AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE SHIPS. THE NAVANTIA

Transcription

AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE SHIPS. THE NAVANTIA
ACHIEVEMENTS
Juan Carlos I Class, Galicia Class and Athlas Family
Francisco Javier Álvarez Laita
María Luisa Medina Arnáiz
August, 2011
Publisher:
Sponsored by:
AMPHIBIOUS WARFARESHIPS. THE NAVANTIA ACHIEVEMENTS
Athlas Family, Galicia, Class, Juan Carlos I Class
Written by:
Francisco Javier Álvarez Laita, María Luisa Medina Arnáiz
(Archivo MdR Almirante de Castilla)
(arcchivomdr.ac@gmail.com)
Editor:
Alfredo Florensa de Medina
(aflorensa@infodefensa.com)
Sponsored by:
The editor does not necessarily identify with the opinions expressed in this publication. The data included
here are the most recent to which access has been gained up to document closure. The editor has
checked the information to ensure that the content is correct, although no responsibility is taken for
eventual errors or omissions.
© Information & Design Solutions, S.L. All rights reserved. This Report may not be photocopied or
reproduced in any medium without the licence awarded by the publisher. Public reproduction of this
report, in whole or in part using any means is prohibited without the publisher's express and written
consent.
Amphibious Warfare Ships. The Navantia Achievements
2
CONTENTS
1.- Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.- Amphibious Ships ............................................................................................................. 7
2.1.- General Aspects ....................................................................................................... 7
2.2.- Missions .................................................................................................................... 12
2.3.- Amphibious forces........................................................................................................ 15
2.4.- Programmes................................................................................................................. 19
2.5.- The supply, the shipyards ............................................................................................ 22
3.- Amphibious ships and craft built by Navantia ............................................................... 26
3.1.- Evolution of amphibious warfare and the building of ships in Spain ............................ 26
3.2.- The Athlas Family . Proven ships ............................................................................... 29
3.3.- LCM-1E Landing Craft ............................................................................................... 33
3.4.- Offers for export ........................................................................................................... 36
4.- Galicia Class shipsAthlas LPD 13000) ........................................................................... 38
4.1.- Origins of the Galicia class ......................................................................................... 38
4.2.- Missions of the Galicia class ships………..................................................................... 43
4.3.- Description of the Galicia class .................................................................................... 44
4.4.- Comparison with LPD and LSD type ships .................................................................. 51
5.- The Juan Carlos I (Athlas LHD 26000) .............................................................................. 56
5.1.- Origins of the Juan Carlos I .......................................................................................... 56
5.2.- Missions of the Juan Carlos I........................................................................................ 60
5.3.- Description of the Juan Carlos ..................................................................................... 61
5.4.- Capacities of the Juan Carlos I .................................................................................... 72
5.5.- Exports
................................................................................................................. 76
5.6.- Comparison with similar ships .................................................................................. 80
6.- Addendum: First touchdowns and resistance cruise……………………........………….. 83
Navantia
3
INDEX OF TABLES
Table 1.- Signs and denominations of large and medium-sized amphibious ships ...................10
Table 2.- Signs and denominations of amphibious ships ......................................................... 11
Table 3.- Classifications of the main amphibious ships ............................................................ 18
Table 4.- Main shipyards ........................................................................................................... 24
Table 5.- Spanish Navy's main amphibious ships ……………………………….......................... 27
Tabla 6.- Athlas Family............................................................................................................. 31
Table 7.- Features of the Athlas Family of ships........................................................................ 32
Table 8.- Features of the LCME-1E landing Craft...................................................................... 35
Table 9.- Design and building milestones of the Galicia class................................................... 41
Table 10.- Details of crew and transported force ..................................................................... 46
Table 11.- Summary of potential cargo …................................................................................ 47
Table 12.- Features of the Galicia class ships........................................................................... 50
Table 13.- Comparison of the Galicia with similar ships (1) ..................................................... 54
Table 14.- Comparison of the Galicia with similar ships (2) ..................................................... 55
Table 15.- Design and building milestones of the Juan Carlos I ............................................... 59
Table 16.- Features of the Juan Carlos I ................................................................................... 71
Table 17.- Troop transport capacity in amphibious operations ………….................................. 73
Table 18.- Milestones of the ships for Australia ......................................................................... 77
Table 19.- Comparison of the Juan Carlos I with similar ships…………………………………... 82
INDEX OF GRAPHS
Graph 1.- Evolution of the missions of large amphibious ships ......................................…….. 14
Graph 2.- Timeline of the Spanish Navy's amphibious force .................................................... 28
Graph 3.- Cargo handling system ............................................................................................ 48
Graph 4.- Conception of the Juan Carlos I ............................................................................... 58
Graph 5.- Cargo handling devices ............................................................................................. 64
Navantia
4
1.- INTRODUCTION
In recent years many large and medium-sized navies have included amphibious ships with broad
multipurpose capacities in their inventories, capable of carrying out tasks of a military nature and in
support for the civilian population in cases of catastrophe or natural disaster. These are ships with a
displacement of between 8,000 and 40,000 tonnes at full load, capable of operating for lengthy periods in
waters far from their base and are equipped with a capacity to operate landing craft and helicopters and
in some cases V/STOL aircraft.
Kunslunshan
, China.
(Photo: MdR
File Admiral
de Castilla)
The aim of this document is to present Navantia's experience in the design and building of large
amphibious ships. It focuses on large amphibious ships and especially on those equivalent to those built
for the Spanish Navy, classesCastilla (LPD) and Juan Carlos I (LHD). Smaller ships such as LST, LSM,
LCM, etc., and landing craft are only dealt with occasionally and collaterally for a better understanding of
the contents of this document.
Dokdo, South
Korea.
(Photo: US
Navy)
5
In addition to this introduction, this document consists of five other chapters. The second chapter
discusses the current situation of amphibious forces around the world, detailing typologies, missions,
most relevant units, acquisition programmes and the shipyards offering products in this field. The third
chapter offers a general treatment of the evolution of the Spanish Navy's amphibious forces and the ships
and landing craft built by Navantia. Galicia class ships are the subject of the fourth chapter, dealing with
their origin and the most relevant characteristics of these amphibious warfare units. The fifth chapter is
devoted to the Juan Carlos I Class, the ship recently delivered to the Spanish Navy and, for the time
being, the two currently being built at Navantia's shipyard in El Ferrol for the Royal Australian Navy
(RAN). Finally, a sixth chapter has been included as an addendum devoted to setting out the most recent
events relating to the Juan Carlos I.
Johan de
Witt,
Rotterdam
and
Amsterdam,
Holanda.
(Photo: Royal
Netherlands
Navy)
In the preparation of this document Esther Benito and Santiago Sinde of Navantia have assisted
enormously in organising visits and in gathering data and photographs impossible to obtain in any other
way. In the graphical part of the job we have enjoyed the selfless contribution of a lower good friends and
great photographers Eugenio Castillo Pert (Eugenio), Carlos Pardo González (Orca), José Luis Porta
Vales (Señalero) and Luis Miguel Rodríguez García (Lucas). Equally, we must highlight the collaboration
of the Spanish Navy's Social Communication Office and especially of Lieutenant Ana Isabel García
García and Boatswain Antonio Ivorra Carmona. Theirs is the merit of the graphical part of this job, and we
wish to express the gratitude of the authors to them.
6
2.- AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
2.1.- GENERAL ASPECTS
An amphibious ship is understood as that destined to carry out landing operations, sending men,
weapons and materials necessary for actions on land, directly or using the means that it transports
(landing craft and helicopters). The classification of landing craft includes all those of small size, with
open deck, that can act autonomously or from the dock or the davits on larger amphibious ships.
Dr Soeharso,
Indonesia. (Photo:
MdR File Admiral
de Castilla)
The amphibious operations developed during the Second World War were carried out under the tactical
concept of the availability of ships to carry a combat force and directly situate it on the beach. Even LSD
type craft were limited to transporting landing craft very close to the landing beach that they had to reach.
After the Second World Cup war many navies took over amphibious ships from the inventories of the
Royal Navy and especially of the US Navy. This was the case, for example, of the French, Greek, Turkish
etc. navies, and subsequently of the Spanish Navy. That period can be seen as the first in which
amphibious forces were outside the scope of the major powers.
A second stage lay in the manufacture by other countries' shipyards of poorly developed copies of ships
designed and used during the Second World War. Classes of these are, for example, Ourage (LPD),
Blavet (LST) and Batral (LSM) built in France, the designs of LST type ships of the HDL 4000class, built
by Hanjin Industrial SB, in South Korea, and now in service with the navies of Venezuela, Indonesia and
South Korea. In addition, among others that should be included in this group are two classes of LST's
built by Tarkizak for the Turkish navy.
The helicopter had already made its appearance during this second phase and, initially, some of the ships
started to include flight decks, normally in the stern, for use by one of these apparatus. The development
of amphibious operations with vertical envelopment through their use started shortly afterwards. The US
Navy modified some aircraft carriers from the Second World War and built seven Iwo Jjima Class LPH's,
to complement classical landing ships.
Following this second period, navies found themselves facing a new type of requirement that implied
intervention in waters further from their shores and in scenarios that include classical amphibious warfare
missions and others of the humanitarian nature and of evacuation of civilians. There was also a
significant tactical change in amphibious action that meant large landing ships acting from beyond the
horizon, far from the beach.
In this third period ships appear that on a single platform bring together its amphibious structure and a
flush deck for helicopter operations. At the time, aircraft of this type had already become a fundamental
element during that period in amphibious warfare missions and in Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations
7
(NEO). In addition, the appearance of V/STOL combat planes enabled the use of this type of aircraft to
provide direct support for disembarked forces using these new types of ships as base.
San Giorgio, Italy.
(Photo: Eugenio
Castillo Pert)
San Giusto, Italy.
(Photo: Eugenio
Castillo Pert)
For the operation of aircraft of this kind, some new types of amphibious ship were designed in order to
take full advantage of these aircraft's characteristics. A ski-jump, weapons elevators, specific landing
spots, etc. were added, all in addition to:

Weapon transport capacity for the airborne component

Increase in personnel for aircraft operation and maintenance

Aerial control facilities
8
Kunisaki, of the
Oosumi class,
Japan. (Photo: US
Navy)
Within the budget limitations imposed by the economic situation, this type of ship continues to be
relatively easy to "sell" to the corresponding political levels and to parliamentarians because of adding
humanitarian type missions and action in the case of catastrophe or natural disaster to force projection
functions. The old "guns or butter" debate has become the well-worn phrase of "humanitarian warships".
When speaking about amphibious ships one of the first problems that arises is a result of the confusing
number of specific signs and denominations used for their designation. Their names are usually linked to
their tactical use. Table 1 sets out the signs and denominations of the main types of large and mediumsized amphibious ships. To complete these data Table 2 includes the most common denominations of
smaller landing craft which, in some cases, are used from amphibious ships.
HMS Albión, United
Kingdom. (Photo:
Royal Navy)
In any case, it should be remembered that all the current identifying signs of ships and amphibious craft
start with the letter L for "Landing", followed by two or three more letters that indicate the specific
typology. In previous periods, since the Second World War, different identifying signs or numerals have
been used that do not follow the aforementioned norm.
The signs and descriptions contained in the tables below correspond mainly to those used by NATO for
the different types of ships.
9
TABLE 1.- SIGNS AND THE NOMINATIONS OF LARGE AND MEDIUM-SIZED AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
ABBREVIATIONS AND
DENOMINATIONS
DESCRIPTION AND EXAMPLES
LL
Landing Logistic
Generic denomination for amphibious ships. Signs used on the Juan
Carlos I during construction.
LHA
Amphibious general
assault ship
Amphibious general assault ship with flush deck and dock for
amphibious craft. Tarawa Class ships (US Navy) are an example.
LHD
Amphibious Assault
Ship, Multi-purpose
Identical to the LHA but with a capacity to lead maritime space control
operations and force projection missions using ASW helicopters and
V/STOL aircraft. Examples of these are the Wasp (US Navy) and Juan
Carlos I (Spanish Navy).
LKA
Amphibious Cargo Ship
Cargo transport ship for amphibious operations fitted with its own
landing craft. The latest designs having dock and helicopter landing
pad.
LPA
Amphibious Personnel
Assault Ship
Personnel transport ship for amphibious operations fitted with its own
landing craft. With helicopter landing pad
LPD
Amphibious Transport
Dock
Transport of infantry and armoured vehicles with capacity for landing
craft in the dock and with flight deck in the stern for helicopters. The
Fearless Class (Royal Navy) and the Galicia and Castilla (Spanish
Navy) are examples.
LPH
Amphibious Assault
Ship
Amphibious assault ship using helicopters and with the use of small
craft. Without dock for the craft. Examples of these are the Ocean
(Royal Navy) and Iwo Jima Class (US Navy).
LCC
Amphibious Command
Ship
Amphibious force command ship. With a minimum transport capacity.
The main example is the Blue Ridge Class (US Navy)
LSD
Landing Ship Dock
Amphibious ship equipped with dock. Transport of loaded landing craft
and of a limited number of personnel. Obsolete An example of this is is
the Spanish Navy's old L-31, Galicia.
LSL
Landing Ship Logistic
Medium-sized and smaller than the previous one. With doors and
ramp in the bow. This is not a first-line ship. An example of this is the
old Sir Bedivere of the Round Table class (Royal Fleet Auxiliary,
United Kingdom).
LSM
Landing Ship Medium
Smaller than the above with stern doors and ramp. A significant
example are Batral (France) class ships.
LST
Landing Ship Tank
Ship for landing battle tanks, with ramp astern. Examples of these are
the Velasco and Pizarro (Spanish Navy).
LSV
Landing Ship Vehicle
Ship for landing vehicles. With doors and ramp in the bow. Not first
line. Examples are the US Army and Philippines Navy ships of the
Major General Gross class
10
TABLE 2.- ABBREVIATIONS AND DENOMINATIONS OF AMPHIBIOUS CRAFT
ABBREVIATIONS AND
DENOMINATIONS
OBSERVATIONS
LCT
Landing Craft Tanks
Landing craft tanks. The BDK that the Spanish Navy once had.
LCM
Landing Craft Medium
Medium-sized landing craft. The new LCM-1 E built for the Galicia and
Juan Carlos I class of ships. Able to carry a battle tank.
LCP
Landing Craft
Personnel
Landing craft for personnel. Some with ramp in the bow.
LCPL
Landing Craft
Personnel Large
Landing craft for personnel. Some classes with ramp in the bow.
LCU
Landing Craft Utility
Large landing craft, for tanks and heavy vehicles. With ramp in the
bow.
LCVP
Landing Craft Vehicles
and Personnel
Landing craft for personnel and light and heavy vehicles. With ramp in
the bow.
LCAC
Landing Craft AirCushion
Landing craft on air cushion. Ro-Ro with access ramp astern and
disembarkation afore. Generically denominated ACV, “Air Cushion
Vehicle”, vehicles with an air cushion or hovercraft.
HMS Ocean.
United Kingdom.
(Photo: US Navy)
11
2.2.- MISSIONS
The missions of large amphibious ships have evolved enormously over the years. During the period of the
Second World War, when the first LSD were conceived, the fundamental mission was to transport landing
craft loaded with material for action on Pacific islands very far from the North American bases in that
ocean. The troops transported were exclusively those needed for the operation of vehicles and armoured
equipment that were transported. Throughout the conflict it was shown that this type of ship had some
very interesting capacities complementary to those of amphibious warfare.
Especially in recent years an evolution has come about from the pure LSD to other types of amphibious
ships designed to provide much greater capacities and a superior technical complexity. This translates
into missions that can be assigned to these units being very broad and also their high acquisition cost.
Simultaneously, missions of a civilian nature that can be carried out have implied that part of the ship's
financing may be obtained from civil protection budgets.
RFA Lyme Bay,
Largs Bay class,
United Kingdom.
(Photo: BAE
Systems)
The missions that large amphibious ships can take on, and especially the LHA, LHD and LPD, are varied
and can be divided into three large groups. In the first place there are those for which they were
conceived, those of a military nature:

Force projection. Including both amphibious actions with Marine infantry forces as well as nonspecialised combined military unit deployment operations in this type of scenario.

Presence in geographically distant zones. Represents the power of the ship proprietor country,
which has been known for many years as "flying the flag". In many medium and small navies
ships of this kind are becoming the new "capital ships" because of their capabilities.

Naval or amphibious operations command. Given the size of these ships and their command,
control and communications systems, the afloat general HQ of an amphibious operation or the
general staff of a naval force can embark, with personnel, facilities and equipment being received
without any problems.

Logistic support for forces deployed on land or at sea. Close to the coast, in an amphibious
operation, landing craft and helicopters are able to offer the necessary logistic support to a
military force acting on land. At sea the transport capacity and the helicopters allow them to carry
out logistics support tasks to a naval formation operating in waters far from their bases. As an
extreme development of support tasks to a naval force the Siramicor programme may be cited for
the definition of a mine warfare system for the Spanish Navy, using small, remotely-operated
craft, and one of the aspects considered is that large amphibious ships can act as supply ships.

Rapid transport. The characteristics of this type of ship allow their use as rapid transport with a
load and unload capability using their own resources. Most notable among the elements that can
12
be transported are wheeled or caterpillar track vehicles, which usually have direct access to the
garage decks, containers, palleted cargo, etc.

Aircraft carriers V/STOL planes. Only for ships type LHA and LHD. The US Navy uses its ships
as platforms for the Marine Corp's AV-8 Harrier II used to carry out direct support tasks to assist
landed forces. In the Spanish Navy, the use of the Juan Carlos I Juan Carlos I is foreseen in fleet
projection missions as an alternative aircraft carrier, also using the AV-8 Harrier II. There are
plans for it to operate with F-35B (JSF) AIRCRAFT.

NEO (Non-combatant Evacuation Operations). This is the acronym given to operations involving
the evacuation of non-combatant personnel, citizens of the flagship country or of other allied
states when facing a deterioration in the political situation or security of a region. Although they
can imply the landing of a protection force to secure evacuation areas and those of a high
concentration of personnel, normally these actions are not of a military nature.
Endeavour,
Endurance class,
Singapore. (Photo:
MdR File Admiral
de Castilla)
Among missions of a military nature, a specific group makes up others of an auxiliary nature. Among
these, the following may be highlighted:

Support ship. Their transport capacities, including personnel and fuel and the large amount of
space, enable these ships to carry out tasks in support of other naval units operating in waters far
from their bases. As an example, the French Navy have used ships of this type to transfer smaller
units to and from their territories in the Pacific.

