Quantcast
Channel: Shipbuilding – Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Viewing all 462 articles
Browse latest View live

Hearing: Coast Guard Requirements, Priorities, and Future Acquisition Plans (FY-2018)

$
0
0

 

May 18, the Commandant, Admiral Paul F. Zukunft, addressed the House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee. The recorded testimony is above. It is fairly long (1h40m). The Commandant’s initial statement, following the introductions, begins at 8m40s and ends approximately minute 14.

The administration’s FY 2018 budget request was not available, but the Commandant was there to discuss future priorities, requirements, and programs. The Department Secretary, General Kelly, is expected to address the Subcommittee on May 24 at 3PM Eastern.

I will just mention a few of the items I thought significant.

Admiral Zukunft noted that Huntington Ingalls has begun cutting steel for NSC #9. Questioned about NSC#10, he said, if it were funded, the Coast Guard would of course use it, but that the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) is the Coast Guard’s #1 priority. His response, that another NSC would have an effect on long-range operating cost, seemed to suggest anticipated significantly lower operating costs for the OPC. Significantly, there has been no mention of reducing the OPC program by one ship to offset the addition of NSC #9. (There is already a strong push to build more NSCs, a bill to authorized a multi-year buy of three more.)

He contended that the Coast Guard has taken a harder hit, due to budget restrictions, than other armed services and would need 5% annual growth and at least $2B annually for Acquisitions, Construction, and Improvements (AC&I). Later he stated that this annual AC&I appropriation would included about $300M annually for shore facilities. He pointed to a need to restore 1100 Reserve Billets and add 5,000 active duty military billets while retaining current levels of Civilian staff.

Apparently the FY2918 budget will begin a program to replace 35 Inland tenders at an estimated cost of approximately $25M each ($875M total). (Even if, in the unlikely event, this program were funded in only five years, that would only average $175M/year, so it is not a big program, but one that should have begun at least a decade ago.)

Cyber security for ports was discussed. The Commandant sees the Coast Guard role as decimating best practices, rather than imposing regulation. We now have a cyber program of record–still very small, two CG Academy graduates going directly into the program. The fact that two billets is worth mentioning, is probably the best indication of how really small the program is. A much smaller pre-World War II Coast Guard probably had more people working on breaking German and Japanese codes. 

Marine Inspection was addressed. The Commandant noted the increased demand for Inspections because 6,000 tugs have been added to inspection program. He noted a need for more stringent oversight of 3rd party inspectors, who in some cases have not been as meticulous as they should have been. He also noted that the US flag merchant fleet, notably the MSC’s Afloat Prepositioning Fleet, will need replacement, which will also raise demand for marine inspectors.

The Commandant also voiced his support for the Jones Act. He noted, we only have three shipyards building Jones Act ships in the US, and their loss would be short-sighted.

There was much discussion about the Arctic and the Icebreaker Fleet. Looks like follow-on funding for icebreaker program (at least after the first) will have to come from CG AC&I rather than the Navy budget. This may be difficult, but it is the way it should be. The chair of committee expressed his reservations about attempting to fund such big-ticket items through the DHS budget. The Commandant stated that the Coast Guard is still considering the acquisition of the commercial Icebreaker Aiviq (but apparently they are doing it very slowly–the chairman of the committee seemed a bit irritated about this).

The committee members seemed to latch onto the idea that the USCG, rather than the Navy, would be responsible for enforcing US sovereignty in the Arctic (which by US definition includes the Aleutians), and seemed to be asking if the Coast Guard was prepared to fight the Russians and/or Chinese in the Arctic. The Commandant suggested instead, that our role was to provide presence in the pre-conflict phase in order assert US sovereignty. He acknowledged that the National Security Cutters are only armed defensively and are not suitable for conventional naval warfare against an enemy combatant.

The Commandant acknowledged that, at some point it may be desirable to arm Polar Icebreakers, meaning they should be built with space, weight, and power reservations for additional weapons.

(I am all for keeping open the option of arming our icebreakers, so that they can defend themselves and do their part, if there is a conflict in a polar region, but there did not seem to be recognition among the Congression Representatives, that an Arctic conflict is most likely to be determined by submarines and aircraft. The icebreakers’ role is likely to be primarily logistical.)

The Commandant apparently does expect that there may be disagreements with regard to the extent of the US authority over certain areas of the Arctic.

In discussing the need for land based Unmanned Air Systems, there was a curious note at minute 40 about go-fast boats going south. Where are they going?

Alien Migrant Interdiction (AMIO). We have gone for seven weeks without a single Cuban Migrant being interdicted. This is because of the end of Wet Foot/Dry Foot Policy. This has allowed reallocation of resources to drug interdiction South of Cuba and human trafficking from the Bahamas

A Congressional Representative, from Texas pointed out there is no CG presence on the Rio Grande River, in spite of it being an international waterway. There was no mention of it, but perhaps he was thinking of the Falcon Lake incident in 2010 when an American was allegedly shot in the head by Mexican drug runners. Maybe something we should reconsider.

The Commandant promised the CG would have an unfunded priority list for FY2018.



FY2018 Budget Request

$
0
0

The Homeland Security “FY2018 Budget in Brief” has been published. You can see it in pdf form here.

The Coast Guard portion is on pages 44-48. The breakdown of the elements of the Coast Guard budget request are on page 47.

The total DHS budget request is $70,692,491,000. Of that, the Coast Guard portion is 15.1%. The DHS request is 7.1% greater than the FY2017 annualized continuing resolution. By comparison, the Coast Guard request is down 2.4%.

