atop port side deckhouse, aft of port side 20 mm mount. 9 hundred , sixty mk.6s built. 1 hundred , sixty mk.5 , mk.6 lcts lend-leased royal navy, , small number soviet union.

though never designed cross pacific under own power, several flotillas of lcts did make journey pearl harbor forward areas. success in towing strings of lcts behind lsds led decision let flotilla no. 31, comprising 24 mk.6s, make island hopping voyage under own power. passage slow , breakdowns numerous, flotilla safely arrived @ destination. 3 months later, groups 91 , 92 of flotilla encountered 6 days of high seas during typhoon off okinawa. fighting 50 foot swells , hurricane-force winds craft made 26 miles in 9 hours, , impossible steer or control. when typhoon abated, lcts had survived , took stock of damage. halyards, antennas , masts blown away, guns ripped mounts, , craft had been severely overstressed each had replace stripped bolts or welds holding sections before proceed destination.

mark 7


uss lsm-437 underway

so successful mk.6 naval architects ordered draw plans larger lct, mark 7, have troop-carrying accommodations mk.6 lacked. design evolved, more emphasis placed on speed , range long pacific transits, result mk.7 outgrew virtue of needs far greater lct provide. in 1944, when mk.7 design reached length of 203 feet, designation changed landing ship medium (lsm). placed in production , proving able maintain convoy speeds of 12 knots, lsm took on of role of lcts in pacific, , 558 built.

mark 8


the lct mark 8 hmav abbeville (l4041)

the british produce 1 more large lct design, 225-foot lct mark 8, similar american lsm, in 1944. intended service in pacific , far east, carried 8 heavy tanks or 350 tons of cargo , had accommodation 50 armed troops plus crew of 22. 1 hundred , eighty-six mk.8s ordered; however, when war ended, cancelled , scrapped, or sold directly civilian service. 31 entered service royal navy. twelve later transferred british army; these operated royal army service corps, royal corps of transport. between 1958 , 1966, other 19 ships transferred foreign navies or civilian companies, converted other uses, or otherwise disposed of.

mark 9

an larger lct mark 9 considered in 1944, but, then, allied amphibious shipping @ peak production , admiralty saw no further need additional lct variants. mk.9 design never finalized.