The Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) is returning to the “NCIS” television program, Tuesday night, Jan. 11th. The Coast Guard Compass has the story.
CGIS Returns to NCIS
1
Author Archives: Chuck Hill
Band of Brothers, Major Richard C. Winters, dead at 92
A fine tribute here.
Naming Ships–The Slippery Slope
This article, which talks about the controversial decision to name LPD-26 for the late Pennsylvania congressman John Murtha, highlights a pet peeve of mine, the breakdown of the Navy’s naming conventions for ships, apparently for political purposes. Naming ships for recent presidents is bad enough. It introduces partisanship where it is not helpful, but the Murtha decision seems a particularly egregious case.
Generally since World War II, the Coast Guard seems to have been doing it right. The last time our ship names reflected politics, seems to have been the 378s named for Secretaries of Treasury. That continued the practice from the pre-war 327s. As politicians, not all of them were people everyone could admire. Apparently someone saw the error in this and the last three 378s were named for Coast Guard heroes.
I was very pleased when the service announced it would name the Fast Response Cutters (FRC) after enlisted hero. 210s have great names, all laudable characteristics to be aspired to, Courageous, Valiant, Resolute, etc. 270’s names come from Famous cutters of the past, good for reminding today’s sailors about those that went before.
We have named vessels for lakes (255s), bays (140 ft WTGB), islands (110 ft WPBs), points (82 ft WPBs), marine life (87 ft WPB),
Always thought the naming of buoy tenders was a bit curious, in that plants aren’t very nautical, but it did continue a tradition. Nothing like being from the Bluebell to make a sailor tough–sort of like a boy named Sue. Naming the 175 WAGLs after light house keepers was a good choice.
Assuming we build the Offshore Patrol Cutters, how might they be named?
- The Coast Guard could certainly can find another 25+ heroes who could be honored by having a cutter named after them. Can’t see any down side except that it doesn’t immediately distinguish the class members from the FRCs.
- Naming for famous cutters seems another likely choice.
- They might also be named after small cities and towns. Perhaps as a thank you to communities with long close Coast Guard association. There is the small possible problem of possible misunderstanding in communications. Names might reprise those of the 75 Coast Guard manned patrol frigates of World war II which were also named after small cities and towns. The Navy is naming the Littoral Combat Ships after small towns too. This could be seen as a conflict or as an expression that the OPCs are also littoral combat ships. Naming would have to be coordinated with the Navy to avoid duplications.
Somewhere this may have already decided but, any thoughts?
Arctic SAR Treaty in the Works
This report in the Canadian press suggests that a SAR treaty, negotiated by the Arctic Council members in December, could be signed when the foreign ministers next meet, beginning May 12th, in Nuuk, Greenland. It also gives a glimpse into the challenges the Canadians are facing in getting forces in the area.
Members of the Arctic Council include Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden, and the US.
It will be interesting to see where they draw the sector lines since there is still some disagreement between the parties as to where the national boundaries lie.
A Tale of Two Harbor Defense Organizations–Part Two
This is the second in a series comparing two incidents from World War II in which ships tried to force entry into a hostile harbor. Part one looked at the bloody, but ultimately successful British assault on the fortified port of St Nazaire. This part will look a German attempt to force their way into Oslo, Battle of Drøbak Sound. Part three will consider what these incidents can tell us about what it takes to stop a terrorist attack on an American port using a ship as a weapon.
————————————
Early in World War II, After the invasion of Poland, but before the invasion of France, the Germans invaded Norway to secure their access to Swedish steel and Iron ore and deny it to the British. (Denmark was also invaded on the same day, to secure airfields to support the Norway invasion.) Unlike their other invasions, there was no direct land route into Norway, so the invasion had to came by sea. With the Royal Navy and their French ally dominate at sea, the transit would be risky, but resistance from the Norwegians was expected to be light. Norway was at peace. They had only a small Navy and standing Army. Their defense depended primarily on mobilizing reservists. If they could be defeated before they mobilized, it would be a quick and relatively inexpensive campaign.