Highlights of the Coast Guard budget request noted include:

(“FTE refers to personnel changes. They are “Full Time Equivilents”)

  • Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) ……………………………………. $500.0M, 0 FTE Provides funding to begin construction of the first OPC, which is scheduled for delivery in 2021. The OPC will replace the Medium Endurance Cutter classes that conduct missions on the high seas and coastal approaches;
  • Fast Response Cutter (FRC)……………………………………….$240.0M, 0 FTE Funds procurement of four FRCs. These assets replace the less capable 110-foot patrol boats, enhancing the Coast Guard’s coastal capability to conduct Search and Rescue operations, enforce border security, interdict drugs, uphold immigration laws, prevent terrorism, and enhance resiliency to disasters;
  • Polar Icebreaker ……………………………………………………. $19.0M, 0 FTE Continues efforts toward awarding a contract for detail design and construction in 2019. This acquisition is recapitalizing the Coast Guard’s heavy polar icebreaker fleet;
  • Inland River and Western Rivers Tender ……………………….. $1.1M, 0 FTE Supports exploratory activities to analyze potential options to replace the capabilities provided by an obsolete fleet of inland tenders and barges commissioned between 1944 and 1990;
  • C-27J ………………………………………………………………… $52.0M, 0 FTE Funds support continued activities of the C-27J Asset Project Office (APO), which organizes logistics, training development, maintenance support, and ensures that these newly acquired aircraft are ready for induction into the operational fleet. Continues funding for initial spares and logistics, training, and mission system development;
  • Pay and Allowances……………………………………………….$109.8M, 0 FTE Maintains parity with DOD for military pay, allowances, and health care, and for civilian pay raise and retirement contributions, including providing a 2.1 percent military and 1.9 percent civilian pay raise in FY 2018. As a branch of the Armed Forces of the United States, the Coast Guard is subject to the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, which include pay and personnel benefits for the military workforce;
  • Operating and Maintenance of New Assets……………………$98.6M, 233 FTE Increases funding for operations and maintenance of shore facilities and provides sustainment funding for new cutters, boats, aircraft, and associated C4ISR subsystems delivered through acquisition efforts;
  • Mission Essential Systems and Cyber Security …………… ……$26.2M, 2 FTE Funds sustainment of critical Coast Guard network infrastructure and pays DOD working capital fund increases necessary to comply with DOD information network and cybersecurity requirements; and
  • Workforce Support Improvements ………………………………….$9.1M, 34 FTE Provides funding and personnel to manage the new Blended Retirement System, increase the frequency of Personnel Security suitability background investigations, and enhance capabilities to handle sexual assault allegations.

FY 2018 Major Decreases:

  • Decommissioning of Legacy Assets…………………………. ($14.1M) (129 FTE) Decommissions one 378-foot high endurance cutter, three 110-foot patrol boats, and one HC-130H aircraft in line with the Coast Guard decommissioning plan; and
  • Management and Support Efficiencies ………………………. ($13.9M) (13 FTE) Reflects savings generated from an enterprisewide efficiency review that can be taken with no direct operational impacts and a minimal loss of current service delivery

This is neither the disastrous cuts that were talked about earlier, nor is it a substantial boost. While less than the FY2017 budget as ultimately funded, it compares favorably to the initial FY2017 request. If the Congress does what it has done in the past, and adds some to the AC&I budget, we may feel this is a better than workable budget.

Compared to the enacted FY2017 budget, Operating Expenses are up $333,772,000 while AC&I is down $720,382,000. Hopefully the Congress will bump this up to nearer what we need annually, about $2B. I would be very surprised if the Congress does not increase the Fast Response Cutter buy from four to six, and NSC#10 and another C-130J are possibilities.


“Breaking Ice: The Next Icebreaker Will Be a Navy-Coast Guard Partnership”–Office of Naval Research

$
0
0

US Coast Guard photo by PO Patrick Kelley

The Office of Naval Research’s online magazine, “Future Force,” has some insights into how they are approaching the task of helping to design the Coast Guard’s new heavy icebreakers.

It also seems to indicate the Navy is increasingly thinking about operating surface ships in the Polar regions and that they are realizing, its very hard.

They are looking at the capabilities of non-ice-strengthened ships in polar regions and at the effects of ice loading. Considering we have been sending National Security Cutters into the Arctic their findings should also be of some interest to us.


Interview: Adm. Paul Zukunft demands Coast Guard respect–Defense News

$
0
0

DefenseNews had an interview with the Commandant. You can read it here. I will not repeat the Commandant’s responses here, but I will repeat one of the questions and add my own thoughts.

Admiral, you have said that the Coast Guard’s identity as an armed service is forgotten. Can you tell me what you mean by that?

The Commandant talks here about budget, but I think this starts with self image. We do SAR. We rescue sea turtles. Armed services are first and foremost ARMED. We are by law a military service, but we are currently inadequately armed for even our peacetime counter terrorism, DHS mission. We are less capable of forcibly stopping a ship than we were 90 years ago.

Do our people know what their role will be if there is a major conflict with the Chinese or Russians? You can bet Navy and Marine Personnel have a pretty good idea of their roles.

We have had a quarter century hiatus in a mono-polar world where no one could challenge American seapower. That is changing rapidly and it is time for the Coast Guard to see itself in a new light. Just as the nation has benefited from having two land forces (Army and Marines), it can benefit from having two sea forces. The Coast Guard is a substantial naval force. Certainly we will not replace the Navy’s sophisticated systems, but there is a need for a high low mix and the marginal cost of adding capability to Coast Guard vessels that are going to be built anyway is very small.

We are currently in an unrecognized naval arms race with China. It is time to give the Coast Guard back the ASW and ASuW capabilities it was building before the collapse of the Soviet Union.

When I reported to the academy in 1965, it had a gun lab, and we were taught ASW (badly) during swab summer. The Coast Guard had 36 ships equipped with sonar, ASW torpedoes and 5″ guns. The ships were old (not as old as now), but we were building a new fleet of 36 Hamilton Class WHECs equipped with a better sonar in addition to torpedoes and a 5″ gun. Being armed did not stop us from doing SAR, fisheries, or aids to navigation.

At that time (1965) in terms of personnel, the US Navy was about 25 times larger than the Coast Guard and had 287 cruisers, destroyers, and frigates. Now it is only eight times as large as the Coast Guard and has only 85 ASW equipped surface ships. We also had a powerful naval ally in Europe in the form of the Royal Navy. Now the Coast Guard is supplying personnel to the Royal Navy and in terms of personnel the Coast Guard is larger than the Royal Navy or the French Navy. Equipping our planned 33 to 35 large cutters as true surface combattants could make a real difference.

Even if we never go to war, preparation can make us better at our peacetime roles. Drug interdiction, migrant interdiction, and even SAR benefit from military grade ISR and C4I. Recognition of naval capabilities in the Coast Guard may justify additional resorces that have dual use for peacetime missions. Its a win-win.

 


What’s in a Name

$
0
0

The program currently stands at 23 vessels delivered with 22 commissioned. They are being delivered at a rate of 5 per year meaning the last of 58 planned should be commissioned by the end of FY2024. 

MarineLink has a story about Bollinger and their production of the Webber class WPBs. I found this particular paragraph interesting.

Making it Personal
To help combat complacency Bollinger came up with the Sentinel Program, to both incentivize its shipbuilders and to make each vessel more meaningful to them. “Each of these vessels is named for a hero in the Coast Guard,” Remont said. For every vessel Bollinger creates a name board, a 4 x 3 board that describes the ship’s namesake with details of their heroic act. “What we’re trying to do is personalize it for our shipbuilders. It’s not just some big hunk of metal with a bunch of cables, it (the ship) is there for a real reason. We erect these sign posts at each station where the vessel is getting created, and the name board follows the ship, traveling with the boat as it moves through the production line. “Every time our shipbuilders get on that vessel they can read about the person, and understand why we are building it.” When the vessel is delivered the name board is given to the CO of the boat so that they and the crew can be reminded of the namesake, too. Following the delivery ceremony, Bollinger selects one employee from each department who exhibits the same characteristics of the vessel’s namesake, and they are publicly recognized and awarded.
 –
This points to yet another reason the decision to name these cutters after Coast Guard heroes was a good one. I knew it would mean something to the crew, but apparently it means something to put a human face on the ships, even to the shipyard works, and perhaps to others that come in contact with the ships. It also teaches Coast Guard history in easily digestible bits.
 –
Hopefully we will continue with this when we name the Offshore Patrol Cutters. I don’t think we could do better than name the first of class for the captain of the Revenue Cutter Hudson during the Spanish-American War, Frank H. Newcomb. There has never been a cutter named after him, and the honor is long overdue.
Newcomb02

Frank H. Newcomb


Contract Award for FRC 39-44, Thoughts on Patrol Craft

$
0
0

Coast Guard Cutter Bailey Barco (WPC-1122) enters San Francisco Bay during the 6,200-mile trip from Key West, Florida, to its homeport in Ketchikan, Alaska, April 28, 2017. The cutter is the second fast response cutter based in Alaska. U.S. Coast Guard photo.

Following is quoted verbatim news from the Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) Website.

Acquisition Update: Coast Guard Exercises Contract Option For FRCs 39-44

June 16, 2017

The Coast Guard awarded a $289 million contract option to Bollinger Shipyards of Lockport, Louisiana, June 9 for the production of six more fast response cutters (FRCs). This option award brings FRCs 39-44 under contract with Bollinger. The current FRC contract contains options for up to 58 cutters and is worth $1.5 billion if all options are exercised.

The Coast Guard is acquiring 58 FRCs to replace the 1980s-era Island-class 110-foot patrol boats. FRCs feature advanced command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance equipment; over-the-horizon cutter boat deployment to reach vessels of interest; and improved habitability and seakeeping. The cutters are designed for multiple missions, including drug and migrant interdiction; ports, waterways and coastal security; fishery patrols; search and rescue; and national defense.

Twenty-two FRCs are in service, with six stationed in Miami; six in Key West, Florida; six in San Juan, Puerto Rico; two in Cape May, New Jersey; and two in Ketchikan, Alaska. Future FRC homeports include: Pascagoula, Mississippi; Atlantic Beach, North Carolina; San Pedro, California; and Honolulu.

Note a few things:

  1. While this is not the total cost of the vessel, the shipyard cost is less than $48.2M. As I recall this is a decrease from previous buys, reflecting the maturity of the program and the decision to order six at a time.
  2. This is presumably FY2017 money and it leaves 14 vessels for future funding. Both the previous and current administration have consistently requested four or fewer vessels be funded, but the Congress has been fairly consistent in funding six per year. It seems likely the remaining 14 will be funded over the next three years. If so all 58 will be fully funded by FY2020.
  3. Bollinger is delivering at a rate of five per year. We just commissioned #22, so we can expect the last of the currently planned 58 in FY2024.
  4. The first three of the 87 foot Marine Protector class WPB were commissioned in 1998. It was 26 years from the commissioning of the first 110 to the commissioning of the first Webber class WPC. If there is a similar 26 year span from the first 87 footer to the commissioning of the first of its replacement class, we should see that boat come on line in FY2024, just as Webber class construction is ending. To make that happen, we need to start market research and planning in FY2021, the year after the last WPC is funded or FY2022 at the latest.
  5. There is talk of building six additional WPCs to replace the six 110s currently in Bahrain. I’ll have more on this later.

Metal Shark Builds WPBs for FMS

$
0
0

Metal Shark Illustration. RHIB pictured is 5.5 meters

NavyRecognition reports that Metal Shark has been awarded a contract

“…potentially worth upwards of $54 million, Metal Shark will build up to thirteen 85-foot Defiant-class welded aluminum cutters for the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and other United States partner nations. Additionally, Metal Shark will supply electro-optical infrared sensors, diagnostic equipment, in-country reactivation, crew familiarization, and test support to NCPV (Near Coastal Patrol Vessel–Chuck) operators.

That is only $4.154M/ boat. This looks an awful lot like a potential replacement for the Marine Protector class 87 foot WPBs, the first of which should be replaced in 2023. The Metal Shark boats are a version of Damen’s Stan Patrol 2606 design, so nominally 26 meters long and 6 meters of beam, but according to the Website, 87′ length overall with a beam of 19’6″. The Marine Protector Class were also a Damen 2600 series design, so the two classes share a great deal of DNA.

There is more information on the boats at the company website here. Unfortunately there appears to be no information on speed, range, or endurance. I would presume those characteristics would at least equal those of the Marine Protector class

Would not be surprised to see the Coast Guard personnel tasked with some training for the crews of these new patrol boats.


Building a 21st Century Infrastructure for America: Coast Guard Sea, Land, and Air Capabilities–House Subcommittee Hearing

$
0
0

 

The hearing recorded above was held 7 June. The original video was found here. That page also provides the chairman’s opening statement and links to the witnesses’ written statements that are also provided immediately below. The video does not actually start until time 4:30.

Below, you will find my outline of the highlights.

Witness List:

  • Vice Admiral Charles W. Ray, Deputy Commandant for Operations, United States Coast Guard | Written Testimony
  • Vice Admiral Sandra L. Stosz, Deputy Commandant for Mission Support, United States Coast Guard | Written Testimony Ms. Marie A. Mak, Director, Acquisition Sourcing & Management Team, Government Accountability Office | Written Testimony
  • Mr. John Acton, Chairman, Coast Guard Affairs Committee, Navy League of the United States | Written Testimony

The GAO’s written testimony is particularly comprehensive. They report that new assets (NSCs and FRCs) are not meeting planned availability. There have been an unexpected number of engine replacements. In the case of the National Security cutters it appears to me the down time was predictable, a normal part of introducing new ships and availability should return to planned levels as more ships join the fleet. The known defect, that when operating in waters 74 degrees or warmer, the NSCs cannot maintain maximum speed has apparently not been corrected. Max speed must be reduced two to four knots to allow adequate cooling.

Planning Documents:  The Congressional Representatives repeatedly complained that they were not getting an unsensored statement of the Coast Guard’s needs. It appears the Coast Guard is not being allowed provide this information. Rather it appears the GAO is telling the Coast Guard how much they will be getting and told to submit a budget that fits the predetermined amounts. Reportedly the Unfunded priorities list will be provided by the end of June. They also asked for the 5 year and 20 year plan (1h04:30). Coast Guard representatives were repeatedly told the Coast Guard does not say what they really need, that information provided by the Coast Guard is inadequate for the sub-committee to make decisions (1h48m).

It appears that the GAO continues to ask the Coast Guard to plan procurements based on historically low AC&I appropriations that were adequate for a time because of the sporadic character of Coast Guard ship building. They acknowledge that the current budget is not realistic. (43:45)

The Coast Guard is now consistent in requesting $2B in the AC&I annually and a 5% annual increase in its operating budget and that we need 5,000 additional active duty billets and 1,100 addtional reservists. There was a statement from one of the Representatives to the effect, We need you to fight for yourselves (1h50:30). The representatives were informed that the 5 year, 20 year plans and unfunded will be delivered together (1:56)

My opinion: we need a regularly revised Fleet Mix Study. That in turn should feed directly into a 30 year ship and aircraft procurement plan

Webber Class WPCs: The Coast Guard is reportedly pushing WPCs operations down as far as the coast of South America. (50:00) This confirms my earlier speculation that these ships would be operated in what had been WMEC roles. Six cutters for CENTCOM The representative confirmed that they had approved procurement of six Webber class requested by CENTCOM. Apparently their approval was in the form of the Coast Guard reauthorization bill which has still not been made law. Adm. Ray stated that these would be in addition to the 58 currently planned (9:30) and it is not clear how or when they would be funded. Adm Stosz indicated it was not certain six Webber class would be the Coast Guard’s choice in how to fill this requirement and the question required more study. (1h11)(1h41m).

Shore Facilities: Reportedly there is a $1.6B shore construction backlog. $700M shore facilities maintenance backlog. Some infrastructure improvements that directly support new operational platforms.are being accomplished under the platform programs (55:00) The representatives asked, why we have asked for only $10M if the total shore facilities backlog is $2.3B?(1h35)

Icebreakers: The possibility of leasing the commercial icebreaker Aiviq is still being considered. (1h27) The owners have offered a plan for Ice trials and the Coast Guard has said it would be interested in observing. (1h29:50)

Great Lakes Icebreaker: Rep. Lewis brought up icebreaker for Great Lakes.Adm Ray says for now we will address with the existing fleet. (1h00:30) Priority is still Polar Ice Breakers.

eLoran: There seems to be considerable interest in eLoran to deal with GPS vulnerabilities. (1:22) The Navy League representative supported the need. The Re-Authorization Bill directs Secretary of Transportation to initiate E-Loran testing. There was a clear anticipation that the Coast Guard would support implementation.

Coast Guard Health Care: Looks like the Coast Guard heath care records system which reverted to paper now may be able to piggy back on the VA’s conversion to the DOD system. (1h25)/(1h32:30) There is currently a major gap in funding for medical care of CG retirees

A Better Armed Coast Guard: Not that the Representatives were specific, but there was a statement, “We want to weaponize you.” (5:55) I think I heard essentially a second time as well. I’m not sure what that means.

Rising Sea Levels: There was concern expressed regarding rising sea level and how they might impact shore facilities (1h12:20)

WMEC Service Life Extension: The Coast Guard was given money several years ago to plan a service life extension program for 270. The Congress has not seen or heard any result and they questioned, why delay? (1:09) See fig. 4 on page 17 of the GAO’s written testimony

Operating Expenses: Replacement ships are costing more.(26:25)(50:55). This is becoming problematic without an increase in operating budget.

Changing the way we buy ships: Included in the Reauthorization Bill are changes in the way the Coast Guard can fund its shipbuilding, putting us on par with the Navy (5:50)

Cyber: Budget includes 70 additional billets. (19:45)  What are we doing for the ports? (1h13:45)

Inland Tender Fleet: Budget includes $!M to investigate alternatives. (52:30) (1h19)

It is remarkable that there seemed to be no sentiment that the Coast Guard budget should be cut, while there was considerable evidence the Representatives believe the Coast Guard is underfunded.



French Navy Gets New Icebreaker

$
0
0

L’Astrolabe (2017) in Kiel, 3 January 2017, photo by HenSti

NavalToday reports that the French Navy will soon accept a light icebreaker/ supply vessel to be named L’Astrolabe. It will replace a smaller vessel of the same name.

It is 72 metres (236 ft) long and 16 metres (52 ft) of beam, somewhat larger than her 66-metre (217 ft) predecessor.

Aker Arctic provided the basic design.

Late addition: Check out NavyRecognition’s report for a better selection of photos.


A Trend: the Nexus of Missile Boats, Corvettes, and Patrol Vessels

$
0
0
There seems to be a trend in anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) armed vessels. This may not look like a topic of interest to the Coast Guard, but it seems the former bright line between vessels designed as missile boats and those designed as patrol vessels may be disappearing. In fact, missile boats, as a class, seem to be disappearing as ASCM equipped vessels seem to be evolving into much larger corvettes which look a lot like offshore patrol vessels.
How it began:
It all started in 1956, when the Soviets replaced the torpedo tubes on their project 183 class torpedo boats (NATO P-6) with a new missile, the (NATO SS-N-2 Styx), and created an entirely new type of combatant that NATO termed the  Komar. (66.5 tons, 83 foot long)

Komar Class Missile Boat, US Navy photo

Suddenly these small vessels could damage or destroy a ship of any size and outrange battleships.

They drew first blood 21 October 1967, when three  Styx missiles fired from Egyptian Komar class missile boats sank the Israeli destroyer Eilat (former HMS Zealous, 1,710 tons).

The Indian Navy again proved the effectiveness of the Styx in 1971, attacking Pakistani shipping and shore facilities, using larger Osa class missile boats.

By 1973 it was the Israeli’s who proved most capable in this new form of warfare, employing helicopters for deception and electronic countermeasures to seduce the Styx which outranged their own ASCM.

The Market: 

Did a bit of a “market survey” comparing the small missile armed combatants of ten nations, built or building, as reported in my 1987 “Combat Fleets of the World” with their current fleet, built or building, mostly from Wikipedia. Checked some of the info against my current edition of “Combat Fleets” but it is already becoming out dated.
1987 to 2017 is a 30 year spread, but 1987 was 20 years after the sinking of the Eilat, and more than thirty years after the first Komars were commissioned. We have had 60 years for the type to evolve and 1987 is roughly the mid-point of that evolution.
It should be recognized that since the collapse of the Soviet Union there has been significant reduction of naval forces for many of these navies, so smaller fleets should not be a surprise.
Notation: Initial in-service dates for the first of class are in parenthesis (In the case of a class that is used by more than one nation I will use the first in-service date. ). In some cases I have included inclusive commissioning dates for the whole class. I have tried to use full load displacement only. There was sometimes conflicting information. I chose what I thought was most credible.
China
1987: 120 Osa 235 tons, 70 Komar 79 tons , plus over 200 torpedo boats

Osa-I class, US Navy photo

Now: 30 of an expected 40 Type 056 corvettes completed (2013) 1500 tons, 83 Type 022 fast attack craft (2004) 220 tons, 26 Type 037 class (1991) 478-520 tons.

Houbei Type 022 class fast attack craft

Type 056 corvette, credit 樱井千一

Denmark
1987: Building StanFlex 300s (1989-1996) 450 tons, 10 Willemoses class (1976) 265 tons. They also had six Soloven class torpedo boats of 114 tons

Danish navy SF300 vessel Støren (P555), photo by Kim Storm Martin

Now: No ASCM equipped combatants of less than 6,600 tons
Finland
1987: Four Helsinki class (1981) 280 tons, four Osa class 235 tons

Helsinki Class now Croatian vessel RTOP-42 Dubrovnik. Photo by Saxum

Now: Four ice strengthened corvettes planned to replace Rauma class and others, four Hamina class (1998) 268 tons, four Rauma class (1990) 248 tons. Discussion of new Finnish corvettes here: https://chuckhillscgblog.net/2015/12/23/finland-seeks-unique-warship/

Conceptual illustration, Finland’s squadron 2020 corvette

Germany
1987: 20 type 143 (1976) 390 tons, 20Type 148 (1972) 264 tons
Schnellboote_Albatros-Klasse

Type 143 Albatros-class boats, S63 Geier in the foreground. The third one is a Gepard-class boat. Photo by Darkone

Now: Smallest ASCM armed combatants are 1840 ton K130 class (2008) (Five built and five more planned)
Corvette_Braunschweig_F260

The German navy corvette Braunschweig ( F 260), lead ship of the corvette class K 130. Photo by Torsten Bätge

Greece
1987: 6 La Combattante IIIB class (1980) 429 tons, 4 La Combattante III class (1977) 425 tons, 4 Combattante II (1973) 265 tons,
LaCombatIII

Antipliarchos Blessas (P-21), LaCombattante III class, photo by Jorge Guerra Moreno

Now 7 Roussen class (2005) 668 tons, 5 La Combattante IIIB class (1980) 429 tons, 4 La Combattante III class (1977) 425 tons, 3 La Combattante IIA class (1973) 265 tons, plus eight 25 knot gunboats (1989) 515-550 tons that could mount four Harpoon (not currently mounted).
P67_Roussen

HS Roussen, P-67 in Piraeus 2009. Photo from K. Krallis, SV1XV

India
1987: Planning the Khukri class (1989) 1,350 tons, Building Turantul class (1984) 493 tons, 3 Nanuchka class (1978) 730 tons, 14 Osa class (1960) 240 tons

Nanuchka II class corvette.

Now: 5 Kora class (1998) 1500 tons, 4 Khukri class (1989) 1,350 tons, 10 Tarantul class (580 tons)

Kora class Corvette, INS Kulish (P63), US Navy Photo

Israel
1987: Planning SAAR 5 corvettes (1994) 1,275 tons, Building SAAR 4.5 (1980) 490 tons, 7 SAR IV (1978) 450 tons, 6 SAAR III (1969) 250 tons, 3 Grumman Mk II/M hydrofoils (1982) 103.5 tons
Israel_Navy_Strike_Gaza_from_the_Sea_(14738072664)

SAAR 4.5 missile boat. Israel Defense Force photo

DafHelChochit

INS Aliya in 1985. An aviation equipped unit of the SAAR 4.5 class

Now: Germany is building four ships, the SAAR 6 class, similar to the K130 class for Israel, that are being called OPVs. 3 SAAR 5 corvettes (1994) 1,275 tons, 8 SAAR 4.5 (1980) 488-498 tons
INS_Lahav

INS Lahav, most advanced SA’AR 5 corvette in the Israeli navy. Now equipped with MF-STAR radar and BARAK-8 Surface to Air Missiles. Photo by Ilan Rom

Norway
1987: 14 Hauk class (1977-1980) 155 tons, 6 Snogg class (1970) 140 tons, 19 Storm class (1963) 125 tons
Hauk_MTBer2 (1)

Hauk-class patrol boats at quay in 2001. Photo by Peulle

Now: Skjold Class (1999-2012) 274 tons
SkajoldClass

P965 KNM Gnist, a Skjold-class patrol boat of the Royal Norwegian Navy, Photo by Mark Harkin

Sweden
1987: Building Goteborg class (1990) 380 tons, 2 Stockholm class (1986) 320 tons, 17 Hugin class (1972-1981) 150 tons, 12 Spica II class (1972) 230 tons, plus 4 Spica class torpedo boats (1966) 235 tons
HMS_Sundsvall_2010

Goteborg class corvette HMS Sundsvall (1993), photo by Poxnar

Now: 5 Visby class (2008) 600 tons, 2 Goteborg class (1990) 380 tons, 2 Stockholm class (1986) 320 tons

HMS_Helsingborg

Visby class corvette HSwMS Helsingborg (K32), photo by Xiziz

USSR/Russia
1987: Building Turantul class (1984) 549 tons and Nanuchka class (1978) 730 tons, Still retained 90 OSA (1960) 235 tons and other missile armed small combatants but none under 200 tons. (No Komar class in service.)

Turantul Class Corvette

Now: Building Karakurt class (2017) 800 tons, 5 Buyan-M (2014) 949 tons. 26 Tarantul class (1984-2003) 493 tons, 12 Nanuchka class (1978-1991) 730 tons

Karakurt Class Corvette

Buyan-M class corvette, Mil.RU photo

In Summary
Notably Denmark and Germany no longer have any ASCM armed combatants under 1800 tons. The latest from China, Germany, India, and Israel are between 1,500 and 2,000 tons. No indication how large Finland’s new corvette will be, but I expect it will be around 1,000 tons. Russia’s latest are 800 tons or larger. Greece and Sweden’s latest are 600 tons or larger. Many of these vessels have speeds of less than 30 knots. Only Norway is making ASCM armed combatants under 300 tons and even theirs are over 200 tons. The original concept of extremely fast, short ranged vessels of less than 100 tons and less than 100 feet in length has completely disappeared from the navies of these experienced missile boat operators. 
Why have these vessels grown in size?
I believe there are several reasons:
  • They want greater endurance and better seakeeping.
  • They want to deploy well beyond their homeports.
  • They want them to be multi-mission.
  • They want air-defense capability after the demonstrated vulnerability of missile boats to helicopters and aircraft during the first Gulf War.
  • The needs of networking, ESM, air-defense, ISR etc overwhelm a small crew.
  • They want to be able to launch a multiple missile attack that allows several missile to arrive on top simultaneously, but they also want a second salvo in reserve. This seems to be moving the norm toward 16 missiles. This is being facilitated by the smaller size of many of the newer missiles.
  • They see a need for organic aviation (either a helicopter or UAV) for over the horizon targeting.
  • Because it is peacetime, the planning horizon is now about 30 years. Operating cost considerations predominate.  In wartime it might make sense to make four cheap manpower intensive vessels rather than one individually more capable vessel, but in peacetime fuel and manning costs trump low initial costs and quick construction. This is part of the reason we have a “gold-plated” fleet now.

World Maritime Fleets–UN

$
0
0

The UN has issued an interesting short report on the status of the World’s merchant fleets. I am going to quote it below.

Top 5 ship owners are Greece, Japan, China, Germany and Singapore. Together they have a market share of 49.5% of dwt. Only one country from Latin America (Brazil) is among the top 35 ship owning countries, and none from Africa.

Top 5 flag registries are Panama, Liberia, Marshall Islands, China Hong Kong SAR and Singapore. Together they have a market share of 57.8%. Developing countries flag more than 76% of the world fleet in dwt. In terms of vessel types, bulk carriers account for 42.8% of dwt, followed by oil tankers (28.7%), Container ships (13.2%), other types (11.3%) and general cargo ships (4%).

Only three countries (Republic of Korea, China and Japan) constructed 91.8% of world tonnage (GT) in 2016. Republic of Korea had the largest share with 38.1%.

Four countries (India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and China) together accounted for 94.9% of ship scrapping in 2016 (GT).

The data confirms a continued trend of industry consolidation, where different countries specialize in different maritime sub-sectors, as analyzed in UNCTAD’s Review of Maritime Transport 2016 and a special chapter of the 2011 Review. It also confirms the growing participation of developing countries in many maritime sectors.

For more information, please contact Jan Hoffmann, Trade Logistics Branch, Division on Technology and Logistics, UNCTAD. Jan.Hoffmann@UNCTAD.org

Thanks to Bryant’s Maritime Consulting blog for bringing this to my attention.


India Launches First Two of Five OPVs

$
0
0

The Indian Navy has announced the launching of the first two of a new class of five Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs). Three more of the class are expected by the end of the year.

Within the Indian Navy, these are unique in that they are being built by a private, rather than a government, shipyard.

Wikipedia reports that these vessels are 110 meters in length (Same as the Offshore Patrol Cutter) with a displacement of 2000 tons (this appears to be light displacement). They are armed with  an OTO Melara 76mm super rapid gun mount (SRGM) and two 30mm AK-630M six barrel Gatling guns. It is powered by twin diesels 18,200 kW (24,400 HP) for a maximum speed of 25 knots.

India has both a Coast Guard and a Navy, and both operated Offshore Patrol Vessels. The Coast Guard was established in 1978 and operates under the Ministry of Defense. Indian CG OPVs tend to be more lightly armed than their Navy counterparts.

The Indian Navy currently operates ten Offshore Patrol Vessels.

The Indian Coast Guard currently operates 16 Offshore Patrol Vessels and three larger “Pollution Control Vessels” which also function as OPVs.

The oldest of the Indian Coast Guard OPV was commissioned in 1983. The oldest Indian Navy OPV was commissioned in 1989.


OPC Design Passes ICDR

$
0
0

OPC Characteristics:
 •Length:  360 feet, Beam:  54 feet, Draft: 17 feet
•Sustained Speed:  22+ knots
•Range:  8500+ nautical miles, Endurance: 60 Days

The Maritime Executive reports that Eastern has passed the Initial Critical Design Review milestone, a necessary step before long lead-time material could be ordered.

Looking at the diagram above, that was included in the story, I would note that the field of fire for the Mk38 mod2 on the roof of the hangar is restricted, by the placement of a satellite antenna. I know spacing out antenna is a difficult problem, but it is unfortunate.

Perhaps we should have a second Mk38 so we could have one on each corner of the hangar, so we could benefit from its electro-optic capabilities forward of the beam as well as having more firepower.

The characteristics quoted above are from the post, and certainly from an Eastern press release. I note the range listed is less than the 10,200 miles previously quoted though still probably adequate and more than the initial specifications.

Thanks to Luke for bringing these to my attention


Hero Names for the OPCs

$
0
0

We got a premature look at the naming sources being planned for the Offshore Patrol Cutters. It was perhaps the default choice in recycling old names, but I believe we owe recognition to many of our heroes that have been neglected. I had hoped we would continue the successful practice of recognizing our heroes, as has been done with the Webber Class WPCs, but extending the sources to include officers as well as enlisted. I had a post in the works to identify candidates for the honor.

Perhaps it is not too late to rethink this. If you agree, I will offer a suggestion how you might be able to make your voice heard.

