Another boat builder is offering a vessel similar to the original concept for the Fast Response Cutter. A composite hull does still sound attractive.
Related: https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2011/01/18/fast-response-cutter-alternative-frc-a/
Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Here’s the link to the company that wants to build an alternative FRC for the US Coast Guard.
http://www.westportshipyard.com/commercial/
Judging by the looks of this boat, It looks pretty sweet and something the US Coast Guard should take a serious look at. Maybe they can take a 110 crew and take it for a test spin before they decide to buy it.
from those that went onboard. Boat ramp too tight, really hurting for C4ISR space, and other systems.
Composite would be very interesting for a cutter. There are other US companies building similar
Maybe that can be an enlarged version of the 87 ft patrol boats for Guam, Hawaii, FL and puerto rico only. I think it would be good for those areas considering distance and large patrol area
I think another option is to get the version that the Royal Australian Navy is using such as the Armidale class patrol boat.
I do like the idea of using off the shelf technology and that is something that the US Coast Guard could embrace and use for their fleet. Also, cutters that have room to grow as technology advances over time.
From being aboard during demo: 34.2 knots in shallow water, quiet, unreal living conditions, done.
Crew ran RHIB ops for demo. Seemed to work flawlessly…but I don’t have much experience for comparison.
Agree that C4I space (aka “CIC”) was limited. How much equipment goes in CIC aboard a CG boat this size? Actual C4I equipment (radars, nav, comms, integration, etc) was impressive.
That’s why I think that boat maybe perfect as an in-between an 87 ft patrol boat and a FRC. Maybe that patrol boat can be used for either East Coast units, West Coast Units or even for Hawaii, Guam based Coast Guard Units. Even if we get it as an alternative for the FRC, maybe we can ask them to enlarge to the space to accommodate the C4I equipment or find smaller compact C4I equipment.
A point made earlier that standardization is good and switching to a different design now can incur additional training expenses is well taken (I thought that post was here, if I deleted it by mistake I’m sorry), but the current FRC is $60M each, money is tight. It’s only responsible to periodically look at alternatives, and also to consider life-cycle costs. Composites may reduce maintenance and result in a longer life. Even so, the Webber class may still be the best alternative.
chuck,
you didn’t delete it, i posted it on the fast response cutter, frc-a discussion.
i agree that they still should be investigating composite alternatives. the university of maine is doing some real interesting stuff with composites including bridge structural materials that are lighter and stronger than steel and are actually being used to build bridges here in maine, seems to me if they can do well as parts of a heavily salted road system in a place with some wicked winters they should fare well in an ocean enviroment.
Good, I had hoped I had not deleted it. Wanted to comment but could not find it.
Wow. Composite hull on a ship that size. Makes total sense to me. Projected 30 year life? Any idea what the cost comparison looks like with the FRC? I can’t imagine this would cost anywhere close to what the first few FRC cost…
in 2003, the USCG went down the composite hull path at considerable pain after the contract with ICGS was signed. FRC-A was finally put on hold and we returned to conventional material/hull forms with a solicitation looking for designs and then the RFP leading to the FRCs being built now. (simplified version, skipping over any 110-123 distractors for the purpose of this thread.) We also did OPTesting on an 85 foot composite hull in the early 2000s. Both the USN and our own operaters declined to positively endorse the concept except for some very narrowly defined parameters. In a recent response in this site, the COMDT sketched out a pretty detailed picture of where we are at now, where funding was utilized, and the priorities the Service is pursuing. Debating and supporting the USCG requirements & capabilities an NSC, OPC and WPC type fleet mix bring to the fight; or, the converse, national implications of a USCG without these capabilities, what wouldn’t get done, and the impact on nearly everyone in what is still a maritime nation, would be of great benefit in continuing to get the critical recap assets we desperately need in the fleet.
Pingback: US to Sell 8 “Global Response Cutters” (FRC-A?) to Pakistan. Webber Alternative? | Chuck Hill's CG Blog