Training ship. In France the third ship of the Mistral class, the Dixmunde, will handle the functions
previously carried out by the helicopter-carrier, Jeanne d´Arc. in training ship tasks. The same is
the case for the Italian Navy's San Giusto, specially conceived for this task, sharing it with the
amphibious ships. In addition, ships of the San Giorgio class have also been used by that Navy
for these functions. Spain has used some of the amphibious ships when it has not been possible
to use the Juan Sebastián de Elcano due to unavailability.
As well as the above functions, inclusion should be made of those of a civil nature relating to operations
to assist the civilian population in emergency situations, both in humanitarian aid operations as well as in
cases of natural disaster. The excellent actions of Spanish amphibious ships should be remembered, with
emphasis, in Central America, in Indonesia and in Haiti to help alleviate the devastating effects of
hurricanes and tsunamis.
The Italian LPD, San Marco has been wholly financed by the Ministry for Civil Protection and is operated
by the Italian Navy in every kind of mission, with the promise of action in cases of disaster situations that
call for its presence.
The following graph shows shows the timeline with the evolution of large amphibious ships' missions..
13
GRAPH 1.- EVOLUTION OF THE MISSIONS OF LARGE AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
YEAR
MISSIONS
Force projection
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
Presence
Operations command
MILITARY
Logistics support
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
V/STOL Aircraft carriers
xx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
NEO Operations
xx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
Humanitarian aid ops.
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
Disaster relief
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
Rapid transport
AUXILIAR
Y
CIVIL
Support ship
xxxx
xxxx
Training ship
xxxx
xxxx
USS Blue
Ridge. (Photo
US Navy)
14
2.3.- AMPHIBIOUS FORCES
In view of that seen up to now, a summary should now be made of the main amphibious warfare units of
the different navies.
The criterion used in drafting this table has been to include large landing ships capable of carrying out
amphibious operations from maritime zones far from the coast. This therefore includes ship types LHA,
LHD, LPD, LPH, LCC, LSD, LKA, etc. In line with the criterion expressed, the LST's are not included,
even though some are very large, but whose main landing capacity is directly on beaches.
USS Peleliu,
Tarawa class,
United States.
(Photo US Navy)
The Navies not included in the following list, except where there may be some error in data collection, do
not have a significant amphibious force capable of operating in waters far from their bases.

Australia
Has two Juan Carlos I class LHD's under contract from Navantia that will be
named Canberra and Adelaide. They will replace ex US Navy and ex Royal Navy
LST's.

Brazil
In recent years this country has increased its amphibious force with the
acquisition of two Thomaston class LSD's (ex US Navy), and various large LST's
from the US and the UK.

China
As well as a large fleet of LST, LSM LCU and smaller landing craft, China has
one ship of the type considered here, the Kunlunshan (LPD) Yuzhao class (Type
071). With displacement of 17,600 tonnes and a flight deck in the stern. A second
unit of this class has already been launched and a further two may possibly be
under construction or planned.

South Korea
The flotilla of LST type ships is to include a Dokdo, class LHA, the construction of
a further two with improved characteristics being planned.

Spain
The Spanish Navy Projection Group has the Juan Carlos I (LHD) and two Galicia
class ships (LPD). A Newport class LST is still in service (L-42 Pizarro).

USA
This country has the largest landing fleet among all the world's navies. Its main
components are:
-
2 Blue Ridge class LCC's. Command ships for amphibious operations.
-
8 Wasp class LHD's
15
-
2 Tarawa class LHA's These are being decommissioned.
-
(1+3) America class LPH's. New series to replace the Tarawa class. One ship
under construction and plans for at least another three.
-
5 (+4+1) San Antonio class LPD's. Five have already been delivered, four are
being built and another is planned.
-
4 Austin class LPD's. These are being decommissioned.
-
4 Harpers Ferry class LSD's.
-
8 Whidbey Island class LSD's.

France
Two ships of the Mistral class (LHA) have been delivered, a third is under
construction and a fourth is planned after 2020. They are complemented with two
Foudre class LPD's, whose sale to a third country is being considered, the fleet of
the previous class of ships being considered sufficient.

Greece
Although it had some old US Navy LSD's, it currently only has LST or smaller
ships.

Holland
After many years of embarking its Marine infantry on Royal Navy ships, it now
has two LPD's: the Rotterdam, similar to the Spanish Galicia class, and the
Johan de Witt, which is a design based on the previous one.

India
This is an expanding amphibious force that has added an Austin class LPD (ex
US Navy) to its flotilla of LST and smaller ships.

Indonesia
Has five Dr Soeharso class LPD's ordered from South Korea and local shipyards.
They have a displacement of 11,400 tonnes and have a dock and flight deck in
the stern. Available data indicate that they may have been designed with more
emphasis on civil protection than on purely military functions.

Italy
Has three small San Giorgio class LPD's and a San Giusto class virgin based on
the previous one. The amphibious capacities planned in the initial designs of the
aircraft carrier Cavour, have been limited by the hangar's vehicle transport
capacity (12 Ariete tanks or 100 all-terrain vehicles) and 360-450 soldados, with
two ramps for vehicles of up to 60 tonnes, one astern and the other starboard.

Japan
In recent years, and against the policy followed since the Second World War, the
Japanese navy has ordered three Oosumi class LPD's. It does not have a
flashback although helicopters can be transported between fore and aft. They
have displacement of 13,000 tons at full load.

New Zealand
This country has a multipurpose ship, the Canterbury, equipped with runway and
hangar for two helicopters in the stern. It can transport two LCM's in the sides, as
well as 250 soldiers and vehicles with two lateral ramps on each side.

United Kingdom
This country has Ocean (LPH), built with flush deck and without dock,
although it does have ramps for loading and unloading vehicles and davits for
amphibious craft. The country also has two Albión class LPD's. These ships are
complemented by four Largs Bay class LSD's built using a design from Damen
Schelde (Holland), some of which will be decommissioned with the new cuts in
the Ministry of Defence budget.

Russia
After the fall of the Communist regime, the Russian navy scrapped its main
amphibious ships.

Singapore
The Singapore Navy has four Endurance class ships that combine the
characteristics of an LPD and an LST, with ramp afore and dock aft. These are
basically used for the transfer of military units, including armoured vehicles, to
training camps in Australia.

Taiwan
This country's amphibious forces are made up of ships from the US Navy, some
of them from the Second World War. The most relevant ones are two LSD's, one
of the Anchorage class and the other of the Cabildo class.
16
USS Makin
Island, Wasp
class. (Photo US
Navy)
To provide a little more wealth of comparison of different navies' amphibious forces, Table 3 offers
classification of the main existing ships. This has been prepared using the previously presented data.
Although the amphibious ships of the U.S. Navy have already been included here, they are beyond the
scope of comparison with those of any other Navy.

Ship size far greater than similar ones in other navies.

Capacities and characteristics They are also bigger than ships built in other Western countries,
the main users and builders, as well as the United States, of units of this kind.

Number of units. The United States' amphibious fleet is almost bigger than those of all other
countries' fleets put together.
There are no units in any Navy similar to those of the Tarawa or Wasp class, or the new America class.
The same happens with the San Antonio class LPD's and the Harpers Ferry and Whidbey Island. class
LSD's.
It is also still interesting to make overall comparisons between the amphibious forces of different countries
that should be considered as a relative value since the size and composition depends on factors such as:

Economic level of the country.

Their Armed Force' political and social interest.

Availability or not of marine infantry forces or other forces capable of carrying out actions against
land taken from the sea.

Scenarios in which the armed forces should act, both in military missions or of civil nature.
17
TABLE 3.- CLASSIFICATION OF THE MAIN AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
LHA
LHD
LPD
LPH
LCC
LSD
Australia
---
(+2) Canberra
---
---
---
---
Brazil
---
---
---
---
---
2 Thomaston
China
---
---
1 (+1+2)
Kunlunshan
---
---
---
South
Korea
1 (+0+2)
Dokdo
---
---
--
---
---
Spain
---
Juan Carlos I
2 Galicia
---
---
---
(4) America
2 Blue Ridge
4 Harpers
Ferry
8 Whidbey
Island
---
---
---
USA
2 Tarawa
8 Wasp
5(+4+1) San
Antonio
4 Austin
France
2+(1) Mistral
---
2 Foudre
Holland
---
---
Rotterdam
Johan de Witt
India
---
---
1 Austin
---
---
---
Indonesia
---
---
5 Dr Soeharso
---
---
---
Italy
---
---
San Giusto
2 San Giorgio
---
---
---
Japan
---
---
4 Oosumi
---
---
---
United
Kingdom
---
---
2 Albion
1 Ocean
---
4 Largs Bay
Singapore
---
---
4 Endurance
---
---
---
Taiwan
---
---
1 Anchorage
---
---
1 Cabildo
USS San
Antonio, United
States. (Photo
US Navy)
18
2.4.- PROGRAMMES
It is also true that there are many navvies who would like to have ships of this kind in their material
inventories or who want them to replace their currently available amphibious forces.
The potential of this kind of ship, in both the military and civil field, makes them highly interesting for many
countries. This has led to many navies, including many without any tradition of amphibious warfare to now
consider programmes for the building or acquisition of units of this type.
At the same time, some countries are considering replacing their existing amphibious ships with others of
the more modern design and with increased capabilities. This is the case with France, who wishes to
replace theFoudre, class transport ships, or Italy, who was considering building two LHD's to complement
existing forces. In the case of the USA, the situation is different because their amphibious units have
been continually updated in recent years.
The main current programmes or forecasts for needs that have been officially stated are:

South Africa
Is considering the acquisition of two LHD Strategic Support Ships (SSS). With a
capacity to transport a maximum of 1500 soldiers and 350 vehicles. They would
also lead and other ships that adds the capabilities of an AOR.

Germany
Does not have any amphibious forces. For many years the Bundesmarine have
considered the acquisition of the LHD or LPD type ship known as the Joint
Support Ship (JSS), without until now having obtained approval of the
corresponding budgets. The country's shipyards have various designs for the
construction of this ship, which is thought might enter into service in the year
2020.

Algeria
Is considering the acquisition of ships of this kind. Navantia have presented the
Athlas LPD 8000 to the Algerian Navy.

Argentina
is studying the acquisition of one or two amphibious ships from other navies'
surplus. The acquisition of the Orage and Ouragan, removed from service by
France, was rejected.

Australia
The RAN have announced the acquisition of the Largs Bay, which has been
decommissioned by the Royal Navy (UK). This will be a transitory solution until
the ships built by Navantia enter into service.
USS Harpers
Ferry, United
States. (Photo
US Navy)

Canada
Is planning to acquire three Joint Support Ship (JSS), which at some moments of
the program combined the characteristics of an AOR with those of a force
projection ship. It seems that Navantia has presented a variant of the Cantabria.
19

South Korea
The construction of a further two ships of the Dokdo class is planned with
improved characteristics on the first of the series. These ships are being offered
for export.

Chile
This country needs at least one multipurpose ship (force projection and action in
the face of disasters). With length overall of 155 m and displacement of 9000
tonnes. Equipped with a flight deck, dock for landing craft and garage for
vehicles. They are studying the acquisition of a ship in service with another Navy.

China
It is foreseen that the construction of Yuzhao class ships (Tipo 071), with a total
of four ships.

USA
Construction is planned or underway of America, class LPH's to replace the
Tarawa, and San Antonio class LPD's.

Philippines
This country needs two multi-purpose ships (force projection and action in the
face of disasters). With a length overall of 150 m and a capacity to transport and
land 500 soldiers. A speed of 20 kn is planned. Navantia have presented the
Athlas LPD 8000 design.

France
The construction of the fourth Mistral class ship is planned for the year 2020.

Greece
The Greek navy is considering the construction of an LPD.

Holland
To replace the AOR Zuiderkruis building work is starting on the Karel Doorman
(JSS), which as well as the logistics capabilities adds those of a helicopter carrier
and of amphibious transport (garage for vehicles, dock, landing craft, berthing for
troops, hospital, etc.). Its design make it look like a derivative of the Enforcer
Family.

Italy
Wants to complement its amphibious fleet with two LHD's with length overall of
170 m and displacement of between 16,000 and 18,000 tonnes They should
have a capacity to berth 450 soldiers and have 1000-1200 linear metres of
garage space for vehicles. With flight deck for helicopters and dock for LCM craft
and three LCVP type craft on davits. They are also considering the later
acquisition of another two ships.

Malaysia
This country wants three multipurpose ships (force projection and intervention in
cases of disaster). Navantia have presented a variant of the Athlas LPD 13000
(Galicia class), with angular profiled superstructures.

Norway
Is considering obtaining a ship with a vehicle and troop transport capability.

Portugal
If the economic situation so permits, the keel of the Alfonso de Albuquerque, is to
be laid in 2012. This is an LPD with a displacement of 10,500 tonnes at full load..
It is designed as a multi-purpose ship equipped with a hospital and able to
transport 650 soldiers and 76 vehicles. With flight deck to operate 4--6 medium
helicopters and a dock for 4 LCM. Design very similar to the Schelde Enforcer
1300.

Russia
Has been looking at the possibilities with various western countries' shipyards of
building four amphibious ships fitted with dock and flush deck. The last two of the
series will be built in Russia. DCNS (France), have been involved in lengthy
contract negotiations with significant political support and have won with their
Mistral class offer. The first two ships will be built in France (STX) and Russia
(Admirality Shipyard). The first ship will not be delivered until 2014. Navantia
presented its bid on 5 November 2010 on the basis of the Athlas LHD 26,000
(Juan Carlos I class).

Thailand
Existing data indicate that they have ordered an Endurance type LHD from
Singapore Marine Technologies similar to those of the Singapore Navy .
According to other sources, the operation is still not closed. It has also been
indicated that the ship will be smaller than those of Singapore.

Turkey
Once to buy a multipurpose LPD type ship (force projection and action facing
disasters) with a transport capacity for 600 soldiers and wheeled and caterpillar
20
tracked vehicles. A displacement of between 12,000 and 15,000 tonnes is
planned. According to other sources, the ship they need calls for greater
capacities. Navantia have presented a variant of the Athlas LHD 26,000 (Juan
Carlos I class).
USS Tortuga,
Whidbey Island
class, United
States. (Photo: US
Navy)
21
2.5.- THE SUPPLY: THE SHIPYARDS
After reviewing the amphibious ship programmes that are foreseen for the new future, it is essential to
look at the shipyards that present some kind of alternative in this field. There is a plentiful supply, but this
diminishes when a shipbuilder is called on to show proven experience in the construction of ships of this
kind. This section includes both the shipyards who have already built ships as well as those who have still
not made their supply specific with the endorsement of contracts on the part of a Navy.
Up to now the German naval industry has not had the opportunity to take on the construction of large
amphibious ships. Even so, the shipyards integrated into the ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems group have
come up with some designs considered by the German Navy. Worth noting is the project known as MHD
200 with a displacement close to 20,000 tonnes and the MHD 150 with displacement of 15,000 tonnes.
The Hudong-Zhonghua Shipyard in China, has built the Kunlushan, the first Yuzhao class LPD (Type
071). Sources consulted indicate that they can follow it up with another two units. Hanjin Heavy
Industries, in South Korea, is the shipyard that has built -up to now the only- Dokdo class ship. The Dae
Sun shipyard has built the first three units of the Dr Soeharso class, designed for export, for the
Indonesian navy.
With regard to the design and construction of amphibious ships by Navantia in Spain, we believe it is not
necessary to discuss this any further here as the rest of this document is devoted to it.
Mistral, France.
(Photo: DCNS)
In the United States the US Navy contracts the construction for each series of ships with one or two
shipbuilders and build the entire class. In recent years there has also been a process of integration of
naval shipbuilders, which has meant that many of the big shipyards depend on businesses dedicated to
aeronautical manufacture (Northrop Grumman and Lockheed). In relation to the construction of America,
Wasp and Tarawa, class LHA and LHD type ships, the only shipyard is Northrop Grumman Ship Systems
in Pascagoula, which was previously known as Ingalls Shipbuilding.
The San Antonio class LPD's are built by Northrop Grumman Avondale, at the factory located in New
Orleans.. The company was previously called Avondale Shipbuilding. The Harpers Ferry class LSD's
were built at the same shipyard, the series now being in its final production phases. The oldest Whidbey
Island class LSD's are the work of Lockheed (Seattle) and Northrop Grumman Avondale. It should be
noted that Northrop Grumman have announced the closure of their Avondale facilities in 2013 and is
considering the possibility of leaving the Naval construction business.
22
DCNS, in France, a company formed by the French government with shareholdings being held by French
arms companies, is the designer of all that country's Navy's main ships. In a field that concerns us, that
company built the two Foudre class ships and has led the building of the Mistral class. Its supply includes
two LHA type ship designs with flush deck for helicopters. The first is the BPC 140, with displacement of
14,000 tonnes, which up to now has not been built. The other design is the Mistral class, denominated
BPC 210 with a displacement of 21,000 tonnes. The STX Shipyard, specialised in recent years in the
production of large cruise ships, has the third ship under production for France and is going to lead the
building of amphibious ships for Russia.
One of the shipyards with the most interesting offer is Damen Schelde Shipbuilding in Holland. For the
Dutch navy, Koninklijke Marine have built the Rotterdam and Johan de Witt. They also supplys the
Enforcer family of LPD and LSD type ships with different lengths overall and fitted with dock and flight
deck aft for helicopters.
Siroco, Foudre
class, France.
(Photo DCNS)
The state-owned shipyard, Fincantieri, in Italy, have built up to now the two San Giorgio class LPD's and
the San Giusto. These ships are among the smallest of their category and have flush decks for medium
and heavy helicopters. The San Giorgio as being significantly modified, indicating under-achievement in
design.
Of the three Oosumi class ships for the Japanese Navy, the first two have been built by Mitsui, while the
third has been launched by Universal.
Although the Royal Navy isn't what it used to be, in the United Kingdom there are two shipyards and
build amphibious warfare ships. The main one is BAE Systems, whose factories launched the Ocean, the
two Albion class ships and the two last LSD's of the Largs Bay class. For its part, Swan Hunter has built
the first two Largs Bay class ships with a Damen Schelde design.
In Singapore the shipbuilder, Singapore Technologies Marine have built the Endurance class for that
country's Navy. The ships have a ramp in the fore and dock aft, combining the characteristics of a large
LST and a small LPD.
Mention should be made of some other shipyards with ample constructive capabilities but who work with
the amphibious ship designs of other companies. These include:

STX in France, who as mentioned build some of the Mistral class vessels designed by DCNS.

PT PAL in Indonesia, with two variants of the Dr Soeharso class.

Estaleiros Navais de Viana do Castelo (ENV) in Portugal, who is expected to be able to build an
LPD under license from Damen Schelde.

