First, some corrections...I should have double checked this before posting, since its from some years back.
23 LSI, LSC, and LSG. Three, HMS Bulolo, Hilary, and Largs were configured as LSI(HQ). Of the actual assault transports, six were LSI(L), two LSI(M), five LSI(S), and three LSI(H). There were two LSC (Landing Ship, Carrier, each with 21 LCM and a maximum of 295 troops). There were also two LSG (Landing Ship, Gantry, each with 15 LCM and a maximum of 215 troops). Four of the LSI(S) served with the Western Task Force, the others with the Eastern Task Force.
There were at least 86 LST of all types, including one of the "Maricaibos" and the three British LCT-1.
509 “major” landing craft (LCT, LCM and LCI), including c. 224 LCT 2/3/5 and c. 163 LCI(L)
1,225 “minor” landing craft (LCA, LCM, LCPR, LCVP, and LCV)
1,742 Total
In addition the following were used in transporting troops and equipment, apparently all were in use on D-Day:
329 ancillary vessels (coastal craft, barges, lighters and so forth)
237 merchant vessels and troop transports
Most of the British troop strength were transported in 17 "troopships", which were mostly repurposed liners. Motor transport for the British forces and stores for both forces were on 45 cargo vessels. Another 20 vessels carried a mixed cargo of troops, vehicles, ammunition, and one or two LCM as deckload. Four were sunk in route and two were bombed at the beachhead. In addition, 14 US Liberty ships, loaned to the Eastern Task Force, also carried a mix of cargo and troops, usually with a deckload LCM. Those 34 vessels carried from 43 to 464 troops, but typically about 150.
The American forces were lifted on 2 AP, 19 APA, 7 AK, and the 4 RN LSI(S).
The rest were a miscellany; there were six ships dedicated to carrying packaged gasoline and one the same for water.
With that they were able to move a HUSKY D-Day lift of:
Commonwealth forces:
13 infantry brigades
2 armoured brigades (and part of 1 Canadian Tank Brigade)
4 divisional headquarters and troops
2 corps headquarters and troops (including three Commandos, an SAS “Regiment” and a Special Raiding “Squadron”)
US forces:
10 infantry regiments
7 tank battalion
4 divisional headquarters and troops
1 corps headquarters and troops (including three Ranger battalions)
The NEPTUNE amphibious forces included the following allocations:
10 APA
3 LSI(HQ)
22 LSI(L)
9 LSI (H)
11 LSI(M)
238 LST
1,045 “major” landing craft (814 LCT, 37 LCI(S), and 194 LCI(L))
1,381 “minor” landing craft (462 LCA, 267 LCM, 608 LCVP, and 44 LCP(L))
2,719 Total (the total of 4,266 known to have been “operational” on D-Day include all small craft, such as LCS(S), LCS(M), LCS(L), LCG, and LCF, as well as oddities like LCP(L) Smokers and LCA Hedgehog that I eliminated to give a better comparison)
In addition the following were used in transporting troops and equipment to the continent in June, although it is unknown how many were used on D-Day:
736 ancillary vessels (coastal craft, barges, lighters and so forth)
864 merchant vessels and troop transports
With that they were able to move a NEPTUNE D-Day lift of:
Commonwealth forces:
11 infantry brigades
5 armoured brigades (plus 6 RE Assault Squadrons, 2 RM Armoured Support Regiments and a separate battery, and 2 Crab regiments, the rough equivalent of 2 more armoured brigades)
4 divisional headquarters and troops
2 corps headquarters and troops (including six Commandos)
US forces:
10 infantry regiments
6 tank battalions
3 divisional headquarters and troops
2 corps headquarters and troops (including two Ranger battalions)
I'm sorry to hear that.Your ship designations are mixed up.
Well, the British LSI(L) was equivalent to a US APA in role and capacity, generally, the LSI(M) and LSI(S) were considerably smaller and had no real American equivalent...the closest would be the APD. The LSI(H) was different still and again had no US equivalent either, Then there are very unique British designs like the LSC and LSG.The British "LSI" was the equivalent (in role, not capacity, generally) of the US "APA: - troop transports with the ability to self-unload because of the ship's ability to carry and crew a boat group of landing craft in the LCA-LCVP-LCM types. The US AKA was similar, except the basic task was carrying cargo. In a general sense, three or four USN APAs and a USN AKA could move and land an infantry RCT in the assault, with a reinforced infantry battalion per APA and the RCTs heavy equipment in the AKA. British LSIs tended to be smaller, and the British didn't really develop an equivalent of the AKA.
