Photos: Eastern’s proposal for the Offshore Patrol Cutter (left), We still have not seen much of Bollenger’s proposal, but I suspect it may look something like the photo on the right, but with  a more conventional mast. 

US Naval Institute News reports on the Commandant’s testimony before the House Appropriations Homeland Security Sub-committee.

“Adm. Paul Zukunft said the service will be looking again at its force-mix analysis, taking into account the money appropriated for a ninth national security cutter for this fiscal year. He said he had “the utmost confidence” the Coast Guard will down-select to one shipbuilder this year for the offshore patrol cutter.

The budget request for Fiscal Year 2017 includes $100 million for long-lead procurement for the offshore patrol cutter program.

I am a little concerned to see the statement below. Note shipbuilder (singular, not plural).

“Zukunft said that the Coast Guard is in “very emotional discussions” with the shipbuilder over the contracts for the last of the fast response cutters. “We need to come to closure on this” in the next few months to clear the way for the construction of the offshore patrol cutters.”

I was under the impression we were to have a competition for construction of the remaining ships. The Coast Guard paid for the design rights so that we could put the remained out for competitive bids. This should have happened a couple of years ago. What happened? And why is this not a multi-year buy?

There is also $150M in the budget for long lead time items for the new Icebreaker. This seems a bit odd, since the builder has not been selected, although I suppose Huntington Ingalls is the foregone conclusion.

————————————————————————–

For more on the previous Force Structure (Fleet Mix) Studies:

• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2011/04/25/fleet-mix-where-are-the-trade-offs/
• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/05/28/offshore-and-aviation-fleet-mix-study-published/
• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/06/13/gao-responds-to-fleet-mix-studies-part-1-the-report/
• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/08/05/gao-responds-to-fleet-mix-studies-part-2-commentary/
• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/10/01/dhs-cutter-fleet-study/
• https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2012/10/12/the-dhs-cutter-study-trade-offs-and-the-case-for-cutter-x/

Stars and Stripes is reporting that Minnesota Sea Cadets are attempting to raise money to purchase the former USCGC Acushnet (WMEC-167) which also saw service as the USS Shackle(ARS-9), a Diver-class rescue and salvage ship.

She would probably be a good choice. Not only only does the ship have a long and notable history, this class was robustly built.

Our friends at CIMSEC have had a week long look at the concept of Distributed Lethality, the Navy Surface Warfare Community’s concept of wide distribution of offensive anti-ship and possibly land attack systems, commonly summarized as, “If it floats, it fights.”

The Coast Guard does not appear to have been included in any of the discussion of this concept, but perhaps it should be.

CIMSEC has collected their recent posts on the subject. There is an intro and background information here, or you can just download the entire collection as a pdf here.

https://www.dvidshub.net/image/2420118/coast-guard-coordinates-removal-sunken-tug-near-juneau-alaska#.Vs0c6YRWu20

This looks like it might be an opportunitiy to test the lethality of our 57mm guns. We have a tug that needs to be disposed of. Let’s see how well a Bertholf’s 57mm Mk110 does against this small target.

In April 2012 we had an opportunity to exercise our weapons against a derilect Japanese fishing vessel that had been adrift since the Tsunami of 11 March 2011. USCGC Anacapa let loose with her 25mm and probably scored over a hundred hits, but ultimately had to use fire hoses to sink the little ship. I used this as an example of how hard it is to sink a ship with gunfire. 

To be fair lets make sure that all the tugs few bulkheads are watertight; you would want to make sure they were before towing it anyway. To make it interesting, start shooting from between 10,000 and 12,000 yards, and fire say 20 rounds at that range. Then close to about 7,000 and shoot another 20. If the tug hasn’t sunk, close to no less than 4,000 and try to finish it off.

Would be very interested to see the results, including how long it takes to sink the ship? How many hits at what ranges? It would be good for an aircraft to get some video of the damage, as it progresses too. The Navy might also be interested in the results.

The Commandant will be issuing the 2016 State of the Coast Guard address at 14:00 (2:00 PM) Eastern Time. Apparently it will be streamed live. Details here. http://www.uscg.mil/CoastGuard2016/

Bairdmaritime is reporting that European ship owners are supporting recommended EU guidelines for policy regarding ships that seek refuge within the territorial sea of EU countries.

I don’t have a Captain of the Port/Marine Safety background. Could this be an issue for the US?

We have a report from the Japan Times that, ”

“The United States and Japan plan to hold a meeting of coast guard commanders with Australia and the Philippines as part of their efforts to forge a unified front against China’s maritime activities, according to diplomatic sources.”

with the meeting likely to take place in the Philippines.