Admirality Shipyard in Russia, who will build Mistral class ships under license from DCNS.
In Table 4 a summary is given of the main shipbuilders who design and/or build amphibious ships and the
products that are launched at their shipyards.
23
TABLE 4.- MAIN SHIPBUILDERS
COUNTRY
SHIPBUILDER
SHIPS
Germany
ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems
MHD 200
China
Hudong-Zhonghua
Kunlunshan
Hanjin Heavy Industries
Dokdo Class
Dae Sun
Dr Soeharso Class
NAVANTIA
Castilla Class
Juan Carlos I Class
Athlas Family
Northrop Grumman Ship Systems
(Possible closure after 2013)
Wasp Class
America Class
Northrop Grumman Avondale
(Possible closure after 2013)
San Antonio Class
Whidbey Island Class
Lockheed
Whidbey Island Class
DCNS
Foudre Class
BPC 140
Mistral (BPC 210) Class
STX
Mistral Class. DCNS License.
Holland
Damen Schelde
Rotterdam,
Johan de Witt
Enforcer Family
Indonesia
PT PAL
Dr Soeharso Class. Dae Sun License
Italy
Fincantieri
San Giusto
San Giorgio Class
Japan
Mitsui and Universal
Oosumi Class
Portugal
Estaleiros Navais de Viana do Castelo
(ENV)
Alfonso de Albuquerque. Not started.
Under license from Damen Schelde.
BAE Systems
Ocean
Albion Class
Largs Bay Class (Damen Schelde Lic.)
Swan Hunter
Largs Bay Class (Damen Schelde Lic.)
Russia
Admirality Shipyard
Mistral Class. DCNS Licence
Singapore
Singapore Technologies Marine
Endurance class
South Korea
Spain
United States
France
United
Kingdom
The MHD200
from
ThyssenKrupp
Marine Systems.
(Photo:
ThyssenKrupp
Marine Systems)
24
The MHD150 from
ThyssenKrupp
Marine Systems.
(Photo:
ThyssenKrupp
Marine Systems)
25
3.- SHIPS AND AMPHIBIOUS CRAFT BUILT BY NAVANTIA
3.1.- EVOLUTION OF AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE AND SHIPBUILDING IN SPAIN
In the first third of the 20th century, the Spanish Navy was one of the few navies capable of successfully
carrying out an amphibious operation on a coast dominated by enemy forces. In 1925, the landing at
Alhucemas meant an inrush of Spanish troops into the heart of Rif territory (Morocco) dominated by Abd
el Krim. This amphibious action, which included the landing of battle tanks, meant the start of the end of
the conflict.
Since the 1950s, the Spanish Navy has shown great interest in developing Marine Infantry forces and the
ships destined for their transport and transfer to the coast. The stages mentioned when dealing with the
evolution of amphibious forces after the Second World War have an almost direct correspondence to
what happened in Spain.
After the War, the Spanish Navy's first amphibious crafts were known as Foca and Morsa, acquired by
the publicly owned Empresa Nacional Elcano in the United Kingdom and were subsequently bought by
the Spanish Navy. They were two LCT(4)'s, bought from the Royal Navy and sold as surplus material
from the war.
The incidents at Ifni and the Sahara made it clear that there was a need for the Spanish Navy to have an
amphibious component that would enable it to act beyond the Iberian peninsula. It should not forgotten
that due to the urgent need to attend to the campaign, the French navy had to lend the Spanish Navy a
certain number of LCM craft and an LST, the Odet, designate by the Spanish Navy as LST-1, and the
French LSD support, Foudre, as "Buque X".
Following the acquisition of craft in the United Kingdom, Empresa Nacional Bazán designed and built
three similar units that were not given a name but four of the numerals BDK-3, 4 and 5. In parallel, and
through defence agreements signed with the United States, ships and amphibious craft started to be
obtained from the U.S. Navy.
Since the mid-1950s and up to the current period in which a unit is still active, the main Spanish
amphibious ships coming from the so-called American Assistance were:

Aragón attack transport. Specialising in the transport of troops and amphibious craft. Designed on
the hull of a war programme freighter.

Castilla attack transport. Specialising in the transport of cargo and equipment. Also designed over
the hull of a Second World War cargo ship like the previous one.

Three LSM's but only received the numerals LSM-1, LSM-2 and LSM-3. Coming from the Second
World War.

Galiciadock ship. Modernised Cabildo class LSD with helicopter landing pad over the dock, which
is open in its upper aft part. Coming from the Second World War.

Three Terrebonne Parish class LST's. They received the names, Velasco, Martín Álvarez and
Conde de Venadito. Built in the United States for the U.S. Navy.

Aragón and Castilla attack transports. Replaced those previously mentioned with the same name.
For a material and personnel transport. Built using the shells of Maritime Administration's rapid
merchant ships. These are the work of North American shipyards and were transferred by the
U.S. Navy.

TwoNewport class LST's that were gaiven the names of Hernán Cortés and Pizarro. Built in the
United States for the U.S. Navy and subsequently transferred to and acquired by the Spanish
Navy. The second of those mentioned will continue in active service with the Spanish Navy until
the Juan Carlos I is completely operational.
In the mid-60s Empresa Nacional Bazán built three landing craft based on the French EDICs at La
Carraca Shipyard (San Fernando, Cadiz). They received the denomination BDK-6, BDK-7 and BDK-8
and were unsuccessfully offered for export with the class name Pelícano.
As can be seen, until the end of the 20th century the major part of the Spanish Navy's amphibious ships
have come from North America, transferred after having had an operational life in the U.S. Navy. An
26
exception to this are the two Royal Navy landing barges and another five with similar characteristics built
at Navantia's factories (Empresa Nacional Bazán at the time).
After the end of the 20th century the Spanish Navy and Navantia started to design amphibious ships
belonging to types that up till that time had not been available on the official list of Spanish Navy ships
(acronym "LOBA" in Spanish). They are two Galicia class LPD's and the Juan Carlos I LHD.
TABLE 5.- SPANISH NAVY'S MAIN AMPHIBIOUS SHIPS
NAME AND NUMBER
OBSERVATIONS
TA-11 Aragón
Attack transport. For troops, materials, equipment and amphibious craft.
Haskell classVictory. Ex USS Noble.
TA-21 Castilla
Attack transport. For cargo, materials, equipment and amphibious craft. Of
the Andrómeda-Tolland class. Ex USS Noble.
LSM-1
LSM-2
LSM-3
L-11 Velasco
L-12 Martín Álvarez
L-13 Conde de Venadito
L-21 Aragón (II)
L-22 Castilla (II)
L-31 Galicia
L-41 Hernán Cortés
L-42 Pizarro
L-51 Galicia
L-52 Castilla
L-61 Juan Carlos I
Landing ship medium. US Navy type LSM. With the ramp for beach
disembarkation of tanks, tracked and wheeled vehicles and troops. First
amphibious ships transferred by the U.S. Navy to the Spanish Navy.
U.S. Navy Terrebonne Parish class landing ship tanks (LST). With aft ramp
for beach zone disembarkation of tanks, armoured vehicles and troops ..
Ex USS Terrebonne Parish, ex USS Wexford County and ex USS Tom
Green County respectively.
Assault craft transport. Troops, cargo, and amphibious craft. Maritime
Administration rapid merchant ships of the Mariner C-4 S-1A class,
modified as amphibious assault ships by the U.S. Navy. Ex USS Paul
Revere and ex USS Francis Marion respectively.
Dock ship for the transport and operation of amphibious landing craft and
vehicles. Cabildo class LSD. Ex USS Noble.
Newport class LST. With ramp afore and door astern for amphibious
vehicles. Ex USS Barnstable County and ex USS Harlan County. The
Pizarro is still in active service with the Spanish Navy.
Built by Navantia at the El Ferrol Shipyard. In active service with the
Spanish Navy.
Built by Navantia at the El Ferrol Shipyard. In active service with the
Spanish Navy since September 2010.
BDK-2 (ex Morsa)
Royal Navy LCT(4) class. Purchased as war surplus by Empresa Nacional
Elcano and subsequently acquired by the Navy.
BDK-3, BDK-4 and BDK5
These are a version of the BDK-1, LCT(4) type, built in Spain by Empresa
Nacional Bazán (Navantia) at the El Ferrol Shipyard.
BDK-6, BDK-7 and BDK8
French designed EDIC class LCT type craft. Built by Empresa Nacional
Bazán (Navantia) at the La Carraca Shipyard (San Fernando, Cadiz).
BDK-1 (ex Foca)
27
GRAPH 2.- TIMELINE OF THE SPANISH NAVY'S AMPHIBIOUS FORCES
YEARS
SHIP
NAME AND NUMBER
1950
1960
BDK-1 (ex Foca)
=====
=====
====
BDK-2 (ex Morsa)
=====
=====
====
BDK-3
=
=====
=====
=
BDK-4
=
=====
=====
=
BDK-5
=
=====
=====
=
LSM-1
=====
===
LSM-2
=====
===
LSM-3
=====
===
1970
1980
1990
TA-11 Aragón
===
=====
=
TA-21 Castilla
===
=====
=
BDK-6
===
=====
===
BDK-7
===
=====
===
BDK-8
===
=====
===
L-31 Galicia
=====
====
L-11 Velasco
=====
=====
===
L-12 Martín Álvarez
=====
=====
===
L-13 Conde de Venadito
=====
=====
L-21 Aragón
=====
====
L-22 Castilla
=====
=====
2000
2010
2020
L-41 Hernán Cortés
===
=====
L-42 Pizarro
===
=====
=>
L-51 Galicia
=
=====
=====
====>
=====
=====
====>
=====
====>
L-52 Castilla
L-61 Juan Carlos I
28
3.2.- THE ATHLAS FAMILY. PROVEN SHIPS
As has be seen up to now, the Spanish naval shipbuilding company Navantia's experience in building
landing ships goes back to the mid-1950s. At the end of the century the first large amphibious ships for
the Spanish Navy also started to come out of Navantia's shipyard in El Ferrol.
The design of amphibious units developed by Navantia enjoy the experience obtained by the Spanish
Navy in the operation of units of this kind. At the same time, they benefit from the savoir-faire of one of
the world's most deeply-rooted shipyards specialising in naval shipbuilding. The main amphibious ships
and craft built or under construction by Navantia are:

Galicia class: Two amphibious assault ships, the L-51 Galicia and L-52 Castilla, built at El Ferrol
Shipyard.

Juan Carlos Iclass: Three ships, the L-61 Juan Carlos I for the Spanish Navy and a further two
for Australia (HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide), also the work of the Fene- Ferrol yard.

LCM-1E class: Fourteen landing craft built at La Carraca factory, without any assigned name,
only using the Spanish Navy numbers L-601 to L-614.
LPD / LSD
ATHLAS 20,000
LHD / LHA
ATHLAS 20,000
ATHLAS 26,000
ATHLAS
13,000
ATHLAS 8,000
ATHLAS 13,000
Athlas
Family.
(Navantia)
ATHLAS 13,000
ATHLAS 20,000
ATHLAS 26,000
LKA / LPA
THE
ATHLAS FAMILY
In recent years, Navantia have presented a set of families of ships to the market aimed at different
missions that, in response to the Spanish Navy's requirements, are also of interest to other navies.
Navantia's developments in the field of amphibious warfare are grouped together as the Athlas family.
This consists of four sub-families grouped together by displacement, having hull and other elements in
common, and with variants depending on the missions that the ship should carry out. They are an array of
products to meet the requirements of any fighting Navy, being able to attend to any typology requirement
and amphibious unit missions with ships whose displacements vary from between 7,000 and 28,000
tonnes.
All these ships have been designed with dock for amphibious craft in the aft, varying in size as a function
of the sub-family (length overall and displacement). Only those classified as LHD or LHA have a flush
29
flight deck occupying the entire length overall, whilst the other types have a flight deck and hangar for
helicopters in the fore.
Within the four sub-families there are versions especially conceived to attend to different assignments,
from the most simple LKA's up to the LHD's with a V/STOL aircraft component control capability:

LHD / LHA
The LHD is more complete with flush deck and ski-jump for V/STOL aircraft,
whilst on the LHA the deck, also flush, is only planned for helicopters and is fitted with neither
trampoline nor aviation control facilities.

LPD / LSD
Fore flight deck. The LPD's are foreseen for the landing of material and
personnel, and the LSD's are optimised for the transport of material and landing craft.

LKA /LPA
Fore flight deck. The LKA version has been designed specifically to transport
cargo, helicopter equipment and landing craft. The LPA is optimised for personnel transport.
In the different versions there are very diverse degrees of design advancement that go from the ships
already built up to the LKA types of the three families, which are have very conceptual developments
since bids have not been presented with them. Table 7 shows the set of Athlas Family developments.
The subfamilies, as we have already indicated, are grouped by displacement and are of the following:
-
ATHLAS 8000: Of between 7,000 and 10,000 tonnes.. There are possibilities of design
development, depending on the requirements, of ship types LPD and LSD. The design has
already been detailed for the Athlas LPD 8000 and has been presented to the Philippine and
Algerian navies. The ship has a flight deck and hangar for two helicopters, can carry two landing
launches in its dock, transport a landing force of 450 persons and 600 tons of vehicles.
Athlas LPD 8000
(Navantia)
-
ATHLAS 13000: Depending on the versions, the displacement varies between 11,000 and
15,000 tonnes. LHD, LPD and LPA options are planned. The Spanish Navy's Galicia and Castilla
are equivalent to the Athlas LPD 13000. It seems that it has been offered to Malaysia
-
ATHLAS 20000: The displacement range lies between 16,000 and 23,000 tonnes. LHD, LHA,
LPD and LKA are foreseen. The Athlas LHD 20,000 and the Athlas LPA 20,000 are the designs
that were proposed for the joint Belgium/Luxembourg, amphibious transport vessel, both with
dock, one with flush deck for helicopter landing and take-off and the second one only with aft
flight deck. The Athlas LHD 20,000 is offered as a variant of its big brother, the Athlas LHD
26000, in amphibious programmes with flush deck.
30
Athas LHD 20000.
(Navantia)
-
ATHLAS 26000: With displacement of between 24,000 and 28.0000 tonnes.. There are plans for
LHD, LHA, and LKA versions, the LPD or LSD not being considered. The Spanish Navy's Juan
Carlos I, and the two Canberra class ships for Australia are of the Athlas LHD 26,000 type.
Navantia have presented a bid to Turkey based on a variant with displacement of 27,000 tonnes
and possibly only with flight deck for helicopters.
Athlas LHD 26000
without ski-jump.
(Navantia)
TABLE 6.- ATHLAS FAMILY
ATHLAS 8000:
ATHLAS 13000:
ATHLAS 20000:
ATHLAS 26000:
LHD / LHA
--- ---
Athlas LHD 13000
Athlas LHD 20000
Athlas LHD 26000
(Juan Carlos I
class)
LPD / LSD
Athlas LHD 8000
Athlas LPD 13000
(Galicia class)
Athlas LHD 20000
--- ---
LKA /LPA
--- ---
Athlas LPA 13000
Athlas LKA 20000
Atlhas LKA 26000
Displacement
7,000-10,000 t
11,000-15,000 t
16,000-23,000 t
24,000-28,000 t
31
TABLA 7.- FEATURES OF THE ATHLA FAMILY SHIPS
LHD 26000
LHD 20000
LKA 20000
LPD 13000
LPD 8000
Length overall
230.80 m
190.1 m
192 m
160 m
138.4 m
Beam
32 m
31.7 m
32 m
25 m
24 m
Depth
27.5 m
24.6 m
21.20
16.8 m
16.8 m
Displacement
25,753 t
21,700 t
22,350 t
13,000 t
8,500 t
Crew
243
220
60
190
134
Propulsion
CODGEL
1 gas turbine,
2 diesel
2 pods
Diesel-electric
4 diesel,
2 pods
Diesel-electric
4 diesel,
2 pods
CODAD, 4
diesel, 2
propellers
CODAD, 4
diesel, 2
propellers
Speed
21 knots
20 knots
19 knots
20 knots
20 knots
Range of action
9,000 miles
9,000 miles
9,000 miles
6,500 miles
7,000 miles
Troops
1,200
780
70
615 / 577
450
Light garage
1,880 m2
1,700 m2
3,858 m2
285 m2
380 m2
Heavy garage
1,410 m2
1,000 m2
3,654 m2
725 m2
825 m2
Hangar
990 m2
600 m2
468 m2
510 m2
250 m2
Flight deck
4,750 m2
4,750m2
2,700 m2
1,340 m
1,200 m2
Dock
1,165 m2
1,100 m2
1,100 m2
885 m2
500 m2
32
3.3.- LCM-1E LANDING CRAFT
The complement to amphibious ships developed by Navantia are the LCM-1E Landing Craft design by
Navantia for the Spanish Navy and built at the company's factory in La Carraca, San Fernando (Cadiz).
The LCM-1E our mechanised landing launches whose design has been optimised in order to act with the
maximum cargo capacity from Galicia and Juan Carlos I class ship docks. the series of crafts is
composed of of a total of 14 units: The two prototypes (L-601 and L-602) and twelve (L-603 to L-614)
series craft.
Their mission is to transport between amphibious assault vessels and the landing beach, in the shortest
possible time, the forces and equipment that make up the landing force, especially heavy materials such
as tanks, artillery, armoured vehicles and sapper plant.
L-611, class LCM1E. (Photo: Alfredo
Florensa de Medina)
The 14 units were delivered to the Spanish Navy between 2001 and 2007. In 1999 the contract was
signed for the construction of two prototypes (L-601 and L-602) for evaluation and trials in different
conditions of use. This process was carried out with the intervention of members of the Naval Beach
Group Craft Unit and with the collaboration of the Spanish Marine Corps ("TEAR"), who provided the
necessary wheeled and tracked vehicles. Trials were even carried out with a Spanish Army. Leopard 2E
tank.
L-607, class LCM-1E.
(Photo: Spanish
Navy)
After correcting the weak points found in the trials of the two prototypes, the Navy ordered a series of 12
units. The Spanish Navy's idea was to have four craft for each of the amphibious ships (Juan Carlos I,
Galicia and Castilla), holding the other two in reserve in case any of the units are withdrawn because of
their type of activity, landing and leaving beaches with heavy cargo loads, which subjects them to
frequent accidents
33
Navantia is currently negotiating with Australia so that this class of craft may be built at local shipyards for
their use in the Canberra class of ship's under construction at El Ferrol Shipyard.
The LCM-1E's are almost rectangular-shaped craft with wheelhouse in the last third on the starboard
side. They have a disembarkation ramp in the fore and a door abaft, both hydraulically operated. The hole
is made of navels deal and the wheelhouse with composite materials. The stern door allows the passage
of wheeled vehicles of up to 12 tonnes, allowing fore-aft interconnection between craft located in large
amphibious ships' docks. It has an almost clear cargo area in the entire length overall and breadth, only
interrupted by the wheelhouse.
They are fitted with equipment superior to what is normal in this type of craft, most noteworthy being
navigation radar, very complete communication system with HF, VHF and UHF equipment, magnetic
needles and gyroscope and a GPS terminal.
For the operation they need a crew of three or four persons, who in the Spanish Navy belong to the Naval
Beach Group's Craft Unit, which is answerable to the Fleet and have their base at the Puntales Naval
Base in Cadiz.
According to information from the Navy, the LCM-1''s have an ample cargo deck capacity with different
possible cargo combinations, the most noteworthy of these being:

One M60 A3 Battle Tank (54 tons.), Leopard 2E (62.5 tons) or M1 Abrams (69 tons).

One M88 A1 recovery vehicle (56 tons).

Two M-109 A2 SP howitzers or an M-109 A2 and one M 992 Field Artillery Ammunition Supply
Vehicle.

Two AAV-7 amphibious vehicles or two Piranha wheeled armoured combat vehicles.

Two C10T heavy-duty tow trucks.

Six Hummer type vehicles.

One Medium lorry with standard 20 foot container and up to 20 tons at sea states 2/3.

One 10 tonne heavy-duty tow truck and 3 Hummers.

