Forbes’ always perceptive Craig Hooper takes a look at the Polar Security Cutter program and finds it ripe for cancellation, “years late, wildly over-budget, and both the budget and the schedule are at risk of slipping even further into the red…”

I still want to know who decided that the Coast Guard should award this critically important contract to a relatively inexperienced and less than fully successful shipyard even though they had failed to offer a proven design as had been required by the original solicitation and apparently repeatedly lied that the design was building (See the graphic from VT Halter above, “Proven Hull Design”).

I don’t know enough to agree that the Polar Security Cutter contract should be cancelled, but I do think Hooper would agree that it is time to start procurement of the Medium Icebreakers we know we need, even if the first is to be built in a foreign yard.

Given his comments on the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) program in the same article, I think he might also agree that the Coast Guard should be looking at an alternate design for a medium endurance cutter replacement to be built in lieu of at least some of the planned OPCs.

The first OPC has yet to be delivered, and the costs are likely to increase. If the PSC aligns with the OPC’s ugly performance trends, starting PSC construction with this amount of design uncertainty puts the Coast Guard at real risk of an even bigger fiasco…Sadly, these Coast Guard tastemakers don’t reflect that the building rate–as it is now–appears unable to meet the positively glacial building pace set by years-late and massively over-budget Offshore Patrol Cutter.

Thanks to Paul for bringing this to my attention.