Australia’s coast guards are volunteer organizations, more like the CG auxiliary, so their representative is likely to be Royal Australian Navy. I would think the Philippine Navy might have a role here as well. Although the Philippine Coast Guard is being reinforced, it is still not up to the task of facing down the Chinese Coast Guard. Even their Navy would have a hard time with that. There is also a Philippino fisheries management agency which is likely to be a player.

Interestingly recently Reuters reported that the US was “open” to joint patrols with the Philippines. Apparently the US is also talking Joint Patrols with India.

What does all this mean for the Coast Guard?

It appears the most likely outcome is USCG and perhaps Japanese and/or Australian ship-riders on Philippine ships and perhaps USCG ship-riders on Japanese cutters. If something happens between Chinese and Philippine units that might prompt the US to intercede, we would certainly want to know what actually happened. We don’t want to be dragged into a war because a Philippine unit acted improperly and then blamed the Chinese. Good documentation would also be useful in influencing domestic and world opinion. Ship-riders would also mean that if the Chinese attempt to bully the Philippines or Japan by the use of deadly force, it would mean they would have to consider the prossible consequences of US and/or Australian casualties as well.

There are other, less likely possibilities, we might, as 7th Fleet has suggested, send a cutter to patrol with the Philippine Coast Guard, or with Philippine Coast Guard representatives embarked, allowing the cutter to provide transportation and support for Philippine Authorities. Also possible, but probably more provocative and therefore less likely, would be putting Coast Guard LEDET and Philippine authorities on US Navy vessels to enforce Philippine law.

I suspect these consultations are in anticipation of a favorable decision on behalf of the Philippines by the International Tribunal on Law of the Sea.  If the Tribunal decices the Chinese are imposing themselves on territory that should be under Philippine administration, what will be done about it?

These are not Coast Guard Craft, but they are interesting to boat drivers in general.

Beside, some day some Coast Guard crew may run into something similar up to no good.

Only been six weeks after the issuance of “Dec. 14, 2015 Congressional Research Service report, Coast Guard Cutter Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress” there was already a 27 January, 2016 update, but this one is very different, because it incorporates the content of the FY2016 Appropriations Act which the President is expected to sign. Hopefully this marks a turning point in Coast Guard Procurement. 

There is a nice summary of how the budget battle developed in Table 7. “Summary of Appropriations Action on FY2016” on page 28. The biggest part of the jump from request to Appropriation was $640M for a ninth Bertholf Class, but there were other increases in both the OPC and NSC programs.

• The NSC program went from a request for $91.4M to a final figure of $743.4M. A delta of $653M
• The OPC program from a request for $18.5M to $89.0M permitting the award of the OPC down select contract in FY2016.
• The FRC program began and ended as $340.0M (six more boats, a total of 38 funded through FY2016).
• The TOTAL for all three programs went from 4449.9M to $1,172.4M

It does look like we have some friends on both sides of the aisle in Congress.

There are some significant provisions in the bill, that should change the way the Coast Guard does business and reports to the Congress.

• There is a requirement for long range acquisition planning. They did not quite go to 30 years as the Navy has done, but to 20 years.(p.34 &37)
• There is a requirement to track operational ship days as opposed to Days Away From Homeport which may include maintenance as well as operations. (p. 37)
• There is a 10 year requirement to maintain a continuous ship presence in the Bering Sea and Arctic using ships at least as capable as the ones currently used. (p.30).

The Congress did seem to take the service to task for being slow in completing evaluation and implementation of the Crew Rotation Concept (CRC) and Unmanned Air Systems.

The Congressional Research Service also questions why the Coast Guard has not attempted to take advantage of the potential estimated 7% saving that typically result from Multiyear and/or Block Buy contracting. I have been wondering about this for some time myself, especially with regard to the Webber Class Fast Response Cutters which are a mature, proven program approved for full rate production. (p. 20)

Passing this along,

“The USCGC INGHAM and USCGC CAMPBELL Associations are planning a joint reunion, 27-29 September 2016, at the USCGC INGHAM Maritime Museum and National Historic Landmark in Key West, Florida,  www.uscgcingham.org, to celebrate the 80th Birthday of the original Secretary Class Cutters.  All former Secretary Class  Shipmates are invited. Initial POC for INGHAM shipmates is Matt Krainski at comet1996@aol.com and Rick Croasdale for CAMPBELL at captrow737@aol.com.  Former shipmates from BIBB, DUANE, HAMILTON, SPENCER, and TANEY may contact their Associations or Marty Moynihan at coeagle17@yahoo.com.  Additional information will be available this Spring.”