After the continued frustration of the Polar Security Cutter program, the ICE Pact agreement between Finland, Canada, and the US seems promising, but we have heard little about how it will work or what it will produce. Forbes discusses the possibilities here.
We may be seeing the first steps of implementation as Canada’s Davie shipyard, which has already purchased a shipyard with a long history of building icebreakers in Finland, seeks to buy a shipyard in the US. There aren’t many possibilities, I would guess either the old Navy yard in Vallejo that has been doing the five year rolling service life extension on Polar Star or the Philly Shipyard currently building “National Security Multi-Mission Vessels” for the merchant marine academies.
Davie, a Quebec shipbuilder set to play a key role in a joint icebreaker production agreement between Canada, the United States and Finland, is moving forward with plans to expand its operations south of the border despite a looming trade war threatening the continent.
As part of the expansion, the Canada-based multinational shipbuilder has set out to acquire an American shipyard, which would secure an initial and important footprint in the U.S. for the company.
Davie is very clearly specializing in icebreakers while continuing to produce ice strengthened commercial ships.
The first of Canada’s Polar Icebreakers (pictured above) is being built by Seaspan, with the second of class being built by Davie. These will be heavy icebreakers, even by US Coast Guard standards, bigger and more powerful than the Polar Security Cutters.
Length Overall 158.2m (519 ft)
Beam: 28m (91 ft 10 in)
Draft: 10.5m (34 ft 5 in)
Classificaton:LLoyd’s Polar Class PC2
Installed Power: 46 MW (61,687 HP)
Top Speed:18 knots
Icebreaking2.5m @ 3 knots continuous
Design Displacement: 26,000 tons
Complement:100 Persons
Canada’s “Program Icebreaker.” Six are planned.
The design for the six “Program Icebreakers” might provide a basis for both the Coast Guard’s Arctic Security Cutter (medium icebreaker program) and the new Great Lakes icebreaker. (It would be a substantial improvement of USCGC Mackinaw and we really need some medium icebreakers.) Their specifications are:
Length: 100-110 m (328 to 360 ft)
Beam: under 23.8 m (78 ft) for Great Lakes;
Draft: 6-8 m (20 to 26 ft)
Icebreaking: Capable of maintaining 3 knots in 1.4 m (4.6 ft) of ice
Accommodations: more than 30 crew and program teams of 34
Range: 20,000 nautical miles at 12 knots
Able to operate and maintain one medium helicopter
Significant general and containerized cargo capacity
Don’t get the impression that the H-65 is going away anytime soon. Expect at least another decade of service. The last of the parent design AS365 Dauphin was manufactured in 2021. The closely related Eurocopter AS565 Panther is still being manufactured and has seen service in eleven countries.
Coast Guard celebrates 40 years of service with H-65 helicopter
Dec. 18, 2024 —
Upgrades throughout the 40-year history of the H-65 were strategically completed to allow for expanding missions and operations in the most challenging maritime conditions, such as cliff rescues. Here an MH-65 crew conducts vertical surface training off the coast of Humboldt Bay, California, to hone critical skills to ensure precise and efficient hoisting techniques in this rugged, coastal environment. U.S. Coast Guard photo.
It’s 2007. Coast Guard Air Station Port Angeles, Washington, receives a call about an injured mountain climber at the summit of The Brothers, a pair of prominent mountain peaks in Olympic National Park near Seattle. The elevation: 6,866 feet. And it’s snowing.
A search and rescue mission was deployed using the HH-65C short range recovery helicopter. “We were right up against that line where it was clear. If we had gone much further toward the peak, we would have been in blizzard conditions. We had to dump fuel at altitude to get light enough,” recalled Cmdr. Christian Polyak, co-pilot on the rescue mission and now commanding officer of Coast Guard Air Station Detroit. “We were able to reach the summit, pluck the injured mountain climber off the peak and get back to the airport in about 15 minutes.”
Unknown to the mountain climber, the Coast Guard H-65 Conversion/Sustainment Program had been working for years – and would continue working in subsequent years – to update the H-65 fleet and support missions like the one that brought the mountain climber to safety. “The rescue couldn’t have been done without the HH-65 and the engine upgrade from Bravo to Charlie,” Polyak explained.
In November 2024, the Coast Guard marked the 40th anniversary of the initial H-65 operation, but the tenure of this critical asset in supporting Coast Guard missions is slowly coming to an end. The service has completed the transition from the MH-65D to the MH-65E, the final upgrade of this airframe. Obsolescence challenges with the MH-65 will lead to the sundowning of aircraft as they reach the end of their service lives.
HH-65A
HH-65B
HH-65C/MH-65C
MH-65D
MH-65E
Began operations: 1984
Began operations: 2001
Began operations: 2004
Began operations: 2009
Began operations: 2015
Original Coast Guard version.
Avionics upgrade undertaken on a portion of the fleet, including a night vision goggle compatible integrated flight management avionics suite.
Engines replaced with Turbomeca Arriel 2C2-CG engines, adding 40% more power. Airborne use of force capability added, including 7.62 mm general-purpose machine gun and a .50-caliber precision rifle.
Obsolete subsystems replaced, such as replacing navigation systems and gyros with digital GPS and inertial navigation systems.
