THE TINARMADA:
SAGA OF THELCT
By Basil Hearde
Some sailors label them "large crude targets. "Some call them names thatwhere unprintable. Two others they were little more than powered barges;the kind of gritty working vessel no one ever took pictures of or wrote numerousduties about. To all the men that man them they were skittish, dirty, cramped,not, sweaty, on comparable, and often downright dangerous. But for all theirscow-like functional simplicity, they were truly unique, a special breedof vessel borne of war. They where the LCTs or landing craft tank of worldwar II.
They came in several sizes, shapes and marks and so help to revolutionizeamphibious warfare, that more and a half century after their conception theyare still the only practical means of getting heavy tanks and vehicles ashorein a hurry where no port facilities exist. Created with one purpose in mind,new versions serve today's navies little altered in concept or use from thedesign that evolved out of the brutal necessity two reclaim distant beachesfrom the grip of axis tyranny.
Although the LCT could trace its lineage to the powered lighters used toland horses and vehicles during the ill-fated Gallipoli campaign of worldwar I, it was the curiosity and influence of England's Prime minister WinstonChurchill that renewed interest in a special vessel capable of carrying atank directly to a beachhead. In mid 1940, with the war not going well forGreat Britain on any quarter, Churchill reviewed design studies of the landingcraft concept evolved in 1937 out of the self propelled lighters all of worldwar one. Ever eager to go on the offensive despite the fact that Hitler appearednearly ready to invade England, Churchill wanted the vessel that could carrya load of tanks and armored vehicles in any kind of seaway and deliver themdirectly onto the beach on now occupied coast of Europe.
Unfortunately, the proposal advanced by the British landing craft committeein 1937 still held to the arcane theory that an army was moved by horsesand mules rather than tanks and trucks. As such, the landing craft they conceivedwas too small for the type of large-scale amphibious actions Churchillenvisioned. Even then in the mid 1930's the mindset of the royal navy focusedentirely on major warships with scant attention being paid to other typesof possible naval warfare.
In pressing his views on admiral Maund, chief of naval construction, Churchillhammered his argument that if the royal navy had possessed ramped amphibiousvessels of the type he advocated the British army might not have been forcedto leave the cream of its armored equipment on the beaches of Dunkirk onlymonths earlier. Few could counter the merit of the doughty Prime ministersviews for, indeed, much of the mechanized might of the royal army had beenleft behind to rust or be captured as the British expeditionary force beata hasty retreat across the English channel.
On this once serene French beach the fast advancing German Wehrmacht andLuftwaffe unmercifully hacked at the British army as it tried to escape ina motley assembly of hastily gathered civilian pleasure craft and riverboats.Sufficient naval transport simply did not exist to ferry a vanquished armyacross the English Channel. The evacuation from Dunkirk was a demoralizingblow to the British morale and though 330,000 men were saved from capture,the royal army was left virtually the devoid of any tanks, artillery or mobileequipment. Humiliated, Churchill vowed the English would never again be forcedto suffer such a shattering exodus from a battlefield. It was a promise hewas determined to keep.
The prime minister's idea called for an amphibious vessel capable of landingat least three 36 ton tanks directly onto a beach; a vessel able to sustainitself at sea for at least a week; a vessel with acceptable if not commodiouscrew accommodations, and a design simplicity whereby the craft could easilybe built in separate unitized sections. The sections would make for easiershipment aboard large cargo vessels were they could then be launched at sea,assembled and loaded by the ships' cranes. He also advocated a simple sequenceof construction that could be executed by steelworkers unfamiliar with theintricacies of ship construction. In short, he wanted assault craft thatwere inexpensive and easy to build; expendable vessels that could put tanksand men ashore in the quickest time.
Taking the prime minister's mandate, admiral Maund enlisted the skills ofnaval architect Robert Baker who in a matter of three days remarkably completedinitial drawings for what would become a 152 foot landing craft with a 29foot beam in a shallow draft. Ship builders Fairfield and John Brown agreedto work out details for the design under the guidance of the admiralty experimentworks at halsar. Tank test with models soon determined the hydrostaticcharacteristics of the crafts flat bottom hull, single rudder and blunt bow,indicating the craft could make 10 knots on engines delivering about 700hp. Two twin propellers.
