Photo of a model of Halter Marine’s Polar Security Cutter seen at Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space Exhibition have surfaced. Photo credit Chris Cavas.
“The U.S. Coast Guard is looking to take the last remaining hurdle to begin construction of its first heavy icebreaker in 50 years. According to USCG leadership the production decision by the Department of Homeland Security is expected this week. This final step will allow work on the Polar Security Cutter to begin at Bollinger Shipyards in Mississippi.”
The post also passes along unfavorable comparisons between US and China icebreaker construction but does not note that the Chinese icebreaker construction has been far less ambitious in terms of capabilities than that of the US Coast Guard.
Hopefully construction will start in the near future. The six years delay in starting construction is less troubling to me than the fact we were about 20 years late in starting the project in the first place. Unfortunately, we saw the same thing in the start of the OPC project.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Let’s hope we have the major design issues resolved before construction ….. Not like the current problems with our OPC Construction ⚓️
Germany is also progressing with Polarstern 2, the project that was used as the basis for VT Halter’s Polar Security Cutter concept.
https://www.awi.de/en/about-us/service/press/single-view/polarstern-neubau-auftrag-fuer-deutschen-forschungseisbrecher-vergeben.html
You can find an English-language data sheet and some conceptual renderings in AWI’s media library:
https://multimedia.awi.de/main/galleryview
Oh, that’s rich! A Congressman asking why it’s taking so long…
CG leadership is too smart to bite the hand which feeds them, but CONGRESS is why procurement is so screwed up. Having to build something which includes parts and pieces from every congressional district is part of the problem….
Another Congressional problem: Requiring the ships be built in America… I’m an America first guy, but for something like icebreakers, which is a small program and highly technical/specialized, why not contract with a Scandinavian ship-builder where there is deep experience and knowledge??
And, it’s a joint program office with the Navy. Why isn’t the Navy getting called on the carpet about this?
Yes, the CG is slow in asking for replacements, but the bottom line is: When pointing out the dilapidated condition of the fleet, the money is never forthcoming. Whose fault is that? (Congress…)
Push for a Great Lakes icebreaker, the last three NSCs, and many of the FRCs came from Congress, not from the CG or the Administrations.
We can’t blame Congress if the administration never asks for funding and really that is the case.
Congress has added ships to our budget that were never asked for by the Executive.
Congress keeps asking for a long term shipbuilding program but we have never given them one.
For a long time Congress asked for an updated Fleet Mix Study. They have finally gotten one after about 15 years but it has not been made public other than a requirement for 8 or 9 icebreakers.
Where is the problem? It may be DHS. The Coast Guard enjoys bipartisan support in Congress. Can’t say that for all of DHS. DHS may be pushing funding for other agencies since the top line for the Departments tends to stay the same.
The Navy publishes a new 30 year shipbuilding plan almost annually and frequently it is not supported by DOD but at least the word gets out.
Even if we did not publish a shipbuilding plan, we should at least send a notice of the state of the fleet indicating which ships are beyond their expected service life and which ships will exceed their expected service life in the next ten years–since it seems to take ten years from initiation of a replacement program to delivery.
Agree with the point that the CG needs a long-term ship-building plan. Watching how other fleet managers do it, it can be as simple as: A large cutter lasts 30 years, and we need 30 of them, so we’re going to buy 1 every year and continually rotate them out. Patrol Boats last 15 years and we need 60, so we’re buying 4 every year, and so on. Pretty easy to figure out a procurement budget on that process, and it means construction lines are “hot” all the time, so if there’s a severe casualty, a replacement can be built quickly.
.
As far as Congress pushing the WLBB, extra FRCs and extra NSCs, that wasn’t mere benevolence. That was flowing money into their congressional districts.
.
I do agree CG leadership should get their act together when it comes to procurement, particularly for the fleet. This “do more with less” junk has been going on for so long, it appears there is an institutional loss of capability to express need in an organized and urgent way. THAT part is 100% on leadership.
No, of course, Congressmen has an incentive to fund construction in their districts, but we also have support from Congressmen who have no “dog in that fight.”
Another reason to set a life limit on our ships is so that they can then be turned over to friendly Navy’s and Coast Guards.
As ships get older maintenance becomes more manpower intensive. For some nations where capital is expensive, but manpower is cheap, the balance of factors favors keeping older ships working rather than buying new.
Passing along our 30 year old ships can help them while the USCG benefits from newer technology.
The Coast Guard has done a lot of good passing along 378s, 210s, and 87 footers to friendly maritime services.
Chuck, do you think CG is better off in Transportation or Commerce (or DOD for that matter)? I feel like DHS has been so mired in partisan controversy lately that CG ends up getting overshadowed by the border/ICE folks. Plus, recent DHS secretaries seem to have somewhat limited knowledge of CG operations/needs (I remember being excited when Thad Allen was being considered for DHS secretary years ago).
@dvandyk90 I don’t feel like there is any ideal Department for the Coast Guard because our missions are so diverse. We support marine transportation system, we do law enforcement, we regulate, we rescue. We are closely related to the Corps of Engineers, to the Navy, to NOAA.
There is simply no department responsible for all the things that the Coast Guard does.
The Coast Guard could be an independent executive agency. I think it could work. There might be benefits to flattening the chain of command.
In Wartime, or when the President so directs, the Coast Guard would come under the Navy as it does now.
The US already has many independent agencies including NASA, CIA, National Transportation Safety Board, GSA, FTC, and the Federal Trade Commission.
Independent agencies of the United States government – Wikipedia
Coast Guard building nation’s first Polar Security Cutter > United States Coast Guard News > Press Releases