Future USCGC Argus at launch Eastern Shipyard, Oct 27, 2023.
It has been almost 19 months since the future USCGC Argus was launched and more than five years since the keel was laid, but still have no news about progress on the ship. It is in the water but no reports of sea trials, no videos of the ship underway. This is not normal!
Not only that, but no news on any of the other three ships contracted to Eastern. The most recent public report is that Eastern started cutting steel for the fourth OPC on October 18, 2022. Chase was supposed to be a year behind Argus, but no indication when it will be launched. Eastern’s own web site “LATEST OPC NEWS STORIES” lists only a story about the launch and christening of Argus.
I did find this rather disturbing quote from “opening remarks, as prepared, of Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee Chairman Mike Ezell (R-MS) from…hearing, entitled “America Builds: Coast Guard Acquisitions and Infrastructure” dated March 5, 2025 which seems to indicate substantial problems remain and that even the National Security Cutter program may not have been as successful as previously portrayed.
Concerns with the Offshore Patrol Cutter Program remain as we prepare for the lead ship to be delivered at the end of this year — four years late, and with a host of non-compliant parts. In addition, new problems have developed with the last hulls in the National Security Cutter Program, and we could receive one ship less than what Congress appropriated.
Hopefully the remark, “we could receive one ship less than what Congress appropriated” refers to the 12th NSC rather than the 11th.
I have more confidence in the capabilities of Austal. They successfully completed large contracts for Independence class Littoral Combat Ships and Expeditionary Fast Transports and the Navy has given them a contract for five Navajo class Towing, Salvage, and Rescue (T-ATS) ships.
From Austal’s website,
“Through continual capital investments, over $500 million to date, Austal USA has expanded its capability and capacity to enable concurrent production of aluminum and steel ships. The company recently broke ground on a new assembly building which will provide 192,000 square feet of new covered manufacturing space. The building will consist of three bays, two of which will be sized specifically to erect the OPC.”
These delays and uncertainties only reinforce my opinion that we need to seek an alternative to replace at least some of the planned 25 OPCs.
The world has changed substantially since the requirements for OPCs were formulated about 12 years ago.
We need more than the 36 large patrol cutters currently planned. We have not had so few since before World War II, until very recently. Meanwhile, demand for Coast Guard presence has been increasing. The FRCs have taken on missions that used to be performed by medium endurance cutters but they do have limited endurance and seakeeping.
Because some time in their, probably 40 year, life new cutters, missions will change and there is a good chance the US will be engaged in a major war, the design of our ships needs to flexible enough to take on additional missions and incorporate additional weapon systems. OPCs and NSC don’t have mission bays or container space that might allow greater flexibility. They don’t seem to be designed to take on any particular wartime missions. The low speed of the OPCs will limit their tactical utility.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
The Integrated Deepwater System Program (IDS Program or Deepwater) was conceived and designed around requirements when people were still living in the euphoria of the ‘Fall of the Berlin Wall’. Peace was declared around the planet, and 50% of the U.S. armed forces were divested. Investments in Defense and the USCG were not forthcoming for some decades. Now that we have nearly lost the ability to recover . . . increased shipbuilding requirements are here, and require robust response.
The Sentinel-class cutter (FRC), Heritage-class cutter (OPC), Legend-class cutter (NSC) structure with new situational awareness systems was conceived, and we planned on a reduced force with the better systems. Fully integrated into the greater DoD information system these new platforms are coming online. The FRC force will grow to over 70 units. The NSC force should have always grown to a one-for-one replacement of the Hamilton-class High Endurance Cutter force, and we are struggling to replace that 12th retired unit in the face of USCG tasking that has grown significantly. The OPCs will fill the gap well . . . if they ever start actually replacing Medium Endurance Cutters soon.
Manning had been an issue before the results of the last election (and that is what it was), and all services including the USCG is filling the ranks rapidly, so manning that 12th NSC is no longer an excuse.
The OPC training pipeline should be ready to step up to full implementation for that is going to be THE PROGRAM very shortly, and it will need more than 25 units with tasking growing by the day.
I hope the FRCs provide more candidates for the advancement track to the Coast Guard Officer Corps so we have a robust supply of new commanders and leaders for our USCG ships.
If infrastructure and shore facilities are improved appropriately recruiting will be a snap.
MHS Genesis https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2023/04/10/the-genesis-of-todays-recruiting-crisis/
Genesis may be an automated digital medical records system and “a leap in medical modernization.” However, it has done nothing to help us Veterans with our once promised digital online medical records for our own review. From region to region they do not even talk between themselves for the most part.
The federal government seems to be on a path to grow their own perfect physical specimens (genetic cloning). As for recruiting . . . all policies of the past have led us (U.S.) to this point and it is no accident. With FDA/NIH & CDC serving themselves with their revolving leadership circle-jerk over the last decades we have created one of the sickest societies probably second only to the Roman Empire suffering from lead poisoning because of their lead impregnated aqueducts. The Romans can claim ignorance, but not these modern day assassins looking out for their own pockets, and NOT looking out for the welfare of the American public.
From the very beginning of this country it has NOT been defended by the perfect soldier/sailor/airman/Marine or Coast Guardsman…and it will not be in the future . . . particularly given the practices of the ‘Powers-that-Be’ over the last decades. Only us (U.S.) flawed human poor working public can truly serve this nation, and that will not change. Given the “Sickening of America” by our previous FDA/NIH and CDC Regime . . . I fear for the future of the country.
