Webber Class FRCs, Multiyear Procurement in the Future?

File:Proposed modification to the Damen Stan patrol vessel for the USCG.jpg

MarineLog and gCaptain have both recently reported that the Coast Guard has exercised an option for six more Webber class Fast Response Cutters. These will be units 13 through 18 of the class. These are, I believe, all from FY2012 money. The Coast Guard had intended to defer ordering two of these to combine them with two being requested in FY2013 to keep the shipyard working at a consistent minimally sustainable rate of four units per year. That may be what they end up doing anyway, delivering one boat every three months.

I thought it was about time to review the status of the Fast Response Cutter project and look at the future. Where are we and where are we going with this project?

Phase One:

The third vessel of the class, William Flores (WPC-1103), was delivered to the Coast Guard August 17th, and is expected to be commissioned in November. If boats are delivered at three month intervals, the last of the FY2012 boats will be delivered May of 2016. If instead, the shipyard immediately begins to deliver boats at the two month interval they should be capable of, the 18th boat will deliver in February 2015.

The existing contract included options for up to 34 vessels, but because all options were not exercised, the maximum number that can be built under the existing contract would be 30. Two option years remain, FY 2013 and 2014, but because of funding difficulties, it appears unlikely that options will be exercised for all twelve units remaining in the existing contract. The FY2013 budget request included only two vessels, rather than the six that would be provided under full rate production.

So, there will be a second phase procurement aimed at building at least 28 vessels and probably more, perhaps as many as 36, if only two are funded in FY 2013 and two in 2014.

The DHS Inspector General has raised some questions about the progress of the Fast Response Cutter Program. The report faults the Coast guard for accelerating production before the completion of operational test and evaluation, which is not expected to be completed until March 2013. Considering that the program was well behind schedule in terms of replacing 110s, some urgency appears justified. Risk areas the DHS IG pointed out were the stern launching system for the ship’s boat, and that “the service has not verified that the FRC is capable of stowing all its gear.” Since the boat launch arrangement follows that used successfully on the last of the Navy’s Cyclone class PCs, and the vessels have much more volume than the 110s they replaced, it seems unlikely either of these is going to be a real problem.

Phase Two:

In October 2011 the Acquisition Directorate, CG-9, had already begun market research (pdf) for the second phase procurement of Fast Response Cutters that is expected to be awarded in FY2015. I am hoping the Coast Guard will seek Congressional approval to make this a “Multiyear Procurement” as defined here:

“Multiyear Procurement (MYP) and Block Buy Contracting in Defense Acquisition: Background and Issues for Congress” (pdf), Congressional Research Service (CRS), Ronald O’Rourke and Moshe Swartz, June 27, 2012 (Sorry you will need to copy and paste: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41909.pdf)

These types of contracts originated in the DOD, but have now been extended to other branches as well. The FRC project seems to meet all the requirements for this type of procurement. This is different from what was done in phase one, which was an annual contract with options for future years. A multiyear procurement offers the Coast Guard at least three possible advantages.

  • Savings as a result of the longer term of the contract,
  • Savings as a result of increased competitiveness in the contract award, and
  • Long term commitment by the Congress and Administration.

The longer term of these contracts, which can commit the government for up to five years, frequently means increased efficiency which can be passed along to the government. The CRS report identifies two primary reasons for the increased efficiency:

  • Contractor can optimize their workforce and production facilities.
  • Long-leadtime components can be procured in Economic order quantity (EOQ)

While it is difficult to know the true savings these advantages offer, they are estimated to be several percentage points.

“Compared with estimated costs under annual contracting, estimated savings for programs being proposed for MYP have ranged from less than 5% to more than 15%, depending on the particulars of the program in question, with many estimates falling in the range of 5% to 10%. In practice, actual savings from using MYP rather than annual contracting can be difficult to observe or verify because of cost growth during the execution of the contract due to changes in the program independent of the use of MYP rather than annual contracting.”

In February 2012, the Coast Guard exercised a $27.2M option to purchase the “Procurement and Data License Package” for the Webber class Fast Response Cutters, so when it is time to award phase two, the Coast Guard can allow other shipyards to bid to build follow-on ships of the same class.

If we don’t go to a multiyear procurement, the current contractor, Bollinger, will certainly have a massive advantage in an annual award process. Awarding a multiyear contract could go a long way toward leveling the playing field, in that other shipyards would see the benefit  in optimizing their facilities for the larger contract.

