One time Coast Guard blogger Ryan Ericson has a post on the US Naval Institute site with his suggestions as to worthwhile charities, “I’m Giving to the Coast Guard Foundation and Wounded Warrior Project with CFC…What About You?”
Feel free to make a case for you’re own favorites in the comments.
The Navy’s history and Heritage Commands notes that today is the anniversary of the transfer of the Coast Guard to the Navy Department. Nominally to enforce “neutrality,” it was in reality to prosecute an undeclared war against Axis submarines.
We all know the CG got out in front of this, much like they did prior to Katrina.
Apparently the Navy is ready to help, but no one (but the Corp of Engineers) is asking. Seems like all those landing craft and boats could be useful.
As noted by Brian McGrath, over at Informationdissemination, the CNO has issued a “Position Report.” (pdf) It’s only three pages and updates his “Navigation Plan.”
This quote caught my eye, “With the other sea services we will revise our maritime strategy, “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower”, to address the challenges and threats facing us in the near future.”
While there may be commitments in a war plan. Most Coasties don’t seem to have an idea what their war time roles would be. Perhaps this is an opportunity to address the apparent ambiguity. As discussed recently, a more explicit explanation of wartime roles for the Coast Guard could go a long way toward informing choices in the procurement of platforms and equipment, particularly the Offshore Patrol Cutter.
A second line, while addressed specifically at the Navy’s close formal relationship with the Marine Corps, suggest there will be an effort to minimize duplication of effort, “We will develop concepts to guide future amphibious operations, building on the ongoing “Single Naval Battle” effort with the Marine Corps.”
Where might we eliminated duplication of tasks and platforms between the Navy and Coast Guard?
As a side note one of the items addressed as a “fundamental responsibility” under the principle “Warfighting First.”
We deployed (and will keep) in the Arabian Gulf new mine hunting and neutralizing equipment, improved torpedoes; advance electromagnetic sensors, “up-gunned” patrol craft (emphasis applied–Chuck), and USS PONCE as an afloat forward staging base.
The reference to patrol craft may be exclusively to the Navy’s Cyclone Class, but some of the patrol craft in the vicinity are USCG. I haven’t seen anything indicating that their armament has been changed. Also have not seen any indication the Coasties are coming home. Could this become a long term standing commitment? Will the 110s be replaced by Webber class Fast Response Cutters?
I’ve added a new page to the blog, intended to provide some insight into the heritage of the Coast Guard. Check it out and if have any suggestions for items that might be added please leave a comment.
Just a short note to highlight the existence of a couple of unusual units that may not be familiar. They have an important, if largely unrecognized mission. These are the Coast Guard’s Maritime Force Protection Units Bangor, WA and Kings Bay, GA.
The units are perhaps unique in that they have only a single mission, and they are funded by the Navy. They protect Fleet Ballistic Missile submarines while they transit on the surface, to and from their homeports. The possibility of a USS Cole style attack motivated their creation. Each unit consist of approximately 200 Coasties and is commanded by an O-5. Having CG crews and carrying CG colors and markings allows them to enforce a security zone around the subs. Both units stood up in July 2007.
They have some unique equipment too, including four 87 footers that were purchased with Navy funds. They are recognizable because of the stabilized remotely controlled machine guns mounted high on the bow.
|
Photo Credit: KEYPORT, Wash. (Aug. 18, 2009) U. S. Coast Guardsmen man the rails as the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Sea Fox (WPB 87374) is brought to life at Naval Base Kitsap. (U.S. Navy photo Ray Narimatsu/Released)
|
|
The names chosen for these Navy purchased vessels all reprise submarines that fought in WWII. A contemporary report on the arrival of Sea Devil indicates these 87 footers are manned differently as well,
“To carry out its new mission, the Sea Devil carries more crew than most 87-footers, who require more training than most, and it packs more firepower.
“Instead of 11 “racks,” or beds, and a crew of 10, the Sea Devil will carry 12 racks and a crew of 15 because of the extra hours and training anticipated for the unique mission.
“Along with two .50-caliber automatic weapons mounted on each side of the vessel, a third is mounted near the bridge.”
They have a lot of other boats as well, including some non-standard types, like the one in which the Chairman of the Joint Chief took a ride.
Photo Credit: Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, pilots a 64-foot Special Purpose Craft in Puget Sound, Oct. 04, 2012, as part of a familiarization tour of Coast Guard units in the Pacific Northwest. The special purpose craft is based at the Marine Force Protection Unit in Silverdale, Wash. U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Nathan W. Bradshaw.
Thanks to Tim Colton and Lee Walher for help preparing this.
Defense News reports, the Air Force is again trying to buy a new Combat SAR helicopter to replace their HH-60s. This will not be an easy program. It ran into legal problems during an earlier attempt, but this is one the CG may want to watch. The program is expected to span 14 years, and the CG MH-60s are now expected to require replacement beginning in 2022. If the program is successful, the CG may be able to ride the coattails of a mature program.
The dust-up between Governor Romney and President Obama about the size of the Navy has lit off a flurry of debates. If you want to take a peak, here are some of the discussions, I’ve looked in on.
The general consensus seems to be that while comparing gross numbers to the fleet of 1916 may not be a good measure, the fleet may need more ships. Today’s fleet is enormously powerful, much more so than any of its competitors, but there simply may not be enough ships to be in all the places where they are needed for many of the relatively mundane tasks that are part of exercising command of the sea.
What does all this have to do with the Coast Guard?
The FFGs which have been the platform of choice for drug interdiction operations are disappearing rapidly. They may be replaced by Littoral Combat ships, but LCS are being built more slowly that the FFGs are disappearing, and they are relatively short legged ships. There is the possibility of using the numerous MSC manned ships, including the new Joint High Speed Vessels, for drug interdiction, but it would require a change of policy.
The Coast Guard is an element of American Sea Power. Under Secretary of the Navy Bob Work never fails to mention the Coast Guard when he talks about American Sea Power. The Coast Guard is the US Navy’s closest ally and their most immediately available reserve. In terms of personnel, the CG is larger than the Royal Navy, but the size of our fleet has also been going down too. Additionally, because of their age, many of the ships we do have are sketchy for distant deployment.
In many situations, including maritime interdiction operations (MIO) like Market Time or the Cuban Missile Crisis Quarantine quantity can be more important than quality. As EagleSpeak notes there are, or will soon be, only 108 surface combatants (cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and Littoral Combat Ships) in the USN. In addition there are only 11 Cyclone class patrol craft (PC). If you subtract all the units that are out of area, in maintenance or workup, or required for other on-going tasks, the number of ships that might be available to undertake a new operation is pretty small and the 38 large patrol ships and the over 130 WPBs and WPCs in the Coast Guard start to look significant. (Beside, putting a $2B DDG in the vicinity of an apparently innocent but potentially hostile vessel, may not be the best use of a precious resource when a single torpedo could take it out for months, if not sink it.)
Does the Coast Guard get any visibility, or more importantly funding, for this role? Not so much. “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower” talks about a “National Fleet,” but whenever fleet size is discussed, only the Navy ships are included. Why is this? Does the Navy want to avoid the possibility of Congress seeing the Coast Guard as an alternative to the Navy? Certainly there are institutional and structural impediments to thinking in those terms. Are our ships too insignificant to count? They are not aircraft carriers, but in terms of cost and capability they are in the same league as LCS, Mine Warfare, and Auxiliary ships that are included.
gCaptain has a pair of videos of tugs in trouble, in separate incidents only a few months apart, on the Piscataqua River in Maine. Apparently no one hurt in either incident. A reminder of the power of a strong river current.
gCaptain is reporting Damen is set to build a new tug with very interesting propulsion arrangement, a sort of Prius of the Sea, that can operate in four different modes, including battery powered.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 