Remaining obsolete subsystems modernized, including replacing analog automatic flight control with digital systems, installing digital weather radar systems and installing digital glass cockpit instruments.
Other program milestones included purchase of seven new MH-65 aircraft to identify and intercept non-compliant light aircraft operating within the Washington, D.C., Air Defense Identification Zone and execution of a service life extension program to extend the service life of the helicopters by an additional 10,000 flight hours.
Since their introduction more than 40 years ago, Coast Guard H-65s have been credited with rescuing approximately 26,000 people. For nearly two decades, the Coast Guard has planned and executed targeted improvements to enhance reliability and performance of the operational fleet. Across each iteration, starting with the initial designation of the HH-65A (Alpha) to the current MH-65E (Echo), every upgrade enhanced the airframe’s capabilities, enabling crews to complete lifesaving, law enforcement and national security missions more efficiently and effectively.
Retired Capt. Keith Overstreet has flown every model of the H-65, starting with the Alpha in 1995 at Air Station Savannah, Georgia. “I started flying the 65 when it was relatively new … when we purchased the H-65 it was really an advanced aircraft with advanced avionics. It allowed us to fly coupled approaches down to the water with a fairly precise position. It could control not only the lateral, the guiding left to right, but vertically down to the water as well.”
As modern as it was for its time, regular upgrades kept it relevant.
“The Alpha had a small navigation screen where you could create a flight plan. It had a forward-looking radar that would map out vessels and terrain,” said retired Cmdr. Kevin Barres, who flew 65s throughout his entire 25 years in the Coast Guard. “Then Bravo came up and you had a color display that differentiated some terrain,” which helped in developing flight plans.
“Charlie meant changes to the engine, and the engine control. It went from mechanical control using air and linkages to digital control. Echo replaced analog avionics components with a digital cockpit that has significant commonality with the H-60 fleet. There were enhancements to the automatic flight control system and there was a complete rewire of the aircraft. Its modern glass cockpit is standard across the board,” Overstreet said.
LEFT: A glass or digital cockpit replaced analog instruments in the MH-65E. RIGHT: The updates for missions requiring airborne use of force capability got underway in August 2006. The Helicopter Interdiction Tactical Squadron specializes in those missions, often used for drug-interdiction, and moved to the MH-65 from the Agusta MH-68A Stingray in 2008. U.S. Coast Guard photos.
“Every upgrade was significant and addressed a specific problem or modernization to accommodate how the mission, aviation and airspace were changing,” Barres said.
Cumulatively, these three pilots have flown nearly 16,000 hours in the H-65 and remember missions completed with fondness and pride.
Barres remembers when a bear-watching float plane split in half in the water, stranding six tourists, the bear guide and the pilot in Haro Bay, Alaska. It was 2006, and he was on his first deployment in Kodiak.
“It was a very windy day. The seas in the bay had built a little bit. When the aircraft tried to take off, the tube that goes across the front that connects the two floats failed and split. The aircraft did a nosedive into the wave and was swamped. They were all able to get out and were standing on the wing while it floated for a little while.”
The Coast Guard responded with an HC-130, an MH-60 and an MH-65. Barres was in the office and volunteered to pilot the MH-65.
“The C-130 got on scene and dropped two survival rafts to them. The bear guide was able to climb up on the capsized life raft and hang on. All the other people were hanging on to the float plane. The plane sunk, and they all ended up in the water for about 10 to 20 minutes.”
They were able to float due to their safety devices, but they all were hypothermic. The two helicopters were able to retrieve everyone, and all survived.
Another “miraculous” search and rescue mission Barres recalls was when he was stationed in Barbers Point, Hawaii. He was involved in rescuing a family that was stranded on a very small skiff in ocean waters for just short of two weeks, surviving on sea water and flying fish, after their small outboard motor malfunctioned. When the family was taken back to their home in Kiribati aboard an H-65, they were met with ecstatic school children and an elected official showered them with gifts of bananas and coconuts.
H-65 does more than search and rescue
“The H-65 has been heavily relied upon for all our aviation special missions,” said Polyak, who currently ranks as the most senior active-duty H-65 aviator.
During a deployment to Japan from Kodiak on a mission to enforce an international fisheries treaty, Polyak was grateful for the enhancements of the satellite communications on the MH-65C.
“Without that upgrade, we wouldn’t have been able to maintain radio communications with the cutter at the distances we were operating the helicopter,” he said. “As a pilot I always want to be able to talk to the ship if I’m 100 miles away from it. When you’re thousands of miles away from land and there’s nowhere else to go, you need to be able to talk to the ship so you can find out where they are and get back to them.”
The stories of the missions are endless. But without the behind-the-scenes mechanics that keep the aircraft operational, none of this would be possible.
“It takes 21 maintenance labor hours for every flight hour,” said Polyak, who served as the branch chief for the H-65 Echo conversion at the Aviation Logistics Center (ALC) in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, leading a team of 36 to deliver MH-65 Echoes to the fleet from 2017 to 2020. “There’s a lot of work happening on the hangar deck. Our enlisted mechanics work very hard to allow this aircraft to continue to operate and do lifesaving missions. There’s an equally important component at the ALC where the overhaul for the aircraft occurs. And there are hundreds of active-duty members, civilians and contractors that only support the H-65 fleet. These quiet professionals are supporting frontline operations. Along that same vein, the Aviation Training Center in Mobile, Alabama, has continued to provide excellent standardization and training support so that pilots and air crews can work together and execute these challenging missions.”