Work now began earnest and by November 1940, the first LCT Mark one, yardnumber fourteen was launched. The designers had transformed Churchill's visionaryconcept into an all welded 372-ton steel-hulled vessel that remarkably drewonly 3 ft. of water at its bow. A twelve foot wide hinged bow door ramp enabledtanks to exit onto beaches with a 1: 35 slope gradient so they could wadeashore in water only 3 ft. deep. A second steel door behind the hinged rampsealed the bow area from the tank well or tank deck. Flanking both sidesof the landing craft were water tight, lengthwise, bulwark coamings thatcontained storage compartments, which added to the buoyancy provided by thedouble bottom under the tank deck. Within the double bottom were ballastand fuel tanks that were plumbed to be able to change the fore and aft trimfor beaching operations.
Diagram of a British Mark 1 LCT
At the rear of the low silhouetted vessel was a small box like bridge beneathwhich two 350 HP. Hall Scott gasoline engines were crammed along with anauxiliary generator, batteries and pumps. The hull tanks contain fuel fora range of 900-mi. Aft of the engine room were equally cramped quarters forten matelotes and a skimpy gallery and meat locker. Behind the bridge wasa tiny wardroom for two officers and months for port and starboard 2 ponderpom-pom machine gun.
Key to the LCTs concept was a large stern mounted kedge anchor which wasdropped while inbound to the beach. This anchor helped to keep the craftfrom slewing or broaching and with its powerful winch, enabled the craftto pull itself off the beach once the cargo was unloaded. The bow ramp wasinitially raised and lowered by hand cranks, but on later marks, a poweredwinch assisted and ramp positioning. Crews would quickly learn that muchtechnique was required in handling of the ramp and anchor winch least theprops get fouled in the anchor cable or the ramp become a giant unruly shovel.
Sea trials soon proved the mark one to be skittish and almost unmanageablein some sea conditions. Door in its difficult test course on the Tyne LCTsshallow draft made steering by the helm alone all but impossible and quickreversal of the engines mandatory. Below, the cork lined crew compartmentsweated profusely and the sound level was deafening. The engine spaces whereno better, insufferably hot and so cramped the motor mechanics had to beof slight physical stature. Yet, despite its many shortcomings and ungainlybarge like appearance, the prototype LCT delivered its promise of handilyputting tanks ashore on any beach.
Orders were immediately placed for 30 mark 1s while the designers set aboutcorrecting all that was wrong in the slightly larger (159') Mk 2 versionthat was quick to follow. In addition to a wider beam (31') three 460hp Paxmandiesel engines replaced the Hall Scott's and 15 and 20 lb. armored shieldingwas added to the wheel house and gun tubs. Built in four sections, the increasedlength and beam also allowed storage for two rows of 25-ton tanks and theenough diesel fuel to triple the mark 2's range to 2700 nautical miles. Inhandling and reliability, the mark 2's would be a quantum leap ahead of itsbox like forebear.
British Mk 2 LCT
73 Mk 2 LCTs were under construction as the prototype mark ones saw theirfirst blistering action during the British evacuation from Greece and Creteearly in 1941. As Churchill anticipated, the LCTs play a key role in savingmuch of the armored equipment that would soon served them well in North Africa.Though the campaign in Crete was far from a victory for the hard pressedBritish, neither was it the gut wrenching type of disaster that had the befallenthem at Dunkirk. Winston Churchill was vindicated. The LCT had earned itsfirst laurels in naval history even though seventeen of the mark 1s wouldbe lost in the hard fighting of the Grecian operations.
With the development of the LCT, the royal navy now had the kind of beachingvessel amphibious warfare demanded. Fast unfolding events in North Africaand Sicily further proved their viability and other marks soon were developedto fulfill a variety of needs. Next to come was the mark 3's. It would beeven larger with an added 32-foot section giving a length of 192 feet anda displacement of 640 tons. Amazingly, this section added at the John brownyard made the vessel a little faster than the original mark one. The mark3 was accepted on 8 April 1941, and would be entirely prefabricated in fivesections. That increase in length allows it to carry five 40-ton tanks andall their related support equipment, or 300 tons of deck cargo.
