Future USCGC Argus at launch Eastern Shipyard, Oct 27, 2023. We have yet to see any reports of sea trial.
Below is a news release from the Department of Homeland Security.
I can’t say I am surprised. A stop work order was issued on OPCs #3 and 4 on June 7, 2024. Progress on Eastern’s OPCs #1 and #2 has been painfully slow.
The question now is, what is the administration going to do to accelerate replacement of long overage WMECs?
Will they accelerate production at Austal or seek a contract with a third yard to build OPCs? The news release states,
“The Coast Guard’s goal is to procure 25 OPCs — and that has not changed. The Coast Guard remains intent on acquiring and delivering the full OPC class as fast as possible to address the Nation’s security and safety needs.”
I feel strongly that the Coast Guard needs a different design, hopefully a smaller, faster ship that would be built in greater numbers and one readily adaptable to one or more wartime missions, to either replace some of the Argo Class or be built in parallel.
You can still call it an Offshore Patrol Cutter, it is just a job description, it is not a class. You can even designate it a WMSM, though I would prefer WPF (Coast Guard Patrol Frigate) or even WMEC, but it does not have to be an Argo class.
Secretary Noem Protects American Taxpayers Against Wasteful Contracts While Revolutionizing Coast Guard for the 21st Century
“This Administration is unwavering in its commitment to the American taxpayer”
WASHINGTON – Today, United States Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced the partial termination of a wasteful shipbuilding contract to protect American taxpayer dollars while revolutionizing the United States Coast Guard for the 21st century.
“This Administration is unwavering in its commitment to the American taxpayer and to a strong, ready Coast Guard,” said a Senior Homeland Security official. “We cannot allow critical shipbuilding projects to languish over budget and behind schedule. Our Coast Guard needs modern, capable vessels to safeguard our national and economic security, and we will ensure every dollar is spent wisely to achieve that mission. This action redirects resources to where they are most needed, ensuring the Coast Guard remains the finest, most-capable maritime service in the world.”
As part of that commitment, the Coast Guard is reviewing contracts which are failing to meet delivery agreements. An existing Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) contract with Eastern Shipbuilding Group (ESG) has been slow to deliver four OPCs, harming the U.S.’s defense capabilities and wasting American’s hard-earned money. In light of that, Secretary Noem partially canceled ESG’s contract for two out of the four OPCs expected from ESG in Panama City, Florida because it was not an effective use of taxpayer money.
ESG’s delivery of OPC 1 was initially due in June 2023 but will now be completed by the end of 2026 at the earliest. ESG missed its April 2024 delivery for OPC 2. The Coast Guard stopped work on OPCs 3 and 4 after ESG notified the service earlier this year they could not fulfill their contractual duty to deliver all four OPCs without unabsorbable loss. The money saved will redirected to ensure it’s actually benefiting the Coast Guard.
Due to decades of neglect by previous Administrations and Congress, the Coast Guard has been underfunded, underequipped, and ignored for too long. President Donald Trump is ending that era of neglect with the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill and Force Design 2028 – Homeland’s plan to transform the Coast Guard into a more agile, capable fighting force. Now, a massive injection of nearly $25 billion is coming to the Coast Guard.
The Coast Guard’s goal is to procure 25 OPCs — and that has not changed. The Coast Guard remains intent on acquiring and delivering the full OPC class as fast as possible to address the Nation’s security and safety needs.
The OPC fleet will complement the capabilities of the Service’s National Security Cutters, Fast Response Cutters and Polar Security Cutters as an essential element of the Nation’s layered maritime security strategy. They will be especially critical to the counter-drug and migrant interdiction missions along the southeast border.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
how expensive are Kristi Noem’s new executive transports projected to be! Or is Donald Trump using the funding from these two ships to construct two new “Alligator Alcatraz” style prisons somewhere…
Neither the secretary DHS or the president can simple take money that congress authorize and appropriated fund for the construction of two cutters, move them other projects. they want. This money has to be accounted for.
TDS reigns.
Since two are in the water and steel has been cut on the first unit at Austal USA . . . I don’t think there will be any major changes to the design. The Technical Data Package (TDP) will most likely be updated. Supply chains will become an issue if not already. The OPCs cannot be built fast enough. Hopefully the first two can provide some insight into the design and improvements.
The tardiness of OPC Program necessitates the Famous-class WMEC SLEP Program to continue.
I fully expect the Austal contract with options will go ahead as currently planned. That will give us eleven and hopefully the #1 and #2 will be finished, if not by Eastern, then perhaps by someone else. That will give us 13.
It is the remaining twelve that I question.
Even before the cancellation, the last OPC was not supposed to be commissioned until 2038. The cancellation means more like 2039 meaning funding will extend another ten years to perhaps FY2035.
I have been writing about the OPC program since at least 2010 and 15 years later we still have not gotten one commissioned. There is no way a single ship building program should extend almost 30 years.
