Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Expeditionary Transfer Dock

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) is a class of auxiliary ships designed for the to support sea-to-shore logistics and amphibious operations by serving as a floating transfer platform. These vessels enable the efficient movement of vehicles, equipment, and personnel between large deck amphibious ships and smaller , reducing reliance on vulnerable fixed ports and enhancing operational flexibility in contested environments. Originally designated as the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP), the ESD program was initiated to address gaps in distributed maritime logistics, with ships constructed by NASSCO based on a modified commercial tanker design. Key features of the ESD include a reconfigurable mission deck spanning approximately 25,000 square feet for vehicle staging, dedicated lanes for (LCAC) operations, a transfer ramp for roll-on/roll-off capabilities, and storage for 380,000 gallons of JP-5 aviation fuel. Measuring about 785 feet in length and displacing around 80,000 tons, these platforms achieve a sustained speed of 15 knots and a range of 9,500 nautical miles, allowing deployment across a wide spectrum of military missions from humanitarian assistance to . The program delivered two dedicated ESDs—USNS Montford Point (T-ESD-1) in 2013 and (T-ESD-2) in 2014—before transitioning to the enhanced Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) configuration, which incorporates additional aviation facilities, berthing for forces, and command spaces on subsequent vessels like USNS Lewis B. Puller (ESB-3). Operated by the 's , ESDs exemplify modular , permitting mission-specific adaptations without extensive redesign.

History and Development

Origins as Mobile Landing Platform

The Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) program emerged from U.S. military requirements for advanced sea basing capabilities, intensified by post-September 11, 2001 operational demands for rapid into contested or infrastructure-denied regions. This initiative addressed limitations in traditional amphibious logistics, which often depended on vulnerable fixed ports, by prioritizing at-sea connectors to enable distributed maritime operations and sustainment of forces ashore without host-nation support. The concept drew on prepositioning ship forces under , aiming to create a floating transfer node for heavy equipment like tanks and LCACs directly from strategic sealift to tactical assault craft. Program development accelerated in the late as part of broader seabasing efforts to achieve overmatch against peer adversaries, with the MLP envisioned as a cost-effective, commercially derived to minimize developmental risks. In August 2010, the awarded NASSCO a $115 million for long-lead materials and preliminary design of the , followed by a $744 million modification in May 2011 to fund of the first two vessels. NASSCO's selection leveraged its expertise in building roll-on/roll-off commercial vessels, adapting proven hull forms to military needs for operations that would facilitate empirical testing of over-the-horizon transfers in realistic sea states. Early rationale focused on validating the platform's role in bridging strategic and tactical mobility gaps, with initial designs emphasizing ballastable decks to submerge the ship partially, allowing roll-on/ of vehicles and craft without cranes or ramps. This approach promised to reduce reliance on contested littorals, supporting Marine Corps maneuver from the sea in scenarios where beachable landing was infeasible due to enemy defenses or terrain. The prototype's underscored a commitment to iterative sea trials for proving transfer efficiency, informed by lessons from prior prepositioning exercises.

Concept Evolution and Testing

![USNS John Glenn (T-MLP-2)][float-right] The Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) concept underwent initial validation through surrogate vessel demonstrations, including the Test Article Vehicle Transfer System (TAVTS) sea trials conducted in May 2010, which successfully transferred vehicles, including battle tanks, between a surrogate MLP and a large medium-speed roll-on/roll-off ship in Sea State 4 conditions over several days. These tests empirically confirmed the feasibility of at-sea heavy equipment transfers, addressing limitations in pier-dependent logistics by enabling afloat staging independent of fixed infrastructure. Builder's sea trials for the lead MLP vessel in March 2013 near verified core seaworthiness, including propulsion, steering, and operations essential for vehicle staging and connector integration. Subsequent at-sea trials from 2013 to 2015, incorporating elements like ship-to-ship connectors and (LCAC) launches during exercises such as Pacific Horizon in 2015, demonstrated reliable operations in 3 for skin-to-skin transfers with prepositioning ships. Integration with the Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF) was tested through scenarios simulating offload from large medium-speed roll-on/roll-off ships to connectors, enhancing throughput by providing a floating for and movement without reliance on contested ports. Early operational feedback identified needs for ballast system adjustments to maintain during transfers and reinforced strength requirements, prioritizing measured over simulations to refine . These iterations validated the platform's role in causal chains, enabling rapid force projection via empirical sea-based validation.