Up to 200 soldiers fitted with their combat equipment.
L-607, class LCM1E. (Photo: Spanish
Navy)
Propulsion is ensured by two MAN diesel engines, each with power of 1,100 HP (809 Kw), which drive
two water jets manufactured by the Swedish company, MJP Waterjets (Osterby Marine Group). With
ballast they can achieve a speed of 22 kn, which is fairly fast for a landing craft. The speed drops to 13.5
kn when sailing at full load. With average cargo the range reaches 190 nautical miles. The characteristics
34
of the craft and its propulsion enable it to carry out over-the-horizon actions with amphibious ships more
than 20 miles from the coastline without enemy forces being able to detect them optically and beyond the
range of coastal defences.
TABLE 8.- CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LCM-1E LANDING CRAFT
DIMENSIONS
Displacement varies between 56.6 t in ballast and 107.6 t at full load.
The maximum length overall is 23.3 m, which falls to 21.2 m between perpendiculars.
The depth is 6.4 and the draft at full load reaches 1 m.
PROPULSION
2 MAN diesel engines D-2842 LE 414 of 809 KW (2x1,100 HP), at 2,300 rpm, which
drive two 785 Kw MJP-650 DD.
Maximum speed 22 kn in ballast, 17 kn with average load and 13.5 kn at full load.
Fuel capacity: 6,114 litres, which gives them a range of 190 nautical miles loaded with
an M60 A3 tank.
CARGO:
Cargo area of 21.3 x 4.9 m, approximately 103 m2.
Different load combinations are possible:
 1 Combat tank or tracked recovery vehicle.
 One or two self-propelled howitzers with or without ammunition support vehicle.
 2 amphibious vehicles or 2 armoured vehicles
 2 heavy-duty tow trucks.
 6 All-terrain vehicles.
 200 Men with their military equipment.
OTHER
ASPECTS
The main equipment is: Navigation radar, communication system (HF, VHF and
UHF), magnetic needle and gyroscope and GPS .
The crew is 3/4 hands.
L-607, class LCM1E. (Photo: Spanish
Navy)
35
3.4.- OFFERS FOR EXPORT
In recent years Navantia's commercial activity in the field of exports has multiplied and led to significant
success. Australia has ordered two Juan Carlos I class amphibious ships (HMAS Canberra and HMAS
Adelaide) and three Air Warfare Destroyers (AWD) similar to the F-105, Cristóbal Colón. Both types of
ship are direct reproductions of those built for the Spanish Navy, one known as the Strategic Projection
Ship ("BPE") and the other a variation on the F-100 anti-frigates. All of them have been designed and
built by Navantia for the Spanish Navy. Mention should also be made of the five F-310 Fridtjof Nansen
class frigates for the Royal Norwegian Navy, which can be seen as a reduced version of the Spanish F100.
In the world of patrol vessels, the Venezuelan Navy has acquired eight ships of the Avante Family into
different classes. Of the two classes, one are Corvettes with a displacement close to 2,200 tonnes and
the others are offshore patrol vessels with a lower displacement.
The two proposed for
the NTBL. Above the
Athlas LHD 20000
and below the Athlas
LKA 20000.
(Information
graphics: Navantia)
These commercial successes confirm that Navantia's designs respond to the requirements of different
navies and these, in general terms, are very similar to those of the Spanish Navy.
It is very likely that Navantia has presented or will present bids for most of the projects set out in section
2.4.- Programmes of this work. Nevertheless, information about bids presented by Navantia to third
countries lies within the scope of confidentiality demanded for commercial proposals. Even so, some
aspects of Navantia's activity in offering their designs abroad have indeed been made public directly by
Navantia, or through the Navies requesting the bid, and these are the data reflected here.
36
Navantia have presented the Athlas LPD 8000 to the navies of Algeria and the Philippines. The
characteristics of the naval forces of both countries make it difficult to imagine them acquiring and
operating larger ships with more advanced features.
According to available data, Navantia has also presented the Athlas LPD 13000 (Galiciaclass) to the
Royal Malay Navy with an updated version of the ships built for the Spanish Navy, which includes bow
superstructures with angular profiles. The presence and capacities of the Galicia in Southeast Asia
following the Banda Aceh tsunami made a great impression on the countries in the area.
The design of the Athlas LHD 20000 has been presented as a bid for the joint Belgium/Luxembourg ship,
and within this sub-family the Athlas LPA 20000 was presented as the shipbuilder's own alternative. It is
worth noting that the Athlas LHD 20000 is also being offered as a variation on its big brother, Athlas LHD
26000, in tenders for amphibious programs with flush deck. The programme was cancelled.
Regarding the Athlas LHD 26000, as well as the success obtained in Australia, Navantia have presented
a bid to Turkey based on this design in a variant with displacement of 27,000 tonnes. On 5 November
2010 Navantia presented a boon to Russia for the building of this class of unit. In January 2011 it was
announced that France had been awarded the contract and that two ships will be jointly built by France
and Russia, and a further two will subsequently be built in Russian shipyards. The first of these should be
delivered in January 2015. It will cost €720 million and the second one is expected to cost €650 million.
These figures are a surprisingly high given that the price of the Juan Carlos I has been €350 million.
The support of the Spanish Navy for Navantia in strengthening the company's commercial activities must
be underlined. The F-101 Álvaro de Bazán's trip to Australia may possibly have been a deciding factor in
the two tenders (AWD and LHD) in that country. Even so, seen from outside and in comparison with what
other countries' governments and institutions generally do, in Spain there is a notable lack of support in
this field.
The LCM-1E landing craft developed and built by Navantia have awakened the interest of various
countries due to the design, features, speed and manoeuvrability. So in June 2009, the Australian
Ministry of Defence officially requested bids from the Spanish company for the acquisition of landing craft
similar to the 14 built for the Spanish Navy. It is not yet known how many launches the Royal Australian
Navy, wish to acquire, but it is thought to be at least eight, four for each of the two LHD's, although some
sources put this at 10 so as to have two in reserve.
A final decision was planned for 2010 following complete analysis of Navantia's bids and the acquisition
costs. The option of the LCM-1E's being built at a local Australian shipyard will be considered. The
Australian Minister of Defence suggested at the time that the future landing craft should be capable of
transporting the heavy equipment embarked on the Canberra class ships, including the M1A1 Abrams
battle tank in service with the Australian armed forces.
The Canberra bow before
fitting the ski-jump at the El
Ferrol shipyard in November
2010. (Photo Francisco Javier
Álvarez Laita)
37
4.- THE GALICIA CLASS SHIPS
4.1.- ORIGINS OF THE GALICIA CLASS
Lee building in Spain of LPD type ships was contemplated in Fleet renovation plans designed in the early
1990s.
The Galicia ships were born by three fundamental reasons:

The Spanish Navy's need to replace the transport attack ships, Aragón II y Castilla II, with other
more modern ships with capacities superior to those provided by the two ex-US Navy ships. The
amphibious force situation at that time was characterised by a lack of ships with landing
operations command facilities, a low capability for helicopter transport operations, a poor capacity
for rapid movement to the beach with landing craft and the impossibility of loading material and
heavy vehicles in the large attack transporters then available to the Navy.

The positive experience obtained with the operation of the first L-21 Galicia, a US built LSD from
the Second World War. Operations during the Green March and the evacuation of Western
Sahara meant a very interesting combination of circumstances, above all because during that
period the aircraft carrier Dédalo was not operational.

With regard to the Castilla, the reasons that led to her construction are of the same, but also in
addition to the lack of work at the El Ferrol Shipyard and the social problems that it generated in
the entire district, which forced the government to look at the contracting of new buildings.
L-51 Galicia. See
stern door. (Photo:
Luís Miguel
Rodríguez García)
To sum up, there were two situations in the early 90s: the Spanish amphibious force -Fleet Delta Groupwas, along with the mine warfare force, the least evolved Navy group had very obsolete resources. At the
same time, the end of the "Cold War", around 1990, led to some confusion about the strategic needs that
would have to be attended to in the future; this in addition to the belief that the new scenario would lead to
a reduction in armament investments -which was called "dividends of peace", very practical in a period of
economic crisis- meant radical paralysis of the new building programmes, creating a difficult situation for
Empresa Nacional Bazán.
Nevertheless,the capacity for projection on land and the amphibious resources were one of the first
aspects to be re-evaluated in the new geostrategic scenario. The need to replace The Navy's ships of this
kind became urgent; the pitiful state of the two Velasco class LST's led to the leasing with a purchase
option of the Pizarro and Hernán Cortés LST's from the United States. This measure caused a strong
38
reaction as it was feared that it would mean the loss of the capacity for new buildings of own design
achieved by Bazán and a return to the period in which the Navy was equipped with second-hand
American ships.
L-51 Galicia. (Photo
Carlos Pardo
González)
All these circumstances finally accelerated the building of the Galicia class ships, which did not just come
from nowhere, but rather from an important international cooperation programme.
In November 1988, the Spanish and Dutch navies, aware of the fact that they had very similar needs and
concepts, signed an agreement for joint development of an AOR project. This agreement led to the
building of the Patiño (Spanish Navy) and the Amsterdam (Koninklijke Marine, Royal Netherlands Navy).
The design work was carried out jointly by Navantia and the Dutch firm Nevesbu VB, a company devoted
to engineering and naval architecture whose activity focuses on the design of complete ships and on
structure projects and facilities for specialised ships, for the offshore industry and for military navies.
As this experience was considered a success, the Dutch and Spanish governments commenced
negotiations in the mid-90s for the joint construction of an LPD type amphibious ship whose need was
noted by both navies. The agreement for design collaboration was signed in January 1991.
El L-52 Castilla.
Leaving the River
Ferrol (Photo: José
Luís Porta Vales)
So the Spanish Navy's Galicia class and the Dutch Navy's Rotterdam were therefore a joint project
between Navantia and Nevesbu in matters affecting general design. On this shared basis, and in
accordance with the requirements of each of the two navies, the respective companies made specific
detailed engineering, with quite significant differences arising between the ships. As an example, mention
can be made of the fact that the Spanish ships can handle heavy helicopters and even V/STOL aircraft
occasionally, whilst the Rotterdam can only operate medium-sized helicopters. In some joint manoeuvres
involving the two navies this has caused headaches for the Spanish Marine Infantry officers responsible
for organising a heliport assault who assumed that both flight decks had the same features.
39
Navantia build the ships for Spain, whilst the Dutch ships or the work of Damen Schelde Shipbuilding (at
the time, Royal Schelde).
L-51 Galicia.
(Photo: José Luís
Porta Vales)
At the time of their construction these ships meant a significant technical leap for the Spanish Navy,
enabling it to move from the concept of "amphibious transport ship" to the concept of "assault platform".
The series consists of two units: the L-51 Galicia and the L-52 Castilla. Both were built on the El Ferrol
shipyard slipways, with shipyard building numbers 200 (the Galicia) and 205, the Castilla. Within the
Athlas Family of amphibious ships that Navantia proposes, these ships would belong to type ATHLAS
LPD 13000.
The degree of domestic input achieved in building the Galicia was 86.2%, which reached 88.9% in the
platform and 55.78% in the combat system. In the second ship of the series the degree of domestic
building input was 91%.
From a review of the documentation prepared it can be seen that the price foreseen in 1994 for the
Galicia was 132.6 million euros (22,065 million pesetas at the time) and was subsequently upwardly
revised to 140.2 million euros (then 23,329 million pesetas).
In relation to the Castilla the documentation indicates a price of 67.3 million euros (11,194.6 million
pesetas). This latter figure has been checked in the available documentation and we understand that the
differences with those of her series twin may be due to:

A situation of work shortage in the El Ferrol Shipyard at the time of starting her construction
advised working for no profit or at low cost.

The price of the Galicia could include the cost of detailed project engineering.

The price stipulated for the Castilla may not have included all the building items that could have
been budgeted separately, or that a contract prices provision was carried out subsequently.
The reality surely lies in the occurrence of three simultaneous circumstances.
The Galicia was one of the first ships to use the Integrated Modular Construction system, which meant a
great technological advance based on increased ship definition work during the design phase. This
system allows jobs to be carried out in parallel, which in the traditional manner and building would have
been sequential, carrying out the majority of the tasks in workshops, in more favourable conditions, which
implies improvements in quality, productivity and a reduction in the total job schedules.
With this construction system the ship is seen as an integration of modules and blocks that are prepared
independently following very detailed planning. The blocks and modules come out of the workshops with
a significant part of the equipment already installed and are transferred to the slipway where they are
mounted, connected and welded to form the ship. This technique whose use started at the El Ferrol
Shipyard has been transferred to the rest of the factories and has become Navantia normal working
practice, making the company one of today's world references in integrated modular construction of
warships.
Specifically, the Galicia ships were built by integrating 69 prefitted blocks on the slipway.
40
TABLE 9.- DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MILESTONES AND DATES OF THE GALICIA CLASS
MILESTONE
GALICIA
CASTILLA
Start of negotiations with Holland:
Mid 1990
---
Signing of collaborative agreement
with Holland:
January 1991
---
Project definition phase
June 1992 - December 1993
--
Signature of execution order
September 1994
1997
Start of plate cutting
May 1995
May 1997
Block prefabrication commencement
October 1995
October 1997
Laying of first keel blocks
31 May 1996
11 December 1997
Launch
21 July 1997
14 June 1999
Entry into service
30 April 1998
26 June 2000
Construction period:
44 months
38 months
In the operating life of the Galicia special mention should be made of the personnel and material transport
work undertaken for KFOR in the former Yugoslavia, their participation in aid operations following the
floods caused by hurricane Mitch Mitch in Central America (November 1998 - January 1999), the cleaning
of pollution caused by the sinking of the Prestige oil tanker (December 2002 - January 2003), Operation
SJ (March 2003 July 2003) of humanitarian assistance in Iraq, the Solidarity Response Operation
(January 2005 - April 2005) of humanitarian assistance in Banda Aceh and the north-east coast of
Sumatra (Indonesia) to contribute towards alleviating the effects of the tsunami that affected the zone,
and UN peacekeeping support mission "Operación Libre Hidalgo in Lebanon (September 2006 November 2006).
Comparison of the
L-51 Galicia as an
oiler replenisher.
(Photo: José Luís
Porta Vales)
With regard to the Castilla,the main missions carried out have been her participation in Operation Romeo
Sierra to clear Parsley Island (17 July 2002), collaboration in collecting audio after the sinking of the oil
tanker, Prestige (January 2003 - February 2003), cooperation made to transport the Legion's material to
the port of Ash Shuahyabah (United Arab Emirates) within the framework of the IF Operation (July 2003 September 2003), and the humanitarian aid mission in Haiti within the framework of Operation Caribbean
Sea (October 2004 - December 2004). The latest relevant intervention was carried out in the first quarter
of 2010 in the humanitarian aid operation undertaken following 12 January 2010 earthquake in Haiti.
41
The L-52 Castilla
seen from the stern,
showing the dock
door, flight deck
and hangar. (Photo:
José Luís Porta
Vales)
42
4.2.- MISSIONS OF THE GALICIA CLASS SHIPS
The Galicia class ships are known by the Spanish Navy as Amphibious Assault Ships ("BAA" in Spanish).
They are designed to transport troops and vehicles and to operate with amphibious craft in the dock and
with helicopters on the flight deck and have as their main mission to be the projection platform in
operations against land taken from the sea for a landing force made up of Marine infantry units and
transport helicopters.
The Galicia enjoys facilities prepared enabling her to act as the Amphibious Force and Landing Force
command ship and as a Maritime Component Command's alternative command ship. For its part, the
Castilla also has an increased C2 Command and Control capability to act as a command ship and as an
alternative Naval Command Component's General HQ command ship in NATO Maritime operations. She
habitually serves as the SP HRF (M) HQ (NATO Maritime Headquarters of the Spanish High Readiness
Force).
Complimentary missions of the military nature include the following:

Participation in peacekeeping operations.

Platform for ASW antisubmarine warfare helicopters, for which she has stores for keeping
sonobuoys and weaponry.

Alternative platform for V/STOL aircraft, which can occasionally take off and land vertically on the
deck. This mission will be of less importance with the entry into service of the Juan Carlos I.

Logistics support

Transport of troops, vehicles (wheeled and tracked), equipment and materials.

Mine Warfare Force command and support ship (MCM, Mine Counter Measures)). This mission
has been replaced by the M-11 Diana (ex F-31).
Complimentary missions of a non-military nature include the following:

Support for the civilian population in emergency situations.

Intervention in humanitarian aid operations through medical and surgical support in cases of
natural disaster.
The Galicia class ships are designed to have an area of action that takes in the north-east part of the
Atlantic Ocean and all the Mediterranean Sea. Consideration is being given to the possibility of extending
its area of activity to sub-Saharan Africa. No consideration has been given to their being able to operate
in polar climates.
One of the humanitarian aid
operations (Photo: Spanish
Navy)
43
4.3.-DESCRIPITON OF THE CASTILLA AND GALICIA SHIPS
The two ships of this class have the same capabilities, except with reference to spaces and facilities
dedicated to command tasks aboard the Castilla. The spaces necessary to house this increase in
capacity have been taken from those used in the Galicia for the transport of landing force personnel,
without affecting the material transport capacity so that the L-52 maintains its assault capacity. The
Castilla has command facilities and berthing to receive the headquarters of an operational amphibious
force or a naval force and, simultaneously, the Landing Force Staff.
These ships have a hull and superstructure made of naval steel and are designed to be able to cope with
force 9 seas (Beaufort Scale) without noticeable damage, being able to stay fully operational in a force 6
sea. Flight deck operations and LCM-1E landing craft and AAV-7 A1 amphibious vehicle manoeuvres
with the stern door open, can be carried out in conditions of force 4 seas.
With a length overall of 160 m, which falls to 142 m when measured between perpendiculars, and a beam
of 25 m. The maximum draft is 6.2 m with a depth to the main deck of 16.8 m, the ship reaching a
maximum height of 62 metres. The standard displacement is 11,200 tonnes, reaching 13,000 tonnes at
full load. In building the ships, 1000 tonnes have been reserved for upgrades and the installation of new
equipment.
Distribution of spaces.
Magenta for
propulsion, Green for
accommodation, Red
for operations and
Blue for hospital.
Transport Space
Green for dock, red for
garages and blue for
hangar (Navantia).
They have been built in line with Merchant Navy Classification Society Standards, to which specific
aspects of warship design have been added, including necessary measures taken in the design to
reduce radiated noise, a lowering of the radar signature and the installation of a hull degaussing system.
In addition, the ships have NBC protection, especially in the superstructure.
These ships have been designed with a deck that goes from prow to poop, interrupted by a large, square
shaped superstructure, which occupies slightly less than half the length overall. The rest is occupied by
the flight deck, the fore area, free of obstacles, and the stern for manoeuvres.
The hangar and its technical rooms occupy the aft half of the superstructure. The hospital is located on
the main deck, with direct access from the hangar and the flight deck. The bridge, command posts and
accommodation area occupied the rest of the space
The dock takes up about a third of the aft of the hull below the flight deck and is fitted with central
breakwaters that separate the crafts' loading ramps and heavy vehicle garage access. The heavy vehicle
loading area is in the central zone of the hull, and below it the engine rooms and garages for all-terrain
light vehicles and cargo. The rest of the hull spaces are crew and embarked force accommodation zones.
Part of the first things for transported forces are located on the dock sides.
44
Dock Plan
(Navantia)
Ship service stores are located in the fore zone in the lower part of the hull. Those used for sonobuoys
and helicopter weaponry are found afore of the dock, in the part below the hull, which is also the location
of those used for stowing the transported force's cargo and ammunition.
The propulsion system is the CODAD type and is driven in to engine rooms, each with two 4.060 kW
Caterpillar-BAZAN Bravo diesel engines and an electrical motor (500 kW), all of these engaged with a
gear that moves a shaft line, each with a 4 m diameter, five-blade, variable pitch propeller. With this
propulsion equipment these ships' maximum sustained speed is 20 kn, and cruising speed is 12, being
able to maintain this pace for a maximum of 6500 miles with the 800 tonnes of fuel that she can carry. It
should be made clear that the electrical motors have been thought of for use at low speed in open deck
door manoeuvres. A 1,250 kW transversal thrust propeller has been fitted afore for operations in port or in
tight manoeuvre zones.
Electrical energy production is guaranteed by four 1,520 kW diesel generator groups in addition to
another for emergencies of 715 kW, which gives an complete electrical plant of close to 7 MW.
Propulsion System
Scheme (Navantia)
Regarding the main systems installed on the ships, according to the Spanish Navy's data, these are:

Combat System TRITAN V.

"SICOA", Amphibious Operations Command and Control System installed on the L-52 Castilla.

Closed-circuit TV (CCTV) for control of interior spaces and key exteriors, including flight deck,
dock, aircraft and boat approach control.
45

Fleet Control System, for links between the ship, landing craft and AAV-7 A1 amphibious
vehicles.

