Shipbuilding, Dealing with Reality

The Coast Guard’s fleet of large cutters  is facing a budgetary “perfect storm,” and if it is to survive without a major reduction in numbers, a change in procurement strategy is required.

The NSCs cost as much as an entire year’s AC&I budget for vessels. An analysis of the Coast Guard’s FY 2012 budget request for vessels and the funding history of the National Security Cutters (NSC), funding only about one half the cost of an NSC each year, and with three more NSCs still to be funded, suggest it is unlikely the Coast Guard will see the first Offshore Patrol Cutter in 2019 as has been planned. In fact there is reason to believe the Coast Guard will not be allowed to proceed with the OPC program as currently envisioned.

There are rumblings that some parties want to kill the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) program all together, and many of those who understand the need to replace old ships question why all of our replacements are notably larger than the ships they replace.

  • 378s, 3,050 tons, full load (fl) to be replaced by NSCs, 4,375 tons
  • 210s, 1050 tons (fl) to be replaced by OPCs, 2,500 to 3,000 tons
  • 110s, 165 tons (fl) to be replaced by RFCs, 353 tons

We haven’t generated the “Fleet Mix Study” that might justify these larger and more capable ships. Saying we need larger ships to provide better living conditions for the crew won’t cut it and frankly it does a disservice to our crews who have shown a willingness to accept spartan condition on shipboard, particularly since now most, if not all, will have a place to live ashore as well.

If we want to actually arrest and reverse the aging of the large cutter fleet and have a more capable fleet in the long run, we have to do something different, and we have to do it soon.

Additionally it appears that we may have funded enough NSCs and the Coast Guard needs a different kind of cutter to address the emerging new ways drugs are being smuggled.

Conceptual Rendering of the OPC

Disclaimer by Acquisition Directorate (CG-9): (This) conceptual rendering (is) for artistic display purposes only and do not convey any particular design, Coast Guard design preferences, or other requirements for the OPC.

This is an alternative plan.

  • Stop NSC production at five or at most six ships and put them all in the Pacific.
  • Forget the Crew Rotation Concept (CRC), at least for now.
  • Kick start the OPC program by building the first six or seven as lower cost, smaller replacements for the remaining 378s and give them the sensors needed to find drug running semi-submersibles and true submersibles.
  • To provide “value added,” work with the Navy to make sure they have credible wartime mission capabilities.

NSCs go north, OPCs go south. NSCs will specialize in ALPAT while OPCs will specialize in drug interdiction, with at least some of them being made capable of interdicting true submersibles.

Normally it takes three ships to keep one on station, suggesting six NSCs to keep two on ALPAT at all times, but mixing in an occasional OPC during the summer months, 5 should be enough.

The OPC, at 2,500 tons or more, is a hard sell as a replacement for 1,000 ton 210s, but as a replacement for the 3,000 ton 378s, at what should be close to half the price of an NSC, the Coast Guard is clearly being a team player. This gets the program started and, in quantity, the price should start coming down substantially. After the first six or seven are built as 378s replacements, and they prove their worth, they may not be as hard to sell as MEC replacements as the economy improves.

Earlier posts (here and here) addressed multiple crewing of National Security Cutters and, following the numbers, demonstrated why, even if it works as planned, the current plan could only provide the equivalent of 10 conventionally manned cutters, not 12, and the total operating costs are likely to be higher compared to conventionally manned ships providing the same number of ship-days.

The only example I know of, where multiple crewing of complex ships works is the Fleet Ballistic Missile submarine program and there, the incentives to make it work are huge. Total numbers of submarines are limited by treaty so there is a desire to get maximum use out of an artificially limited supply and the capital cost per crew member is probably an order of magnitude greater than it is for Coast Guard Cutters. The Navy with all their experience does not attempt to multi-crew it’s attack submarines even though this is a closely allied program, again with a far higher ratio of capital cost to crew cost. If we want to try this concept, try it on the Fast Response Cutters first, where it is more likely to work, but kill it as a planning consideration for large ship procurement. Consider it just another hoax perpetrated on the Coast Guard by Integrated Deepwater Systems.

Since we started planning the new fleet of large cutter, our needs have changed. Drug smugglers have begun to change their tactics, using semi-submersibles and even true submersibles (here, here, here, and here). A ship equipped with a towed array and an embarked Navy MH-60R ASW helicopter detachment would substantial improve our chances of intercepting these.

Having a credible wartime capability can also help convince members of congress these ships are a worthwhile investment. Once we have given the ship a towed array and the ability to operate Navy ASW helos, at almost no costs we can add the ability to operate them in a war time role by insuring we have spaces appropriate for storing their weapons and other equipment, spaces that can be used for other purposes until required.  It also should not be difficult, working with the Navy, to insure they can accept at least some of the LCS Mission Modules.

A 2,500 ton OPC, as currently planned, is in many respects an excellent replacement for a 378 and it will have lower operating costs. More importantly, if the OPC program survives and goes on to replace the 210s and 270s, we will have a far more capable fleet overall.

We need to start this change with the FY2013 budget.

 

Port Security Breakthough?