And last, but by no means least, this strategy would commit the Congress and the Administration to a constant, long term support of the program that is mature and obviously needed.

DC Chapter of CPO Association Asks Your Help to Restore Monument to WWI Dead

In response to my earlier post about the Seneca and Tampa, It was brought to my attention that the Washington, DC Chapter of the Chief Petty Officers Association has taken up the challenge to refurbish the 85 years old monument on Coast Guard Hill in Arlington National Cemetery. They hope to have the first phase, the upper marble portion, completed for Veterans Day this year, with the second phase completed to coincide with the 85th anniversary of its dedication on May 23, 2013. Total project is approximately  $95,000. 

I don’t think they would mind if I quote their site (http://wdccpoa.org/restoration/), so here goes:

U.S. Coast Guard Memorial Restoration

The Chief Petty Officer’s Association (CPOA) needs your help to restore the U.S. Coast Guard Memorial in Arlington National Cemetery. Members of the CPOA Washington D.C. have conducted basic maintenance on the memorial to keep it clean and presentable.

However, time and the elements have taken their toll on this historic monument dedicated to Coast Guardsmen lost during World War I.  It will need significant structural and cosmetic repairs to return the monument to its former glory, and ensure it remains so well into the 22nd century.

We are prohibited from using Coast Guard money to pay for this restoration. So we need support from the public, shipmates, family and friends to fund this important effort.  Even though the memorial is dedicated to those lost during World War I, the memorial also serves as a reminder to everyone who visits our nation’s most prominent national cemetery of all the sacrifices made by Coast Guardsmen during war and peace. We must raise more than $95,000 dollars to conduct the repairs and provide ongoing maintenance to the structure. We can only do this with your help.

A message from our president.

Dear Shipmates, Coast Guard Family & Friends,
Thank you for visiting RESTORATION 2012, the DC-CPOA’s initiative to raise $95,000 to restore the U.S. Coast Guard  Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery. Since becoming President of the DC Chapter of the CPOA I have had the distinct privilege and honor to engage in several events on Coast Guard Hill – with my fellow shipmates, my family, and the entire Coast Guard family.

Through our annual Flags Across America events, I’ve had the opportunity to help maintain the monument and participate in honoring our fallen shipmates. For me, each visit serves as a reminder that although many of our shipmates have been lost, there are many more left to carry on the traditions and memories of “Standing the Watch.”

I am honored to work on RESTORATION 2012 and engage all of you to help us rebuild and restore this great monument to our fallen. In the Coast Guard we are known for our team work and heroic acts; I am confident that we will once again pull together to reach this important goal. Every contribution counts and I ask you to send your donation today.

Thank you for your generosity. Semper Paratus!

Jon Ostrowski, BMCS, USCG

President, Washington D.C. Chapter, Chief Petty Officer’s Association

Please send donation checks to:

Washington D.C. Chapter

Chief Petty Officer’s Association

P.O. Box 70105

Washington, DC 20024

Or


September 1918, Seneca and Tampa

September 1918 was a bad month for the Coast Guard, September 17 to 26, a particularly bad week. In that week, the service lost 122 men in two incidents. Eleven were lost out of the crew of the Cutter Seneca in an attempt to save the steam ship Wellington, and 111 Coast Guardsmen, along with 20 others, were lost when the Tampa was torpedoed and sank with all hands.

File:Seneca1908.jpg

Photo: Cutter Seneca (1908)

Here is a story about the memorial to these men at the National Cemetery in Arlington, VA, and efforts by the DC Chapter of the Chief Petty Officers’ Association to honor them.

Coast Guard Cutter Tampa crewmembers (1918). U.S. Coast Guard photo.

Photo: Crew members of the cutter Tampa

Previous posts about the loss of the Tampa before, here and here.

Unconventional Contender for the Offshore Patrol Cutter

http://www.flickr.com/photos/73614187@N03/8003937595/

The first conceptual design for the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) by an American shipbuilder since the demise of the Deepwater program has surfaced, and it is unconventional. Vigor Industrial proposes using the Ulstein X-bow. gCaptain brings us the story.

The proposal is 328 foot long and has a 54 foot beam. More info here.

The information available does not include maximum speed or the configuration of the propulsion systems. On the video it is clear that it has a drop down trainable thruster under the bow, and it appears it may have a single conventional shaft.

It is also unclear if the ship can hangar an H-60.

I like the boat hangar idea, in that it provides some of the flexibility of a reconfigurable space that might be able to use some of the systems being created for the LCS.

