Draft Technical Package for the Offshore Patrol Cutter Released

Posted on by
28

The Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) has issued the draft technical package for the Offshore Patrol Cutter. It was announced on the Federal Business Opportunity website, March 12, 2012.

“The red-lined draft System Specification contains all of the changes that the Coast Guard incorporated as a result of industry comment. This document will be automatically distributed to those companies and individuals that received the draft OPC specification released in May 2011. The other draft documents will be available on the USCG OPC website at: http://www.uscg.mil/acquisition/OPC/default.asp“

A two step Acquisition process is expected. First, three contractors will be selected to develop their preliminary designs into fully detailed contract proposals. They will compete for the final award which will include the first OPC and all documentation. It may (and probably will) also include options for follow-on ships. So far, the Coast Guard is saying they will maintain their flexibility regarding who will build follow-on ships.

On the Acquisitions directorate website, you can down load hundreds of pages of technical requirements for the contractors, but don’t expect to find updated information on the specification of the ships. As noted above, revised draft specifications were sent to companies and individuals that received the draft OPC System Specification released in May 2011. Hopefully the Acquisition Directorate will release at least some basic information in the near future.

Still going through the documents yields some useful information of more general interest. The list of Government furnished Equipment (GFE) and Government Furnished information (GFI) tells us about much of the equipment the vessels are expected to carry. (I will not list all the normal items included on every cutter.)

Armament:

  • Mk 48 mod 1 Gun weapon system
  • Mk 110, 57mm gun system
  • Electro Optical Site Sensor (EOSS), MK 20 MOD 0
  • 25mm, MK 38 MOD 2
  • Two SSAM gun systems, (remotely operated .50 Caliber)

Sensors:

  • IFF, AN/UPX-29A
  • AN/SLQ-32B(V)2 (and Mk 53 NULKA decoy system)
  • Multi-Mode Radar (air as well as surface? AN/SPQ-9?)
  • Encrypted GPS
  • CBRN monitoring

Boats: 2 x 7m OTH IV (apparently no 11m boat)

Aviation:

  • TACAN
  • Visual Landing Aids (VLA)
  • Glide Slope Indicator (GLI)
  • Wave Off Light Assembly (WOLS)

The Mk48 Mod 0 (www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011gunmissile/Thursday11660_Aswegan.pdf) is apparently the system on the National Security Cutter. Perhaps, the Mk48 mod 1 is simply an improvement, but unlike some of the other components of the system, the AN/SPQ-9 radar is not called out specifically, so this system may not have a radar. It may be that the “multi-mode radar” refers to the AN/SPQ-9. Hopefully that is the case.

A quick scan through the other documents shows that the Coast Guard has not ruled out the possibility of hybrid or integrated diesel-electric propulsion.

“One Line Diagram. During Contract Design the Contractor shall provide the Electric-Drive Propulsion System One Line Diagram (if an Electric Propulsion System or IDE is provided). [235-01-2219]”

Other included systems are:

  • Two encrypted computer networks including one for classified material.
  • Television systems for both monitoring security and entertainment and training.
  • UHF MIL SAT COM Equipment
  • A crane for loading stores
  • A bow thruster
  • An unmanned air system (UAS)

It appears there may also be a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility).

Generally it appears, a much more sophisticated ship that the WMECs they are replacing.

(illustration: French shipbuilder DCNS concept)

Intercept That Drug Runner–Sorry, Not Enough Ships

Posted on by
17

https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/USCGC_Hamilton_%28WHEC-715%29.jpg

File:USCGC Reliance WMEC 615.jpghttps://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ea/Thetis_cutter_WMEC-910.jpg

There have been several articles recently as a result of a breakfast meeting with reporters hosted by Air Force Gen. Douglas Fraser, chief of the U.S. Southern Command, reporting that SouthCom is intercepting only one in three drug shipments that they know about. He sited diversion of assets for combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and operations off Libya, Somalia, and Iran.