Redesignation to ESD and Relation to ESB

In September 2015, the U.S. redesignated the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) as the Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD), formalizing its primary role in facilitating at-sea transfer of vehicles, equipment, and personnel between large amphibious ships and smaller craft or landing zones. This change aligned with traditional three-letter hull designations and emphasized the ESD's design for efficient intra-theater support, such as loading and offloading (LCAC) vehicles without reliance on pier infrastructure. The redesignation occurred amid evolving operational needs, recognizing the ESD's specialized niche in distributed maritime operations rather than broader basing functions. Concurrently, the evolved select hulls from the MLP program into Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) variants by incorporating additional modular mission sets, including facilities with a for helicopters and vertical takeoff , as well as command and support berthing for forces. While sharing the same core platform—a converted commercial design for flexibility and cost-effectiveness—the ESB extends ESD capabilities to serve as a forward-operating sea base, enabling sustained presence for mine countermeasures, counter-piracy, and humanitarian missions. This allowed toward multi-mission adaptability, with ESBs providing enhanced operational tempo support beyond the ESD's focused transfer mission. The ESD program was effectively capped at two hulls—USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) and USNS John Glenn (T-ESD 2)—with no further procurements authorized after the decisions, redirecting funds to higher-priority and amphibious vessels amid constrained . This limit reflected a pragmatic assessment that the ESD's connector role could be sufficiently met by existing assets, while ESB conversions and new builds addressed demands for versatile forward basing in contested environments. ![USNS Lewis B. Puller (T-ESB 3)][float-right]

Design and Technical Specifications

Core Platform Features

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) employs a configuration, enabling operators to flood dedicated tanks with to increase the vessel's from approximately 9 meters (29.5 feet) in its standard loaded condition to 12 meters (39.4 feet), thereby lowering the deck to align precisely with the well decks of (LCAC) vessels for seamless over-the-horizon transfers. This adjustment facilitates skin-to-skin connectivity, supporting up to three LCAC lanes simultaneously without requiring specialized pier infrastructure. The design draws from commercial heavy-lift vessel principles, emphasizing structural simplicity and during partial submersion in sea states up to 3. With a full-load of 78,000 tons, the ESD measures 239.3 meters (785 feet) in and 50 meters (164 feet) in , providing a robust platform for sustainment in distributed operations. The main deck incorporates 25,000 square feet of configurable (Ro/Ro) space optimized for heavy vehicles, containers, and palletized cargo, augmented by auxiliary storage for 380,000 gallons of JP-5 to extend operational persistence. Propulsion is provided by a commercial diesel-electric system generating sufficient power for sustained speeds exceeding 15 knots over a of 9,500 nautical miles unrefueled, with design priorities on , redundancy, and maintenance in forward-deployed, low-support environments rather than high-speed transit capabilities. This configuration supports extended station-keeping for evolutions while minimizing vulnerability through non-combatant crewing and minimal armament.

Modular Capabilities and Sea Transfer Systems

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) features a reconfigurable mission deck designed to support interchangeable mission modules, enabling adaptation for logistics transfer, vehicle staging, and equipment handling without reliance on fixed infrastructure. The Core Capability Set (CCS) integrates vehicle staging areas and transfer systems, allowing the deck to be fitted with modular bays for rolling on heavy vehicles such as main battle tanks or wheeled assets directly from prepositioning ships. This modularity facilitates rapid adjustments to mission requirements, with the platform's open architecture supporting the integration of temporary configurations for aviation support or medical facilities when needed, though primary emphasis remains on sea-based logistics sustainment. Sea transfer operations leverage float-on/float-off technology and a vehicle transfer ramp, permitting semi-submersible positioning to allow (LCAC) vessels to enter via up to three dedicated lanes for loading and unloading. Heavy-lift cranes on the mission deck enable over-the-horizon transfers by hoisting equipment onto smaller connectors or directly supporting LCAC operations, achieving skin-to-skin cargo movement with large medium-speed roll-on/roll-off (LMSR) ships in 3 conditions. Operational testing demonstrated the ability to transfer a reinforced company's equipment ashore within 12 hours from 25 nautical miles using LCACs, confirming effectiveness for connector-independent in moderate seas up to 3 for both launch and recovery. Survivability enhancements include distributed damage control systems, such as zoned firefighting with a fire main, aqueous film-forming foam stations, and multiple repair lockers equipped for rapid response to flooding or fire. A man-rated crane on the mission deck supports recovery of boats or unmanned systems for maintenance, contributing to operational continuity post-incident. Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) assessments verified these features through trials, noting effective equipment distribution for damage mitigation, though full live-fire survivability evaluations were deferred to subsequent fiscal years.

Differences from Expeditionary Sea Base Variants

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) emphasizes logistics transfer functions through its semi-submersible design, enabling skin-to-skin connections with amphibious ships for efficient loading and unloading of vehicles, containers, and Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCACs) via three dedicated LCAC lanes and 25,000 square feet of raised vehicle deck space. In contrast, the Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) variant augments this base platform with extensive modifications, including a four-spot flight deck and adjacent hangar bay to support rotary-wing aviation operations, which ESDs omit to maintain focus on cargo throughput. These additions enable ESBs to serve as forward staging bases for helicopters and vertical lift assets, expanding beyond pure transfer roles into aviation-enabled power projection. ESBs further incorporate mission bays and enhanced berthing for 250 to 350 personnel, facilitating special operations forces (SOF) support, airborne mine countermeasures (AMCM), and command-and-control integration, capabilities absent in the simpler ESD configuration. While both classes share identical length (239.3 meters), beam (50 meters), propulsion (commercial diesel-electric), speed (15 knots), and range (9,500 nautical miles), ESBs exhibit greater displacement (90,000 tons fully loaded versus 78,000 tons for ESDs) and draft (10.5 meters versus 9 meters), reflecting the structural reinforcements for upper-deck expansions. This design divergence yields trade-offs in operational flexibility and sustainment: ESDs' reduced complexity lowers acquisition and lifecycle costs by prioritizing modular interfaces over multi-domain features, allowing higher-volume sea transfers without the overhead of or SOF accommodations that characterize ESBs. However, ESBs' enhancements enable standalone basing in contested environments, albeit at the expense of some cargo deck repurposed for hangars and areas.