Link-11 technical data link in both ships and Link-16 in the Castilla.
The communications system is very complete and has: ICCS (Integrated Communications Control
System), 4/HF, UHF, VHF, SATCOM, Satellite Communications, SECOMSAT and INMARSAT B. It also
has an automatic message handling system (MHS).
The most relevant sensors on these ships are:

Daimler Chrysler TRS-3D/16-ES three-dimensional air exploration radar on the Castilla.

HKH 1007 (band F) surface and navigation radar.

Kelvin Hughes KH 1007 (band F) helicopter approach control radar.

LPI PILOT Mk 2 MOD 7 (band I) navigation radar.

IFF AN/TPX-54 (V) Mk-XII (mode 4 inc.).

REGULUS Mk-9500 ESM communications system.

Basic ESM ALDEBARAN system Mk-3300 on the Galicia and ESM/ECM ALDEBARAN Mk-3400
on the Castilla.

TACAN AN/SRN-15A System.
The weaponry consists of two 20 mm Oerlikon guns, with the possibility of installing a further two, and
six SBROC MK-36 chaff launchers. Consideration was given during the design to the possibility of being
able to install a Meroka CIWS point defence system in the aft area of the superstructure, above the
hanger and flight deck.
28
30
Petty officers and
enlisted men
138
144
Total
184
190
Chiefs and Officers
8
Chief petty officers
4
Petty officers and
enlisted men
12
Total
24
118
Chiefs and Officers
---
---
1
---
Petty officers and
enlisted men
17
---
Total
18
21
CASTILLA
GALICIA
16
Embarked Air
Wing Unit
(UNAEMB)
CASTILLA
18
Disembarkation
Force
GALICIA
Chiefs and Officers
Total
Accommodatio
n Capacity
Naval Beach
Group
Chiefs of Staff
Crew
TABLE 10.- CERW AND TRANSPORTED FORCE LIST
Chiefs and Officers
10
---
7
---
Petty officers and
enlisted men
13
---
Total
30
32
Chiefs and Officers
33
36
Petty officers and
enlisted men
474
Total
543
406
Chiefs and Officers
69
16+---
76
30+---
Petty officers and
enlisted men
654
144+---
Total
799
767
As can be seen in Table 11, the Galicia has a crew of 184 persons and a transport capacity for another
615. For the Castilla the figures are 190 and 577 persons respectively. These ships can also carry a
further 50 persons for a period of 48 hours or 150 persons for 24 hours in spartan conditions.
46
The accommodation is planned for 30% of the crew and transported force to be women. For the crew it is
organised in twin cabins with individual head for officers, in four berth cabin is with independent head for
chief petty officers, and six berth cabins with shared heads for petty officers and enlisted men. For the
landing force, officers will have twin single-head cabins, NCO's will be in six berth cabins with multiple
heads and the corporals and soldiers in 12 to 36 berth shared head dormitories. .
There is a central wave breaker in the fore area of the dock, which can take four LCM-1E landing craft, or
46 AAV-7 A1 amphibious assault vehicles prepared to leave from the flooded dock. In addition, they have
two Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats (RHIB) as auxiliary craft, stowed on davits found on both sides at hangar
level and handled with the on-board cranes. To open the dock there is a large fold-down door in the stern,
which occupies the length overall of the dock. In transport missions, the dry dock could be used for
stowing tanks or containers.
In total they have more than 3,745 m2 of cargo area, including stores, flight deck and hangar, the
main usable ones for stowing cargo being: Flight deck and hangar, (1,340 m2 and 510 m2), Main
garage and lower garage (725 m2 and 285 m2) and dock (885 m2). The ships have a capacity to
transport 170 M-113 armoured Caterpillar track transporters or 130 Pizarro combat vehicles or 33
M60A3 battle tanks.
TABLE 11.- SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CARGO
AREA
SURFACE
Flight deck:
1,340 m
2
TYPE OF CARGO
WEIG
HT
2 Heavy or three medium helicopters or 100 AT vehicles or
containers
490 t
510 m
2
4 Heavy or 6 medium helicopters or 36 AT vehicles or pallets
725 m
2
14 Combat tanks or 50 AT vehicles or containers
Lower garage:
285 m
2
16 AT vehicles
Dock:
885 m
2
4 LCM-1E or 46 AAV-7 A, 16 M60 battle tanks or containers
1,040 t
Fuel:
---
200 t for vehicles and helicopters and 50 for landing craft
250 t
Stores
---
Material and ammunition
700 t
Hangar:
Main garage:
Total cargo:
950 t
3,430 t
Heavy and Light Vehicle Garages (Navantia)
There are different possibilities for access aboard. Firstly, the large dock door is planned for use as a
ramp for loading and offloading heavy vehicles (battle tanks, etc.), when the ballast tanks are not full the
dock level remains above the float line and the door-RAM allows access from a quay. A second access is
the door-ramp located on the starboard side, which gives direct accessto the heavy vehicles garage.
Finally, there are three personnel access hatches on the sides.
47
To handle cargo the ships have two 25 and 2.5 tonne cargo cranes respectively located on the starboard
and port sides of the hangar door. Vehicle and cargo movement within the ship are supported by a very
complete set of elements. The hangar is served by a bridge crane. In the heavy vehicles garage there are
two monorails hanging from the ceiling, with a capacity to lift and move loads of up to 2 tonnes. The
vertical movements are made by four bayed elevators, which from fore to aft are:

Elevator no. 1. 4 tonnes. For cargo. Attends to the stores situated in the fore zone. Situated on
the front part of the superstructure.

Elevator no. 2. 7.5 tonnes. For vehicles. Links the heavy vehicle garage and the front part of the
light vehicle garage.

Elevator no. 3. 25 tonnes. For vehicles. Under the forward part of the hangar, linking it up with the
heavy vehicles garage.

Elevator no. 4. 7.5 tonnes. For vehicles and cargo. Below the poop part of the hangar, passing
through the heavy vehicle and light vehicle garages to reach the stores located at the bottom
(cargo, munitions, sonobuoys, weaponry for helicopters, etc.).
GRAPH 3.- CARGO HANDLING SYSTEMS

Elevator No. 1: 4 t. (Stores) (Dark blue)

2 monorails in garage (2 t) (Red)

Elevator No. 2: 7.5 t. (Vehicles) (Dark blue)

1 gantry crane (Red)

Elevator No. 3: 25 t. (Vehicles) (Dark blue)

1 stern door ramp (Yellow)

Elevator No. 4: 7.5 t. (Vehicles, stores and
munitions) (Dark blue)

1 side door ramp (Yellow)


3 side doors
2 cranes (25 and 2.5 t) (Blue)
With regard to the aviation facilities, the ships have a 58 x 25 m flight deck, three spots for the landing
and takeoff of medium helicopters or two heavy ones. Operations can be carried out day or night on the
deck in visual or instrumental flight, Vertrep (Vertical Replenisment) and HIFR (Helicopter In-Flight
Refuelling). Six medium Augusta Bell AB-212 helicopters or four heavy Sikorsky SH-3D's can operate
from them. These decks can occasionally be used for take-off and landing operations. There is a 35 x 50
m hanger fore of the flight deck to store the apparatus that make up the air component, with two large
doors and equipped with maintenance workshops, with a capacity to handle four heavy or six medium
helicopters. There is a flight control post above the flight deck at the hangar entrance. For empennage
and take off they fitted with supports such as: GSI (Glide Slope Indicator) embarked on visual aid system
for helicopter landing.
48
Flight deck with three medium or two heavy helicopters. (Navantia)
Hangar with six medium or four heavy helicopters or
vehicles. (Navantia)
The Hospital is equipped with a telemedicine system, has an examination room/ oficina, pharmacy and
storage areas. It also has an oxygen and gas station and has the following distribution of specialised
areas:

Triage room with a six beds with oxygen supply and vacuum and equipment for the operation to
carry out.

A pre-surgery able to hold 3 ICU beds.

Two fully equipped operating theatres prepared for general surgery and traumatology.

Hospitalisation area/fully equipped ICU with eight monitored beds fitted with oxygen supply and
vacuum. There is also an Infectious Room (4 beds).

Radiography room, with lead-lined protective cabin, equipped with: fixed X Ray equipment,
ecography unit, digital processor.

Laboratory with the bank and capacity to analyse: haematology, biochemistry, gases, cultures
and water.

Sterilisation equipment composed of two autoclaves and a thermoseal.

Dental surgery with mural radiological equipment and equipped for a wide variety of interventions.
49
TABLE 12.- CHARACTERISTICS OF GALICA CLASS SHIPS
Leading Dimensions
Standard displacement:
11,200 t
Displacement at full load:
13,000 t
Maximum length overall:
160 m
Overall length between
perpendiculars:
142 m
Maximum beam:
25 m
Depth to main deck
16.8 m
Maximum draught:
6.20 m
Design draught:
6.9 m
Propulsion type
CODAD
Low speed propulsion:
Electrical
Diesel engines:
4 x 4,060 kW
Electrical motors:
2 x 500 kW
Gearboxes:
2 Royal Schelde
Variable pitch propellers:
2 x 5 blades, 4 m
Ø
Maximum sustained speed:
20 knots
Cruising speed:
12 knots
Transversal prow propulsion:
1 x 1,250 kW
Autonomy @ 12 kn:
6,500 miles
Diesel generator sets:
4 x 1,520 kW
Emergency diesel generators:
1 x 725 kW
Propulsion
Propulsion organised on two levels, each one with two diesel engines, one electric motor and a gearbox joined to
shaft and variable pitch propeller. Electric motors are used during manoeuvres with the deck open.
Surface Areas
Flight deck:
1,340 m
Main garage:
725 m
2
Dock:
885 m
2
2
Hangar:
510 m2
Lower garage
285 m2
Crew and troops
Crew:
184 / 190 pers.
Chiefs of Staff:
24/118 persons
Embarked airborne unit:
30/32 persons
Naval Beach Group:
18/21 persons
Embarked forces:
543 / 406 pers.
Total accommodation capacity:
799 / 767 pers.
The specific data for the Galicia and the Castilla are indicated separated by a bar. A further 50 persons can embark
for a period of 48 hours or 150 persons for 24 hours.
Capacities
Ammunition:
180 tonnes
Spare parts:
24 tonnes
Medical supplies:
12 tonnes
Sonorbuoys and helicopter
weaponry:
25 tonnes
Provisions:
150 tonnes
Drinking water:
320 tonnes
Fuel for the ship.
800 tonnes
Comb. Helicopters and
vehicles:
200 tonnes
Landing craft fuel:
50 tonnes
They have 42 general stores and 14 munitions stores. They have a room for flour stowage, two storage rooms for
frozen provisions and three refrigerated rooms for other provisions (milk, potatoes and vegetables).
50
4.4.- COMPARISON WITH OTHER SIMILAR SHIPS (LPD)
In making a comparison of the Galícia class with similar ships, in order to enrich our view, LSD type ships
have also been included, even though we know that they are designed and built to carry out different
tasks.
The following classes of LPD type ships are included in the comparison: Kunlushan (China), San Antonio
(USA), Foudre (France), the Rotterdam and Johan de Witt (Holland), the San Giusto and San Giorgio
(Italy), Oosumi (Japan), Albion (United Kingdom) and the Endurance (Singapore). The LSD ships
included in the comparison are those of the US Navy's Harpers Ferry and Whidbey Island class and
the United Kingdom's Largs Bay type.
An LCM-1E entering
the dock. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
Regarding the LPD and LSD amphibious ships included in Table 3 (Classification of the Main Amphibious
Ships) in the second chapter, those that are considered technologically surpassed are not included. This
is the case of the two Brazilian Thomaston of the Anchorage 1 class and Taiwan's Cabildo class and
the U.S. Navy's surplus Austin class, as well as the same class of ship in service in India.
The interior of the
dock with an LCM-1E.
(Photo: Spanish
Navy)
51
The comparison is made of a total of fourteen classes of ship, eleven LPD's and three LSD's, which has
meant gathering the data to examine in Table 13 and Table 14.
Very little is known about the Chinese Navy's LPD, the Kunlushan. In view of the lack of experience of
that country's shipyards in building ships of this kind under the Chinese Navy in its operation, it may be a
prototype in which numerous dysfunctions will have to be corrected.
In the USA, the San Antonio class is dedicated to transporting personnel, landing craft, vehicles,
equipment and material, and is able to act independently or in conjunction with LHA and LHD type ships.
The Whidbey Island class LSD and its Harpers Ferry class direct derivatives are ships specialising in the
transport of landing craft, vehicles, equipment and material, to complement the action of large LHA and
LHD vessels. The three classes of ship correspond to the very specific requirements of the U.S. Navy and
the Marine Corps.
The Foudre (France) are very direct derivatives of the Orage class LSD's, and have many characteristics
that bring them close to that type of ship. Very constrained by the interest of the French Navy in ships of
this class being able to carry two CDIC (LCT) Craft in her dock, which implies that the dock is open in the
third furthest astern. Denominated TCD 90, where the letters correspond to Transport de Chalands de
Débarquement (landing craft transport). A further two ships were to be built in this series to substitute
those of the Mistral class. The French Navy did not seem excessively content with these units.
In Holland the Rotterdam is similar to the Galicia class, but with the limitation of flight deck usage only by
medium-sized helicopters. The Johan de Witt is an evolution of the previous design, improving it and
correcting the specific design errors of her predecessor.
The hangar with two
Augusta Bell 212.
(Photo: Spanish Navy)
The San Giorgio and San Giusto class ships of the Italian Navy San Giorgio and San Giusto class were
designed and built as LST's, with ramp afore and landing craft on deck over davits. These are the
smallest ships within this comparison and are possibly among the least capable. There can be considered
as having failed as seen by the significant reconversion work to which they have been subjected,
removing the fore ramp, modifying the positioning of the landing craft and leaving the flight deck clear, but
only for helicopters.
Japan have built three Oosumi class amphibious vessels with a design very constrained by restrictions
due to that country's fear being accused of having ships for military action against other nations. Although
its silhouette makes it look like it is a ship with flush deck, the truth is that only the aft zone can be used
by helicopters, with the rest being used for cargo and vehicle stowage. They have a large dock capable of
taking in two LCAC.
In the case of the Albion (United Kingdom) the usual can be said about the Royal Navy's ships in recent
years: lots of ship for little content. These are among the biggest ships, but their cargo capacity is lower
than much smaller ships. The Largs Bay class LSD's warships conceived to act in the second line, and
their characteristics a much closer to being a specialised transporter than an amphibious warfare ship,
52
and was even initially classified as an ALS, Alternative Landing Ship Logistic, to be subsequently
denominated Landing Platform Dock (Auxiliary).
The Endurance of Singapore or a hybrid between a large LST, with bow ramp and a small LPA with dock
and helicopter landing. These are designed to transport Singapore Army combat units, including
armoured vehicles, to training camps in Australia as the lack of space makes it impossible to carry out
these tasks on their own territory. Like nearly all hybrids they will end up being mediocre in every regard.
Galicia class ships (Spain), in conjunction with their Dutch designed sister ships, offer the best response
to the requirements of any medium-sized Navy. They bring together a set of characteristics that make
them the ideal ship for carrying out a high number of military and civil missions on a contained scale.
View of the Galicia class dock
with wave-breaker and landing
craft access ramp. (Photo: Carlos
Pardo González)
Dock command post on a Galicia
class ship. (Photo: Carlos Pardo
González)
53
Galicia
Rotterdam
Johan de
Witt
San Giorgio
San Giusto
Foudre
Dr Soeharso
Oosumi
TABLE 13.- COMPARISON OF THE GALICIA WITH SIMILAR SHIPS (1)
Country
Spain
Holland
Holland
Italy
Italy
France
Indonesia
Japan
No. of ships
2
1
1
2
1
2
5
3
Type
LPD
LPD
LPD
LPD
LPD
LPD
LPD
LPD
Year
1998
1998
2007
1987
1994
1990
2003
1996
Displacement
11,200 t
13,815 t
fl
10,800 t
12,750 t
fl
16,000 t
6,687 t
7,665 t fl
5,600 t
7,950 t fl
8,230 t
12,013 t
fl
7,300 t
11,400 t
fl
8,900 t
14,000 t
fl
Length overall
163.12 m
166.20 m
176.35 m
133.3 m
137 m
168 m
122 m
178 m
Beam
25 m
25 m
29.2 m
20.5 m
25 m
23.5 m
22 m
25.8 m
Crew
113
113
146
163
198
224
126
135
Propulsion
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
Dieselelectric 4
diesel, 2
propeller
s
Dieselelectric 4
diesel, 2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
Speed
20 knots
19 knots
19 knots
21 knots
20 knots
21 knots
15 knots
22 knots
Range of action
6,500
miles
6,000
miles
10,000
miles
7,500
miles
7,500
miles
11,000
miles
8,600
miles
---
Personnel
615 / 577
611
400
345
349
470
507
330
Cargo
Garage
1,100 m2
and 250 t
of cargo
Garage
903 m2
and 627
m3 for
cargo
Bigger
than the
Rotterda
m
Garage
2,050 m2
1,200
tonnes
Garage
1,360 m2
13 battle
tanks
1,400
tonnes
Dock
Yes, 4
LCM-1E
Yes, 4
LCM-1E
or 6
LCVP
Yes, 2
LCU
Yes, 3
LCM
Yes, 3
LCM
Yes, 2
CDIC or
10
LCM(8)
2 LCU
and 2
LCVP
Yes, 2
LCAC
Air Wing
2 spots,
4 Sea
King or 6
AB-212
2 spots,
6 Cougar
2 spots,
6 Cougar
3 spots,
3 Sea
King or 5
AB-212
3 spots,
3 Sea
King or 6
AB-212
2 spots 4
Super
Puma
2 spots,
2 Super
Puma
2 spots, 2
Chinook
Hangar
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
---
Yes
No
Hospital
12 beds
Yes
Yes
---
---
Yes
Yes
---
54
Galicia
Kunlunshan
(Yuzhao)
Albión
Largs Bay
Endurance
San Antonio
Whidbey
Island
Harpers
Ferry
TABLE 14.- COMPARISON OF THE GALICIA WITH SIMILAR SHIPS (2)
Country
Spain
China
United
Kingdom
United
Kingdom
Singapor
e
USA
USA
USA
No. of ships
2
1
2
4
4
5+4+1
8
4
Type
LPD
LPD
LPD
LSD
LPD
LPD
LSD
LSD
Year
1998
2008
2003
2004
2000
2006
1985
1995
Displacement
11,200 t
13,815 t
fl
17,600
pc
14,600 t
16,981 t
fl
16,160
pc
6,000 t
8,500 t fl
25,296 t
fl
11,604 t
16,601 t
fl
11,590 t
16,568 t
fl
Length overall
163.12 m
210 m
178 m
176.6 m
141 m
208.48 m
185.8 m
185.8 m
Beam
25 m
28 m
28.9 m
26.4 m
21 m
32 m
25.6 m
25.6 m
Crew
113
120
325
60
65-100
361
334
320
Propulsion
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
CODAD,
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
2 diesel,
2
propeller
s
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
4 diesel,
2
propeller
s
Speed
20 knots
20 knots
18 knots
18 knots
15 knots
+ 22
knots
22 knots
22 knots
Range of action
6,500
miles
---
8,000
miles
8,000
miles
10,400
miles
---
8,000
miles
8,000
miles
Personnel
615 / 577
---
305
356
350
705
402
402
Cargo
Garage
1,100 m2
and 250 t
of cargo
---
550 m.
Garage
(6 tanks)
1,200 m.
Garage,
200 t on
deck
18 Tanks
and
another
20
vehicles
Garage
2
2,323 m
and 708
m3 of
munitions
Garage
2
1,208 m
and
cargo
1,133 m3
Garage
2
1,214 m
and
cargo
149 m3
Yes, 4
LCVP
Yes, 2
LCAC or
1 LCU
and 14
AAV
Yes, 2
LCAC or
1 LCU
and 4
LCM(8)
Yes, 4
LCAC or
3 LCU or
10
LCM(8)
or 64
AAV
2 spots
2 spots
Dock
Yes, 4
LCM-1E
Yes, 4
ACV
(LCAC)
Yes, 4
LCU or 2
LCAC
Air Wing
2 spots
4 Sea
King or 6
AB-212
2 Z-8
Super
Frelon
2 spots
2-3 Sea
King or
Merlin
2 spots
2 spots
2 spots.
4 CH-46r
or MV-22
Osprey
Hangar
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Hospital
12 beds
---
---
No
No
24 beds
8 beds
8 beds
Yes, 1
LCU
55
5.- THE JUAN CARLOS I (ATHLAS LHD 26000)
5.1.- ORIGINS OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
The launch at El Ferrol Shipyard on 10 March 2008 of the Strategic Projection Ship, Juan Carlos I (L-61),
had historical significance on being the largest warship of the built in Spain, even bigger than the aircraft
carrier, Príncipe de Asturias, the combat group support ship, Patiño, both recently built, and the España
class battleships built as part of the Maura-Ferrándiz Squadron Plan almost a century ago. She also
holds the record for being the biggest warship ever operated by the Spanish Navy.
To find the origins of the BPE, consideration should be given to Spain's defence needs and, moreover, go
back to the year 1992. On 19 June of that year a meeting was held in Petresberg (near Bonn, in
Germany) of the Council of Ministers of the European Union member states, which aimed at deciding on
what defensive actions could be undertaken jointly in cooperation with the European Union and with
NATO. This meeting marked the development of the Western European Union defence policy.
Anchored in the
River Ferrol, Juan
Carlos I showing the
launched bow and
the ski-jump.
(Photo: José Luís
Porta Vales)
The Petersberg tasks that came out of the Declaration of that meeting were a fundamental element in
defining a common defence policy, which included a high number of military missions to be developed by
European countries' Armed Forces. The definition of these missions had been preceded by an agreement
on the subject established at the NATO Defence Ministers' meeting held a few days before, And which
was subsequently included in the Lisbon Treaty on 13 December 2007.
The Petersberg Tasks as set out in Article 17 of the European Union Treaty were classified in three
fundamental groups:

Humanitarian assistance missions and the evacuation of civilians in conflict areas.