Looking forward, pilots are grateful they had the opportunity to fly the H-65s.
“It’s amazing the way we in the Coast Guard were able to bring it online,” Barres said. “Basically, going from 1960s helicopters to the most modern helicopters in the world at that time and then over 40 years keeping the aircraft upgraded and relevant.”
“At one point we had nearly 100 airframes in the fleet,” he continued. “The 65 never let me down on a mission or my crew or the folks that we were out there trying to help, whether it was law enforcement, or a fisheries patrol or a search and rescue case.”
All three pilots find immense career fulfillment in completing search and rescue missions made possible by the capabilities of the H-65.
“That day when you look somebody in the eye,” Overstreet said. “And you know, and they know that they would not be on this earth alive if you hadn’t been there. That makes it easy to put your all into your work every day.”
An airman from Air Station New Orleans, who was on the first helicopter that returned following the Hurricane Katrina, recounted, “The second that everyone heard us on Channel 16, Channel 16 just blew up with mayday calls.” Flying on waivers, he did rescues for five days and nights straight. At the time, this was considered the biggest search and rescue event in U.S. history. U.S. Coast Guard photo.
The Coast Guard Deputy Commandant for Operations has issued “United States Coast Guard Force Posture 2024.” Dated October 2024, it is reportedly the first of its kind and a new edition will be published annually. I have appended the Coast Guard News Release regarding the publication below.
“This posture statement informs all audiences about the U.S. Coast Guard’s operational priorities, initiatives, requirements and future challenges across its missions and geographic regions. It conveys how we are “Advancing Mission Excellence” in accordance with the 2022 Coast Guard Strategy and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Strategic Plan. This posture statement serves as a window into the breadth and depth of the Coast Guard’s commitments and how it is posturing our workforce, capabilities, and assets to deliver operational services that best serve the American people.
It is organized under four major topics rather than by the eleven statutory missions.
Operating Environment (p.3)
Guiding Principles (p.3/4)
Operating Posture (p.4-7)
Geographic Operating Areas (p.7-11)
I love it, but it does lack a clear summary of what we will do differently. I will try to interpret some of that. Below I provide a readers’ digest version with a few comments, looking first at the eleven Coast Guard missions as listed in 6 U.S. Code § 468, at select Geographic Operating Areas, and finally I will speculate on the long term implications. Given the increased use of the Coast Guard as a tool of foreign policy, I also suggest changes to the Area Commanders’ areas of responsibility (AOR) to make them fit more easily into the national command structure.
MISSIONS
Some of the missions are specifically addressed in the “Operating Posture” section, others are not. The Eleven missions are:
Non-homeland security missions:
Marine safety
Search and rescue
Aids to navigation
Living marine resources (fisheries law enforcement)
Marine environmental protection
Ice operations.
Homeland security missions:
Ports, waterways and coastal security
Drug interdiction
Migrant interdiction
Defense readiness
Other law enforcement.
I will just address them in alphabetical order:
Aids to Navigation:
Aids to Navigation is not called out under a separate heading.
“Our comprehensive approach (to the Marine Transportation System (MTS)) encompasses…Maintaining aids to navigation…” (p.4)
The Coast Guard is reinforcing actions to be “brilliant at the basics” that strengthen…aids to navigation.
The Coast Guard is in the early phase of recapitalizing an aging fleet of inland aids to navigation tenders with new Waterways Commerce Cutters, crucial to maritime commerce in our inland river system. These investments are central to maintaining service delivery in an increasingly complex MTS (Maritime Transportation System–Chuck).
Sounds like minimal changes in the near term but expect improving technology may reduce manpower requirements. Elsewhere there is indications buoy tenders may increasingly be used for non-AtoN missions. This suggests that the number of sea-going buoy tenders (WLBs) is unlikely to be significantly reduced, but their character may change–more on this below.
Defense Readiness
We are increasing attention on the Coast Guard’s defense readiness mission given the increasing threat posed by nation-state competitors. Through integration with Department of Defense efforts, refreshing defense-related plans, and preparedness exercises, we are sharpening readiness to support homeland defense requirements and force deployment commitments for major overseas contingencies. We continue to meet our commitments to North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) for National Capital Region and deployable Rotary Wing Air Intercept and we are adjusting the structure of our Port Security Units (PSU) to address Reserve workforce shortages. We are also integrating PSU elements with DoD expeditionary units to increase their deployment readiness.
This is a welcome recognition of an increasingly hostile world and the emergence of non-state actors who, acting independently or as a proxy for hostile states, can impact national security.
Drug Interdiction is not called out as a separate topic. The only indication of a change is this statement under the section “Western Hemisphere,”
“We will maximize employment opportunities by conducting a mix of missions such as counter drug and combating illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing when appropriate.” (p.9)
Ice Operations:
Ice operations is not called out as a separate mission, but it is addressed in the “Polar Regions” section (p.8/9) of the Geographic Operating Areas section.
Arctic and Antarctic Ice operation will get a big boost as we go from 2 polar icebreakers to eight. In the Arctic there will be a continuing need for non-icebreaking large cutters and we can expect increased exploitation of fixed wing aircraft and particularly satellite for communications and information.
