The Marine Corp is undertaking a study of fitness criteria. This is important to many in all branches of the military. Hopefully it will lead to standards that are more relevant and more fair.
We all know, the Coast Guard will continue to use cutters long after there nominal life. Maybe we should act on that, by looking at using more durable material. Marine Link talks about how making hulls of titanium could provide significant savings in the long run.
The proposed rationale for maintaining the option of up-arming cutters is also interesting.
I will just quote their conclusion, but take a look at the whole rationale.
—
“The bigger the Navy (and USCG combination), the cooler it gets. It especially argues for building lots of USCG cutter hulls, but leaving them mostly unoutfitted for naval combat. One can build 20 titanium USCG cutters for the life cycle cost of 10 steel hulls, and make them ready for sea, but only install one ship with the best weapons package. The world will know that you can build something that can dominate the battle space, but there is no need to fit all 20 with the latest and the greatest (which saves enough money to build a couple of additional hulls) if there is no immediate threat of war. Meanwhile the “enemy” will know that when they start to rattle their sabers you will not have 10 (if built in steel) obsolescent hulls, but instead will have access to more than 19 hulls that can be fitted with the hottest weapons much more quickly. This is a much better result than having 10 old “fancy steel” units and actually will defer cost until it is needed. This thinking already works with steel hulls, but if the hulls do not waste away it becomes even more cost effective and further strengthens Dr. Daidola’s argument.
“So here we have three clever engineers who have developed two independent USCG procurement approaches, which each save incredible amounts of money, and, when combined, save even more money.”
Below is a Northrop Grumman press release.
—
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. – June 8, 2020 – Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) has been awarded a newly expanded role as systems integrator for C5ISR and control systems on the U.S. Coast Guard Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC), by Eastern Shipbuilding Group (ESG), the prime contractor for the OPC program.
Artist’s rendition of USCGC ARGUS, the first vessel of the Heritage Class Fleet of Offshore Patrol Cutters. (Image courtesy Eastern Shipbuilding Group)
In a newly expanded role as C5ISR systems integrator, Northrop Grumman is responsible for integrating all cyber hardened C5ISR systems, including command and control, communications, navigation and the shipboard computer networking systems.
“With C5ISR and control system test and integration underway, the ESG-Northrop Grumman team hasn’t missed a beat,” said Todd Leavitt, vice president, maritime systems and integration, Northrop Grumman. “The effort and resiliency shown by our teammates at Eastern Shipbuilding Group has been outstanding.”
Northrop Grumman’s responsibilities for the OPC platform include the integrated bridge, navigation, command and control, computing network, data distribution, machinery control, and propulsion control systems, cyber/information assurance, testing and integration work.
Northrop Grumman solves the toughest problems in space, aeronautics, defense and cyberspace to meet the ever evolving needs of our customers worldwide. Our 90,000 employees define possible every day using science, technology and engineering to create and deliver advanced systems, products and services.
The June 2021 edition of the U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings has a short article by Captain Michael Cilenti, USCG, currently CO of USCGC Tampa, in the “Professional Notes” section, pp 78-79, about the service life extension program (SLEP) planned for six of the 270 foot WMECs. It is available on line if you are a USNI member.
Captain Cilenti, confirms what we have suspected, that the 76mm Mk75 gun and Mk92 firecontrol will be replaced by a 25mm Mk38, the same gun currently used on the Webber class WPCs.
The Captain is concerned primarily because the loss of the Mk92 means the loss of the ships’ most capable radar. The Mk92 is a multi-function radar. In addition to providing firecontrol, it is the ships’ only air search, and its most sensitive surface search. It is more effective in detecting the targets such as low profile semi-submersibles.
Capt Cilenti suggests that there is are alternatives already in or planned for Coast Guard use that could be installed to provide these capabilities. He suggest the AN/SPS-75 (TRS-3D), currently installed on the Bertholf class National Security Cutters and the Freedom class LCS, or the AN/SPS-77, planned for the Offshore Patrol Cutters and currently used on the Independence class LCS.
He notes that the addition of a multi-mode radar would allow the 270s to control emergency helicopter low visibility approaches by the embarked helicopter and facilitate UAS operations.
