The Cutterman’s Association has posted a new picture of the Sentinel class WPC Bernard C. Webber. Looks like she is very close to being launched.
New Photo, Fast Response Cutter Bernard C. Webber
1
Tag Archives: FRC
The FY2012 AC&I Budget Request for Vessels
The FY 2012 budget for “vessels” is a year without major funding for the National Security Cutter (NSC) project. It only includes $77M to finish funding the fifth ship. Consequently, even though vessel funding dropped from $851.7M in the FY2011 request to only $642M, we see the start of a program to update 140-foot WTGBs, 225-foot WLBs and 175- foot WLMs, beginning with the oldest WTGB and funding of five Mission Effectiveness Projects (MEP) for 270 foot WMECs. We also see an acceleration of the Response Boat-Medium and Fast Response Cutter Programs.
But of course the plan has been to complete the NSC program before starting the OPC program and having the first OPC delivered in 2019. I don’t see how this can happen without a major bump in AC&I funding or at least a major diversion from other areas. The funding for the first five NSCs was spread over eleven years. In the last ten budgets, from FY 2003-2012, NSC funding has averaged $312M. Only in FY 2011 did funding for the program approach the full cost of an NSC ($615M requested compared to a projected cost of $697M for NSC#5), that year, there was no funding for the Fast Response Cutter Program. The Coast Guard is unlikely to get $1.2B it needs in FY 2013/14/15 to complete the “In Service Vessel Sustainment” and WMEC Mission Effectiveness Projects and each year build:
- one NSC (approx. $700M)
- six FRC (approx. $350M)
- 40 Response Boat-Medium (approx $100M)
Short of canceling one or more of the NSCs (my preferred alternative), the only way to deliver an OPC by 2019 is to build the NSCs and OPCs in parallel.
Fast Response Cutter Alternative? FRC-A?
The following are excepts from a news release found here: http://www.msstampabay.com/
14 January 2011:
“The Department of the Navy announced Friday the award of a $29 million shipbuilding and support contract to Maritime Security Strategies, LLC, (MSS) of Tampa, Florida. The contract, under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, was awarded for a 43-meter Coastal Security Craft (CSC) for the Lebanese Navy. MSS will work with its primary design agent and shipbuilding partner, RiverHawk Fast Sea Frames, LLC, also of Tampa, to design, produce and outfit the ship.
“The MSS/RiverHawk … currently has two 60-meter Offshore Supply/Command Vessels under construction for the Iraqi Navy….MSS/RiverHawk use epoxy resin (instead of carbon fiber) for the AMP hulls because of its virtual indestructibility and the fact that it is so easy and inexpensive to repair and maintain. The deck and superstructure are aluminum, which allows topside arrangements to be reconfigured in a modular fashion as mission requirements dictate over the life of the ship.”
—————————-
There are several things I find interesting here.
- Why didn’t they choose either the 87 ft WPB or the Webber (Hero) class WPC, which are relatively well know quantities? Is the Navy attempting to open up additional sources of combatant craft? Is it just the fact that three of the four principals in the company are retired Navy admirals? Interestingly all three have backgrounds in minesweepers.
- This is a fixed price contract ($29M) for a first of class, with no learning curve. The the price is already significantly less than that for the Webber Class ($88M for the first and $41.5M each for the most recent buy) for a vessel with very similar capabilities. In fact it appears this vessel is closer to the original specifications for the Fast Response Cutter–composite construction and 30 knots–than the Webber class. Is it really that cheap to build?
- If I interpret their web site correctly, the vessel was apparently already under construction before the contract was finalized. Is this a lost leader, sold for less than the true cost, to prove their capability in hopes of attracting additional orders?
- Jargon used to describe the vessel sounds a lot like that used for the LCS. They call it a “sea frame” and talk about its adaptability, including the ability to take aboard two 40 foot containers (or presumably four 20 foot container?). Will the use of LCS containers make these vessels useful as anti-submarine and mine countermeasures vessels? The company appears to be positioning itself, if not to replace the LCS, to at least supplement it and exploit its supporting technology.
- This web site description shows variations on the basic design that seem optimized for supporting special operations (two 12 meter fast interceptor boats, or a helo deck for not just any small helo, but specifically the “little bird,” a reference to the MH-6/AH-6 special operations helicopter). Is this the replacement for the Cyclone class PCs that were always considered a bit too large for the Special Operations role? The fiberglass construction should also tend to make the vessels more stealthy.
—————————-
The original Concept for the Fast Response Cutter, FRC-A, included a composite hull. These comments are from the Acquisition Directorate web site:
“12. I’ve heard talk of the FRC-A, and Sentinel Class patrol boat, what’s the difference?
“The FRC-A designation referred to the first revision of the original FRC design specifications which called for, most notably, a composite-hulled ship. After careful research and evaluation, the Coast Guard concluded that not only was the technology not yet mature enough to produce the conceived design, but that it would not possibly be available soon enough to meet the critical mission requirements and capability needs of the service, both now and in the foreseeable future. As such, the Coast Guard proposed a revised design specification, identified as the Sentinel Class patrol boat, through a “parent craft” acquisition strategy. Parent craft describes the use of an existing ship design that has successfully performed equivalent missions.
“13. Is a composite technology out of the picture now?
“Following the award of the Sentinel Class patrol boat contract, and to ensure that mission needs are met as quickly and cost-effectively as possible, the Coast Guard will examine and develop options to procure the remaining Fast Response Cutters based on the overall performance of the Sentinel and the ability of the Sentinel Class to meet original FRC A-Class requirements. No decision with regard to composites has been made.”
There is a lot more information on their web site, but to briefly compare the two classes.
- The “AMP 145” is 145 ft. long, the FRC is 154.
- AMP, 28 ft beam, FRC 25.4 ft
- AMP displaces 230 tons, FRC 353 tons, I am sure the builders of the AMP would credit at least some of the lighter weight to the construction techniques and suggest that this will result in fuel savings.
- AMP 30+ knots, FRC 28+
The AMP 145 is propelled by two diesel engines using water jets. (There is a three engine option for 40+ knots.) They claim a maneuvering speed of 1-3 knots. One of the things that has always bothered me about the Webber class was the decision to delete the controllable pitch props, which were included on the parent craft, in favor of cheaper fixed pitch propellers. Potentially this may mean that the vessels may have low speed maneuverability problems. The conning officer will have a choice between engaging the engines which will accelerate the vessel to a minimum speed, dictated by the idle speed of the engines and the pitch of the prop, or disengaging the engines entirely. His choice of speeds is not infinitely variable between zero and maximum, as is the case with controllable pitch props. In most cases, of course, this can be dealt with, but there are situations, including towing or when the berthing space is tight, where it can be problematic.
The adaptability of the design is also interesting. In addition to the containerized options, the ability to carry two boats or to provide a flight deck for the Fire Scout UAV are both interesting.
As always, the devil is in the details, but it appears that the cutter we wanted earlier may now be available. At any rate, competition is a good thing. It appears the Coast Guard may have another option available, possibly at considerable savings. Will the Coast Guard, as stated above, revisit their choice?
(Thanks to Lee Wahler for bringing this to my attention.)
Continuing Resolution, Changes in the Wind
Ryan Erickson is reporting that a continuing resolution has passed the house and will now go to the Senate. (Hopefully the Federal Government won’t have to shutdown.) In addition to authorizing expenditures, included in the bill is language that will allow the Coast Guard to make some changes, that include decommissioning three ships.
“…the Coast Guard may decommission one Medium Endurance Cutter, two High Endurance Cutters, four HU–25 aircraft, the Maritime Intelligence Fusion Center, and one Maritime Safety and Security Team, and make staffing changes at the Coast Guard Investigative Service…”
There is more detail in Ryan’s article, but a couple of numbers stood our for me.
“…$73,200,000 shall be for vessels, small boats, critical infrastructure and related equipment…” in the AC&I budget, and additionally
… $1,191,502,000 shall be for the Integrated Deepwater Systems program…of the funds made available for the Integrated Deepwater Systems program, $103,000,000 is for aircraft and $933,002,000 is for surface ships.” So there is $155.5M in the Deepwater Budget that is not for aircraft or ships?
Presumably the Deepwater money for surface ships includes exercising the option for the fifth National Security Cutter (about $480M based on the last award) and four more Fast Response Cutters, #9-12 (about $166M based on the last award)
That would still leave about $287M. Could it be that the programs are accelerating? Can someone fill us in?
The Final Three of Fourteen Heroes
As previously mentioned, the Coast Guard Compass has been running a series providing information about the men and women the first fourteen Fast Response Cutters are to be named for. Since my last post on this subject, they have completed the series. The last three in the series are:
- Isaac Mayo a late 19th century junior surfman who served on Cape Cod
- Richard Dixon, a late 20th century surfboat coxswain who earned two Coast Guard Medals serving in the Pacific Northwest
- Heriberto Herandez, a fireman who was posthumously awarded the Bronze Star with Combat “V” and the Purple Heart for action in Vietnam.
If you would like to catch up on the stories of the other men and women these vessels are named for, you can find them below.
- Bernard C. Webber
- Richard Etheridge
- William Ray Flores
- Robert J. Yered
- Margaret Norvell
- Paul Leaman Clark
- Charles Walter David Jr.
- Charles Sexton
- Kathleen Moore
- Joseph Napier
- William Trump
Incidentally, I’d like to see us start referring to these as the “Hero class” cutters, a lot less awkward than “Fast Response Cutter” and more meaningful than FRC.
Two More Heroes for Two More Cutters
The Coast Guard Compass has continued to expand their coverage of the stories of the individuals the first 14 Fast Response Cutters are to be named for, adding two more since our last post on the subject.
Napier was a Life Saving Service Great Lakes station keeper in the late 19th century. William Trump was one of the many Coast Guardsmen involved in the Normandy invasion. You might also like to follow this link (also included in Trump’s story), that gives more detail about the Coast Guard and the Normandy invasion.
If you would like to catch up on stories previously published, they are linked here.
More Enlisted Heroes/FRC Namesakes
Earlier we noted that the Coast Guard Compass is posting a series of short histories highlighting the namesakes of the first fourteen Fast Response Cutters. We provided links to the first four in two previous postings:
Two more were linked in comments on a previous post:
Since then, they have posted three more:
For more information on the Cutter COMANCHE and her efforts to rescue the survivors of the Transport DORCHESTER which resulted in the death of Charles Walter David, Jr. go here.
Two More Hero Names for the Fast Response Cutters
Coast Guard Compass is continuing their series, telling the stories of enlisted Coast Guard heroes who are the namesakes of the new Fast Response Cutters. They have just added two more:
If you missed the first two, they were:
If you read the story of William Ray Flores, it also includes the story of his Coast Guard shipmates who made sure he received the recognition he deserved.
Since Robert J. Yered received four Bronze Stars in addition to the Silver Star that is discussed in the Coast Guard Compass, I suspect there is more to his story, but it does also briefly address the Coast Guard’s role in Vietnam.
Fast Response Cutters–Named for Heroes
Today the Coast Guard Compass announced the first fourteen names to be assigned to the Fast Response Cutters (the Bernard C. Webber Class). They are also doing a series explaining the accomplishments of each of the service members the vessels are named for. These are the first two:
CG Participation in “Influence Squadron”/Global Partnerships
The idea of “influence squadrons” has been kicking around the Navy for a while now. The idea is an expansion of the “partnership” stations that the Coast Guard has participated in (here), (here), and (here). Information Dissemination offers some background and has a proposal for implementing these concepts and he sees the Coast Guard as an integral part of it.
Specifically he suggests that we test the concept off the Horn of Africa (Somalia and adjacent territory) by deploying an influence squadron in October of 2011. In addition to the LEDETs and Deployable Operations Group personnel you would expect, he would like to include, “The USCGC Bertholf (WMSL 750), which will work in cooperation with regional Coast Guards to establish fishery protection operations and training around Somalia.” He did not mention the Fast Response Cutter, but vessels like these were including in the original concept of the influence squadron and they are the type of small ships that we might offer our allies in the area through the Foreign Military Sales program (aircraft) (boats). This not only helps the ally, increasing the total size of procurement can lower the unit cost for the Coast Guard as well.
In “New Fiscal Year Reflections ” there is also a call for the Navy to “put its money where its mouth is” in terms of implementing a cooperative strategy or support someone who will (the Coast Guard).
“Either the US Navy needs to make the strategic commitment to the low end and have this reflected in shipbuilding with vessels more appropriately sized for engagement with Coast Guard sized fleets of regional partners, or advocate for a larger US Coast Guard to take up that responsibility as part of the National Fleet. Including smaller vessels as part of the US Navy fleet isn’t a tactical choice as it is framed by Naval leaders; it is a strategic choice the US Navy decided against, despite the rhetoric of their own strategy.”
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 