Living Marine Resources
“We will increasingly favor shore-based law enforcement teams and our patrol boat fleet, supported by maritime domain awareness sensors, to ensure we best match this mission.”
Webber class WPCs have proven capable of assuming much of the fisheries protection mission. They can go anywhere fishing vessels can go and stand up to any weather they might be fishing in. So FRCs are stepping up to missions WMECs have traditionally done. Not mentioned, but on the other hand, in Alaska and the distant Pacific there is still a role for larger ships.
Marine Environmental Protection:
There was no section devoted to Marine Environmental Protection as a specific mission. MEP was referred to briefly in the Mission execution section (p.5) Arctic (p.8)
But there was this under “Incident Management and Crisis Response” (p.6)
Management of large, complex incidents is a central Coast Guard competency. Employment of this capability enables success for the most consequential crises and events, builds trust, and supports DHS. However, the Coast Guard does not have a large contingency capacity “in garrison” for emergencies. We will continue to strengthen Coast Guard incident management capacity and proficiency to meet increasing demand, including in the Reserve workforce. The Coast Guard continues to respond to stakeholder requests for assistance for incident management while we prioritize incidents with a Coast Guard nexus and prevent overextending Coast Guard resources.
Marine Safety
There is a lot of activity here,
“The Coast Guard is reinforcing actions to be “brilliant at the basics” that strengthen marine inspection, investigation, Vessel Traffic Services, waterways management, and aids to navigation.”
Changes in the environment include autonomous vessels, offshore renewable energy installations, an emerging space launch and recovery industry, and alternative vessel fuels. All of which require determination of standards.
Migrant Interdiction
“The Coast Guard will deploy cutters and aircraft, and adaptive force packages where practical, sufficient to interdict migrant ventures, save lives, and deter maritime migration. We continue to prepare with partners to respond to a mass migration to mitigate a national crisis. We are also integrating new technology to better anticipate, detect, deter, and interdict migrant ventures.
No significant reprioritization here. This is an area where the Webber class WPCs (20 in D7 alone) have supplemented or replaced WMECs. It is an area where shore based Unmanned Air Systems and Unmanned surface vessels like saildrone could provide persistent initial detection and perhaps reduce demand for fixed wing search aircraft.
Other Law Enforcement
Not surprisingly there is no mention of this “mission” because the Coast Guard does it on an ad hoc incidental basis. The Coast Guard’s specific law enforcement missions, drug and migrant interdiction, marine environmental protection, and fisheries are addressed separately. It is a catchall for any illegal activities. So, no change.
Port, Waterways, and Coastal Security
The Coast Guard’s force posture for this mission was configured for the post 9/11 security environment and the Coast Guard is examining approaches to optimize our capabilities to meet emerging threats. For example, the proliferation of drones poses a growing risk to the MTS and we will continue to employ our counter-UxS technology in conjunction with DHS and other partners to prepare for this threat. We are also taking steps to ensure that our deployable specialized forces are configured for their role as threats and operational needs evolve.
Recognizing and preparing to counter the UxS threat is significant. I’ve already made several suggestions. I hope if we get a hard kill system, it will also improve effectiveness against other potential threats.
This was included under Defense Readiness,
“…we are adjusting the structure of our Port Security Units (PSU) to address Reserve workforce shortages. We are also integrating PSU elements with DoD expeditionary units to increase their deployment readiness.”
To me Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security is a subset of Defense Readiness once you understand that Defense Readiness is a full time, 24/7 job that does not wait until war is declared or the Coast Guard is transferred to the Navy Department. Attacks like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, will likely come as a surprise, there may be no time to mobilize before an attack, and our Maritime Transportation System is a likely target.
Search and Rescue:
“Search and Rescue is an enduring, no-fail mission that is deeply ingrained in the Coast Guard’s identity. As it remains a top priority, technical advances now allow us to perform the mission more effectively and with fewer resources.“
SAR success standards are not being lowered, but technology is increasingly taking the search out of search and rescue. Individual units have greater capability so fewer dedicated units may be required. Expect fewer personnel to be assigned to less demanding SAR missions that are also covered by local government first responders.
GEOGRAPHIC OPERATING AREAS
The Operational Posture goes on to discuss specific operating areas. Some of this has been addressed in the mission summaries above, so I will say no more about the Arctic, Western Hemisphere, Middle East and Europe, Caribbean, and Atlantic basin that are discussed individually in the Operational Posture, but I will talk about the Indo-Pacific, Eastern Pacific, and Antarctica.
Indo-Pacific
The Indo-Pacific is a top regional priority given its geostrategic importance, criticality to global trade, and the threat contesting a free, open, and rules-based maritime commons.
Yes, we are paying more attention to the Pacific, the Indian Ocean not so much. We expect to have six Webber class WPCs in Guam. Harriet Lane (WMEC-903) has been moved from Atlantic Area to Hawaii and it looks like a second WMEC may also be moved. Two OPCs each are expected to go to Long Beach and Kodiak. Assuming Alex Healy stays in Kodiak and the last Pacific Area 210 is decommissioned or transferred to Atlantic Area, that will give Pacific Area 13 large patrol cutters–still fewer than the 16 that were in PacArea in 2000 and only 39.4% of the 33 large cutter total I think we have now and will have for the foreseeable future.