The lack of transparency is disturbing given the new administration is comfortable talking about the problems in shipbuilding, navy, USCG etc.
Give them time. The ‘Trump Train’ is running at full steam and we are only fixing the highest priority problems first. It has only been four (4) months after all. Give it at least six months then let us (U.S.) visit this topic again for multi-faceted it is for Robert Kennedy has a part to play. Most of congress will be running scared with a True Leader looking out for the American Public in charge. Everyone else is looking out for themselves. Few if any Sacrificial Servants here!
They are not firing on all cylinders. We are due our FY26 defense budget submission.
to Chuck, “These delays and uncertainties only reinforce my opinion that we need to seek an alternative to replace at least some of the planned 25 OPCs”
I am curious what type of vessel should we build to supplement the OPC‘s? Are you thinking about a smaller vessel like your cutter X that it could be built in larger numbers and quicker?
I’ll toss one out there. Damen 6711/6911. 6711 is the basis of the Arialah class OPV. It can land an H-60, carry 2 large boats and has a Mk 110 with 2 additional keep out guns and RAM launcher. You could separate the engine rooms and lengthen it a bit as some variants have taken it out to 72m. Speed in the low 20s with lots of range. We could easily hand it to Bollinger to build. I’d also toss Delta Marine given this is basically a yacht design and of a size they alone can handle domestically.
As noted earlier, https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2023/04/02/how-long-should-an-opv-be-is-there-a-minimum/, I think 80 meters (262 feet) is about the minimum for true Offshore Patrol Vessel that includes all the endurance, range, and seakeeping required but if it is to incorporate weapons in wartime, increasing the size to 90 or 100 meters is probably a worthwhile investment.
Pakistan has shown that you can have a reasonable AAW missile capability on a 100 meter long 2600 ton ship, if you are willing to forgo a gun larger than 40mm. https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2024/07/30/gun-vs-missiles-pakistans-damen-built-2600-ton-opv/
Cutter X could work for the Peacetime Coast Guard and could take on some wartime roles, but given the increasingly hostile environment, it might be worthwhile to invest in more capable ships.
I particularly see a need for something with the potential to escort shipping over the vast distances of the Pacific between the West Coast and the highly contested areas that would be subject to attack by Chinese land based anti-ship ballistic missile and land based bomber launched cruise missiles.
This is most of the distance across the Pacific where the threat is probably exclusively submarines. That does not mean the escorts will not have to deal with cruise missiles at all, but the numbers would be relatively small. The subs are likely to prefer using torpedoes that don’t so precisely reveal their location.
I think we will see convoys but they will not look like WWII convoys. They will be much more spread out, to make it more difficult for subs to target more than one ship at a time.
Most of the ASW will be done by helicopters and Maritime Patrol Aircraft, but we will need surface ships to support the helicopters and to tow the active/passive arrays that will cue the helicopters.
We also need surface ships with helicopters to rescue the crews of sinking ships. This is an important task that is frequently overlooked. Particularly now that the US has a severe shortage of trained mariners. If there is no mechanism for rescue, it may be hard to get people to take the risk.
Using DDGs to escort logistics ships would be overkill.
Most of the escorts would only need basic self defense capabilities against limited numbers of cruise missiles. 8 Mk41 VLS cell could provide space for 16 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles (ESSM) and four vertical Launch ASROC. It is highly unlikely they would need more than that on a single trans-Pacific voyage. Even the 11 round Sea RAM that is currently replacing Phalanx on DDGs might be enough.
A hard kill anti-torpedo torpedo would be very much appreciated.
Three cutters, each with one or two ASW helicopters might make an effective escort group. Adding a frigate to the mix to provide limited area AAW, another flight deck and another towed array would of course help.
In all seriousness, adapting an existing and proven hull might be the better option in this case. Given the delays and shady behavior by the builder, expediency, functionality, and effectiveness should be prioritized over purpose built to complete the missions. Which is arguably more important at this juncture.
To that end, converting the various types of oilfield support vessels to cutters may be the best solution in the short term. Many are already outfitted with cranes or are designed to accommodate one. They have a massive amount of deck space for equipment. Some are purpose built with stern ramps for launching hardware, like small boats. Helipads and hangars can be added over the open deck space as needed.
In terms of weapons, just about every piece of military hardware built by the U.S. can be shoehorned into a 40’ intermodal shipping container. The containers can then be mounted anywhere hard points and supports can be welded. The platform supply vessels guarding submarines at the Coast Guard MFPUs have Mk38 Mod2 mounted on the shorter 20’ containers.
Back in 2003 The German Navy even went so far as to grab the turret off a PzH 2000 self propelled 155mm howitzer and mounted it to the deck of frigate.
The U.S. army retired its fleet of Stryker M1128 mobile gun systems, but the core of that platform is the proven M68 105mm. We have an academy with engineering students, why not have them tackle the integration hurdles of adapting the M1128 turret to sea duty? The core of the Mk38 is the 242 Bushmaster which was not originally intended for use on boats. So we know its been done before.
Lastly, once the OPC program is up and running the modified boats can be sold back to the commercial market to recoup costs. Using civilian ships with a bunch of military hardware bolted to them isn’t glamorous but it will get the job done until the American ship builders get their act together.
It doesn’t say OPC anywhere, but could this be related? RFI for vessel tow and assessment – https://sam.gov/opp/0b3e8604f56e4be98dc69b11defb0dda/view