WiredDotCom’s Dangerroom has got an interesting piece on a new piece of equipment that can launch a large number of different types of weapons and decoys.
It was tested using the Javelin missile, but among other things, it looks like it could probably handle Brimstone/SeaSpear or the 120 mm mortar which should soon have guidance by either laser guidance or GPS against fixed targets.
US Coast Guard photoThe Coast Guard has four 52 foot motor life boats, all built in the 1960s, all in the Thirteenth District:
Victory -Station Yaquina Bay, Newport, Ore.
Invincible II -Station Grays Harbor, Westport, Wash.
Triumph II -Station Cape Disappointment, Ilwaco, Wash.
Intrepid –Station Coos Bay, Charleston, Ore.
The Coast Guard’s information sheet regarding this class is available here (pdf). There is also a short Wikipedia entry here.
These boats were brought to my attention by a reader who felt they needed replacement and further suggested that a replacement might also be useful for seasonal work in the Arctic.
I have to assume they have some unique capabilities, for these fifty year old boats to have been retained when first 44s and then 47 foot MLBs might have replaced them. At 32 tons they are considerably bigger than the 20 ton 47 footers, and they have considerably more range. It also appears they have more comfortable accommodations for extended missions.
The reader alluded to, recommended a C. Raymond Hunt designed, 61 foot 43 ton pilot/rescue boat, built by Gladding Hearn Shipbuilding. Somerset, Mass, for service in Bermuda.
Earlier we discussed the Netherlands’ new 32.5 ton design that might also be an appropriate replacement. There is also more here.
At any rate it would be a small class, probably less than ten, but we would not necessarily have to start from scratch in seeking a replacement for these now very old, but apparently uniquely useful rescue vessels.
Just a quick note to say the CG has redesigned its retiree website. You can find it here:
Once again we are at the anniversary of Pearl Harbor. I am repeating my previous posts, but again I will recommend the Coast Guard Historian’s very extensive treatment of the Coast Guard’s role available here.
gCapatin has an amusing post about traditional toasts that meanders to include some songs, but definitely worth the read.
gCaptain reports the Finns are building another new ice-breaker, this one will be dual fuel, eg, able to Natural Gas.
Reportedly the vessel will “… be capable of operating continuously in ice up to 1.6m thick and break a 25 meter wide channel in 1.2 meter thick ice at a speed of 6 knots.”
Both the former Coast Guard 378s now in service with the Philippine Navy are being used to respond the recent Typhoon damage.
http://anc.yahoo.com/video/brp-ramon-alcaraz-serving-command-223334786.html
Fiercehomlandsecurity reports GAO has found a disconnect between DHS border and maritime R&D and the users of the result. I tried to wade through the GAO report, but was unable to make much progress. At any rate the dollar amounts are small by government standards, but there were a few things that were clear. First DHS does not spend very much on Border and Maritime R&D, and second that the Coast Guard’s portion is only a disproportionately small sliver of that.
Looking at the chart in the Fiercehomelandsecurity article you see is that of the three centers of Maritime and Border research within the DHS, CG R&D has by far the smallest share. What you do not see is that this is only part of DHS’s total R&D effort. Science and Technology’s Border amd Maritime Division is only one of six divisions doing R&D for DHS (p.6)
So the CG is a major part of the department, but is directly supported by only a very minor part of an already small R&D budget, so is it surprising that there is a disconnect between the end users and the R&D effort?
The GAO report can be found here.
Defense News has an excellent interview with the Commandant. The whole interview is relatively short and to the point, only ten questions. I’ll just pick a couple of quotes to give you the flavor, but the whole thing is worth the read.
The Coast Guard is in a tough spot right now and the Commandant talks about how the budget process for each year has gotten progressively more difficult…
“So when you try to balance the recapitalization, the construction projects, keep your people, keep them adequately trained and then spend money on operations, at a certain point, you get to that tipping point where you have no other alternative other than to start cutting people or start cutting projects. And I think we’re at that point now.”
Some good news:
“We’re going to deploy Polar Star down to Antarctica to break out for the first time in many years.”
An interesting development, in response to this question, “What’s the role of the Coast Guard in that Pacific pivot strategy?” the Commandant noted the decreasing number of Navy assets in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific and added,
“…within a few short weeks or months, we’re going to publish a Western Hemisphere strategy, which more clearly defines what the Coast Guard intends to do to make sure that our hemisphere is taken care of.”
Look forward to seeing that. At the same time I hope we don’t neglect the very substantial part of the US EEZ in the Central and Western Pacific. (Don’t suppose we could get the Navy to fund Offshore Patrol Cutters operating our of Guam.)
The Calgary Herald is reporting that the Canadian Government has raised the estimated price of their new Heavy Icebreaker, the Diefenbaker, from $720M to $1.3B (Canadian). Not a lot of difference in the value of the Canadian and US dollars these days, so it make the Coast Guard’s estimate of close to $1B look…well, reasonable.
The two classes of icebreakers are very much contemporaries. The Polar Star is projected to last only until 2020. It is not yet clear when a new USCG icebreaker will enter service since its procurement is only in the preliminary stages, and there has been no significant funding for it. Plus the Coast Guard is contending they will need funding assistance from other agencies to make construction possible.
“…a scheduling conflict at the shipyard with the navy’s new resupply ships means work on the Diefenbaker won’t start until at least 2018, and the icebreaker won’t be ready until 2022.”
Perhaps an opportunity for some cooperation?