Construction and Commissioning

Shipbuilding Contracts and Builder

The U.S. Navy awarded General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO) a contract in April 2011 for the detailed design and construction of the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP), later redesignated as Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD). This was followed by a $744 million fixed-price incentive fee modification in May 2011 to fund the construction of the first two ships, building on a prior $115 million award for long-lead materials and advanced design efforts. The incentive structure was intended to align contractor performance with schedule and cost targets, leveraging commercial shipbuilding practices to mitigate overruns common in traditional naval programs. NASSCO, based in , , served as the prime builder, adapting proven commercial hull designs derived from Alaska-class oil tankers previously constructed for to accelerate development and reduce costs. The ships' modular emphasized non-developmental hull forms and integrated military-specific features like capabilities for vehicle transfer, achieving deliveries in line with contracted timelines of 2013 and 2015. No additional ESD hulls beyond the initial two were authorized, as the Navy shifted resources toward high-priority combatants such as aircraft carriers and submarines, with subsequent MLP variants reconfigured as Expeditionary Sea Bases (ESB) under expanded contracts. This reflected broader force structure decisions prioritizing peer-competitor threats over auxiliary platforms.

USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1)

The lead ship of the Expeditionary Transfer Dock class, , was constructed by (NASSCO) in , . Her keel was laid down on January 19, 2012, she was launched on November 13, 2012, and christened on March 2, 2013. The vessel was delivered to the U.S. 's (MSC) in May 2013, marking the first operational unit in the program originally conceived as a Mobile Landing Platform. Named in honor of the Montford Point Marines—the first African American recruits to serve in the U.S. Marine Corps, who underwent segregated training at Camp Montford Point, , from 1942 to 1949—the ship's designation recognizes their pioneering role in integrating the Corps during . This naming reflects the historical context of in military training, where Montford Point served as the exclusive facility for Black Marine trainees until desegregation in 1949. Following delivery, underwent initial outfitting for basic sea transfer operations, including installation of preliminary modular systems for vehicle and equipment handling. Ballasting and stability tests were conducted in the to validate design specifications for load handling and platform functionality, confirming the hull's capacity to support over-the-horizon connectors like . These pre-operational trials focused on core platform integrity prior to full mission systems integration. From inception, the ship has been crewed exclusively by civilian mariners under oversight, with no organic military detachment, enabling flexible support without dedicated warfighting personnel. This crewing model aligns with the vessel's role as a non-commissioned auxiliary, emphasizing sustainment over operations.

USNS John Glenn (T-ESD 2)

Construction of the USNS John Glenn (T-ESD 2) began in April 2012 at the General Dynamics National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO) shipyard in , , as the second vessel in the Expeditionary Transfer Dock program. The ship was named in honor of , the first American to orbit and a former U.S. senator and Marine Corps aviator, reflecting the Navy's tradition of commemorating notable figures in its naming conventions for auxiliary vessels. The christening ceremony occurred on February 1, 2014, presided over by Glenn's wife, , marking a key milestone in the vessel's progression from to operational readiness. Delivered to the U.S. Navy by NASSCO on March 12, 2014, the incorporated refinements based on lessons learned from the lead ship, (T-ESD 1), including over 10,000 process improvements implemented across the program to enhance build efficiency and vessel performance. These adjustments focused on techniques and minor tweaks rather than fundamental changes, allowing for streamlined of the core Expeditionary Transfer Dock platform. The vessel's configuration adheres to Navy specifications for the Core Capability Set, enabling it to serve as a floating for at-sea transfer of personnel, vehicles, and equipment, with capacity to support approximately 750 embarked troops and up to 120 vehicles such as light armored vehicles or equivalents during operations. Following the delivery of the , the concluded procurement under the pure ESD designation with just two ships, redirecting resources and design evolution toward the Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) variant for subsequent hulls, which added aviation facilities and other modular enhancements while retaining the foundational transfer dock capabilities. This shift marked the end of dedicated ESD construction, positioning the as the final vessel in its specific subclass operated by the .

