Photos: Eastern’s proposal for the Offshore Patrol Cutter (left), We still have not seen much of Bollenger’s proposal, but I suspect it may look something like the photo on the right, but with a more conventional mast.
US Naval Institute News reports on the Commandant’s testimony before the House Appropriations Homeland Security Sub-committee.
“Adm. Paul Zukunft said the service will be looking again at its force-mix analysis, taking into account the money appropriated for a ninth national security cutter for this fiscal year. He said he had “the utmost confidence” the Coast Guard will down-select to one shipbuilder this year for the offshore patrol cutter.
The budget request for Fiscal Year 2017 includes $100 million for long-lead procurement for the offshore patrol cutter program.
I am a little concerned to see the statement below. Note shipbuilder (singular, not plural).
“Zukunft said that the Coast Guard is in “very emotional discussions” with the shipbuilder over the contracts for the last of the fast response cutters. “We need to come to closure on this” in the next few months to clear the way for the construction of the offshore patrol cutters.”
I was under the impression we were to have a competition for construction of the remaining ships. The Coast Guard paid for the design rights so that we could put the remained out for competitive bids. This should have happened a couple of years ago. What happened? And why is this not a multi-year buy?
There is also $150M in the budget for long lead time items for the new Icebreaker. This seems a bit odd, since the builder has not been selected, although I suppose Huntington Ingalls is the foregone conclusion.
For more on the previous Force Structure (Fleet Mix) Studies: