The US Naval Institute News Service has made available the U.S. Department of Defense’s Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy.
I have only scanned it, but it does mention the Coast Guard in the context of freedom of navigation exercises and capacity building for our allies.
a
Photo: A Philippine Navy weaponized AW109 helicopter on board the frigate BRP Ramon Alcaraz (formerly the USCGC Dallas (WHEC-716)). Source: Philippine Navy
Janes is reporting that the two former USCG 378s, that are now in the Philippine Navy, will be operating “weaponised” AW109 helicopters.
This is the same helicopter that saw service as the U.S. Coast Guard MH-68A Stingray airborne use of force helicopters. It is smaller than the MH-65, with about two thirds the gross weight and horsepower.
The weaponised versions carry two 12.7 mm machine gun pods, each with launchers for three 70 mm laser-guided rockets (on each pod–Chuck). The aircraft can also be configured to carry a sonobuoy dispenser for anti-submarine warfare operations.
The laser guided rockets will probably be “APKWS II” used by the USN and US Marines, but there are a number of similar systems that convert unguided 70 mm Hydra rockets to small passive laser-guided missiles.
It is not clear if these aircraft will also have the .50 cal. sniper rifle or door mounted 7.62 mm machine gun like those on Coast Guard airborne use of force helos. If they have at least the door mounted machine gun, I would think that seven round rocket pods would be preferable to the .50 cal. gun pods with only three missiles each. If there is no door-mounted machine gun and there is a need to fire warning shots, then perhaps use only one .50 cal gun pod and one seven round rocket pod.
Navy recognition is reporting that all four type 053H2G frigates (NATO designation Jiangwei I) have been transferred to the Chinese Coast Guard, contributing to the already feverish build up of this service. These 115 meter (376 foot), 2,200 ton, 27 knot, helo deck and hangar equipped, diesel powered ships entered service with the Chinese Navy (PLAN) between 1991 and 1994, so while far from new, by USCC standards, they should have considerable life remaining. The design seems quite appropriate for a cutter.
The fact that the PLAN is willing to give up these ships suggest both the pace of modernization of the PLAN and the priority given to bulking up their Coast Guard.
The conversion apparently results in the removal of all the primary weapons including a twin 100mm gun, anti-air and anti-surface missiles, and anti-submarine weapons.
But the ships will not be unarmed, and how they are armed may suggest how Chinese Coast Guard vessels, which were essentially unarmed in the past, may be armed in the future.
The guns that remain are four twin 37mm type 76A mounts. Positioned as they are, this will allow at least two twin mounts to be pointed at any direction, and in perhaps most cases three twin mounts. The projectile weight is about 1.6 pounds; rate of fire is 375 rounds/minute/barrel. They have a range of 9,400 meters and an effective range of 3,500 meters, with a 1600 round ready service capacity at each twin mount.
While these weapons are obviously limited in range, at close quarters they would be extremely dangerous.
In an earlier post I used the weight of projectiles a ship could shoot per minute as one measure of the possible effectiveness of a weapon system. By that measure four 37mm firing 375 one-point-six pound projectiles per minute would mean the capability of firing 2400 pounds of projectiles per minute. This is more than a single 57mm Mk110 (1160 pounds), a 76mm Mk75 (1120 pounds), or even a 5″/62 Mk45 mod4 (1400 pounds).
Why did they retain all four mounts? It would not have been hard to remove two of the four mounts and still retain, what many would see as more than adequate law enforcement firepower, but we probably should not read too much into the retention of all four mounts; it was the easier option, and they may be seen as nothing more than on board spares. They certainly have retained a fierce capability to engage at anything less than 4,000 yards. I would not mind seeing similar redundancy on USCG cutters for our peacetime missions..
The deletion of the ASW equipment certainly suggest the new, more militarized, Chinese Coast Guard does not see itself as ASW capable, and the removal of the 100mm guns suggest they don’t expect to be used as a Naval Gun Fire Support asset.
The Mexican Navy recently decommissioned a destroyer escort that, during the Second World War, was manned by the Coast Guard. The ARM Manuel Azueta (D-111) was the former USS Hurst (DE-250). She was first commissioned 30 Aug. 1943. Her first CO was LCdr. Bret H. Brallier.