Operational Role and Deployments

Primary Missions and Strategic Utility

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) primarily functions as a floating pier, enabling the at-sea transfer of vehicles, equipment, supplies, and personnel from large-deck ships such as Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF) vessels or amphibious assault ships to smaller , connectors, or directly to shore facilities. This core capability supports the doctrinal requirement for seabasing operations, allowing forces to assemble and without reliance on fixed port infrastructure that may be denied or degraded in contested environments. By positioning the ESD offshore, it facilitates the seamless movement of heavy cargo, including main battle tanks and wheeled vehicles, via roll-on/roll-off ramps and crane systems, thereby integrating with joint force logistics chains to sustain Marine Corps and Army units. Strategically, the ESD enhances sea control and distributed by providing a prepositioned, mobile platform that can surge capabilities to forward areas, mitigating (A2/AD) threats posed by peer adversaries through dispersed operations. In alignment with Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) and Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO) concepts, it enables the rapid establishment of temporary nodes, reducing vulnerability to precision strikes on centralized hubs and allowing for agile force maneuvering across archipelagic or littoral domains. This operational flexibility positions the ESD as a force multiplier, where efficient at-sea transfers—demonstrated in capability assessments to handle up to 25,000 tons of —accelerate the transition from strategic lift to tactical employment, supporting sustained joint campaigns against high-end threats. The ESD's utility in enabling speed-to-capability stems from its design to operate independently or in concert with amphibious ready groups, prepositioning assets for immediate response to emerging crises and thereby compressing decision timelines for combatant commanders. Empirical testing has validated its role in shortening force assembly periods compared to traditional port-dependent methods, with transfer operations supporting the buildup of combat-effective units in days rather than weeks, grounded in the causal linkage between mobile and operational in peer competition. This prepositioning emphasis underscores the ESD's contribution to requirements for resilient sustainment, particularly for Marine expeditionary units requiring rapid equipment reconstitution in austere theaters.

Key Deployments and Exercises

The USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) supported Exercise Ssang Yong 16, a bilateral U.S.-Republic of Korea amphibious exercise, by positioning off the coast of from March 14 to 18, 2016, to facilitate integration with Marine Corps landing operations and test at-sea transfer capabilities alongside amphibious assault ships. In July 2016, Montford Point demonstrated seabasing operations with the roll-on/roll-off vessel USNS Dahl off the U.S. , executing a skin-to-skin maneuver where Montford Point served as a floating pier for simulated cargo offload, validating transfer of equipment from large ships to smaller connectors like (LCAC) vehicles. Continuing Pacific-focused testing, Montford Point conducted another skin-to-skin evolution with the large, medium-speed roll-on/roll-off ship USNS Soderman near on July 12-13, 2017, emphasizing the platform's role in distributed maritime operations by enabling direct connector access for force projection without reliance on fixed ports. These maneuvers highlighted Montford Point's integration with existing amphibious fleets, such as (LHA) and (LHD) vessels, during 2016-2018 rotations that prioritized empirical validation of over-the-horizon in austere environments over doctrinal planning. The USNS John Glenn (T-ESD 2) entered service later and focused initial operations on capability demonstrations rather than extended deployments, with limited public records of multinational exercises; however, the class as a whole contributed to U.S. Navy seabasing proofs-of-concept through LCAC interface training off Camp Pendleton, California, preparing for contested at-sea transfers. No Expeditionary Transfer Docks have recorded combat deployments, but their exercises underscored utility in humanitarian assistance scenarios by simulating rapid cargo handling—such as equipment prepositioning for —without specific tonnage data from operational missions. Participation in large-scale multinational events like has emphasized complementary roles with allied amphibious forces, though ESDs primarily supported U.S.-led connector drills rather than direct multinational offloads.

Integration with Amphibious Operations

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) enhances amphibious operations by serving as a floating that interfaces with and Marine surface connectors, such as (LCAC) vehicles, to facilitate at-sea logistics transfers from larger prepositioning ships to smaller craft capable of over-the-shore delivery. This capability supports distributed maritime operations by positioning equipment and personnel farther offshore, thereby mitigating risks associated with concentrated assaults and contested littoral zones during Marine forcible entry missions. In alignment with the U.S. Navy's distributed lethality concept, ESDs function as mobile "lilypads" that extend the operational range of smaller connectors and aviation assets like the MV-22 Osprey, enabling Marine Expeditionary Units to from standoff distances while avoiding predictable fixed beachheads vulnerable to adversary anti-access/area-denial threats. Operational testing has validated ESDs' role in seamless integration with amphibious ready groups, allowing LCACs to load —such as armored vehicles—at before transiting to austere shores, which reduces the time and exposure of traditional amphibious assault ships in high-threat environments. Under () operation, ESD crews undergo specialized training in heavy-lift transfers and modular mission sustainment, ensuring interoperability with Navy-Marine teams through standardized procedures for equipment handling and at-sea replenishment. 's management emphasizes readiness for expeditionary support, with ESD platforms demonstrating high material availability to support cyclic amphibious exercises and responses.