Photo of Mk3 LCT 7059 is Courtesy of laurence sharpe-stevens
ofThe BritishWarship Preservation Trust.
Though the royal navy like the higher load capability of the mark 3's itsoon discovered several construction deficiencies. Quickly pressed into servicewithout sufficient testing, combat operations demonstrated the need to addlongitudinal stiffeners to the Mk 3s(and later the Mk4s) in order to avoidtorsional stresses to the so lengthy hull.
The soon to evolve Mk4 would be slightly shorter but would have a much widerbeam of almost 39 feet as opposed to 31 feet of that Mk 3 and a displacementof of 186 tons. The wider beam was intended for cross channel operationswhere the ferrying aspect was critical for the fast unloading of the raidingassaults as opposed to seagoing use for the transfer of tanks and vehiclesto smaller landing craft. Better accommodations for the tank crews was alsomade possible by the increased beam. In each subsequent model, despite thesize variances, the basic arrangement of power ramp, long tank well and aftgoing station would essentially be retained.
British Mk 4 LCT
Although at a glance, the LCT all looked to be much the same vessel, theydid contain a wide variety of interior equipment, communications, and berthingand armament installations. Various makes of engines and generators werefitted, as hard pressed wartime engine production allowed. These included225 HP gray built diesels and 350 HP Napier lion gasoline engines in additionto the widely used Paxman diesels. The LCT use versatility also led to theadaptation of many special purpose versions such as rocket craft (LCT-R)armored gunboats (LCT-G) and 76 patient hospital ships (LCT-H). Ends to thesimplicity of their construction, many were modified into other specificuses such as dredges, salvage, repair and mine craft. One even served asa floating a bakery during the Normandy invasion. Their shallow drafts alsomade that LCT Ideal for riverine use in inland waterways. In fact, afterthe war many weary LCTs shed their guns and donned civilian paint workingas car ferries in many corners of the world. For vessels hastily constructedas expendable invasion craft, the LCT showed an amazing adaptability littleenvisioned by its designers. Armament varied widely on the LCTs with theponderous two pounder pom-pom mounts gradually losing favor for the moreagile faster firing 20 mm Oerlikons on later production. Widely used wasthe combination of 40-mm Bofors 20 mm Oerlikon that proved the LCT to bea superb the gunfire support vessel. Indeed, in calm seas the LCTs flat bottomoffered such excellent stability that howitzers and mortar batteries wereoften temporarily installed for close in fire support. Other weapon, combinationsmade the LCT into effective floating flak batteries for harbor or supportarea defense. These installations would be manned by a combination of navaland army crews, as the occasion warranted.
British Mk 3 LCT(R)
As the war broadened in scope after pearl harbor, English LCT productionincreased. Three hundred fifty Mk 3's were built (71 with sterling gasolineengines) followed by an 865 Mk 4s powered with two reliable 460 hp Paxmandiesels. These could carry nine M4 Sherman or six Churchill tanks. Carryinga load of 350 TN., the Mk4 would be dealt throughout the war, being the largestLCT reduction in English yards.
Tested in early assault operations like the ill-fated Canadian commando raidon Dieppe in 1942, shortcomings in the larger LCT maneuvering ability ledto the preference for shorter overall length in future variants, most ofwhich were to be built in the united states. England's hard learn lessonin amphibious warfare would inure to the benefit of their yank allies. Soonto be mass produced, American made Mk 5 and Mk 6 LCTs, 160 of which werelendleased to the royal navy, would be 117 and 120 footers, respectively,and both marks would be rated at out by 285 TN. displacement. These versionswould see the largest number of LCTs procured with 500 Mk 5's and 965 Mk6'sbuilt by the war's end.
With America's entry into the war the vast reaches of the Pacific Ocean wouldraise a whole new concept of amphibious warfare principles. Without a singleamphibious vessel on its register at the time of Pearl Harbor the U.S. navyfound itself forced to look at and consider several of the successful Britishdesigns already in existence. One of these, an idea advanced by K. C. Barnabyof Thornycroft, was for a double-ended ramp ferry LCT to work with landingships. The Bureau of ships like the concept and quickly set about drawingplans for landing craft based on Barnaby suggestions, although favoring onlyone ramp.