Saw a story about this done by a San Diego Television Station, CBS8, (See the video) on the Coast Guard’s “News and Blog Summary.”  If it works as advertised, it could be a huge step forward in port security and maritime domain awareness.  A network of buoys, linked together to a shore facility by Wi-Fi detects, locates, and provides imagery of vessels carrying explosives or radioactive material. To get more detail, I contacted, Intellicheck Mobilisa, the contractor that is developing the system.  I was able to ask a few questions of their vice president for Marketing, Kenna Pope.

The ability to simultaneously screen large numbers of containers implicit in this technology is also interesting.


Continue reading

Quick Video Tour of Morro Bay’s Engineroom

We have had a recent series from the Icebreaking tug USCGC Morro Bay (WTGB 106) as she deployed from her homeport in New York to the Great Lakes to help with icebreaking there. Here is a very quick video of her engineroom. Looking good for a 30 year old ship (Commissioned in 1981). The FY2012 budget request includes funds to renovate the first of her class.

Morro Bay is one of a class of 8. Here are their basic specs:

  • Displacement: 662 tons full load
  • Length: 140 feet (42.67 meters)
  • Beam: 37.6 feet (11.43 meters)
  • Draft: 12.5 feet (3.66 meters)
  • Two Fairbanks Morse main propulsion diesels that drive generators (engines and generators at their far end, are gray in the video)
  • Westinghouse electric drive motor
  • Single shaft
  • Two 125 KW ship service generators (they are yellow in the video)
  • 2,500 HP
  • Speed: 14.7
  • Endurance 1,800 nmi/14.7 knots, 4,000 nmi/12 knots (probably requires only one diesel)
  • Crew: 3 officers, 14 enlisted

Please, correct me if I am wrong, but I presume the ship service generators are forward of the main prop diesels.

Here are links to some of the previous posts about Morro Bay’s deployment:

Budget Realities Setting In?

The Marine Log is reporting “House Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee Chairman Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) set a no-nonsense tone when he opened up a hearing yesterday to review the Administration’s budget requests for the U.S. Coast Guard…’Congress must make extremely difficult decisions in the coming months to bring our spending under control and cut the deficit’…Chairman LoBiondo commended the service for uncovering some savings through efficiencies in operations and the consolidation of services, but wanted to know ‘if more operational savings can be found that will not adversely impact safety, security, and mission success.'”

He called the Coast Guard’s  five year Capital Improvement Plan “fantastic,” (not in a good way, as in, it is a fantasy) referring to a planned 66 percent increase in funding over the next three fiscal years. (Assuming we are talking about a 66% increase in AC&I over the FY2012 request ($1.4B) that is a $924M increase annually, approximately a 9% increase in the total budget.)

He also took the service to task for its failure to complete a “fleet mix analysis” that the Subcommittee requested over 13 months ago.  “I urge the Service, in the strongest possible terms, to satisfy our request for this document in short order…Second, the Service continues to lack the polar missions plan long sought by Congress. To add insult to injury, the Service intends to spend millions of unbudgeted dollars to refurbish the POLAR SEA’s engine and then decommission the icebreaker.  This is a classic example of throwing good money after bad.”

The Coast Guard is still projecting procurement planned under the discredited “Deepwater” program, almost ten years ago, that included replacing 12 WHECs with 8 multi-crewed National Security Cutters (NSC) and replacing 29 WMECs with 25 Offshore Patrol Cutters (OPC), a reduction of 20% in the number of hulls. Meanwhile, there is little evidence to prove multiple crewing of NSCs will work; UAVs, which don’t seem to be working out for reasons beyond Coast Guard control, were supposed to do a lot of the air surveillance work; drug runners are turning to semi-submersibles and true submarines that are increasingly hard to detect; and new responsibilities are coming with the opening of the Arctic to commerce. It is also possible to make a case that the South Pacific EEZ was never adequately policed. Things have changed and they justify more, not fewer assets. Continue reading

Arctic Patrol Vessel–New Zealand

New Zealand has produced a couple of Canadian designed ice strengthened offshore patrol vessels, HMNZS WELLINGTON and  OTAGO, that they intend to use to support their operations in the Antarctic. WELLINGTON has recently completed her first deployment to the antarctic.

File:HMNZS Wellington.JPG
HMNZS WELLINGTON visits Wellington for the first time; Author: Derek Quinn; Date: 2010-09-23
While I think we all recognize the need for a heavy icebreaker capability, we are unlikely to ever have enough to fulfill all our growing needs for presence in the Arctic. Ice strengthened Arctic patrol cutters similar to the WELLINGTON might provide a viable alternative to fill this need.

Fast Response Cutter Photos

The Cutterman facebook page has published some more photos of the Fast Response Cutter Webber (and possibly a bow on view of a follow-on ship). Unfortunately they are all taken from low on the starboard bow or directly on the bow so we don’t get views of the whole ship. Look forward to seeing the vessel emerge from the building shed and seeing the whole vessel.

Patrol Boats for Iraqi Navy–Ready to Take Over?

The Iraqi Navy has accepted the second and third of a projected class of fifteen 35 meter (115 foot) patrol boats that will ultimately take over security duties at their offshore oil terminals now provided by Coast Guard 110 foot and Navy Cyclone Class patrol craft.

The patrol boats are being built in Louisiana by Swiftships at a cost of about $20M each. The crews are also being trained in Louisiana.

https://i0.wp.com/gcaptain.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/PB-301-Iraqi-Navy-patrol-boat.jpg

Continue reading