, Effectiveness, and Debates

Achievements in Power Projection

The Expeditionary Transfer Docks (ESDs) have demonstrated enhanced capabilities through successful integration into seabasing operations, particularly in the theater. During Exercise Ssang Yong 2016, the (T-ESD 1) conducted skin-to-skin transfers with the large medium-speed roll-on/roll-off ship USNS Stockham, facilitating the at-sea movement of vehicles and equipment to support amphibious landings by U.S. and Republic of Korea forces. This operation, part of the largest multilateral amphibious exercise to date, validated the ESD's role in enabling rapid equipment prepositioning and offload without reliance on port facilities or host-nation infrastructure, thereby reducing logistical timelines and vulnerabilities associated with legacy shore-based methods. Prior to Ssang Yong 2016, the Montford Point had achieved a record of 22 successful skin-to-skin moorings and six touch-and-go maneuvers, underscoring the platform's reliability in dynamic maritime environments. These capabilities extended to operations in the Western Pacific, such as skin-to-skin exercises off Saipan in 2017, which supported freedom of navigation objectives by providing a mobile, self-sufficient transfer node for joint forces. The ESD's modular design allows seamless integration with landing craft air cushion (LCAC) vehicles, projecting combat power ashore while minimizing dependencies on contested or unavailable land bases, as evidenced in these exercises where transfers occurred efficiently at sea. Analyses of naval force structure highlight the ESDs as a cost-effective complement to traditional amphibious hulls, leveraging existing platforms to address capacity shortfalls without the expenditures of new construction. evaluations of seabasing alternatives indicate that afloat transfer systems like the ESD reduce overall deployment costs compared to expanding fixed prepositioning or building additional large-deck ships, with estimated savings from utilizing prepositioned assets over procuring equivalents estimated in the billions. This reuse approach supports sustained by providing versatile, low-marginal-cost capacity for equipment staging and aviation support in distributed operations.

Criticisms on Cost and Limitations

The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ETD), formerly known as the Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) in its configured variant, has drawn criticism for its acquisition costs exceeding $500 million per unit, which some analysts contend do not align with the platform's limited defensive capabilities and exposure to threats in contested maritime domains. These vessels lack integral offensive or robust defensive armament beyond crew-served weapons, relying on external escorts for protection, a design choice that heightens vulnerability against anti-access/area-denial threats like anti-ship missiles prevalent in peer conflicts. Department of Defense acquisition reviews have underscored this mismatch, noting that the high —stemming from specialized modular mission bays and facilities—yields platforms ill-suited for independent operations in high-threat zones without significant additional investment in armaments or escorts. Operational testing by the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) in the mid-2010s revealed key limitations, including constraints that restrict at-sea vehicle and equipment transfers to calm conditions, such as significant wave heights below 0.1 meters ( 1) for certain ramp interfaces with fast transport vessels. These restrictions, inherited from the Mobile Landing Platform precursor design, reduce effectiveness in realistic ocean environments where waves routinely exceed 3, prompting questions about the docks' reliability for sustained in dynamic theaters. Critics from naval policy circles argue that such constraints amplify the risk profile, as the ships' large and predictable transfer roles make them detectable targets during limited operational windows. Doctrinal evolutions emphasizing distributed operations and unmanned systems have contributed to perceptions of underutilization, with the T-ETDs logging fewer deployed days than projected in early program assumptions, diverting funds from alternatives like Arleigh Burke-class destroyers that offer greater multi-mission versatility at scale. budget proposals in fiscal years 2022 and beyond sought early retirement of lead T-ETD hulls, reflecting opportunity costs amid shifts toward low-signature, unmanned logistics enablers that reduce reliance on vulnerable manned floating bases. Civilian-crewed operations introduce sustainment hurdles, including recruitment shortfalls for specialized mariners and integration delays for modular payloads, even as Navy sustainment data reports material availability rates above 80 percent for the class. These challenges stem from the hybrid military-civilian manning model, which prioritizes cost savings over rapid-response maintenance but strains broader Military Sealift Command resources during peak demands. While modularity enables mission adaptability, detractors highlight that deferred upgrades and crew training gaps can extend downtime in austere forward environments, offsetting the design's efficiency gains.

Proposed Retirement and Repurposing Proposals

The U.S. Navy's fiscal year 2025 budget proposed the early decommissioning of the (T-ESD 2), a vessel commissioned in 2014 with an estimated decade or more of remaining, as part of broader efforts to retire 19 ships and reshape the fleet under the service's 30-year plan. This aligns with prior proposals from onward to divest Montford Point-class ESDs ahead of their expected end-of-life, prioritizing a composition of newer, multi-mission platforms over retaining specialized transfer docks amid constrained budgets and procurement delays. Such retirements have encountered congressional pushback, with lawmakers previously denying divestment requests in 2024 and prompting the to resubmit similar justifications tied to force structure efficiencies. The 's rationale emphasizes transitioning to integrated amphibious and expeditionary capabilities, but this risks idling assets with proven pier-side transfer functions and minimal maintenance needs in reduced operating status. A May 2024 Heritage Foundation policy brief counters these plans by advocating reactivation of both ESDs—USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) and USNS John Glenn—to exploit their residual capacity for non-traditional roles without requiring full combat integration. ESD-1 would deploy to U.S. Southern Command for maritime counter-narcotics , hosting helicopters, small boats, and teams to drug trafficking routes, while ESD-2 could function as a forward repair platform for battle-damaged warships in the , enabling on-site heavy-lift maintenance beyond fixed-base limitations. Repurposing advocates emphasize cost-effectiveness, with reactivation entailing far lower expenditures and timelines than new-construction alternatives like auxiliary floating drydocks, which lack ESDs' self-deployment range and versatility for carrier or amphibious repairs. This strategy bolsters deterrence through proximate sustainment in contested areas—countering peer competitors' mobile repair assets—while dual-use applications in mitigate escalation risks inherent in overt military forward positioning. The brief urges the Secretary of the Navy to task the with a 45-day , underscoring empirical fiscal over premature disposal.

