I am an avid consumer of the Ghost Army’s work, and openly admire it. Because you encourage dialogue, I decided to share a little piece of research I have conducted for the last two decades: the design and development of landing craft and ships used during WW2 (and ever since).
I returned to this WW2 special episode, and I am sorry to say, it has several errors, historical, biographical and even conceptual, This is a consequence of the vacuum of information about this topic that prevails.
I understand the need for brevity in producing your videos, as well as keeping your research to reasonable extents. Again, available sources are very scarce, incomplete and even misinformed (the only book published solely on the LCVP is quite misleading at best, and downright fictitious in part. I had the misfortune of contributing a number of my own images and drawings to the book, which the author had the gall to misrepresent.
I have had innumerable obstacles in my research, and have endlessly struggled to better complete it, so I hesitate to publish my results; above all I want to elucidate this subject - it is quite complex. Just the scale of the overal effort spent on these vessels is overlooked and underrated.
I believe a summary would make for a fine episode of ‘War on the home front’. Part of the reason for the apparent lack of public interest in the subject is due to the lack of clear detailed available information. I wonder why German military technology is the complete opposite.
I would like to offer a brief alternate narrative. Calling the LCVP the vehicle that won the war is equivalent to naming the B-17 ‘the bomber that destroyed Germany’. War is never that simple.
Anyone interested is welcome to respond.
Good point, it is not just the landing craft LCVP but also the massive standardizations. Shermans fitted in the LCVP. 50 cals was te standard. The Allies stuck with the B-17 also because newer options like the much higher flying B-29 was years away. To me standardization and the Allie use of micro electronics were winning. The Allies were way ahead in instrument flying which (I am a pilot must have saved lots of airmen). Germany lost a lot of planes on the Eastern Front of accidents and only in 1943 started with Instrument rating flight. => If you enter a cloud you are in what feels in a pack of milk 
AND clouds consist of unstable air so you can FEEL like you fly stable and horizontally but actually are diving because the winds inside the cloud are going down. HOW do I know? I had this experience with an ex-miltary instructor. Pretty intimidating but useful.
Oh and keep the complaints of points of improvement coming History is also listening and evaluating points
I did not know that, but all I need to picture it is the fact that the US also built the bomb (aided by sophisticated electronics). The bomb did not win the war, it only ended it. To put it in a different wording, mass quantities of better than adequate equipment and massive support. The US armed forces were the envy of the fighting world. War works mostly in numbers.
A Sherman tank would sink an LCVP, but fitted snugly in a Landing Craft Mechanized or LCM, 10, 000 of which were built (and used). They were operated nearly everywhere that LCVP’s were, but did not get the press. The LCM(3) and LCM(6) were Higgins designs too, built in numbers by Higgins and others. Amphibious Ships (AKA’s and APA’s) were designed to carry 12-15 36 foot craft (mainly LCVP’s) and 2-4 LCM’s. Other 36 foot landing craft were built and used throughout the war and their overall combined number was close to the LCVP’s None of the smaller landing craft (up to 56 footers) would have been able to operate without the amphibious ships that carried them to near the beaches. And all this was just for initial landings. Tip of the spear.