I hope someone is paying attention to the Captain’s plea. Adding a modern multi-mode radar and a UAS system such as V-BAT, could give us WMECs that are more capable than ever, of performing their law enforcement and SAR missions, while requiring few crew members and less extensive training. Deleting the Mk92 firecontrol system without replacement will leave these ships little more capable than the 210s and probably preclude installation of more capable Unmanned Air Systems.
The 270 SLEPs will begin in the near term. A decision to retain and enhance these ships sensor capability is urgent.
Late Addition:
I would suggest that the 25mm Mk38 be mounted up a deck, like the gun of the very similar Irish Naval Service Offshore Patrol Vessel LÉ Eithne pictured below. This would provide a greater degree of protection from green water coming over the bow. (Incidentally that gun is an earlier version of the 57mm being used on the National Security Cutters.)
Dmitry Shulgin reports the successful test of a new rocket assisted, laser homing round, the “Guided Multipurpose Munition” (GMM), for the Carl Gustaf Recoilless Rifle (M3E1 in US service) and the AT4 single shot, recoilless, smooth bore, disposable, anti-tank weapon (designated M136 in US service).
We talked about the possibility of Coast Guard use of the Carl Gustaf before. The M3E1 is now a common weapon that will arm every US Marine infantry squad. In the US Army there will be one for every platoon.
It may be that the laser guided round is only a Special Forces requirement, but after development it is almost certain to become more generally available.
This would not be a comprehensive answer to the Coast Guard need to be able to counter a terrorist attack by surface vessel, regardless of size. Even with the new round, it does not have the 4,000 yard range I believe desirable to minimize the probability of effective counter fire from improvised armament. It is unlikely to be effective against larger vessels, but, particularly with the new guided round, it could certainly be effective against small, fast, highly maneuverable threats.
There is always a concern for providing security for a highly portable weapon like this, but security requirements for these weapons and their ammunition should be comparable to that provided for machine guns.
As noted earlier, if things get hot for PATFORSWA, the cutters there could benefit from having a Marine detachment aboard that can employ the Carl Gustaf.
Other than the PATFORSWA, the first Coast Guard units that should receive armament upgrades are the force protection units that escort Fleet Ballistic Missile Subs during surface transit.
“The United Nations declared June 5 an international day for the fight against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing in late 2017. Yet, on the fourth observance of the annual awareness campaign, the global challenges continue to grow.”
The IndoPacific Defense Forum, which is sponsored by the United State Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) is apparently telling the nations of their area of responsibility that the Coast Guard is ready to assist them in combatting IUU fishing. Specifically that we can,
To paraphrase Roy Scheider from the movie “Jaws,” I think we are going to need more boats.
Earlier today, I passed along a story about one Coast Guardsman’s experience on D-Day on my CG Blog Facebook page.
Got a response from a reader who linked a longer tale of the Coastie’s ship, LCI(L) 85: The Four- Leaf Clover. This is the story of a very small ship, about the same size as a Webber class WPC, one that did not even rate a name, in a very big war. Several crewmembers were discussed including what happened to them after D-Day and after the war. Its a great story.
I’ve added both stories to my heritage page. There are several other D-Day stories there as well.
Thanks to Tom Wade for bringing this to my attention.
Below is information from the Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) newsroom.
June 3, 2021 —
The Coast Guard awarded contracts to four companies today, in a step toward acquiring the next generation of Coast Guard over the horizon cutter boats, the OTH V. The awardees are:
Each awardee will produce a single boat that will be operated to demonstrate the actual capability of each design. Following the demonstration, a single contractor will be selected to produce the OTH V over the next 10 years. This production supports new cutter deliveries and recapitalization of OTH IVs. The total value of the indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity OTH V contract – which includes manufacture, delivery and logistical support – is approximately $100 million.
The requirements for OTH V are similar to the prior iteration, but are intended to incorporate technology improvements. The requirements include a minimum top speed of 38 knots, powered by a diesel engine with waterjet propulsion and a minimum range of 150 nautical miles. The OTH V will carry up to 13 people, with dimensions limited to 26 feet long by 8.5 feet wide, and a performance weight of approximately 8,700 pounds. The updated cutter boat will capture technology improvements for its waterjet, as well as upgraded versions of the scalable integrated navigation and automatic identification systems. This will also be the first Coast Guard boat to include a shock monitoring system providing the crew with real-time information about wave impacts on the vessel.