Given the great distances involved, the fact that 84% of the US EEZ is in Pacific Area, and because we have an obligation to the Compact of Free Associated States–Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau–that together have additional EEZ equal to about 50% of the entire US EEZ, it makes no sense for 60% of the large cutters to be in Atlantic Area. More than half of all large patrol cutters should be in Pacific Area.
Eastern Pacific:
“…with declining major cutter and maritime patrol aircraft availability, we will increasingly employ fast response cutters, ocean-going buoy tenders, and adaptive force packages supported by expeditionary logistics.” I am not surprised; this is something that was begun when Admiral Fagan was Pacific Area Commander.
“…we remain committed to supporting the Mexican Navy as they expand their Captain of the Port authorities through increased information sharing, joint training and exercises, and capacity building engagements. This expanded partnership will enhance maritime governance in the Western Hemisphere and contribute to the fight against illicit trafficking of fentanyl and precursor chemicals through Mexican ports into the U.S.”
US navy fleets areas of responsibility. Source Wikipedia.
The only mitigating rationale I see for not transferring most of the large cutters to Pacific Area is that the Eastern Pacific drug transit zone is actually closer to Atlantic Area ports than to Pacific Area ports. This is why all of South America is under 4th Fleet, which is an Atlantic Fleet command. Probably an argument should be made for realigning the Coast Guard Area geographic descriptions to match those of the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets. A change of name to Eastern and Western Area might be appropriate and in fact a more accurate description.
Atlantic area includes not only the Atlantic coast but also the great lakes, inland areas, the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean, and parts of the Arctic and Southern Oceans. Pacific Area also includes inland areas, the Indian Ocean (part of which is under Atlantic Fleet), and parts of the Arctic and Southern Oceans.
A realignment along Fleet dividing lines would also mean the dividing lines would more closely correspond to COCOM areas of responsibility and limit the number of cases where COCOMs would need to deal with both Coast Guard Areas to NORTHCOM. Currently there is also overlap in SOUTHCOM, AFRICOM, and CENTCOM. All three of those COCOMs would only need to deal with the Eastern (Atlantic) Area. That seems to be what is happening with AFRICOM and CENTCOM now anyway. PATFORSWA WPCs, Atlantic Area assets, operate routinely in the Indian Ocean, part of the PACAREA AOR.
Unified Combatant Commander’s Areas of Responsibility.
As Pacific Area assumes more responsibility in the Western Pacific and potentially the Indian Ocean passing off responsibility for all Coast Guard operations in 4th Fleet’s Area of Operations to Atlantic Area might make sense.
Antarctic:
The U.S. priority for Antarctica remains maintaining “a continent reserved for peace and science in accordance with the provisions of the Antarctic Treaty of 1959.”
No real change expected other than more and better icebreakers, but not everyone thinks like the US.
We should have the agility to react to a change from the present “continent reserved for peace and science.” We really have no reason for confidence that Antarctica will not become a zone of Conflict. Fortunately, actions to increase capabilities in the Arctic may also serve us well in Antarctica.
Implications for the Future
Cutter Design:
Patrol Cutters: Moving from “Patrol and Interdict” to “Target and Interdict” suggests that cruise speed endurance may become less important, and that higher max speed and an economical loiter speed may become more important. Greater emphasis on Defense Readiness would also suggest the desirability of greater speed. This suggest that we may want to build fewer than the currently planned 25 OPCs and shift investment to a new design based on a different set of priorities that we can build in greater number; ships with greater speed and increased modularity to accommodate an uncertain future.
Buoy Tenders: Improved aids to navigation may mean tenders will spend less time on routine AtoN maintenance. Still, they will need to be geographically distributed to respond to critical outages. It seems these ships will become more multi-mission by design. They should continue to be able to operate in ice. Their increased use for non-AtoN missions suggest that they may need overflow berthing and more fuel and stores capacity when supporting WPC deployments and to make them more effective in law enforcement roles–more speed, a flight deck and hangar for UAS and a deck gun such as the Mk38 Mod4.
Deployable Teams
Sounds like we will be getting more deployable Law Enforcement Detachments given the proliferation of capacity building objectives. Increased specialization and a desire for continuity in this area may someday result in a new rating.
Thanks to Paul for bringing the video to my attention.
Oct. 25, 2024
Coast Guard unveils first Operational Posture Statement
By Zach Shapiro, MyCG Writer
The Coast Guard just released its first Operational Posture Statement, which outlines the service’s operational priorities, including its plans to adapt to personnel and resource challenges. Vice Adm. Peter W. Gautier, Deputy Commandant for Operations (DCO), unveiled the document Friday during an event at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C.
Think of the new annual Operational Posture Statement as a tactical annual document that supports the long-term Coast Guard Strategy by providing more specificity.
To improve operational efficiency and effectiveness, for example, the Coast Guard will increasingly use intelligence and data to shift its approach from “patrol and interdict” to “target and interdict.”
And to improve readiness, the Coast Guard will focus on three key elements: the workforce, capabilities, and assets. The Operational Posture recognizes the need to meet increasing demand while addressing workforce and resource shortages. The service will also continue to recapitalize cutters, boats, aircraft, and infrastructure.