Peacekeeping operations.

Combat missions in crisis situations or to re-establish peace.
In order to be able to carry them out meant the need for Western Europe to have an amphibious
projection force capable of transporting, landing and providing land support to a contingent of 60,000
persons with their corresponding equipment and heavy and light resources. This joint naval and land
force would have to be supported by all countries included in the Western European Union.
At the time, at the end of the 1990s the Spanish Navy had the aircraft carrier, Príncipe de Asturias, the
Galicia class amphibious ships with dock, and the two ex-US Navy LST's that formed the Hernán Cortés
class. The obsolescence of the latter made it necessary to consider their renovation. The new platform
should bring together the best aspects of the Galicia ships and the Príncipe de Asturias, providing a troop
transport capacity of around 900 persons.
56
The Juan Carlos I
passing the Castillo
de San Felipe.
(Photo: José Luís
Porta Vales)
Using their great experience in both the design of the LPD's as well as the light aircraft-carriers -the
Spanish R-11 itself and the Thai Chakri Naruebet- during that period, Navantia had made two preliminary
designs to compete for the construction of the NTBL (Navire de Transport Belgo-Luxemburgois), arising
from the joint requirement of Belgium and Luxembourg for the construction of an amphibious vessel that
would respond to their obligations in relation to the Petersberg Tasks. The first of these designs can be
defined as a wheeled cargo transport ship, with a deck for helicopters taking up the rear half of the length
overall and equipped with mexeflote pontoons for vehicle offload. The other design was an LHD, smaller
than the Juan Carlos I, but which had some of her main features: Flush deck for helicopters, floodable aft
dock, large capacity for material and troop transport, position of the island and elevators, etc.
The merger of E.N. Bazán and Astilleros Españoles had just taken place at the time of preparing those
projects and would eventually give rise to the establishment of Navantia. A historical fact that can be
mentioned is that the team who prepared the LHD design for Belgium and Luxembourg was made up of
engineers from Bazán, whilst technicians from Astilleros Españoles' design office worked on the RO-RO
solution. In the end, budgetary reasons meant that the NBTL project could not go ahead in 2003.
Leaving the River
Ferrol (Photo: José
Luís Porta Vales)
In parallel, the Spanish navy had made clear their interest in having a third amphibious platform, which, along
with the Galicia and the Castilla, would enable the projection of "BRIMAR" (Marine Infantry Brigade) to be
considered.
The preliminary definition of the ship was made between the Logistics Division of the Naval Chiefs of Staff
and the Navantia Design Office. The programme objectives (NST: Nato Staff Targets) on which Navantia
based the Feasibility Study were initially established by the Spanish Navy. With them the Navy defined the
program requirements (NSR: Nato Staff Requirements). Contract negotiation, functional design of the ship
and the detailed engineering necessary for the construction were then carried out.
Navantia presented the Navy with a total of four preliminary projects, three of them corresponding to ships
with dock and the fourth a pure amphibious helicopter-carrier, and therefore was no dock for landing craft. As
well as this, the differences between the projects lay in the size of the ship, the number and type of
amphibious craft that could be carried under the surface areas dedicated to hangar, garage for heavy
vehicles and garage for light vehicles. All the designs had a troop transport capacity of around 900 persons.
57
The preliminary design selected, Project 387-A in the Navantia technical office internal denomination, was the
one with the greatest transport capacities with a dock for four LCM type landing craft.
GRAPH 4.- CONCEPTION OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
PRÍNCIPE DE
ASTURIAS
AIR WING
CAPACITY
CHAKRI
NARUEBET
ATHLAS
FAMILY
JUAN
CARLOS I
GALICIA
AMPHIBIOUS
CAPACITIES
CASTILLA
 Flight deck with 12º ski-jump.
 V/STOL plane aviation operation capability.
PRÍNCIPE DE ASTURIAS
AND CHAKRI
NARUEBET:
 Capable of operating with helicopters.
 Hangar below the flight deck.
 Command capability (Naval operations).
 Airborne operations control capability.
 Dock and landing craft transport capability.
 Vehicle and equipment transport capacity.
CASTILLA AND GALICIA:
 Personnel transport capacity.
 Heli-transport operation capability.
 Command capability (Naval and amphibious operations).
As can be seen from the graph, the Juan Carlos I arose from the need for a single ship with the
characteristics of the aircraft carrier,Príncipe de Asturias and of Galicia class amphibious ships. With
regard to the Príncipe de Asturias and the Chakri Naruebet, the Juan Carlos I retains the flush flight deck
with 12° ski jump, the capacity to carry out aviation operations with V/STOL planes and medium and
heavy helicopters, the flush hanger below the flight deck, the infrastructure used for naval operations
command under the control of airborne operations. With regard to the Castilla and the Galicia, the
fundamental characteristics retained were the dock and the possibility of transporting landing craft,
vehicles, equipment and personnel, a capacity for heli-transport operations and the facilities to enable
command tasks in naval and amphibious operations.
In spite of her obvious attractions, the Juan Carlos I, has been seen as controversial in certain sectors of
the Spanish Navy who saw the ship as an endangerment to the idea of future replacement of the Príncipe
de Asturias with a specific aircraft carrier development and not with an amphibious ship with airborne or
multi-purpose capability.
There were two tendencies within the Navy at the start of the design. One maintained the need for the new
ship to have an operating capability for AV-8B Harrier or their successors, and the other proposed a purely
58
amphibious design with deck devoted exclusively to the operation of helicopters, without a V/STOL aircraft
capability . The decision to install the ski-jump fwas very controversial and was not included until the final
moments of the preliminary design. Something similar possibly happens with other capabilities linked to
aviation control and other controls that are not purely amphibious.
In the order of things, it is worth highlighting the fact that the Juan Carlos I programme was completed in
a period of nine years, which, considering the size and complexity of the ship, is a very short time period,
and even more unusual it is compared with the calendars of other Spanish Navy programmes.
TABLE 15.- THE MAIN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DATES OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
DATE
MILESTONE OR TASK
2001 - 2002
Preparation of project feasibility report.
2002 - 2003
Project definition.
JANUARY - 2004
Commencement of functional design tasks.
25 - MARCH - 2004
Signing a contract to build Strategic Projection Ship.
FEBRUARY - 2005
Completion of the Functional Design phase with the Preliminary Design Review (PDR)
OCTOBER - 2005
The Critical Design Review (CDR) overlapped with this phase.
FEBRUARY - 2005
The start of Detailed Design, also known as Detailed Engineering.
MAY - 2005
21- JULY - 2006
10 - MARCH - 2008
30 - SEPTEMBER - 2010
Start of the process of building the 111 blocks that constitute the ship with the
simultaneous cutting of the first play of blocks 320 and 330 at the Ferrol and Fene
facilities.
Laying of first keel blocks.
Launch of the ship at the El Ferrol Shipyard.
Delivery to the Spanish Navy.
View from the stern
showing the door
and the two
horizontal sheets
that form it. (Photo:
Francisco Javier
Álvarez Laita
59
5.2.- MISSIONS OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
The ship's mission is to enable the projection of Marine Infantry and Army Forces in line with their elements
and own forms of action, and to serve as a temporary platform for the Embarked Air Wing. Since the start,
the Juan Carlos I has has been designed to carry out four types of mission, although not simultaneously,
with diverse characteristics, for each of which the ship should be configured differently, combining the
different aviation and amphibious capabilities, and of troop, vehicle and cargo transport capacities, for
primary health care and humanitarian assistance. The multi-purpose nature is therefore a key feature of the
BPE, although there are mission profiles that, given the configuration required, are incompatible with others.
The four mission types to which the different basic configurations respond are described below.
The Amphibious Operations in which force personnel and material transport capacities should be
prioritised for landing in potentially hostile territory. In them, the possibilities offered by the flight deck, the
helicopter operation capability, the dock and the amphibious craft transported, etc. acquire their full
dimension.
A second group of operations are those relating to the transport and deployment of Army units,
including both personnel and heavy material. In this regard it can be pointed out that the ship's heavy
vehicle garage accepts Leopard 2 battle tanks in service in the armoured units, and that the CH-47
Chinook helicopters can be housed in the hangar and in the light vehicles garage, always with the rotors
removed, and four of them can operate simultaneously from the deck.
The Juan Carlos I it is also designed to participate in integrated projection actions within the fleet,
complementing or substituting the aircraft carrier, Príncipe de Asturias, during planned downtime. On
these occasions the BPE's aviation capability and facilities will be used to maximum in order to act as
command ship.
Finally, but no less important, the possibilities must be pointed out of this ship acting in humanitarian
assistance operations, including a capacity for hospital care, transport of aid and materials, equipment,
personnel to operate it, helicopters and amphibious craft to act in zones without any infrastructure.
Those mentioned above are the missions that the Spanish Navy plans for this ship, but it should be made
clear that she could carry out perfectly well any of those described above in point 2.2.- Missions.
During the ship gestation and building process, until she was assigned the nameJuan Carlos I, she was
known as Strategic Projection Ship ("BPE" in Spanish) and in nearly all the prior drawings bore the
lettering "LL" (Landing Logistic).
First docking of the
Juan Carlos I at
Rota, which will be
its usual base.
(Photo: Spanish
Navy)
60
5.3.- DESCRIPTION OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
Ship configuration
The Spanish Navy's new unit is a steel single hull ship with a flush flight deck equipped with a ski-jump
afore on the port side and with a large island on the starboard side. As well as the flight deck, the ship is
organised on three decks. Unlike other similar unit such as aircraft carriers or LHA and LHD ships, the
flight deck does not have lateral balconies, but takes maximum advantage of the beam having
longitudinal safety nets for accident prevention.
Under the flight deck is the deck for the hangar and garage for vehicles and light materials. The hangar
occupies the zone furthest astern, the rest of the surface area being for stowing vehicles. Both zones can be
extended, as per requirements, by occupying the other area.
View of the flight
deck from the
primary flight.
(Photo: Francisco
Javier Álvarez Laita
Below these spaces is the accommodation deck, which contains berthings, the hospital complex, galleys,
messes and rooms. This is a significant difference from the aircraft carrier, Príncipe de Asturias, where the
living areas are situated below the flight deck, forcing the crew to put up with high levels of noise.
The Deck with the dock and garage for heavy vehicles and/or material constitute the ship's last tactical zone.
Astern Is the dock which is closed with a door-ramp usable for the access of vehicles or craft when the ship
has been adequately ballasted. The forward part is reserved for the heavy vehicle garage.
The dock has a wave-breaker that takes up half the length overall. The rear door is divided horizontally
into two parts. The upper, smaller part folds upwards and allows the dock and vehicle garage to be
ventilated when starting the landing craft or vehicle engines. In the Galicia class ships the rear door is a
single piece. Lessons have been learned from the operational experience with these ships.
As well as the stern door, two lateral doors have been fitted for vehicle and cargo access, enabling access
from the wharf to the garage decks. They are located on the starboard side and are fitted with ramps. They
calculate it to support heavy vehicles and give access to their deck.
Vertical movements within the ship had been resolved by using ramps and elevators. There is an internal
fixed ramp on the port side that links the heavy and light vehicle/material decks. There are also ramps that
connect the dock and the heavy materials garage.
61
Before final
painting, the size of
the flight deck can
be appreciated.
(Photo: Francisco
The flight deck and the hangar are linked using to aircraft elevators, sized to be able to operate with the
largest foreseen size, including the V/STOL F-35B. One of these is located in the centre of the flight deck
astern and the other forward of the island on the starboard side. They respectively communicate the hangar
and the light vehicles and material garage with the flight deck. There is also an elevator that connects the
two garages, allowing the transfer of containers and vehicles. In addition, the ship has elevators for
munitions, hospital, VIP personnel, provisions and a service elevator.
Juan Carlos I bow
elevator and crane.
(Photo: Francisco
For the necessary flexibility in cargo movements on internal decks, there are two bridge cranes, one in the
hangar and another in the dock and on the heavy vehicles deck, with a hoist and transfer limit of 18 tonnes. A
crane with a hoist capacity of 18 tonnes is installed on the starboard side forward of the island. The complete
set of all the cargo movement equipment has been represented in Graph 5.
62
With regard to seakeeping, the Juan Carlos I is designed to be able to cope with force 9 seas without any
appreciable damage, and is able to carry out flight operations at sea state 5. the ship is stable moving
backwards at sea state 4. LCM-1E and AAV-7 A1 amphibious vehicle manoeuvres with the poop door open,
can be carried out in conditions of sea state 4. All of this is provided by the Juan Carlos I a fin stabiliser
system.
The ship's autonomy will enable deployment in the operations' zone in the theatres considered without
external support, and it will be at about 9,000 nautical miles at economic speed (15 kn), using the diesel
generator sets as the propulsion system. The ship has enough pantries and refrigerator plant for 50 days'
logistic autonomy.
As the ship is expected to have a long operational life, a reserve weight of 1,000 tonnes has been included in
her design as a margin for growth for future upgrades or equipment expansions.
The Integrated Modular Construction System has been used in her manufacture. 60% of the total of 122
blocks that compose the ship have been produced at the Fene factory, transferring them on large barges
for their integration on the Navantia Ferrol slipway.
GRAPH 5.- CARGO HANDLING DEVICES
The ship has a hospital with the possibility of embarking a second stage, a Role 2+ as per the NATO
classification, which means a capacity to carry out on board diagnostics and surgical treatment and
hospitalisation of up to 18 patients. There is a triage area, 2 operating theatres, a critical patient unit with
8 beds, a 14 bed hospital ward, a 4 bed infectious area, dental surgery, X-ray facilities, pharmacy store,
laboratory and an examination room. All of these facilities are also integrated into an advanced
telemedicine system. In this way any patient operated on, in the ICU or treated with a remote diagnostics
technique, will be able to be evaluated in real-time at the Hospital General de la Defensa Gómez Ulla in
Madrid. This entire set of equipment has been thought of and created with a single objective: To take by
sea the health care that any "basic hospital" can provide to any part of the planet where it may be
required. A set of equipment with the necessary measures of flexibility and dynamism, assisted by
immense transport possibilities that make possible the scope of this ship.
Propulsion and Manoeuvrability
Some of the most relevant and novel aspects of the Juan Carlos I are those relating to the propulsion
system, which is completely electric, combining diesel generator sets for navigation at cruise speeds and
a gas turbine when higher speeds are required. Another new aspect is the use of azimutal pods astern in
the place of traditional shaft and propeller systems.
63
One of the two
diesel generators.
(Photo: Francisco
The ship has two separate machine rooms. One in the stern housing a 19,750 BkW turbo generator
set composed of a General Electric GE LM-2500 gas turbine, the corresponding electrical energy
production system at 6,600 v. and one of the two main electrical panels.
The second room is located afore and houses two diesel generator sets, each one made up of an Izar
MAN 7,680 kW diesel engine and the corresponding 6,600 v. generator. The second of the four main
electrical panels is also located in this second machine room. In addition, the ship has an emergency diesel
generator set of approximately 800 kW.
Gas turbine and
generator. (Photo:
Francisco Javier
Álvarez Laita
Since this is a CODAGL plant (COmbined Diesel And Gas turbine eLectric), the diesel sets work to
maintain the ship's cruising speed. The turbo generator is added when greater power is required,
enabling maximum speeds to be reached. Other combinations of the existing engine sets are possible but
they imply higher fuel consumption, lower productivity, and therefore a reduction in the maximum range.
64
Distribution is made from the main electrical panels at 6600 V to the pods, the transversal bow thrusters
and the 6600/440 V transformers/reducers located in different parts of the ship.
The thrust elements are two azimutal pods in the stern, each with an 11 MW shunt excited motor that
drives two 4.5 meter diameter propellers, one forward and one rear.
The pods of the Juan Carlos I are known as SSP (Siemens-Schottel-Propulsor) and have been
developed in a joint venture by two German companies, Siemens, with enormous experience in advanced
electrical motors, and Schottel, with proven specialisation in naval propulsion. These pods are the biggest
ones ever built and there are very few similar examples.
Each pod has two fixed-pitch, three-blade propellers. The four propellers are different from one another.
The front propellers work producing traction and the rear ones impulsion, in straightahead the starboard
pod propellers are dextrogyric and the port ones levogyric.
Detail of some pods
similar to those of the
Juan Carlos I fitted on
another ship. (Photo:
Siemens Marine
Systems)
In comparison with a traditional system, electrical propulsion using pods offers a series of advantages:

Working the propulsion simultaneously as rudder and be able to turn 360° provides the ship with
a high degree of manoeuvrability even at low speed and in closed waters such as in ports.

The nucleus is a shunt excited motor, which by functioning below the waterline does not require
any special cooling system.

As the motor is mounted outside of the hull it doesn't occupy any space inside it, leaving room for
other functions.

The electric propulsion allows the machine rooms, which hold the generators, to be situated in
any space on the ship compatible with her navigational and transport capability

Due to the compact size of the pods, and the two propellers that they mount, they are a very
efficient propulsion system when added to an appropriate below-waterline hull design. The thrust
achieved by each pod is greater than that of traditional propellers.
65

Lower vibration and noise levels by not having gear shafts, rudders, etc.