The OTH V will be deployed across the Coast Guard fleet, including national security cutters, fast response cutters, offshore patrol cutters, polar security cutters and legacy medium endurance cutters. Outfitted with a robust onboard navigation and communications system, the OTH V will provide a high speed capability to extend the parent cutters’ capabilities when deployed in support of multiple Coast Guard missions.
OTH Vs will support mission accomplishment in almost all mission areas, with emphasis on search and rescue, drug and migrant interdiction operations, living marine resources, defense readiness and ports, waterways and coastal security.
For more information: Boat Acquisition program page
Marine Link has an article discussing the importance of the Waterways Commerce Cutter program. Waterways Commerce Cutter: It’s Time For An Upgrade.
The author makes a case as to why these little vessels need to be better than might be assumed. That they are in fact multi-mission vessels. He sees a massive increase in the river cruise industry.
Its an inciteful look at trends on America’s rivers and well worth the read.
The US Naval Institute has an article discussing the Coast Guard’s difficulty getting qualified volunteers for sea duty, Demise of the Cutterman, Part II. This article makes reference to a 2015 post, The Demise of the Cutterman. I think both are currently accessible even to non-members, at least for a limited time.
I considered that perhaps there were other reasons for the difficulties. Was it possible the difficulties were due to the change in the manning requirements of the recapitalized fleet?
Are there more sea duty billets than there were before? I checked this and there does not appear to be great difference in the gross numbers.
I compared the previous fleet of 12 WHEC 378s, 28 WMECs, and 41 Island class WPBs (81 total) to the projected fleet of 11 NSCs, 25 OPCs, and 64 Webber class WPCs (100 total).
The requirements to man 64 Webber class (24 crewmembers each) compared to 41 Island class (16 crewmembers each) required 880 additional.
This was largely offset by the change from 12 WHECs (177 crewmember each) to 11 NSCs (122 crew members each) for a reduction of 782 billets.
There has been no change in the WMEC/OPC fleet yet but the shift from 28 WMECs (requiring a total of 2449 billets) to 25 OPCs (requiring approximately 2500 billets) should only add about 51 billets.
So it looks like the recapitalization should require only about 150 additional billets or an increase of less than 3%. But the specifics of the crews composition may have changed.
I don’t have enough information to investigate these in detail but I suspect three changes have effected our ability to crew the new ships.
Do we have fewer non-rates? I suspect the percentage of the crew who are non-rates has decreased. (It is not hard to fill non-rate billets.) This means that more of the crewmembers are married and have families at home. It also means fewer non-rates are being introduced to sea duty, so the number of prior sea service personnel advancing to petty officer will be reduced. Assuming no change in the proportion of non-rates choosing to return to sea as petty officers later in their career, this will effect the future talent pool as well. It will mean fewer salty first class, chiefs, and warrant officers.
More technical ratings? Again this is a supposition on my part, but presumably the new generation of ships require greater levels of expertise to operate. This means a higher proportion of the crew is mature with more responsibilities and more attractive job possibilities outside the Coast Guard. Increasingly, individuals in this demographic will seek shore duty or choose to leave the service, which is an option for most because they will have completed their initial enlistment.
More officers required? Also a supposition on my part, but at least in the case of replacing 41 WPBs with 64 WPC, we are going from 82 officers to 256, a 210% increase. Junior officers are probably not a problem, so I presume the problem is in getting middle grade billets filled, particularly O-3 and O-4 billets. While I doubt that there is a shortage of volunteers to command Webber class WPCs, I can understand why there would be a hesitance to volunteer for other O-3 billets afloat. If you have ambitions of command afloat, and you don’t get command of a Webber class, the feeling may be that your chances for future command afloat selection are extremely slim, because those who had Webber class command will inevitably be considered better qualified.
There is a cure for this that would provide incentive to take those O-3 billets. Make an O-3 tour, e.g. department head on “big white one” or buoy tender XO, a prerequisite for command afloat as an O-3 or O-4. The result might theoretically reduce the future pool of command afloat candidates, but the pool should still be large enough, and those selected for O-3/O-4 command afloat would be more experienced and will have passed an additional layer of vetting.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 