Since I wasn't comparing them as anything other than landing ships, I'm not sure what I conflated? BTW, the TLS, like the TLC, was initially intended as a means of carrying tanks, vehicles, and troops into an amphibious assault, not just tanks. The “Maracaibo” conversions could hold 18 Churchills or 22 25-ton tanks or 33 trucks. The “Boxers” (LST-1) could hold 13 40-ton or 20 25-ton tanks (in the hold) and as many as 36 3-ton trucks (on the main deck). The purpose-bui;t US design, the LST-2, could hold 13 40-ton or 20 25-ton tanks and 35 (or 36) 2.5 or 3-ton trucks loaded to a max gross weight of 10 tons). They all carried about 207 men, but could carry more for short trips (calculated as "about 500" from experience) where the lack of accommodations was unimportant.An LST - the US-built for the purpose types or the British tanker conversion - was designed to move medium tanks, not troops. Conflating LSTs and LSIs is the equivalent of conflating APAs and LSTs and so says nothing about amphibious lift for medium tanks, so its very unclear what you're trying to establish here.
It may surprise you, but few of the LST in NEPTUNE embarked tanks for the assault, primarily because it was not considered an assault vessel, For example, my Dad's AAA AW Btry landed on UTAH from an LST...on 14 June. The AAA AW Btry's landed on D-Day were embarked on LCT. The issue was complicated at Sicily by the shallow waters surrounding most of the beaches, which necessitated the use of ponton causeways, since when they grounded they were typically a couple of hundred yards from water shallow enough for vehicles to drive off into. The main limitation on beaching on the LST-2 was actually its load limit. It was designed to ground on a 1/50 slope, carrying a 500-ton load, 72 tons of fuel, 50 tons of water, and a full crew and troop complement. A full load of tanks would mean a 700-720 ton load, with vehicles on the main deck it would go to 850 tons or more. In that case it would have to land on a much steeper beach – 1/30 or more.
How odd? I don't think I ever said they weren't? Both AP and APA were present for HUSKY, as were AKA, but no AK or AKA were present for NEPTUNE.You'll note APAs and AKAs were present for TORCH and HUSKY, of course; here are some of them during HUSKY:
My bad, LCM, not LSM.Likewise, USS LSM-1 was not commissioned until May, 1944; (see link http://www.navsource.org/archives/10/14/14001.htm, so it's also unclear LSM could have been present for HUSKY.
British 7th Armoured Division was also part of NEPTUNE's assault force, it was a large component of FORCE L. So add four medium tank battalion equivalents, giving 19 versus a nominal 14 for HUSKY, but the devil is in the details. The effective equivalent in HUSKY was considerably smaller due to the lack of LCT (and inexperience). For the British it was four and one-third armoured regiments and for the Americans it was effectively about 19 medium tank platoons...ten and two-thirds tank battalions compared to the 15 assaulting in NEPTUNE (see below).Even going by your figures, the infantry brigade/RCT numbers were 23 for HUSKY and 21 for NEPTUNE, so that is actually in HUSKY's favor; special operations units of various types are eight for HUSKY and eight for NEPTUNE, so that's presumably close to a wash. Joslyn lists the British 8th and 27th armoured brigades, Canadian 2nd Armoured Brigade, and the US Army's 3rd and 6th armoured groups for the NEPTUNE assault; in rough equivalents, that's 15 medium tank battalions. HUSKY had roughly the same, between the US, British, and Canadian assault divisions.
In terms of infantry, yes. In terms of armor? No. For example, KOOL Force (essentially 2d Armd Div (-) and the 18th RCT, executed the assault with two platoons of Company I, 67th Armored...ten medium tanks. They actually debarked at 0200 on 11 July, nearly 24 hours after anchoring. The rest were embarked on the LST, while most of the combat and administrative vehicles were embarked on seven Liberty ships, which had to be offloaded into LCM and LCT. The 16th RCT and 26th RCT in DIME Force executed the assault each with the support of just a platoon - 5 medium tanks. JOSS Force landed with one company of the 67th Armored attached to each of the three RCT of the 3d Inf Div. At least CENT Force had an entire tank battalion attached...but only had six LCT-5, so was limited to just 30 of the 54 medium tanks available for the assault. The British were in the same boat, just two tank regiments were available for the two assault divisions in ACID Force and the same for the two divisions of BARK Force, and they too were limited by the number of LCT available.The HUSKY assault force was very close to the NEPTUNE assault force in terms of maneuver battalions.
The problems associated with the HUSKY assault force and its peculiar nature are well addressed in [url]file:///C:/Users/richt/AppData/Local/Temp/p4013coll8_60.pdf[/url].
So in HUSKY the RCT/Brigade was sometimes supported in the assault by a rump company of tanks...if they had them. In NEPTUNE they were supported by a battalion of tanks...mostly because of the results of HUSKY and AVALANCHE, which demonstrated that tanks on the beach were key to success and in minimizing casualties.