References

  1. [1]
    ESD Program - General Dynamics NASSCO
    An Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD), formerly the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP), is designed to be a semi-submersible, flexible, modular platform.
  2. [2]
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) / Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB)
    The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) and Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) ship classes are highly flexible platforms that may be used across a broad range of ...
  3. [3]
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock - Military Sealift Command - Navy.mil
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock provides logistics movement from sea to shore supporting a broad range of military operations.
  4. [4]
    Navy Fast-Tracks New "Sea Basing" Ships For Maritime Attack
    Mar 11, 2024 · The demand for sea basing gained attention and support following 9/11 and was driven by a need for a more flexible response in regions where ...Missing: Landing | Show results with:Landing
  5. [5]
    The Sea Base: A Status Report | Defense Media Network
    Nov 23, 2010 · A third element is the Mobile Logistics (or Landing) Platform (MLP), the “pier in the sea” onto which the offshore ships unload, and from which ...Missing: post- | Show results with:post-
  6. [6]
    MLP 1 Montford Point-Class Mobile Landing Platform [MLP]
    Sep 25, 2024 · The MLP class initially belonged to MSC's Maritime Prepositioning Ship Force as a mobile sea-base option that provides the Navy fleet with a ...Missing: origins history
  7. [7]
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD)/Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB), US
    Jan 28, 2022 · The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) and Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) are a new class of auxiliary vessels built by General Dynamics for the US Navy.
  8. [8]
    Construction Begins on First Mobile Landing Platform
    General Dynamics-NASSCO was previously awarded a $115 million contract for long-lead time material and advanced design efforts for the first MLP in August 2010.Missing: initial | Show results with:initial
  9. [9]
    Navy Awards Mobile Landing Platform Construction Contract
    May 29, 2011 · The contract is for two Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) ships, the first of which will be a heavy lift ship with float-on/float-off capability. ...
  10. [10]
    The US Navy's Mobile Landing Platform Ships (MLP)
    The U.S. Navy reports that the first mobile landing platform, the NSNS Montford Point, ran through a series of purpose-proving evolutions, including the loading ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Seabasing: A Critical Enabler of the Joint Expeditionary Force - DTIC
    Mar 18, 2005 · The Defense. Science Board Task Force on Sea Basing concluded that future sea basing needs are “well beyond today's Navy and Marine Corps ...
  12. [12]
    The Seabase in Evolution: The Navy's New Mobile Landing Platform
    Mar 8, 2013 · Instead, the USNS Montford Point is the first of a new class of Navy ships, a Mobile Landing Platform, in essence a deployed port at sea.Missing: origins | Show results with:origins<|separator|>
  13. [13]
    Cargotec Ship-To-Ship Vehicle Transfer Sea Trials
    During the trials, the US Navy demonstrated the transfer of vehicles between the surrogate 'mobile landing platform ... Sea State 4 during several days of testing ...
  14. [14]
    Cargotec's innovative 'Test Article Vehicle Transfer - GlobeNewswire
    During the trials, the US Navy demonstrated the transfer of vehicles between the surrogate 'mobile landing platform' (MLP) Mighty Servant 3 and the 'large ...
  15. [15]
    Cargotec Transfers Battle Tanks Between Ships - Marine Link
    May 19, 2010 · The test demonstrated a self-deploying ramp system installed on the MLP and a new self-deploying sideport platform installed on the LMSR vessel.Missing: rates | Show results with:rates
  16. [16]
    First MLP Passes Builder's Trials - USNI News - U.S. Naval Institute
    Mar 25, 2013 · The 80,000-ton Mobile Landing Platform Montford Point (T-MLP-1) completed builder's trials near San Diego, Calif. last week. in anticipation of ...Missing: 2011-2015 | Show results with:2011-2015
  17. [17]
    US Navy's first MLP ship completes builder's trials - Naval Technology
    Mar 26, 2013 · The US Navy's first ship of the mobile landing platform (MLP) class, USNS Montford Point (MLP 1), has successfully completed builder's sea ...Missing: 2011-2015 | Show results with:2011-2015
  18. [18]
    [PDF] Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) Core Capability Set (CCS) and ...
    Oct 29, 2014 · - MLP (CCS) is capable of transiting the required. 9,500 nautical miles at 15 knots unrefueled. - MLP (CCS) can land and launch Landing Craft ...Missing: throughput rates Abrams
  19. [19]
    1st MLG tests ship-to-ship connector
    Jul 22, 2014 · 1st Marine Logistics Group participated in the testing of an emerging seabasing capability, using the Joint High Speed Vessel and the Mobile Landing Platform.Missing: trials | Show results with:trials
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Mobile Landing Platform with Core Capability Set (MLP w/CCS) - DTIC
    Jul 6, 2015 · MLP (CCS) is envisioned to enable the transfer of equipment to both LCAC vehicles and the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV), either of which then ...