One thing I found very curious, as noted in the AOL defense report, “Fraser focused on Navy vessels and did not specifically address the Coast Guard, which does contribute some ships to Southern Command operations.” Why the hell not?

The General reported a decline in our ability to intercept drug shipments.

At sea, Fraser explained, the U.S. Navy is retiring the smaller ships that have traditionally been the mainstay of drug interdiction patrols, the aging and increasingly expensive to operate Perry-class frigates, while their much-delayed replacement, the Littoral Combat Ships, is just beginning to enter service. “We ‘ll see a gap in the numbers of those types of ships,” Fraser said. “So we’re working with the Navy to see what other types of vessels and capability that’s coming back from Iraq might be available,” particularly small craft that have been used for river patrol and offshore patrol in the Gulf. Such boats could boost the U.S. fleet’s own interception capability but also, and perhaps more importantly, some could be transferred to friendly countries that are currently short on assets to intercept drug boats moving through their own territorial waters.

Nationaldefensemagazine.org also reported he made reference to the possibility of terrorists entering the US by using the drug smuggling routes.

There was much made of the lack of assets available to partner nations.

Here is a proposal, The Coast Guard still has 10 WHECs and 29 WMECs that are due for replacement. If we can get them replaced, we can turn them over to partner nations. That should essentially totally eliminate any shortage of vessels in SouthCom. The sooner we replace them the more useful they will be.

Why couldn’t the General have put in a good word for the Coast Guard?

Law of the Sea–Why not?

Posted on by
4

Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty always seemed like a good thing. Both the Commandant and the CNO support it.

I can’t claim to have a full understanding of the treaty, but I have begun to get inklings of why others have reservations about it. As in all things legal, it is subject to interpretation, and the interpretation of others do not necessarily match our own.

In the interest of having a balance view, you might want to spend a few minutes reading what Peter Brookes, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, has to say about why its not a good idea.

The right of innocent passage seems to be one of the things that is subject to interpretation, and it is not just China and developing countries that see things differently. So do the Canadians. (More here, here, and here.)

Chinese General Calls for Creation of a Chinese Coast Guard

Posted on by
1

As we have noted, the Chinese have a number of agencies that have duties that are assigned to the Coast Guard in the US. There have been calls for reorganization before. Now “The Global Times,” reports that Luo Yuan (Luo), a CPPCC member and major general of the PLA Academy of Military Sciences, has also proposed establishment of a national coast guard. He is interviewed here.

He also has some strong words for Vietnam and the Philippines, and of course accuses the US of meddling.

Informationdissemination took a comprehensive look at their vessels here.

Panama Canal Expansion May Impact Port Development

Posted on by
29

File:Missouri panama canal.jpgPanama has begun expansion of the Panama Canal, (described here) with the intention passing ships three times as large as those currently able to use the canal.

Meanwhile Panama is hoping US ports will be expanded to accept the larger ships,

“By WALTER C. JONES – Morris News Service – ATLANTA — The administrator of the Panama Canal chastised U.S. and Canadian officials Tuesday for not preparing their ports to take advantage of the expansion his country is undertaking. Alberto Aleman Zubieta, CEO of the Panama Canal Authority, stressed that Panama is doubling the canal’s capacity by widening its system of locks and waterways to accommodate ships three times the current maximum. But Panama won’t realize the full benefits if East Coast ports aren’t also enhanced to accept those ships. “What concerns me is how long it takes to do these types of projects and that they are not now being done in the U.S.,” Aleman was quoted as saying by Modern Materials Handling magazine.

“He made his comments to the logistics managers attending the inaugural trade show of MODEX, sponsored by the Material Handling Industry of America. In two years, the canal will celebrate its 100th anniversary with the completion of its expansion project. East Coast ports like Savannah, Jacksonville and Charleston hope to attract that added traffic. However, none are deep enough for the larger ships to enter fully loaded except at high tide. Only ports in New York and Virginia can now.”