The Operational Posture “is our effort to communicate with our stakeholders and be transparent with the American people on how we will confront all of these challenges, this increasing mission demand, and provide the kind of services that Americans deserve,” Gautier said.
Six guiding principles underpin the Operational Posture Statement:
Balance current operations with future readiness
Strengthen maritime governance
Counter strategic competitors while fulfilling our primary responsibility to secure and defend the homeland
Adjust force structure and posture to maximize operational effectiveness while maintaining a high level of support for our people, platforms, and infrastructure
Employ resources holistically to meet growing demands
Leverage intelligence, information, and improved maritime domain awareness to shift from a “patrol and interdict” to “target and interdict” model
These priorities reflect the increasing national and global demands for Coast Guard services. As 90 percent of global trade moves by sea, maritime security is the bedrock of national security and economic prosperity. In the face of rising global maritime tensions, the Coast Guard has a unique and critical role as a law enforcement entity and military agency.
Amidst this evolving environment, Gautier emphasized, the Coast Guard remains committed to its Search and Rescue (SAR) mission. That mission is “a sacred trust with the American people and a no-fail mission. It is our primary lifesaving mission. It defines us as a humanitarian service,” he said.
Moving forward, the Coast Guard intends to release a new Operational Posture Statement annually to outline the ways in which the service is adapting to new challenges and missions to best serve the American people.
To read the Operational Posture Statement in full, please click here.
Screen grab from page 2 of the DOD Arctic Strategy, 2024
Here is a link to the new DOD Arctic Strategy here. I found it disappointing. There isn’t much strategy here. I would sum it up as–we are going to keep doing what we are doing, but we are going to do it better. (See critique below.)
“This strategy will strengthen the ability of the United States to build integrated deterrence and effectively manage risk to U.S. interests in the Arctic region by enhancing our domain awareness and Arctic capabilities; engaging with Allies, partners, and key stakeholders; and exercising tailored presence.”
About the US Coast Guard:
The US Coast Guard or USCG was mentioned in three places, once in a caption of a picture of USCGC Healy and these two paragraphs.
DoD will partner with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including through the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), which plays a vital role in maintaining U.S. presence in the Arctic region and supporting domain awareness. The USCG is responsible for operating and maintaining the United States’ icebreaking capability, and DoD will continue to support the USCG’s long-term acquisition of at least eight polar icebreakers that will provide needed icebreaking capability for both military and civilian purposes, including PR/SAR. While disaster response is not a force sizing or shaping requirement, DoD remains ready to support DHS and the Federal Emergency Management Agency in the event of disaster, terrorist attack, or other mass-casualty incident in the Arctic when directed by the President or when requested by a lead Federal department or agency and approved by the Secretary of Defense.
Service-specific, Joint, Interagency, and Combined Exercises. Security and stability in the Arctic depend, in part, on the Joint Force’s ability to respond rapidly and effectively to threats in the region. Exercises increase interoperability with Allies and partners, validate plans, train our ability to rapidly deploy to all parts of the Arctic region, and provide an opportunity to test equipment in Arctic conditions. As such, the Joint Force will continue to exercise frequently in the Arctic through Service specific training, joint exercises —to include with USCG— and
combined exercises with our Allies and partners. DoD will
ensure CCMDs with Arctic equities work toward global integration through joint exercises and ensure key exercise lessons inform capability requirements and strategic planning.
That’s it.
About Icebreakers: Icebreakers are mentioned twice, it the paragraph above and here,
The PRC seeks to bolster its operational expertise in the Arctic, where its presence, while limited, is increasing. The PRC operates three icebreakers—the Xue Long, Xue Long 2, and Zhong Shan Da Xue Ji Di—which enable the PRC’s dual civil-military research efforts in the Arctic. Over the course of the PRC’s 13 Arctic research expeditions to date, the vessels have tested unmanned underwater vehicles and polar-capable fixed-wing aircraft, among other activities. People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) vessels have also demonstrated the capability and intent to operate in and around the Arctic region through exercises alongside the Russian Navy over the past several years.
Critique:
“DoD will reach this end state through a monitor-and-respond approach.”
In other words, we will be reactive rather than proactive.
The threat to Europe in the Polar regions is just part of the long running NATO defense problem. No real change there, except the formal extension of NATO into Sweden and Finland.
The Air Threat over the Pole to North America is looked after by NORAD. Apparently, NORAD does not look after Greenland, but that does not seem to be a central problem.
Ground operations in the Arctic are always going to be difficult. There may be small unit operations but no need to worry about an invasion of North America coming over the pole. NORTHCOM is exercising both land and air assets that would be needed to deal with realistic threats.
The North Slope oil fields and the associated pipeline are probably a target if we become engaged in a long-term conflict that involves combat in or over the arctic. The oil fields are not mentioned in the strategy,
What has changed?
The opening of the Arctic Ocean to maritime commerce has made it a possible avenue for logistics between Russia and China with the potential for militarily valuable shipments moving both ways between the Russian Arctic coast on one end and the Russian Pacific Coast, North Korea, or China on the other. The weakness of Russian transcontinental land transportation systems makes the Northern Sea Route particularly important.
The door to be shut or left open is the Bering Strait.
Bering Strait. 44 Nautical miles (82km) wide, with the Diomede Islands in the center.