Six separate task forces would seize critical facilities all along the Norwegian coast. Rather than a Normandy style assault, the invasion of Norway looked like several simultaneous Special Forces operations. Troops would be landed from warships that could make the transit quickly. It would all be over before the Norwegian military could react–or so they thought. Continue reading
France & Australia Cooperate on Fisheries Enforcement in the South Pacific
“Australia and France will step up patrols for illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean under a new agreement signed by the two countries…French patrols will also include Australian fisheries officers, and Australian vessels will carry French officers so that each country is able to apply the laws of the other to offenders.”
France and Australia have the second and third largest EEZs in the world after the US.
Thanks to Mike Colombaro at http://combatfleetoftheworld.blogspot.com/ for the link.
Working with Army Air for Coast and Harbor Defense
Here is an interesting explanation of how a command in Korea used a little out of the box thinking to address an unconventional threat. In a bit different circumstances, the NCC (Naval Component Commander) might be Coast Guard, and a similar command arrangement might be useful. (Its also possible Coast Guard units might find themselves in Korea again.)
Thanks to Grandlogistics for the link.
Costa Rica, “Coast Guard Si, Navy No”
Costa Rican Law makers have denied permission for US Navy ships to dock and resupply in Costa Rican ports while granting that privilege to Coast Guard ships.
This is another reason the Coast Guard needs its own ships. Its not enough to simply provide law enforcement teams to Navy ships.
Coast Guard vessels are often welcomed where Navy ships would be viewed with suspicion.
Comparing Apples and Oranges–Ships and Cars
Ran across a statement in gCaptain that the 378s had cost $15M each (haven’t been able to find it again). I went looking for confirmation and found another source that listed the cost as $16-20M. In any case, comparing that range, with the range of costs for the National Security Cutters suggests that the price for these admittedly nicer ships is 30 times that of the ships they are replacing.
I bought my first new car in 1971, about the same time the Coast Guard was buying 378s. It cost me $2004 for a Datsun 510, a then technically advanced, but small economy car. (Upper middle-class performance cars like the GTO were going for about $3,500) Cars in the same economy car market segment now cost seven to ten times what my ’71 cost. In fact if you look hard you can find cars (base models of the Nissan Versa or Hundai Accent) that are better in every way and only cost five times as much.
Using this inflation calculator, inflation based on the CPI from January 1971 to January 2010 was 444.44% meaning, costs are about five and a half times what they were in 1971.
Yes the NSC is better equipped and larger than the 378s, but cars in the same market segments today are also about 25-50% larger, faster, safer, have more gadgets, and even get better gas mileage. My Datsun had bias ply tires, a four speed manual transmission,rubber floor mats instead of carpeting, no power windows, no air conditioning, an AM radio, the glass was not tinted, seat covering material was a sticky vinyl, and not even a rear window defogger.
Cars and ships are not exactly analogous, but it is hard to see how the price has gone up 30 times. The high prices for the NSC are not just a Coast Guard problem. In fact, on a cost per ton basis, the price for the forth NSC, $480M, is lower than that for the Littoral Combat Ships in the recent 20 ship buy that seems to have been viewed as a shewd deal.
Looks like there is plenty of room for efficiency improvements in the shipbuilding industry.
All the fault may not be with the ship builders. The Coast Guard has been working with interested builders in preparation for the Offshore Patrol Cutter project. Hopefully they are talking about how to work the price down to something more reasonable.
Sail Training Ship for Pakistan
Looks like the US Coast Guard is not the only service that still sees value in sail training. The Pakistanis have recently acquired a new sail training vessel. A bit smaller than the Eagle, but still a good sized ship, it measures 59.35 meters (196 ft) in length, with a draught of 4.8 meters (15.84 ft) and 498 tons. Its 18 sails total 949 square meters (10,335 sq.ft.).