This is likely to have a long term impact of the relative importance of ports in the US with ports that can accommodate these larger ships doing relatively better than ports unable to accept them.

(Photo credit: Photo #: 80-G-701369, Official U.S. Navy Photograph, now in the collections of the National Archives.)

Development in Propulsion

Posted on by
Reply

gCaptain reports on development of a new propulsion system that is purported to offer better fuel economy and towing capability without penalties at high speeds, all characteristics important in Coast Guard cutters.

“The Voith Linear Jet drive, however, is a hybrid of the ducted propeller and the water jet drive, having a highly skewed propeller, similar to a jet drive’s impeller, within a shroud containing stators, also similar to a water jet.  According to Voith, “It consists of a specially shaped jet, a rotor and a stator. The prototype has a rotor diameter of two meters, a jet length of three meters and an input power of 6.0 MW.”  This gives their drive the thrust characteristics of a ducted propeller, with the speed characteristics of a water jet drive.”

“Typical VLJ applications will be any ship with a mixed operating profile between low speed cruising and sprint speeds like Navy and Coastguard vessels…”

The comparison charts are particularly interesting. Promising if it works as advertised.

Submarines for Counter-Drug Ops?

Posted on by
17

File:Sbsribs.jpg

There has been a report that the Colombians are purchasing two subs from Germany, and that “The U206s are critical to Colombia’s fight against the drug gangs’ semi-submersible vessels.”

I also see a need for ASW assets to deal with the problem, but the Type 206A subs are tiny, slow, and old enough to be Coast Guard Cutters (They have crossed the Atlantic for exercises). The newest entered service in 1975. Their systems have been updated, they do have passive detection systems, but there have got to be easier and cheaper ways to detect drug subs and self propelled semi-submersibles.

It will be interesting to see how they are actually used. If this does work, will the Coast Guard get their own subs?

(Photo credit Zatoichi1564 (talk) via Wikimedia Commons)

Texas Coast Guard?

Posted on by
4

Perhaps motivated by events on Falcon Lake and the general boarder lawlessness, Texas seems to be taking on a job that looks like it should be handled by the Coast Guard, DEA, and DHS. They are buying six machinegun equipped Riverine Gunboats (defensetech.org/2012/03/01/texas-preparing-its-own-riverine-navy/) that would look right at home with the Navy’s Expeditionary Combat Command.

(Thanks to Lee for the heads up)

Canada’s Arctic Offshore Patrol Ship (AOPS)

Posted on by
34

Ran across an interesting presentation of the design of Canada’s projected Arctic Offshore Patrol ship (pdf). This apparently dates back to 2008, but it is the most detailed presentation I have seen on their concept.

While probably not as capable as the Healey, which is more than twice as large, something similar might be able to fill the Coast Guard’s stated requirement for two additional medium icebreakers.

The design has several interesting features

  • It is designed to IACS Polar Class 5, “Year-round operation in medium first-year ice which may include old ice inclusions” with a double acting hull form.
  • It includes three RHIBs and a landing craft, in addition to two 70 man covered lifeboats.
  • Flight Deck and hanger sized to support a helicopter larger than the H-60 (the CH-148).
  • Propulsion is diesel electric using Azipods. Power is provided by four generators  (Can’t say I’m comfortable with how they achieved redundancy by using a centerline bulkhead to split two main machinery spaces into four).
  • It incorporates provision for carrying five containers, and has a 10 ton crane on the main deck aft.
  • Requires a relatively small crew (45) but includes provision for an additional 40.

Compared to the Wind Class Icebreakers that once made up most to the Coast Guard fleet, they are slightly larger (6,940 tons vs 6,500), much longer (359.5 ft vs 269), narrower (59.7 ft vs 63.5), much more powerful (20,100 HP vs 12,000), and faster (20 knots vs 16.8).

Compared to the Norwegian Coast Guard vessel Svalbard on which it is based it is 50% more powerful.

We can’t be sure at this point, that this is the ship the Canadian’s will build, but it’s probably pretty close.