Looks like she is still very close to her World War II configuration. The depth charges are gone, but three 3″/50s and 40mm anti-aircraft guns remain. You can see a nice selections of photos here.
Would be nice if this ship could be preserved as a museum.
There is now some thought that we may have been underestimating some of our most valuable personnel assets. That perhaps a whole class of people is being undervalued. What is this “underclass?”
—Introverts.
Reportedly the Dutch military has been having second thoughts about their admitted preference for extroverts.
Navy Recognition has a short update on the status of the C-130J in the Long Range Search fleet. For more info on the program, check here.
MarineLink is reporting Argentina has recently completed repairs on their only icebreaker, ARA Almirante Irizar.
There are some remarkable parallels between USCGC Polar Sea and Argentina’s Icebreaker, ARA Almirante Irizar. They are essentially the same size (length and beam within a foot and the same draft) and the same age (both commissioned in the late ’70s). The Polar class ships have much greater horsepower with their gas-turbine engines, but their diesel horsepower is very similar. Both have been out of service for years. The Polar Sea since 2010 after failure of five of her six diesel engines. The Almirante Irizar since 2007 after a serious fire.
Sounds like the required repairs were quite extensive. Not surprisingly it cost more that initially expected and repairs included enhancements rather than just a restoration of the previous configuration.
As the Coast Guard looks at the Polar Sea, we will also likely want to incorporate some changes.
The Healey has been getting a lot of press lately. They have been working with the R&D center looking at using UAVs including the Scan Eagle.
They are now on a second mission of the season.
Pacific Exclusive Economic Zones. David Butler/Globe staff, click on the chart to enlarge
An interesting discussion in the Boston Globe about how to deal with potential changes in the world’s Exclusive Economic Zones as rising sea levels change the shape of land areas, perhaps resulting in the complete disappearance of some sovereign nations.
One of the possibilities is that the EEZs may be frozen in their current configuration and become an asset of the population, even after the land becomes uninhabitable or disappears completely, and that this asset may be sold, traded, or leased away. We know territorial sovereignty can be sold, after all, the US benefited from the Louisiana Purchase and Seward’s Folly (Alaska).
A Chinese Corporation has been attempting to build a new port complex on “reclaimed” land in Sri Lanka. “Located next to the Colombo Port, the US$1.4 billion project will add about 233 hectares of reclaimed land to the capital and house luxury office buildings, apartment blocks, a golf course, a water sport area, medical facilities, education institutions, hotels, a theme park and marinas.” The project is on hold right now, but if it goes forward, the Chinese firm would be granted 20 hectares (49.4 acres) on an outright basis and 88 hectares (244.6 acres) on a 99-year lease.
This is not a transfer of sovereignty, and Sri Lanka is not in any danger of disappearing, but it does indicate the scope of China’s interest in the area and, located right off the Southern tip of India, it is sure to feed into India’s fears of being surrounded by a Chinese “string of pearls.”
Potentially more serious is the decision of the government of the Maldives, “The law passed by the Parliament will now allow absolute foreign ownership of land in Maldives if the investment is above USD 1 billion. The caveat to the law is that 70% of the land has to be reclaimed from the sea.”
The Maldives, with an average elevation of 1.6 meters, is one of those island nations that are in danger of being adversely effected by rising see levels. If anyone takes the Maldives up on their offer, it will probably be the Chinese, who have already shown a lot of interest in the Indian Ocean island nation. Again this is not a transfer of sovereignty, but it may be a harbinger of things to come
(Beside it really wanted everyone to see the chart of Pacific EEZs. A lot of that is US EEZ.)
A Coast Guard MH-60 Jayhawk helicopter crew hoists 18 crewmen from Shell’s drilling rig Kulluk 80 miles southwest of Kodiak City, Alaska, Dec. 29, 2012. U.S. Coast Guard Photo
gCaptain reports that Shell Oil’s attempts to drill in the Arctic are adversely effecting its operations elsewhere. The articles goes on to discuss the Coast Guard’s efforts in support of the operation.
“That for me is the opportunity cost,” Admiral Paul Zukunft, commandant of the Coast Guard, told Reuters in his office at the agency’s Washington, D.C. headquarters late last week. “It means you do less somewhere else in order to supplement activity in the Arctic.”
Perhaps this is a place where we should be applying “User Pays.”
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 