The “strategy” mentions the Bering Straits only as a choke point,
The Arctic includes multiple strategically significant maritime chokepoints. Reduction in sea ice
due to climate change means chokepoints such as the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia and the Barents Sea north of Norway, are becoming more navigable and more economically and militarily significant.
We would certainly want to deny use of the Strait by our enemies and ensure that we and our allies have the option to transit through the Strait.
The planned deep-water port in Nome (currently on hold) will be essential to forces that might be used to control access to the Bering Strait. We would also want to make sure St Lawrence Island and Little Diomede remain in US hands. The US might also want to seize Big Diomede. None of these strategic locations are mentioned in the plan.
Diomede Islands: Little Diomede Island or Kruzenstern Island (left) and Big Diomede Island or Ratmanov Island in the Bering Sea. Photo is from the north. Photo by Dave Cohoe.
But who is in charge?
First look at the map at the head of this post. They have divided the Arctic so that operations there are under three different Unified Combatant Commands, USEUCOM, USINDOPACOM, and USNORTHCOM. In other words, no one below the President is in charge over the whole area.
These are the Unified Combatant Commander’s Areas of Responsibility. What is not made clear in this graphic is that all of Russia including the larger Asian part is under USEUCOM.
Perhaps most critically, the Pacific interface with the Arctic is under all three COCOMs.
USEUCOM is responsible for the Russian land areas in spite of the fact that the Bering Strait is 4521 statute miles from the COCOM’s headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, and that is the shorter distance West from Stuttgart across the Atlantic and over the US, rather than over Russia. –This has got to be wrong.
USNORTHCOM has the Bering Strait and the Eastern half of the Bering Sea but normally they have no significant naval force. Their primary responsibility is the air defense of the US and Canada.
USINDOPACOM, which has the naval assets in the Pacific that might be used to attack Russian assets in Asia has responsibility for only the Western half of the Bering Sea below the Bering Strait.
This division of responsibility, placing Russian Asia under USEUCOM, also means that if the US should be at war with both China and Russia, then at least officially, conducting the war in the Pacific would be under two or perhaps three different COCOMs. I doubt this would actually work this way.
Flexible patrol ship scale model on Danske Patruljeskibe booth at DALO Industry Days 2024.
Naval News reports that the Danish Navy is now planning to increase the armament of a proposed class of up to six ice strengthened patrol vessels. The design has not been finalized, but they have decided the security situation demands additional installed weapon systems.
What I think they leave out of the article is that while the Chinese seem to be planning heavy icebreakers including possibly nuclear-powered ones, the Chinese icebreakers built so far are nowhere near as powerful as Polar Star or the Polar Security Cutter. Mostly they have been ice capable research ships. Their only Chinese built medium ice breaker, Xue long-2, is smaller and a third less powerful than Healy. The three Chinese icebreakers currently in the Arctic include the much smaller 5,600-ton, 8,600 HP (6.4KW) Polar Class 6 Ji Di, smaller than the old Wind class icebreakers.
By some counts the US, and most notably Canada, have more icebreakers than China. All of China’s icebreaker construction is not directed at the Arctic. They also have interests in Antarctica (which I find more troubling), and they have ports that ice over requiring domestic icebreaking.
The Sandboxx also describes the 8,500 ton Project 23550 ice class patrol vessels as Russia’s “… first “combat icebreaker,” a small, agile, and armed-to-the-teeth escort ship with launchers installed for anti-ship and cruise missiles.” That is hyperbole. It has provision for placing two containers on the stern. Those containers could contain cruise missiles, but any ship that can mount containers in a position where the space above the container is unobstructed could have a similar capability. Other than being armed with containers, they are armed very much like a Coast Guard cutter. They have a single medium caliber gun, either 76mm or 100mm. They have no surface-to-air missile system other than perhaps man portable air defense systems (MANPADS) and no CIWS of any kind. Furthermore, they are not Russia’s first armed icebreaker. Russia has had armed icebreakers since at least WWII, including the Project 23550’s predecessors, the Ivan Susanin class, eight ships completed 1973 to 1982, four of which are still in service. I went aboard one of them in San Francisco, when they came to help celebrate the 200th anniversary of the beginning of the US Coast Guard.
It would not be too difficult for the US to build counterparts to the Project 23550s for the US Coast Guard or Navy, especially after the recent ICE Pact agreement with Canada and Finland. Ships don’t have to be as capable as the Polar Security Cutters to be useful. The Chinese are proving that.
The U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Kimball, right, and a Japanese naval training vessel travel near the island of Unalaska in 2021. (U.S. Coast Guard photo)
The Alaska Beacon reports on the local reaction to the presence of Chinese ships in the Bering Sea, July 6 and 7.
The reaction clearly favored a more powerful and more visible response than a Coast Guard cutter and C-130.
So why use a cutter? Wouldn’t a destroyer or frigate be more appropriate?
A destroyer would have been faster, but the cutter is actually faster than the frigates the Navy is currently building.
The immediate answer is that there probably were no US Navy surface combatants in the vicinity, but would that have even been desirable?
What if they had suddenly become hostile?
Well, the cutter would probably have been sunk. That is a fact, but that is probably equally true of a destroyer outnumbered and taken by surprise at close range. Losing a cutter would be less of a loss and a prompt response from the Air Force would follow, probably quickly sinking the Chinese warships that have no fighter protection. That’s assuming they had not already been sunk by a US Navy submarine that may or may not have also been following them.