Reduction in maintenance requirements by having a lower number of mechanical subsets.
Heavy vehicle and
materials garage
(Photo: Francisco
But the electrical propulsion system using pods also present some disadvantages. Firstly, the electrical
power distribution at medium voltage, 6600 V, is not usually used in ships and demands the use of large
diameter cables (9 cm) and requires personnel with specific training. A second delicate aspect is that the
propulsion force transmission to the ship is focused on a single point, the pod sockets in the bottom of the
hull. This is aggravated when consideration is given to potential problems in the pods' azimutal bearings.
There is also the added difficulty of guaranteeing the water tightness of the completely submerged tubular
body where the electric motor is housed. Spare parts are scarce and expensive, given the fact that there
are so few ships with this kind of propulsion.
Since the dock dimensions are set so that four LCM-1E can operate within it, and that the ship's beam is
limited by the constraint of it being able to use the Panama Canal locks, the space for fitting the pods in
the stern on both sides of the dock has been limited. The equation, summarized, is quite clear:
Beam - Width of Dock = 2 x Maximum Size of the pods
This has limited the size of the propulsion pods that can be installed and, in consequence, the maximum
speed that the ship can attain. In addition, the pods are in a very tight space, and since they stick out from
the hull if they are totally turned to one side, with the ship side alongside a wharf the engine on that side
cannot be turned until the ship is moved away from it.
The propulsion system enables ship speed control from 0 knots up to the maximum speed, a little over 21
knots, in the aviation operations configuration. This speed drops to 19 kn at full load in amphibious or
transport configuration. During sea trials in 2010, the ship far surpassed the speed of 21 kn. These speeds
are obtained using the diesel generator sets and the turbo generator. The ship has a cruising speed of 15 kn
using the diesel generator sets as a propulsion system, in this way fuel consumption is minimised in making
transits to intervention zones and enables autonomy close to 9000 miles to be achieved. The ship will attain a
maximum reverse speed of around 8 kn, keeping adequate course stability.
The azimutal pods system selected for the propulsion ensures manoeuvrability in the entire range of speeds,
and especially in low-speed operations (amphibious operations, transits, etc.). To facilitate manoeuvres in
closed waters the ship has two transversal propulsion sets in the bow, each with power of approximately
1500 kW.
It has been calculated that the ship's turning circle will not exceed four times the length overall between
perpendiculars when operating in conditions of maximum displacement, as an amphibious force projection
vector, and at maximum speed (20 kn). Sea trials have confirmed the performance of design expectations.
66
The entire propulsion system is controlled by the propulsion control system (SSP), which in turn is linked to
the Integrated Platform Control System ("SICP"). An automata network and computers are used to monitor
and control all the electrical and auxiliary plant, allowing real-time management of more than 50,000 input
signals.
Seen as a whole, the propulsion system used in the Juan Carlos I is a novelty for the Spanish Navy. Ships
using diesel-electric propulsion up to now have been the Segura or the Hespéride, but not with pods. In any
case the BPE is one of the biggest warships in the world to incorporate this propulsion system.
Heavy vehicle
garage and hangar.
(Photo: Francisco
Combat Command and Control Systems
A Combat Command and Control System has been installed on the Juan Carlos I whose main
components are: sub-systems dedicated to Ship Command Support CMS (Tactical Combat Network),
Embarked Naval Command Support System (Command and Control Network) and with the infrastructure
for Embarked Naval Command Support (Command and Control Network)
With regard to Command and Control,
extensive set of classified networks that
in amphibious operations and even as
SCOMBA system developed by Faba
buildings.
the ship integrates all the domestic and NATO systems in an
confer the capability of acting as command ship at brigade level
the naval HQ HRF command ship. The combat system is the
and which is being installed on all the Spanish Navy's new
Among the main sensors that have been installed, special mention should be made of 3D Lanza-N air
radar, Aries surface and helicopter control radars (situated fore and aft of the superstructure) and PAR
(Precise Approach Radar), all designed and built by Indra, and Sperry navigation radar.
Other electronic equipment are an IFF associated with the three-dimensional radar, ESM/ESM systems,
Regulus and Rigel from Indra, for radar signals (anti-missile defence) and communications for
interception and monitoring of emissions. There is also an optronics system for identification and selfdefence.
In relation to navigation, the ship has an integrated system including bridge management, navigation
sensors, AIS and ECDIS. An integrated system has been implemented for (internal and external)
communications, which includes MHS, tactical links Link 11 and Link 22/16 and military and civil satellite
communications.
In January 2011 it was announced that the Spanish Navy had contracted the Italian company Calzoni
S.R.L to build and install an Electro Optical Deck Approaching System on the Juan Carlos I. The
complete system should be installed before 15 December 2011. It is already in operation on the Italian
67
aircraft carrier, Cavour, and is compatible with the latest generation of night vision goggles. The EODAS
is an electro-optical system planned to facilitate approach and landing of V/STOL aircraft on the flight
deck in both day and night operations. It is made up of two main subsystems: Deck Approach Project
Sight (DAPS) or flightpath indicator and the Head-Up Display (HUD) or aircraft position indicator. The
HUD will allow the LSO -the officer in charge of landing safety- to observe the approach of fixed-wing
aircraft from the primary flight display, having the appropriate resources that enable him to know the
position of the aircraft in relation to the flight path and be able to abort or approve the landing approach.
Reserves of weight and space have been prepared for a mine detection system using an unmanned
submersible vehicle placed in the water from the ship and operated by cable. Weight and space have
also been reserved for the installation of an AN/SLQ-25 Nixie acoustic torpedo countermeasure system.
NBC and Firefighting Protection
The ship has protection against NBC contamination agents (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical) in spaces
used for accommodation, command and control, propulsion and machines, and is capable of generating
overpressure in these areas, which are considered the ship's citadel. This protection is set out in six separate
zones, each with its own air filter service against contaminating agents. There is also an automatic system of
alarms, radiation and chemical agent detection as well as an external deck and dock sprinkler system.
With the aim of limiting the damage caused by fire, the ship has been divided into six main fire zones using 5
main anti-fire bulkheads that are also sealed against smoke. The fire zone water-tightness systems on the
large decks of the hanger and garage, using folding bulkheads, are a new design and comply with the
SOLAS standard's applicable regulations.
Weaponry
The weaponry planned for the Juan Carlos I BPE is relatively small-scale, basically to provide the ship
with a moderate close-in defence system when facing asymmetric threats. The weapons installed are
limited for the time being to four 20 mm and two 12.7 mm machine guns. The ship also has 4 SUBROC
anti-radar (Chaff) launchers and anti-IR (Flares).
The Spanish Navy tends to arm ships of this kind with a minimum of defensive weaponry. This ship has
been conceived as a protected unit in the sense that her defence is the specific responsibility of other
units, which could be submarines, surface ships or aircraft. Therefore, the Juan Carlos I will not initially
have any point defence system with machine guns, cannons or missiles operated remotely from the CIC.
The fundamental idea is that these ships are going to operate at the heart of a naval formation in which
the escort ships should assume the tasks of protection. It will be possible to put the validity of this manner
of operating to the test when these ships find themselves obliged to operate alone. In some missions the
Spanish Navy's amphibious ships have been forced to rely on the protection of Marine Infantry teams
armed with small portable anti-air missiles.
In the case of the Juan Carlos I there is a reserve of space and weight to integrate self-defence weapons
during a later phase: ARPECAS system for asymmetric defence with two 25 mm MK-38 Mod.2, made by
BAE Systems and Rafael, remotely operated from the CIC, and 2 SEA RAM assemblies for anti-missile
defence. The major doubt is about when the Spanish Navy will decide that it is necessary to fit its main
ships with defensive weapons of this kind.
68
Heavy vehicle
garage and RAM
connecting with the
hangar and light
vehicle parking
area. (Photo:
Francisco Javier
Álvarez Laita
Difficulties resolved
The fine-tuning of a ship like the Juan Carlos I is a long process in which all design and building
dysfunctions that may affect the future life of the ship should be detected and resolved. This is where we
see the importance of periods of trials dedicated to in-depth testing of the ship and all her equipment. It
has been with reference to propulsion where the major dysfunctions have been detected and resolved.
During the initial trial of the diesel generators, the port side engine failed, breaking a connecting rod
causing breakdowns that could not be repaired. This meant changing the entire engine, extracting it
through the machine room roof, "operation caesarian section", up to the heavy vehicle garage and
through there on an expressly conceived platform. These engines are designed by the German company,
MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, one of the world leaders in diesel for marine propulsion and electrical power
generation. They are built under licence by Navantia at the Cartagena engine factory. Due to a question
of dates, the new engine was manufactured in Germany and has already been installed and is working
perfectly. At the indication of the designer, the starboard engine has been modified to avoid a recurrence
of the problem. Everything seems to indicate that it was a design problem, now resolved, in which the
main final debate has been about determining who takes responsibility for the costs that have been
incurred.
During the first propulsion trials vibrations were simultaneously detected along with cavitation of the
propulsion pods' fore propeller blades. The German company responsible for the propulsors, Schottel
GmbH, requested a sourced situation report from the Wageningen-based (Holland) Marine Research
Institute (MARIN). The solution has been a new water-drop shaped fairing around the podshubs,
replacing the previous round ones. These structural components are known as Head boxes, and are
designed with specifically defined forms and are situated afore of the pods to optimise the water entry
flow. The propulsors' fore helicoidal blades have also been redesigned, and they have been
manufactured and fitted on the ship prior to her delivery to the Navy.
It is important to note that situations of this kind are normal on ships that are class leaders as in the case
of Juan Carlos I. They are resolved during the trial periods to guarantee correct functioning and, in spite
of their importance, have no major consequences. In fact, the Australian ship programme has benefited
from the tuning-up experience gained with the Juan Carlos I, which has been confirmed as totally
adequate in the latest sea trials following modifications made in August 2010. It should be noted that
these trials also corroborated a certain increase in speed thanks to the adjustments made. It should also
be noted that although these modifications were partly the cause of a few months' postponement in ship
delivery to the Navy, the schedule for obtaining this ship has been unusually short, as we already
commented, in relation to that initially planned.
69
Another quite different manner of defining a ship is to consider the main quantitative data that
characterise her. Table 16 shows the most relevant and appropriately classed parameters of the strategic
projection ship, Juan Carlos I.
First helicopter
landing on the flight
deck of the Juan
Carlos I. Landing on
8 February 2011, at
10h 51’, the Sikorsky
SH-3D Sea King with
tail number 08.
Subsequently done
by a Hughes 500 and
an Augusta Bell AB212. (Photo: Spanish
Navy)
70
TABLE 16.- CHARACTERISTICS OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
Principal characteristics
Displacement at full load:
26,800 t
Displacement as aircraft carrier
23,900 t
Maximum length overall:
231.40 m
Overall length between
perpendiculars:
205.70 m
Maximum beam:
32.00 m
Design beam:
29.50 m
Design draught:
6.80 m
Depth to flight deck
27.50 m
Gas Turbine Generator
1 x 19,750 BkW
Diesel generator sets:
2 x 7,680 BkW
Propulsor PODS:
2 x 11.0 MW
Propellers in each POD
2 x 4.5 m, 3
blades
Main Plant:
2
Transversal bow propulsion:
2 x 1500 kW
Maximum full load speed:
20.0 knots
Aircraft carrier mode maximum
speed:
21.0 knots
Maximum sustained speed:
19.5 knots
Autonomy @ 15 kn:
9,000 miles
Emergency diesel generators:
800 kW
Light cargo deck
2,050 m2
Heavy cargo deck
1,400 m2
Flight deck:
>4,500 m2
Propulsion
Surface Areas
Hangar:
1,000 m
Dock:
975 m
Total deck cargo zones:
5,425 m
2
2
2
Crew and troops
Crew:
243 hands
Chiefs of Staff:
103 hands
Embarked airborne unit:
172 hands
Naval Beach Group:
23 hands
Embarked forces:
902 hands
Total accommodation capacity:
1,443 hands
Embarked forces can be increased by installing accommodation containers in the hangar and light material garage
This means a reduction in the vehicle and aircraft cargo capacity.
Cargo capacity in tanks
Diesel fuel:
2,150 t
Aviation fuel, JP-5:
800 t
Lubricating oil:
40 t
Technical water:
17 t
Drinking water:
480 t
Ballast water:
9,140 t
Larders and stores for
provisions
260 t
Combat rations
60 t
General stores
80 t
Supplies and spares
105 t
Crew provisions, EM, UNAEMB,
GNP
20 days
Provisions embarked forces
30 days
Cargo capacity in holds
The ship has an additional 60 tons of combat ration cargo that will be considered preloaded on the vehicles situated
in the cargo garages.
71
5.4.- CAPABILITIES OF THE JUAN CARLOS I
The multi-purpose nature of the Juan Carlos I, allows the ship to carry out -not simultaneously- a series of
missions that make up an ample spectrum, going from Fleet operations with the participation of combat
aircraft to purely humanitarian aid missions, as well as amphibious and troop and personnel transport
missions.
Air Operations
The Juan Carlos I is fitted with a flush flight deck with a length of approximately 202.3 m and breadth of 32 m,
with a surface area a little over 4,500 m2. A ski-jump has been fitted on the port side of the bow with a 12°
slope, similar to that of the aircraft carrier, Príncipe de Asturias. It is capable of operating with V/STOL
aircraft, type AV-8B Harrier and JSF F-35 Lightning II. There are plans for day and night flight operations
support and with instrumental flight capability.
The flight deck has a runway port side for V/STOL aircraft and six spots on them for operating helicopters
with characteristics similar to the NH-90 and SH-3D. There is sufficient space for four CH-47 Chinook
helicopters to carry out simultaneous landing and take off, these being the Army's largest. Aft of the island
there is a take off/landing point for V-22 Osprey type tiltrotor aircraft. The deck's starboard zone is reserved
for aircraft and service vehicle parking.
There is a hangar of approximately 1,000 m2 that can be expanded with the light cargo garage up to
slightly more than 3,000 m2. The flight deck is vertically linked to the hangar by two aircraft elevators.
There are also other service elevators and lifting resources dedicated to specific functions: munitions,
hospital, etc.
This illustrates the fact that the flight deck can be used in combat operations with V/STOL aircraft or in
vertical actions through the use of rotary-wing aircraft.
Various options are possible for the composition of the embarked air wing. One of them, pure combat,
could be with up to 19 AV-8 B or F-35B; another could be made up of 10 AV-8 B and 12 NH90, and there
is also the possibility of a configuration with 25 NH90 helicopters.
Flight deck
Layout of the
hangar and
elevators
General
layout of the
Air
Operations
hangar
General
layout of the
hangar.
Maximum
capacity of
AV-8B Plus
72
Amphibious Operations
The amphibious capacity of the Juan Carlos I and of the ships that make up this class arises from uniting air,
troop and personnel transport capabilities along with the possibilities offered by the dock installed in the stern
and the amphibious force command capabilities.
The ship has a dock astern with 69.3 m length overall and a 16.8 m beam with a 16.8 x 11.5 m door. It has a
capacity for four LCM 1E type landing craft and four or six RHIB Supercats simultaneously or a high number
of AAV-7 A1 amphibious vehicles. Additional Supercats can be stowed in the dock aboard the LCM 1E
landing craft, in the vehicle garage or heavy materials garage, always to the detriment of the capacity for
another type of cargo. The dock's design allows the use of landing craft used by other countries, including
LCM's, amphibious vehicles and hovercraft (a U.S. Navy LCAC).
In amphibious operations the material transport capacity is such that it allows the transfer of light and heavy
material allocated to the force being projected and to ensure the sustainment of the operations on land for a
period of 30 days.
Hangar and
light cargo
garage
Amphibious
Operations
Dock and
heavy cargo
garage.
Amphibious
Operations
Table 17 shows the crew list and the troop transport capacity in amphibious operations.
TABLE 17.- TROOP TRANSPORT CAPACITY IN AMPHIBIOUS OPERATIONS
Chiefs and
Officers
Chief petty
officers
Petty officers,
seamen and
soldiers
Total
Ship's crew
24
49
170
243
Chiefs of Staff
45
32
26
103
Embarked Air Wing Unit (UNAEMB)
41
60
71
172
Naval Beach Group
1
4
18
23
Disembarkation Force
46
64
792
902
Total: By category:
157
209
1,077
1,443
It is possible to transport more troops by assembling accommodation containers in the hangar.
Transport of vehicles and cargo
The vehicle and cargo transport capacities are distributed between the light vehicle and heavy vehicle
garages, these being expanded when necessary by using the hangar and the dock for these functions.
The Juan Carlos I has a 3,046 m 2 surface area devoted to wheeled cargo with the possibility of
expansion up to more than 5,400 m2.
The garage for vehicles and light cargo is situated on the deck immediately below the flight deck. It has
a surface area of 2,046 m2, which can be expanded up to around 3,000 m2 by occupying the hangar for
73
these tasks. This garage can take vehicles such as the Hummer, VAMTAC or lorries, all of them with
the corresponding trailers.
Heavy vehicles and cargo are stowed in a specific garage situated at dock deck level. It has a surface
area of 1,400 m2 and is calculated to be able to house M60 or Leopard 2 battle tanks and Aljaba type
transport vehicles. The transport surface area can be increased by 975 m2 using the amphibious craft
dock for these activities. The BPE can transport a maximum of 46 Leopard 2 battle tanks, 29 in the
garagae and 17 in the dock.
Non-wheeled cargo can be transported in the two garages and complimentary service areas in the place
of vehicles. They are a very varied and most notable is the existence of volume with a capacity to store
144 containers or standardised cargo pallets, etc.
Light cargo
hangar.
Vehicle
transport.
Heavy
cargo
hangar.
Vehicle
transport.
Troop transport.
The ship has an accommodation capacity for a crew of 243 persons and a total of 1,200 persons belonging
to the embarked force. 103 General Staff personnel, 23 of the Naval Beach Group (GNP), 172 of the
Embarked Air Wing and 902 persons of the landing force.
As a general rule, each accommodation area has a common rest area that provides a certain intimacy and
allows reading and study. In any case, there is at least one rest area for every two watertight compartments..
At least 20% of space by category has been reserved for accommodation and specific sanitary services for
female personnel. This reserve has been designed with sufficient flexibility for it to be used by male personnel
in its entirety or in part if necessary.
The ship's characteristics allow the use of transport zones (hangar and garages) for the accommodation of
personnel, using accommodation containers to do so. An additional transport capacity of 1,000 persons can
be achieved for limited periods of time.
Light cargo
hangar.
Troop
transport.
74
Heavy
cargo
hangar.
Troop
transport.
Humanitarian assistance
The possibilities of this ship taking part in humanitarian assistance actions are extensive and are defined
by the capacities to transport personnel, equipment and cargo of a specific nature, in containers (up to
144), pallets, etc., which may be landed without the need for prepared port facilities, using helicopters
and the assigned amphibious craft.
One of the fundamental elements of this capacity is the hospital installed on the ship. It is linked with the
dock, the flight deck and the cargo decks by means of an elevator, enabling rapid and efficient movement
of the injured. The hospital has two operating theatres, a dental surgery, infirmary, doctor's
surgery, hospital ward, intensive care unit (ICU), contagious disease unit, injury classification
area, X-ray chamber, laboratory and a pharmacy. The hospitalisation area can be expanded using
the troop transport zones and the spaces used for vehicle transport.
Another example of the possibilities that the Juan Carlos I offers in this field is a material transport capability
for the deployment of a CIMIC encampment and its accommodation modules for assembly on land. It should
also be remembered that almost any crew material can be loaded in the Army's Engineering Units.
Light cargo
hangar.
Humanitaria
n assistance
Heavy cargo
hangar.
Humanitaria
n assistance
75
5.5.- EXPORT
In a hard fought tender with other companies, and whilst facing the crisis of the sale of some of the
shipyards integrated into Navantia, the Spanish company won the tender to build the two LHD ships for
Australia. Various industrial groups presented bids, on the shortlist being DCNS with the Mistral, with a
few modifications, and Navantia jointly with the Australian shipbuilder Tenix offering the Juan Carlos I
design. It should be noted that at that time the BPE was being built, whilst France already had the first
two Mistral class ships in service.
Almost simultaneously, Navantia won the tender for the building of three air warfare destroyers in
Australian shipyards. The other shortlisted candidate in this tender was the US naval design company,
Gibbs & Cox, who have designed the U.S. Navy's main cruisers, destroyers and escort ships.
The Juan Carlos I
approaching Rota
naval base. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
The two Australian ships, HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide, will be built in El Ferrol up to the flight
deck level. The island and ship completion will be the work of the Australian shipbuilder, Tenix, Navantia's
partner in this project. Nevertheless, there has been recent speculation about the possibility of the second
unit being totally completed in Spain. The main contractor is Navantia, who takes on 65% of the project,
the remaining 35% corresponding to the Australian company, Tenix.
The contract was signed in November 2007 for a total amount of €1411.6 million. This figure includes the
two ships and the modifications to the design, which we will be minor. Subsequent to the agreements with
Navantia and the signing of the contract with the Australian Ministry of Defence, Tenix Defence became
BAE Systems Australia.
According to Navantia technicians, the similarity between both types of ship is a little over 90%. The main
differences with the Juan Carlos I will lie in certain items of equipment for which the Australian Navy have
preferred to make their own choice. For example:

Combat Management System 9LV developed by the Swedish company, Saab.