Diagram of the US built LCT Mk 5
The result, by the spring of 1942, was LCT Mk 5, a 117 foot craft with asizable beam 32 feet 9 in. that could accommodate five 30 ton, four 40tontanks or 150 tons of cargo. With a group of twelve men and one officer housedwell aft, this 286 ton landing craft the merit of being shipped to assaultareas in either three sections aboard a cargo ship or carried piggybackpre-assembled aboard the flat deck all of a 327 one LST. The LCT would belaunched like heeling the LST on its beam to let the craft slide off itschocks into the sea. Cargo ships with lower each of the three water tightsections into the water via their booms where the LCT would be connectedBritish style, afloat on their own bottoms.
LCT Mk 5 as deck cargo on a LST
Powered by three 225 hp gray marine diesels the Mk 5's had a limited rangeof 700 NM. They were only capable of making eight knots and as, at best ina driving sea; a speed to slow for independent passage across the fast vastPacific. Shipped 24 where areas aboard other vessels, Mk 5's soon provedthemselves in repeated into this operations becoming a mainstay for gettingtanks ashore in the fast this possible time. Inland Americans feel yardswould lead year the war LCT reduction dated in great measure line of threefabricated is eyeing of its components it wasn't long before patriotic yardworkers "boasted that they built them by the mile and cut them up in feet".
First used in the invasion of north Africa, LCT Mk 5 crews immediately earneda reputation for delivering the goods under intense enemy fire and the worstof whether or sea conditions. Their barge like size, Lilliputian living spacesand the veried nature of their duties led to a special "esprit d corps" amongLCT crews that sometimes bordered on polite piracy. Enjoying little priorityin fleet maintenance schedules the crews largely were left to fend for themselvesin half- forgotten backwaters. Much of this lack of status with their peersaboard the APAs, LSTs and LSDs of the ever-growing amphibious forces wasthe simple reality that an LCT was the smallest landing craft organize intoindependent assault flotillas. Almost entirely manned by reserve and wartimedraftees most LCT skippers, often to the chagrin of their naval superiors,threw away the book and manage their high-spirited crewmen more with theattitude of the team coach and the high collar spit and polish naval officer.With something akin to buccaneer spirit liberally spiced with down homeentrepreneurial skill, these long suffering LCT crewmen somehow scroungedthe parts to keep their often bulky, war-wary vessels going. While many formerLCT crewman fondly recalls exploits in war ravaged ports no record existsof them ever once failing to accomplish the toughest missions.
Diagram of a LCT Mk 6
The LCT Mk 6. Variant soon appeared as somewhat larger (120') landing craftboasting the same engines, equipment
Photo and comments Courtesy of George ShinerLCT 926
This photo showsLCT 926 beingused as a bridge between a landing ship, tank and the beach. This was donewhen a LST couldn't get close enough to the shore. Note the open bow doorsof the LST and the jeep being driven onto the deck ofLCT 926.All of the LST's cargo could be moved across the deck of the LCT in thismanner and be dry when it reached the shore. Concerning this photo GeorgeShiner said, "I can remember that later they tried to move a tank acrossand it was too heavy and submerged the stern of the LCT, so I think theyabandoned the idea. At least they never used our LCT for that purpose again."This photo was labeled Purvis Bay. It was most likely taken on the isle ofTulagi, a small island in Purvis Bay, off the coast of Florida Island. Itcould also have been taken on Florida Island itself. Florida Island is northof Guadacanal. Solomon Islands.
So successful was the LCT Mk 6 that naval architects where soon ordered todraw up plans for an even larger LCT Mk 7 version which would have troop-carryingaccommodations that Mk 6 lacked. As the design evolve, more emphasis wasplaced on speed and stamina for long pacific transits with the result thatthe Mk 7 literally outgrew itself by virtue of specific seeakeeping needsfar greater in the LCT profile could provide. When Mk 7 design study reacheda length over 200 ft., its designation was changed in 1944 to LSM (landingship medium). Placed in production and proving itself able to maintain convoysspeeds up twelve knots, the 203 foot LSM quickly took over much of the Pacificrole of the LCTs seeing 558 built by V-J day in 1945.
