Defense News reports, the Indian Coast Guard is continuing to grow, including development of a radar and electro-optic based Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) system that is expected to include 84 remote sensor sites.
The system is a response to the Nov. 26, 2008, Mumbai terror attacks which came by sea. For them 26/11 has the same meaning 9/11 has for the US.
HSToday is reporting that the Coast Guard has clarified the expected delivery schedule for the Offshore Patrol Cutters, but the result is still not all that clear. Perhaps more importantly they report the Coast Guard will issue “…a “clean” contract in its request for proposals (RFP), reflecting all amendments to the RFP to date, in the week of Jan. 7.” Responses are required by January 23. There is also a statement of intent to hold the maximum price of units four through nine to $310M each.
They state that the interval between units for the first four ships will be one year. Unit five would be expected six months after unit four, with the remaining units of the eleven ship contract being delivered at six month intervals.
Previous information had indicated that FY2015, 2016, and 2017 would be single ship buys and the remaining eight ships would presumably be in four successive two ship buys. The article does not mention it, but the first ship is reportedly expected near the end of calender year 2019. I had hoped for, and expected, only a six month delay between units three and four, but it may be to early to say anyway. The report states,
“Shipbuilders have the option of proposing a different delivery schedule to the Coast Guard in the second phase of the competition, the solicitation noted. The Coast Guard could then incorporate the revised schedule into the final contract for the winning bidder.”
The competition is to be done in two phase. Phase one (expected to last 18 months with completion near the beginning of FY2015) is an initial selection of up to three competitors to complete a preliminary design. Phase two selects a final winner for detail design and construction of the prototype, with options included in the contract for an additional ten ships to be spread over six fiscal years. It might be possible to award all or part of the follow-on construction as a Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) (pdf)). A MYP has the potential to afford substantial savings but requires Congressional commitment.
I’m a bit surprised there is no mention of this clarification on the Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) web site.
The Air Force is planning to replace their HH-60 “Pave Hawk” Combat Rescue Helicopters with 112 new aircraft.
Until recently their had been significant interest in this contract, but Defense News is reporting,
“EADS North America, Boeing and Northrop Grumman all confirmed to Defense News that they will not be putting in a bid on the program before the Jan. 3 due date. The decision was first reported by Reuters.”
“…leaving a clear path for Sikorsky to land the nearly $7 billion contract.”
The Coast Guard will need to start looking at how to address their aging helicopter fleet in the near future. The Air Force buy may have a significant influence on the Coast Guard’s choice.
Officer of the Watch has a ten and a half minute video and pictorial of Russian Nuclear icebreakers. Interesting to see the number and variety of ships.
A nice three and a half minute video from the NFL pointing out that both kickers and the Coast Guard are under appreciated. Unfortunately you do have to watch the commercial that leads into it.
HSToday.US has a short article here on the new classes of cutter boats.
Two things that might be significant:
Additional background from the Acquisition Directorate (CG-9) can be found here.
Following the sinking of the car carrying RO-RO (roll on-roll off) “BALTIC ACE” in only 15 minutes following a collision with what appears to have been a smaller ship, gCaptain is raising questions regarding the safety of the type. Of the crew of 24, 13 were rescued, five bodies were recovered, and six are missing and presumed dead.
Issues they see with regard to RO-ROs are that the type tends to sink faster and more easily than other types of ships, and that their design may also make it more difficult for the crew to abandon ship.
In the interest of efficient loading and unloading RO-ROs tend to have few water tight bulkheads. They may have large openings in the hull, close to the waterline, covered by equally large hatches, some of which also serve as ramps. Their stability may be compromised by cargo that can shift easily. Because of their high sides, lifeboats are usually positioned high above the water, making lowering and embarkation more difficult.
gCaptain does acknowledge.
“While many experts agree that RoRo’s are dangerous, in 2004, more than 1.3 billion passengers, 188 million cars, 856,000 buses and 28.7 million trailers were carried on 5.9 million crossings globally and non-passenger carrying RoRo’s, like the Baltic Ace, have a similarly impressive safety record in recent years.”
An index of gCaptain’s coverage of the incident here.
We have previously noted that the Iranians have attempted to use reflagging and disguised ownership to circumvent sanctions. Now Reuters is reporting Iranian ships appear to be attempting to manipulate the Automatic Identification System (AIS) to help Syria also avoid sanctions.
gCaptain had reported earlier on Irans’s attempts to help Syria here.
Thanks to Phil Leon for bringing this to my attention.
The Marine Log is reporting the House of Representatives has passed a compromise CG Authorization and sent it back to the Senate. It looks encouraging, but this is not a budget and if sequestration goes into effect, all bets are off.
It is now 71 years since the attack. Taney, the last remaining warship that survived the attack, is a museum, and most of the men and women who experienced the attack are gone. But if you would like to learn more about what the Coast Guard was doing, I suggest a visit to the Coast Guard historian’s Pearl Harbor index.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 