  21. [21]
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) - Navy.mil
    Oct 13, 2021 · The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) ship class is a highly flexible platform, like and Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) that may be used ...
  22. [22]
    Navy Renames Three Ship Classes, Creates 'Expeditionary ...
    Sep 4, 2015 · Navy Secretary Ray Mabus redesignated three new ship classes to give them more traditional three-letter names.
  23. [23]
    Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB) - Navy.mil
    Mar 21, 2025 · The ships were initially called the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) and the MLP Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB), respectively. In September ...Missing: origins history
  24. [24]
    Exp Transfer Dock (ESD) / Exp Base Mobile (ESB) Fact Sheet
    Builder: NASSCO ; Propulsion: Commercial Diesel Electric Propulsion ; Length: 239.3 Meters (785 feet) ; Beam: 50 Meters (164 feet) ; Displacement: 78,000 tons ( ...
  25. [25]
    Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) / Expeditionary Sea Base (ESB)
    ### Summary of Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) Features
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) Core Capability Set (CCS ...
    - Can operate skin-to-skin, to include vehicle transfer through Sea State 3, with both the USNS Bob Hope. (Bob Hope class) and USNS Dahl (Watson class) Large.
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Expeditionary Transfer Dock (T-ESD) and Expeditionary Sea Base ...
    Executive Summary. • From June 2015 through August 2016, the Navy conducted the Expeditionary Sea Base's (T-ESB) Post-Delivery Test and Trials (PDT&T).Missing: US | Show results with:US
  28. [28]
    [PDF] EXPEDITIONARY SEA BASE (ESB) - Executive Services Directorate
    Apr 29, 2022 · The Expeditionary Transfer Dock (ESD) program (formerly Mobile Landing Platform (MLP)) originally supported procurement of three ships for the ...<|separator|>
  29. [29]
    [PDF] GAO-17-211, NAVY SHIPBUILDING: Need to Document Rationale ...
    Mar 1, 2017 · 3The ESD and ESB ships were originally known as the Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) ... better cost and schedule performance outcomes, and therefore.
  30. [30]
    USNS Montford Point - Professional Mariner
    Oct 24, 2013 · Montford Point is based on the 185,000-dwt Alaska-class tankers that Nassco delivered to BP between 2004 and 2006. If it looks a little ...
  31. [31]
    Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans - Congress.gov
    Mar 31, 2025 · The Navy released a force-structure goal that called for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers.
  32. [32]
    USNS Montford Point (T-ESD-1) - NavSource Naval History
    A Landing Craft Air Cushion is launched from the Military Sealift Command mobile landing platform USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) during Pacific Horizon 2015.
  33. [33]
    USNS Montford Point Floated from Dry Dock (USA) - Offshore Energy
    Nov 14, 2012 · The first of three MLPs planned for construction at NASSCO, Montford Point is scheduled to be christened in March 2013 and delivered to MSC in ...
  34. [34]
    USNS Montford Point takes on legacy, leads new class of Navy ships
    Mar 4, 2013 · Much like the Marines, this vessel was named after the well-earned access for blacks into the Marine Corps. The USNS Montford Point will allow ...
  35. [35]
    https://www.dvidshub.net/video/282953/usns-montford-point-christening
  36. [36]
    Naval Systems - Navy Pushes Hard on Seabasing as Montford Point ...
    The vessel will go through further testing and trials leading to installation of a Core Capabilities Set, which includes a sideport ramp, large mooring fenders, ...Missing: ballasting Mexico
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Increasing Seabasing - Marine Corps Association
    In September 2015, the Secretary of the Navy changed the designation of the MLP (mobile landing platform) to ESD (expeditionary transfer dock). This change ...
  38. [38]
    USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) - Navysite.de
    Propulsion system: Diesel-Electric. Propellers: two. Length: 785 feet (239.3 meters) ... Light Displacement: approx. 39,900 tons. Speed: 15 knots. Armament: none.Missing: specifications | Show results with:specifications
  39. [39]
    NASSCO Delivers USNS John Glenn - Marine Link
    Mar 12, 2014 · Construction of the USNS John Glenn began in April 2012. Throughout the MLP program, NASSCO has incorporated more than 10,000 improvement ideas ...Missing: T- ESD christening enhancements
  40. [40]
    Godspeed the John Glenn: Navy Christens Ship for 1st US Astronaut ...
    Feb 3, 2014 · The USNS John Glenn will be delivered from NASSCO to the Navy later this year. "I am really proud to have my name on this ship," Glenn said. "I ...Missing: ESD enhancements
  41. [41]
    USNS John Glenn (T-ESD 2) - Unofficial US Navy Site
    General Characteristics: · Christened: February 2, 2014 ; General Characteristics: · Delivered: March 2014 ; General Characteristics: · Builder: National Steel and ...Missing: construction christening enhancements
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Littoral Operations in a Contested Environment
    ... (ESD) (formerly called the mobile landing platform/ MLP); and the expeditionary base mobile (ESB). Page 17. 13. NEF Coastal Riverine Force (CRF) may be useful ...