The US Navy just does not routinely keep surface vessels in the area of the Aleutians. Apparently, the Chinese were only there for two days. It would probably take longer than that for a USN combatant to make a transit, putting it out of position for its normal duties.
They were probably only doing this because the US does Freedom of Navigation Exercises in their backyard. But their response just plays into our narrative that we have every right to transit the Taiwan Straits–Look, they are transiting a narrow passage between US islands, and we didn’t object.
Would I like to see the cutters better equipped to defend themselves, sure, but it probably would not make any difference if they came to blows. Meanwhile the cutter makes a pretty good AGI.
The Chinese are unlikely to start a war in the Aleutians unless they simultaneously also start it somewhere else, like Taiwan, but we still want to keep an eye on them, to discourage mischief.
Thanks to David for bringing this to my attention.
Coast Guard members salute during the playing of the national anthem during a decommissioning ceremony for the Coast Guard Cutters Sea Dog and Sea Dragon in St. Marys, Georgia, May 29, 2024. Rear Adm. Douglas M. Schofield, Coast Guard District Seven Commander, presided over the ceremony honoring the years of service the Sea Dog and Sea Dragon and their crews provided to the nation. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Ryan Dickinson)
Below is a press release. The two 87 foot patrol boats were assigned to a Force Protection unit for the Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs) based at Kings Bay, GA.
“The Coast Guard cutters Sea Devil (WPB 87368) and Sea Fox (WPB 87374) have relocated from Bangor, Washington, to replace the Sea Dog and Sea Dragon.”
Sea Devil and Sea Fox were assigned to the Force Protection Unit that escorts SSBNs from Bangor, WA. Is that unit being decommissioned, or are they being reequipped? The two WPBs at each unit were not the only boats used by these units.
As I recall these WPBs and their operating costs were paid for by the Navy Department. In any case these decommissionings do not affect normal Coast Guard operations.
These four WPBs were equipped a bit differently from standard Marine Protector class 87 footers, including having a .50 cal. mounted in a remote weapon station on a band stand on the bow.
KEYPORT, Wash. (Aug. 18, 2009) U. S. Coast Guardsmen man the rails as the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Sea Fox (WPB 87374) is brought to life at Naval Base Kitsap. (U.S. Navy photo Ray Narimatsu/Released)
Thanks to Paul for bringing this to my attention.
May 29, 2024
PHOTO RELEASE: Coast Guard cutters Sea Dog, Sea Dragon decommissioned in St. Marys, Georgia
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — The Coast Guard decommissioned the U.S. Coast Guard cutters Sea Dog (WPB 87373) and Sea Dragon (WPB 87367), Wednesday, during a ceremony in St. Marys, Georgia.
Rear Adm. Douglas M. Schofield, Coast Guard District Seven commander, presided over the ceremony honoring the years of service the Sea Dog and Sea Dragon provided to the nation.
The Sea Dog and Sea Dragon were 87-foot marine protector-class cutters assigned to Coast Guard Maritime Force Protection Unit Kings Bay in the Coast Guard’s Seventh District.
Maritime Force Protection Unit Kings Bay is designed to support the Navy’s efforts to provide anti-terrorism and force protection for its Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines and to assist in meeting its Presidential mandates for ballistic weapon security.
The Sea Dragon was commissioned in January 2008 and the Sea Dog was commissioned in July 2009.
“The men and women of the cutters Sea Dog and Sea Dragon, past and present, have exemplified unwavering professionalism and dedication, safeguarding our nation’s waters and supporting critical defense missions,” said Capt. David Vicks, commanding officer of Maritime Force Protection Unit Kings Bay. “I extend my profound gratitude to these courageous crews as we honor their steadfast service.”
Following the decommissioning ceremony, the cutters will be transferred to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point.
The Coast Guard cutters Sea Devil (WPB 87368) and Sea Fox (WPB 87374) have relocated from Bangor, Washington, to replace the Sea Dog and Sea Dragon.
For breaking news, follow us on X (formerly Twitter). For additional information, find us on Facebook and Instagram.
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — The Coast Guard is scheduled to hold a commissioning ceremony for the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Calhoun (WMSL 759), the service’s newest national security cutter, Saturday, in North Charlston. The event will be presided over by Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Linda Fagan. The cutter’s namesake comes from the first Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, Charles L. Calhoun. The commissioning ceremony’s date of April 20 is in honor of Calhoun’s birthday.
WHO: Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Linda Fagan; Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard Heath Jones; Capt. Timothy Sommella, the commanding officer of the Calhoun; and Calhoun crew members.
WHAT: Commissioning ceremony for the Coast Guard’s newest national security cutter.
WHEN: Saturday, April 20, 2024, at 10 a.m.
WHERE: Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, 2000 Bainbridge Ave., North Charleston, SC 29405.
Editors’ Note: Interested media are requested to RSVP by emailing a list of members’ names to Ensign Cody Meyers at Cody.L.Meyers@uscg.mil for base access no later than 5 p.m. Wednesday. Credentialed media are asked to arrive no later than 9 a.m. Saturday with a driver’s license and proof of insurance to clear security.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 