Sea Giraffe multi-role surveillance radar made by Saab

Infra-red Search & Track System (IRST) Vampir NG developed by the French company, Sagem
Defense et Securite.

MSSR 2000 I from EADS Cassidian.

Integrated navigation system developed by Northrop Grumman.
With regard to the air component, the ships will be able to carry Tiger ARH Armed Reconnaissance
Helicopters and NH90 TTH transport helicopters. As they have a ski-jump, we cannot rule out the
Australian Navy or Air Force later being able to operate F-35 planes from the ship. Australia has been a
76
level 3 partner in the JSF programme since 2002. Nevertheless, their known purchase forecasts are for
about 100 aircraft with an F-35A configuration (CTOL: conventional takeoff and landing), destined to
substitute the Air Force's F-18 and F-111 and not usable from the Canberra class vessels. There is no
evidence for the time being of the Australian authorities having considered the acquisition of F-35B
V/STOL units.
The main dates of the Royal Australian Navy's shipbuilding programme are set out in Table 18.
TABLE 18.- MILESTONES OF THE SHIPS FOR AUSTRALIA
Signing of
Contract
SHIP
HMAS Canberra
HMAS Adelaide
9 October 2007
Keel laying
Launch
Entry into
service
23 September 2009
17 February 2011
January 2013
18 February 2011
2013
June 2014
To transport the two half built LHD's to Australia a marine transport specialist, Dockwise Shipping, has
been contracted to transport them aboard the Blue Marlin, one of the world's biggest heavy transport
vessels. The ship is an open deck vessel, with the superstructure is concentrated in the bow and a semisubmersible platform for loading and discharge. She has a length overall of 206 m and breadth 63 m and
can move at a speed of 12 kn. She can transport loads of up to 73,000 tonnes on the poop deck (164.2 x
63 metros). The floatation box mounted on the port side stern can be dismounted in order to increase the
load possibilities, Given the dimensions of the Canberra, 231 m length overall and beam 32 m, if she is
fitted longitudinally on the Blue Marlin shaft line, then 67 m would stick out from the stern. Transported
obliquely with respect to the ship's line, taking maximum advantage of her deck, only 28 m would stick out
on each side.
Manoeuvring with
the help of four tugs
at Rota Naval Base.
(Photo: Spanish
Navy)
It is interesting that transport contracting was made shortly after building started on the first of the two
ships. The fact is that there are very few possibilities for transporting the hulls of the two amphibious
vessels (apart from the one chosen, the only other possibility is to make an oceanic tow), and that the
service of these large transporters is very much in demand, meaning almost going on a waiting list.
According to data obtained, the price stipulated is more than $20 million. Such a high transport price
came as a surprise to Navantia, and that is bearing in mind that the company is used to chartering ships
of this kind, as they were used for the Scorpene half hulls for Chile and Malaysia, transporting them
between Navantia and DCNS facilities.
The transfer of the two incomplete Australian ships to that country will be made in two trips: the first in
August 2012 and the second in the year 2014. The loading operation of each of the LHD's on the Blue
Marlin will be impressive and delicate. The authors of this work believe that that manoeuvre will be carried
out in the Ares Firth, the LHD having first been towed from the El Ferrol Firth.
77
It does not seem possible to use the Suez Canal for the voyage to Australia, and it is unthinkable, due to
the joint length overall ship and load, to use the Panama Canal. The two most likely routes are:

Via South Africa, going round the Cape of Good Hope to reach Australia by sailing across the
Indian Ocean.

Via South America, around Cape Horn, to reach Australia by crossing the Pacific ocean.
In either of the two cases, the transfer of each of these ships will be a major technological and nautical
achievement to follow with maximum interest.
The Juan Carlos I
during docking
manoeuvres at the
new quay at Rota
Naval Base
specially designed
for this ship. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
We cannot close this point referring to export without mentioning the concurrence of bids made to the
Russian navy for the building of four amphibious warfare ships. After lengthy negotiations, the
preselected ships were the Mistral (DCNS, France) and the Juan Carlos I (Navantia, Spain), the tender
than being awarded to the state-owned French company. The entire negotiation and award process was
characterised by a marked incidence of political intervention.
When ballast is not
loaded the stern
door can be opened
without flooding the
dock. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
Initially, two ships will be jointly built between France and Russia at the STX (Saint-Nazaire) Shipyard,
and in a second phase a further two vessels will be built at a Russian Shipyard (Admiralty Shipyards in
Saint Petersburg). The project will be led by the French company, DCNS (France) and the Russian,
United Shipbuilding Corporation (USC). According to declarations made by a Russian government
spokesman at the Kremlin and reported by the agency RIA Novosti"The cost of the first ship will be 720
million euros, the second will cost 650 million euros."). The higher cost of the first ship for Russia may be
due the cost of design changes made in order to adapt it to the needs of the Russian Navy: modifications
78
to the hangar and elevators due to the dimensions and weight of the Russian helicopters, installation of
equipment that differs from the original equipment, etc.
According to data provided by the prestigious naval annual Combat Fleets, published by the US Naval
Institute in its 2005-2006 edition, each of the first two Mistral class ships cost $236 million in the year
2002. At the same time, according to sources consulted, the price stipulated for the Spanish Navy for the
Juan Carlos I was €360 million in the year 2005. The same sources indicate that it is possible that the
amount paid by the Spanish Ministry of Defence was "a little short" in relation to the real cost of the ship.
There were also complementary contracts for aspects of the ship and equipment not taken into
consideration in the basic contract. With respect to the price of the contract with Australia, it has already
been mentioned that the cost per ship in the year 2007 was €706 million. Within these comparisons, it
should also be remembered that the Juan Carlos I is a much bigger and more complex ship than the
Mistral.
So, regardless of how far the build ships' known figures are updated, the costs announced for the Mistral
ships destined for Russia seem disproportionately high. The reasons for this could be due to a Russian
press agency error or to any other that may occur to the readers.
Navantia's commercial activity is set to offer this ship to other navies. As mentioned above, Navantia
have presented a bid to Turkey on the basis of the Athlas LHD/LHA 26000 in a variant with
displacement of 27,000 tonnes and possibly only with flight deck for helicopters. It is hoped that during
the long cruise that the Juan Carlos I is to take around the Mediterranean in the spring of 2011, she may
be able to visit various countries to show the savoir-faire of the Spanish shipbuilder, and we hope to see
the ship in the Bosphorus.
Sectioned drawing of the ships for Australia. (Information graphics: Tenix, BAE Systems Australia)
79
5.6.- COMPARISON WITH SIMILAR SHIPS
In making a comparison of the Juan Carlos I with other amphibious ships, the primordial feature selected has been
that they have a flush flight deck. Only seven classes of ship meet this requirement: Juan Carlos I (Spain and
Australia), Dokdo (Korea), Mistral (France and Russia), Ocean (United Kingdom), and Tarawa, Wasp and
America (USA). The feature stipulated as obligatory means that the ships belong to types LHD, LHA and
LPH
Bow and ski-jump of
the Juan Carlos I.
(Photo: Spanish
Navy)
With regard to the USA, units of this kind appeared for the first time in the U.S. Navy as a development of
assault helicopter-carriers from modified Second World War aircraft-carriers and subsequently those
specifically built in the Iwo Jima class. In fact, the U.S. Navy believed that vertical envelopment
operations that could be developed with those ships needed to be complemented with the possibility of
landing heavy equipment. That is how the Tarawa and Wasp classes were born. These ships and their
successors, the America class, by the length of their flight decks allow the landing of V/STOL aircraft.
Since it was thought that the ships decks should be optimised for helicopter operations, no ski-jump was
fitted, meaning that planes such as AV-8B Harrier or JSF F-35 Lightning II cannot take off fully loaded.
The size of these ships doubles those of other countries.
The America class has been designed without a dock to transport landing craft or LCAC, leaving these
tasks for LPD and LSD type ships in service or being built for the U.S. Navy. The ships are optimised for
the transport of troops and for aviation operations with F-35 B and the MV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor, with far
superior aerial vector dimensions than their predecessors. Although they have been classified in some
naval annuals as LHA, we understand that it is more appropriate to define them as LPH. A return is made
to the concept of Iwo Jima and Ocean classes, which were considered surpassed, but with a
displacement of 45,000 tonnes.
Leaving U.S. Navy ships aside, which respond to other requirements and other budgets, in Spain the
design of the Strategic Projection Ship stands out for its characteristics above all else. In this field what
must be noted as the first advantage is her versatility, with a wide range of missions that can be carried
out. A second point is that referring to extensive troop and material transport capacities, especially of
heavy equipment. Her flight deck with ski-jump provides a capacity to operate with AV-8 B or JSF aircraft,
collaborating in landed troop support or in the aerial defence of the fleet in which she is integrated. The
ratio between crew and transported troops is optimal, especially at times when recruitment is a problem
for all navies.
Other navies have subsequently developed amphibious ships along the lines of this concept. So in the
United Kingdom the Royal Navy built the Ocean, which is basically an Invincible hull redesigned for
amphibious warfare. The ship cannot operate with V/STOL aircraft, and neither does she have a dock to
operate landing craft, which implies very severe limitations in amphibious operations.
80
In France, the Mistral class ships can be considered to be in direct competition with those built by
Navantia, although they are smaller and their features are not as complete. None of them can operate, for
example, short takeoff aircraft. After those of the US Navy they are the biggest number built. As well as
the French Navy's three (Mistral, Tonnerre and Dixmunde), the four to be built for the Russian navy
should be added.
Arial view of the
flight deck in which
the touch-down
spots can be clearly
seen. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
In the Far East, South Korea have launched the Dokdo. According to available data, a second unit of this
class, named Marado, was planned for delivery in 2010. There are also plans for a third unit, the
Baengnyong, which implied modifications to the original project in order to use the JSF. This ambitious
plan has been halted at the first unit without there being any indication of dates for the series continuing.
The current situation could be indicative of design difficulties, possibly not very well achieved and the
need for significant improvements, these including among other aspects it being adapted for the use of
JSF aircraft. This country is going through a process of naval evolution which should move from coastal
actions to offshore operations, and in this regard units of this type can be of great interest. In addition, in
the medium to long term, the South Korean Air Force is considering the purchase of F-35 B planes, which
would be used on the Navy's ships.
The building of the Juan Carlos I for the Spanish Navy, and the interest aroused by Australia with the
order of two similar units from Navantia, is a response with a clear tendency on the part of Chiefs of Staff
to be able to have units of this kind, with the latest contract, that of Russia, being just such an indication.
It is certain that in the coming years we will see the appearance of new designs of units of this kind and
orders to the shipyards for more ships belonging to the classes that have been discussed here.
The Príncipe de
Asturias and the
Juan Carlos I
docked at Rota
Naval Base. (Photo:
Spanish Navy)
81
Juan
Carlos I
Dokdo
Mistral
Ocean
Tarawa
Wasp
America
TABLE 19.- COMPARISON OF THE JUAN CARLOS I WITH SIMILAR SHIPS
Country
Spain and
Australia
South
Korea
France and
Russia
United
Kingdom
USA
USA
USA
No. of ships
1+2
1+2
2+3
1
2
8
+1
Type
LHD
LHA
LHA
LPH
LHA
LHD
LPH
Year
2010
2008
2006
1999
1971
1989
2014
Displacement
26,800 t fl
13,000 t
19,000 t fl
16,529 t
21,600 t fl
21,578 t fl
27,165
40,891 fl
28,295 t
41,133 t fl
44,850 t fl
Length overall
231.40 m
200 m
199 m
203.4 m
254.2 m
257.3 m
257.3 m
Beam
32 m
32 m
32 m
32.6 m
40.23 m
42.67 m
59.1 m
Crew
243+172
448
177
461
1,073
1,082
1,059
Propulsion
CODAGL
2 diesel, 1
gas turbine
2
pods.
CODAD, 4
diesel, 2
propellers
Diesel
electric, 4
motors. 2
pods
2 diesel.
2
propellers
2 boilers, 2
turbines. 2
propellers
2 boilers, 2
turbines. 2
propellers
2 gas
turbines.
2 propellers
Speed
21 knots
22 knots
19 knots
19 knots
24 knots
24 knots
22 knots
Range of action
9,000 miles
10,000
miles
6,000
miles
8,000
miles
10,000
miles
9,500
miles
9,000 miles
Personnel
1,028
720
450
526
1,903
1,893
1,687
Cargo
Garage
3,290 m2
Expandable
---
2,650 m2
Cannot
carry
heavy
cargo
---
Garage
2
3,134 m
and 3,311
m3 of
cargo
Garage
2
1,115 m
and 4,530
m3 of cargo
Dock
Yes, 4
LCM-1E
and 5 RHIB
or 2 LCM8E and 1
LCAC
Yes, 2
LCAC
Yes, 1
CDIC or 4
LCM(8) or
2 LCAC,
2
885 m
No
Yes, 4 LCU
or 1 LCAC
or 7
LCM(8)
Yes
No
Ski-jump
Yes
No
No
No
Not
necessary
Not
necessary
Not
necessary
V/STOL Aircraft
Up to 19
AV-8 B or
F-35B
No
No
No
24 AV-8 B
Harrier II
24 AV-8 B
Harrier II
23 F-35B
JSF
Air Wing
6 spots
10 AV-8 B
and 12
NH90
6 spots
10 EH 101
Marlin
6 spots
16 NH90
6 spots
12 Sea
King and 6
Lynx
9 spots
20 CH-46E
10 CH-53E
6 AH-1W
and 3 UH1N
9 spots
20 CH-46E
10 CH-53E
6 AH-1W
and 3 UH1N
9 spots
12 MV-22
Osprey
Hangar
1,500 m2
Expandable
Yes
1,800 m
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Elevators
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
Hospital
22 beds
---
69 beds
---
---
587 beds
24 beds
2
82
6.- ADDENDUM: FIRST TOUCHDOWNS AND RESISTANCE CRUISE
After the closure of the texts of this document, two events have taken place which, due to their relevance,
we would like to leave reflected in this addendum. These are the first landings on the flight deck of
helicopters and VSTOL aircraft, and the resistance cruise carried out in the waters of the Atlantic and the
Mediterranean.
First touchdowns
Within the strategy followed by the Spanish Navy for the operational fine tuning of the Juan Carlos I some
of the essential parts for those where in relation to approval of the flight deck and the trials on it of
different types of aircraft that make up the Aircraft Fleet.
So on 8 February 2011, at 10h 51’ the first touchdown took place of a helicopter on the flight deck of the
Juan Carlos I. The helicopter used was a Sikorsky SH-3D Sea King with tail number 08. This is the
largest rotating wing aircraft operated by the Navy. Subsequently, on the same day, the tests were
completed with landings of a Hughes 500 and an Augusta Bell AB-212.
An unusual view of a
manoeuvre by a
Sikorsky SH-3D Sea
King over the Juan
Carlos I flight deck.
At 19h 51’ on 2 May 2011 Harrier AV-8B Plus with tail number 23 touched down on the Juan Carlos I.
This manoeuvre, the first for this kind of aircraft on the new ship, was made shortly before the ship left on
her resistance cruise.
First touchdown of a
Harrier AV-8B Plus
83
Resistance cruise
As we have already mentioned, the second of the event has been the resistance cruise carried out that took
the ship from Rota to Istanbul via Las Palmas in the Canary Islands. The game of cruises of this type is to
test all the ship's equipment, crew training and the operation of embarked airborne units. This is in addition to
the aim of collaborating with the domestic industry by showing the ship and her capabilities to a potential
client such as the Turkish navy
During this cruise the Juan Carlos I carried an UNAEMB (Embarked Air Unit) consisting of a Harrier AV-8B
Plus of the 9th Squadron, and three helicopters: two Sikorsky SH-3D Sea Kings, of the 5th Squadron and a
Hughes 500 of the 6th Squadron. With regard to the amphibious capabilities, a landing force made up of 100
marines were transported along with various vehicles and two amphibious assault craft LCM-1E. A group of
midshipmen were also embarked on the ship.
The trip, with a duration of just under a month and a half, started at Rota Naval base on 2 May 2011 and
finished at the same port on 11 June. During the trip to Rota Naval Base, the ship stopped off at five
Spanish and foreign ports: Las Palmas in the Canary Islands, Cartagena, Mahón, Tolón (France),
Istanbul (Turkey) and Ceuta. Diverse flight, landing craft and Marine Infantry operations were carried out
during the cruise.
The Juan Carlos I,
during the resistance
crews anchoring off
Es Castell
(Villacarlos), in
Mahón Bay. (Photo
Spanish Navy)
The Juan Carlos I in
the Marmara Sea,
across from the
Topkapi Palace in
Istanbul. (Photo:
Navantia)
The visits to the ports of Tolón and Istanbul should be highlighted since they meant the first anchorings
outside Spanish waters and, consequently, the ship "coming out" in front of foreign navies. During her
stay in Istanbul from 29 May to 3 June, the ship received VIP visits both from members of the Turkish
Navy as well as from representatives of local industry, showing all the Spanish Navy's new amphibious
84
unit's operational capabilities. In this way Navantia has become a highly significant candidate for that
country's LPD programme.
The Juan Carlos I at one of the quays in the port of Istanbul. (Photo Navantia)
View of
Istanbul
from the
bridge of
the Juan
Carlos I.
(Photo:
Navantia)
85

AMPHIBIOUS WARFARE SHIPS. THE NAVANTIA

Transcription

Similar documents

December - Model Ship Builder

ANALYSIS OF THE CAUSES OF MARITIME CASUALTIES

Let AutoHunter track `em down to save you time and money. Let

CAX Barbarian Bruiser

u.s.s. PIEDMONT AD-17 At that time, if I amnot mistaken, the ship

The New Command Culture of Cooperative

DITA VON TEESE, NOVEMBER 2005 SPANK ME, 2002 VINNIE

The Netherlands as a maritime crossroad

The Navy`s Role in the

Pass The Word President`s Message