  43. [43]
    Solve Amphibious Shipping Shortfall with ESDs and ESBs
    The ESB has similar provisions to the ESD, but, instead of accommodations for LCACs, incorporates a flight deck with four spots able to accommodate large ...
  44. [44]
    USNS Montford Point, USNS Dahl Demonstrate Seabasing
    Jul 26, 2016 · The S2S maneuver was achieved by the two ships connecting while Montford Point acted as a floating pier for a simulated offload. Montford Point ...Missing: exercises | Show results with:exercises
  45. [45]
    Military Sealift Command exercises 'floating-pier' concept
    Jun 14, 2017 · USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) and USNS Soderman (T-AKR 317) performed a “skin-to-skin” maneuver near Saipan, July 12-13.Missing: 2016-2018 | Show results with:2016-2018
  46. [46]
    [PDF] military sealift command
    USNS Montford Point conducted Landing Craft,. Air Cushion (LCAC) interface training off the coast of Camp Pendleton, California. The training prepared the ...
  47. [47]
    RIMPAC Participants - U.S. Pacific Fleet
    Ship Participants · USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) · USS Princeton (CG 59) · USS Kidd (DDG 100) · USS Sterett (DDG 104) · USS William P. Lawrence (DDG 110) · USS Fitzgerald ...
  48. [48]
    https://www.dote.osd.mil/Portals/97/pub/reports/FY2016/navy/2016tesb.pdf
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Repair and Rebuild - American Enterprise Institute
    concept of distributed lethality necessitated further investment in ... ary Transfer Docks ESD-1 and ESD-2) are slated to take up long-term station ...<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    MSC arrives in Republic of Korea, supports Exercises Freedom ...
    Mar 7, 2016 · The Expeditionary Transfer Dock USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) is scheduled to conduct a skin-to-skin maneuver in which she connects side-by-side ...
  51. [51]
    Military Sealift Command's USNS Stockham, USNS Montford Point ...
    Ssang Yong 2016 is the largest multilateral amphibious exercise to date. It is a biennial exercise conducted by integrated Marine Expeditionary Brigade/Navy ...
  52. [52]
    USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) conducts Skin-to-Skin operations in ...
    Jul 26, 2017 · USNS Montford Point (T-ESD 1) conducts Skin-to-Skin operations in Saipan. US Pacific Fleet. #UnitedWeSailMissing: successes | Show results with:successes
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Navy Inactive Fleet Has Life Still: Expeditionary Transfer Docks ...
    May 30, 2024 · Expeditionary Transfer Dock ships (ESDs) could be deployed effectively in areas around Central and South America known for narcotics.
  54. [54]
    [PDF] Sea Basing and Alternatives for Deploying and Sustainng Ground ...
    A large, medium-speed roll-on/roll-off ship (top) and an intratheater high- speed vessel (bottom) are shown alongside a notional mobile landing platform (center) ...
  55. [55]
    An Analysis of the Navy's Fiscal Year 2024 Shipbuilding Plan
    Oct 26, 2023 · CBO estimates that total shipbuilding costs would average about $34 billion to $36 billion (in 2023 dollars) over the next 30 years, which is ...
  56. [56]
    Sea State 3 Limitations Mean Failed Operations - Next Navy
    May 14, 2018 · On the flip side, the Navy models suggested the seas would stay below Sea State 5 about 80 percent of the time (and stay below Sea State 4 about ...
  57. [57]
    Navy Moving Away from 'Optionally Manned' Vessels as Service ...
    The Navy is placing less weight on optionally manned surface vehicles as it refines requirements for a new type of vessel that will support ...Missing: doctrinal shifts
  58. [58]
    Navy Inactive Fleet Has Life Still: Expeditionary Transfer Docks ...
    May 30, 2024 · USNS John Glenn (ESD-2) should be used as a heavy lift repair ship ... cranes, steel plate, cofferdams, and floating drydocks that ...<|separator|>
  59. [59]
    [PDF] GAO-23-106440, Weapons System Sustainment: Navy Ship Usuage ...
    Jan 2, 2023 · Challenges in performing intermediate maintenance for ships: In. February 2022, we identified four main challenges affecting the. Navy's ...
  60. [60]
    Navy Could Sideline 17 Support Ships Due to Manpower Issues
    Aug 22, 2024 · Based on the crew requirements on the platforms, sideling all the ships could reduce the civilian mariner demand for MSC by as many as 700 ...Missing: Dock | Show results with:Dock
  61. [61]
    [PDF] department of the navy fiscal year (fy) 2023 budget estimates
    Apr 3, 2022 · Unit Cost: Unit cost provides cost per unit sold based on total cost and the total anticipated number of sales. Unit cost can change in the ...
  62. [62]
    New Navy Budget Seeks 6 Battle Force Ships, Decommissions 19 ...
    Mar 11, 2024 · It's $165 million to modify the first boat, plus 12x$56m = $372m for the dozen missiles aboard, plus fleet spares. That's well over $600m per ...<|separator|>
  63. [63]
    U.S. Navy Pulls Together $9 Billion to Invest in Submarine Supply ...
    Mar 11, 2024 · Its newly-released FY2025 budget cuts back on R&D spending ... USNS John Glenn (now only 10 years old). These candidates were ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Department of Defense Report on Force Structure Changes for the ...
    The Department of the Navy plans to retire 123 aircraft in FY 2025 for a total operational savings of $362.9 million in FY 2025. 75 of these aircraft are Navy ...