Conflict between Japan and Two Chinas coming to a Head?

Up to six Chinese law enforcement agency vessels, roughly analogous to Coast Guard Cutters, have entered the territorial waters of islands administered by Japan, and Japanese Coast Guard Cutters responded. It does not look like the disagreement is going to go away quietly. Anti-Japanese anger is being nurtured in China. Both China and Japan are preparing for a leadership change, and no one wants to look weak.

File:Senkaku-Diaoyu-Tiaoyu-Islan.jpg

Illustration: from CIA map

A good summary of events is here. A second source indicates the Chinese have “1,000” fishing vessels en route.

“And, whether we like it or not, Washington is involved.

The Chinese have taken an additional step and filed a claim on the islands with the UN describing its interpretation of where the baselines are drawn and enacted a national law that,

“prohibits foreign warships and vessels from entering the waters around the Diaoyu Islands without permission from the Chinese government.”

This seems to reflect China’s broader interpretation of the ability of a state to restrict access to its EEZ.

If the situation were not complicated enough, don’t forget there is a third party here, who are also inserting themselves in the mix. Taiwan also claims these islands and have also sent their Coast Guard into the area.

Photos of some of the players here.

Ship’s Bridge of the Future?

gCaptain has a report on a proposed new bridge configuration from shipbuilder Ulstein–very futuristic. I liked the chairs.

We may some day get to the point we don’t actually look outside anymore. We might use enhanced synthetic vision that can provides a close up view of what other vessels are doing, annotated with ID, course, speed and CPA (closest point of approach), along with other information retrievable from a data base.

I’m sure there are better ergonomic options that what we are doing today, but sometimes too many options for presentation can lead to confusion. The Ulstein Vision reminded me of the BMW “iDrive” which has gotten a lot of criticism, apparently because it is too unconventional.

Looking at the huge expanses of glass in the animation, I remembered two of my ships that had survived WWII. Their pilot houses were dark with only relatively small round ports. The 327 had not always been that way. When built, like all cutters built between the wars, she had had large square windows on the bridge, but with the war, ports in the hulls were plated over and the large bridge windows replaced by the much smaller round ports–providing more protection from shrapnel.

Bridge configuration is an area that probably doesn’t get as much attention as it should.

Ship Self Defense System (SSDS)/Quick Reaction Combat Capabity (QRCC)

(The Navy does love acronyms)

This is the name of a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) based system that uses a fiber optic local area network to assemble and evaluate information from sensors, and recommend or even initiate actions to defend ships from cruise missile attack. Apparently the Navy intends to extend it in some form to all non-Aegis ship down to the Littoral Combat Ship.

Systems that have been integrated into the system include the AN/SPQ-9B radar, the AN/SLQ-32 Electronic Attack System, the NULKA missile decoy system, Mk 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapon System. If they sound familiar it may be because they are all on the National Security Cutter and may be on the Offshore Patrol cutter as well.

Defense Industry Daily reviews the program here.

Cod Wars–A Bit of History

Always thought this was an interesting bit of history, and in view of what is happening in the South China Sea now, perhaps instructive. Three “Cod Wars” between 1958 and 1976, it is a David vs Goliath tale of small (but ice strengthened) ships taking on a much larger and stronger force to protect their fishing industry, and ultimately winning what became the internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone.

The Icelandic Coast Guard used net cutters and occasionally opened fire. Ships were intentionally rammed. Ultimately Iceland won because they were needed as a base for NATO operation, otherwise it might have turned out very differently.

Could Maritime Domain Awareness Ride the Coattails of Missile Defense?

At least since 9/11, the Coast Guard has been talking about Maritime Domain Awareness–the ability to keep track of everything approaching our coasts. The effort has used the Automatic Identification System (AIS) which gives the position and identification of cooperating vessels, and also anticipates cooperation with the Navy’s Maritime Patrol Aircraft and Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) system which will use large land based unmanned aircraft, in addition to the Coast Guard’s own assets.

Concurrently the US has been developing a defense against ballistic missiles. (More info here on additional effort.) If they go to the trouble and expense of doing that, then they will almost certainly also develop a defense against cruise missiles as well, since it is relatively easy to launch cruise missiles against the US from nondescript container ships. The system that is likely to be used, the Army’s JLENS, has demonstrated a capability to track even small boats.

Sounds like the pieces of a comprehensive system that the Coast Guard may be able to exploit, may be coming together.