The British would generate one more large LCT design, the 226 foot Mk 8 whichwas roughly similar to the American LSM. Intended for the pacific and fareast, it carried eight heavy tanks or. 350 tons of cargo and had accommodationfor 50 fully armed troops plus a crew of twelve. Only one Mk 8 was in operationby VJ day in 1945, the balance having been canceled after VE-day. A stilllarger Mk 9 was considered in 1944, but by then, allied amphibious shippingwas at peak production and the admiralty saw no further need for additionalLCT variants. The Mk 9design was never finalized.
By late 1943, most early Mk 5's where relegated to states side training orharbor duties. By then almost 500 American Mk 5's had been built. They hadserved long and hard to virtually every invasion in every theater of operations.Some even served the Russian navy. The few mechanical or design faults ofthe Mk 5 would be corrected in Mk 6 with 965 of these being delivered beforethe end of hostilities.
Though never designed to cross the Pacific on their own bottoms, severalflotillas of LCT did make the journey from Pearl harbor to forward combatareas. Success with earlier having towed strings of LCTs behind LSDs to forwardareas led to the decision to letflotilla number31 with 24 Mk 6's make an island hopping voyage under their own power.Leaving pearl harbor on fifteen 1945, the passage was torturously slow andbreakdowns were numerous along the way. Weary and much sun burned, the happyflotilla safely arrived at its destination in a key on fifteen April, aftermaking one of the longest duration voyage in the history of World War II.
Three months later groups 91 and 92 of this flotilla encountered six daysof high seas in atyphoon offOkinawa.Fighting monstrous 50 with swells and hurricane force windsat saw the craft made only 26 mi. in nine hours, the LCT formation actedlike sea going Bobsleds almost impossible to steer or control. Skidding andzooming from one direction to another many of the crewmen felt ceaking hullswould not long withstand the nerve-shattering roller-coaster ride. When thetyphoon finally abated, the LCT had remarkably all survived and was ableto reform to take stock of the damage before continuing on to their destination.Battered and bent, most halyards, antennas and masts blown away, guns andripped from their mounts, to a craft all had been so severely over stressedby the mountainous seas that each had to replace the stripped bolts or weldmentsholding their sections together before they could proceed.
In the forefront of virtually every wartime assault landing, LCT crews tooka heavy beating sustaining the heaviest losses of any large landing craft.The royal navy lost 133 LCTs of all marks, 29 of which were American madeMk 5's.TheU.S. navy lost 67 Mk 5's and Mk 6'sin storms, accidents or combat. 26were lost in the Normandy landings alone, many of these in a howling Galethat wrecked the French beaches days after the initial landings. Hundredsof more were badly damaged in the invasion landings, hammered into so muchscrap metal by vicious Axis gunners as again and again they snubbed theirblunt bows on alien beachheads.
That World War II was an amphibious war is borne out by the more than 70,000landing craft of all types built in United States alone. From the firstuncomplicated British Mk 1 ramped sea-going barge, the LCT at transformedinto a versatile, well proven mini-warship by 1945. Unlike so many of theirwartime landing craft contemporaries the LCT would long remain in peacetimenaval service. Reforming a variety of nine combat shores ranging from coastalcargo carriers to harbor ferries, a served naval bases all over the world.
Hundreds of Mk 5 and Mk 6 LCTs would be loaned or given to thepostwarfleets of allied or NATO countries. Although they are fast being retired,many of these still serve third world navies today. Other LCTs remained onactive duty with the U.S. navy assault craft divisions. Late in 1949, theLCT designationwas changed to LCU (landing craft utility) with many war-built Mk 6'scontinuing to serve U.S. navy well in two and beyond theVietnam era. Numberand not named, modern LCT/LCU versions still fulfill vital naval functionsmore than a half century later. Much to the chagrin of his many critics,Winston Churchill's ingenious concept for an amphibious landing vessel wasnot just another of his wild aberrations.
© 2000 LCT Flotillas of World War II ETO PTO