There should be no more than five years of planning, contracting, and design. Fund two a year for ten years, and commission the last of 20, 20 years after the program began. If we keep the cutters for 30 years, we have 60 cutters. We should be starting a new program every ten years making progressive improvements.
Interestingly, this past week the State of Washington signed a contract with Eastern for the construction of two new all electric state ferries. Appears that Eastern is more interested in commercial construction projects an national security ones
Less paperwork. More financial security. Better profit margins.
I have to wonder why this there was no announcement of this cancellation on Coast Guard websites.
It seem to me that the Coast Guard needs to take control of ship building program away from the Navy Navsea System Command. They are the ones who pick Eastern Shipbuilding for OPC. And VT Halter Marine for the PSC.
NAVSEA doesn’t run the Coast Guard’s shipbuilding program; the service has its own internal structure for that. The only touch point between the two are for Navy Type, Navy Owned systems.
Chuck I hope that the congressional committees that over the Coast Guard called for testimony on these issue. I think the head of Ingalls and Eastern, need to be held accountable the problems with the 11th NSC and the 2 OPC. Plus the Navsea System also.
Why does it take so much time for sea trials for Argus?
That is the multi-million dollar question. It’s very possible Eastern was in over It’s heard with the OPC.
As much as Id like to see the ships delivered, there is a point where throwing more money at a vendor unlikely to deliver is not wise.
The culture of underperformance (overweight, endless cost overruns and late delivery) has become the norm in naval shipbuilding.
It easy to envision Eastern as being in over their heads. They were a curious choice from the beginning.
Harder to explain is what happened to the NSC? HI, after building ten of them, should have had the process down. It’s hard to explain how that program got so offtrack.
Gibbs and Cox has a 3000-3500 ton frigate design that is being built for the Taiwanese navy. It is designed to be easy to build and maintain.
Perhaps an austere version of this ship could be considered as a “Patrol Cutter” or “Patrol Frigate” with the ability to handle both peacetime and wartime roles???
I apologize for the double post. It was not intentional.
The Gibbs and Cox design shares some systems with the new Connies. This would be a logistical advantage in wartime.
We are going to have a lot of FRCs because it seems we are having trouble building anything else.
I know some work has been done in that area but whatever can be done to increase their utility should be investigated.
UAVs, better weapons, sensors, habitability, …
The FRCs are a great success story. If they are what we have some money should be put into enhancing them.
I also like the Gibbs and Cox design which was also pitched to Australia. It is the kind of ship we need to be building instead of the OPCs.
@jmoskalik I deleted your extra double post.
“The culture of underperformance (overweight, endless cost overruns and late delivery) has become the norm in naval shipbuilding.”
Correction: in U.S. naval shipbuilding. Other nations are able to build ships in 18 months that take U.S. shipbuilders 10 years to build. It’s not just Coast Guard ships–the Navy’s problems are at least as bad. Look at the problems with the Constellation Class Frigate. Two years since the keel was laid on FFG-62 (USS Constellation), and it’s only 10% complete. At that rate, it will take 20 years to build (if the programs isn’t canceled entirely), and it’s based on a proven European frigate design, the FREMM, which was supposed to accelerate production (but the U.S. Navy insisted on changing 85% of the FREMM design and only keeping 15%). The Ford Class “supercarriers” are also years behind schedule and still working out problems with the new technology even after the first one (CVN-78) was delivered. The U.S. Navy’s new SSN(X) attack submarines are so many years behind schedule that the first one won’t be delivered until 2040, yes 2040! It’s “full speed astern” for the rapidly shrinking U.S. Navy, which has zero frigates (and won’t have any until the 2030s) and is about to decline from 11 carriers to only 10 carriers. And don’t get me started on the LCS…
If this is the one you’re referring to, I agree with you and Chuck that it would be a good option. At 117m/384 feet, it would definitely be longer than the OPC which is 360 feet. However, the displacement is just 3800 tons vs the 45 tons of the OPC and it has considerable more armament.
It would be great to see us take a proven design, make the necessary USCG modifications required and get these out the door quick. Our fleet is aging/shrinking faster that we can replace it so we need all the help that we can get. Perhaps the new attitude and funding will have an impact on our current ship acquisition programs.
Let’s hope….
Sorry, I forgot to post the link.
https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/indo-pacific-2023/2023/11/gibbs-and-cox-unveil-australian-light-frigate/
I also like the Gibbs and Cox design which was also pitched to Australia. It is the kind of ship we need to be building instead of the OPCs.
Taiwan’s large cutters are also Vard designed and would be like growing OPC to be an NSC stand in. Not what we need now, but might some day.
Tow #’s 1 and 2 to Baltimore and let the CG Yard finish the job.
I think the OPC should have been build in South Korea and Japan. They build ships faster than America
I think we need to fix Navsea. The implications of having a less than stellar Navsea impact just about every shipbuilding program.
I guess I should say US naval shipbuilding program incase anyone thinks I’m referring to Nigeria.