Our large cutters are the Coast Guard’s equivalent of the Navy’s destroyers or frigates. The Navy names these after heroic Navy and Marine Corps personnel. We should follow this tradition and name our Offshore Patrol Cutters after notable personnel of the Coast Guard or its legacy services.

Additionally we might have to stretch to find 25 ships whose accomplishments really justify namesakes, particularly if we want to use names with an Arctic connotation like Bear, Northland, Storis, and Eastwind for icebreakers. Have we really thought out all 25 names?

We certainly have enough heroes. For most, we cannot reflect their accomplishments by reprising ship names. Particularly during WWII, many of their vessels (e.g. LCIs, PCs, or 83 foot WPBs) were nameless, designated only by a number that defies reuse. In other cases they were not assigned to ship.

Naming ships is about more than honoring the past. It is message to the future, written to the crews, the Coast Guard, the rest of the Government, to the American people, and the world, including our allies and our enemies. It tells them all, what should be expected of the Coast Guard and its people. For this purpose, I believe more recent examples are more effective than those from the early 19th century.

The Commandant has recently had to remind Congress and the Administration that we are a military service. It could not hurt if many of the names chosen for the OPCs illustrate this.

Naming our ships for heroes rather than recycling previous ship names allows us to highlight the deeds of Coast Guardsmen who were not aboard ships including aviators and Port Security personnel.

I will highlight a few I found particularly significant and list some others that might be worth consideration. The list is incomplete. I had not exhausted all my sources, so there are others that might be worthy of consideration. I believe I excluded all those that have or are planned to have Webber class namesakes.

My list of primary candidates consist of 39 names. There is representation from the Vietnam War, WWII, WWI, the Spanish-American War, and the War of 1812 as well as peacetime heroics with heavy emphasis on events in the 20th century. It includes many junior officers and reflects the diversity of Coast Guard missions.

If you would like to express an opinion on the naming of the OPCs I suggest you contact:

CDR Charlotte Pittman, USCG, Deputy Chief of Public Affairs
Email: Charlotte.E.Pittman@uscg.mil

THE PRIMARY CANDIDATES

USCG Cmdr Harold S. Berdine of cutter Spencer talking with US Navy Capt Paul Heineman of the Escort Group A-3 after sinking German submarine U-175, North Atlantic, 500 nautical miles WSW of Ireland, 17 Apr 1943. US Coast Guard photo by Jack January

BERDINE, Harold S., Cdr. (later RAdm.) WWII, Battle of the Atlantic, 2 Legion of Merit, CO of USCGC Spencer when she sank U-boat U-175 and possibly a second U-boat. Citation: “The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Legion of Merit with Combat “V” to Commander Harold Sloop Berdine, United States Coast Guard, for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services to the Government of the United States as Commanding Officer of the U.S.C.G.C. SPENCER when that ship engaged and sank a German submarine on 17 April 1943. While escorting a large convoy, the SPENCER made contact with a submarine and went into action immediately. With a splendid demonstration of ship handling, prompt action, and accurate judgment, and with the convoy bearing down on his ship and the submarine, Commander Berdine boldly maneuvered his ship into position for two attacks while the U-Boat was still ahead of and close aboard the convoy. He maintained contact with the enemy ship while passing down through the convoy columns, and close stern of the convoy, delivered a third accurate depth charge attack. The submarine was forced to the surface, was then engaged with gunfire and sank shortly after. Many of the enemy crew were captured. Commander Berdine’s outstanding performance of duty on this occasion reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service. (Commander Berdine is authorized to wear the Combat “V”.)” Later a second Legion of Merit.

BREWSTER, Caleb, Revolutionary War/War of 1812 (One of the characters on the television series “Turn, Washington’s Spies.) Revolutionary War Spy, 20 years in the Revenue Cutter Service, and CO of the Revenue cutter Active during the War of 1812. http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2014/07/caleb-brewster-revolutionary-war-hero/ also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caleb_Brewster

BLUE, Victor, Lieutenant, Spanish American War, USLHS, of SUWANNEE (formerly MAYFLOWER) went ashore to make a visual reconnaissance of Santiago Bay and the ships in it. Guided by a member of the Cuban insurgent forces, he passed through enemy lines and observed the Spanish squadron on 12 June. His report confirmed that all of Admiral Cervera’s squadron had in fact entered the bay, thus enabling the blockade by heavy ships of the Navy to be concentrated at that point, without having to worry about threats to the troop convoys preparing to depart from Tampa

Photo: Thomas James Eugene Crotty

CROTTY, Lt Thomas James Eugene, WWII, Mine warfare expert. Captured by the Japanese on Corregidor and died in POW Camp.

DEXTER, Dwight, CO of NOB Cactus, (Guadalcanal, WWII). Silver Star, “In action against an armed enemy as commanding officer of the Naval Local Defense Force and Anti-Submarine Patrol, Guadalcanal-Gavutu, Lieut. Comdr. Dexter landed with the Marines on August 7, 1942, and established and administered the Naval Local Defense Forces in these occupied islands until November 5, 1942, on which date he was evacuated due to illness. During the three months while he was in command of this unit, he was subjected to almost daily aircraft bombing attack and, for many weeks, to an almost nightly naval bombardment. Throughout this entire period, his courage, determination and zeal made it possible to maintain in operation a signal station and a boat operating organization which was essential to the successful unloading.”

EAGAN, Lance A., Lieutenant, USCG, Vietnam War, Silver Star, “The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star (Air Force Award) to Lieutenant Lance A. Eagan, United States Coast Guard, for gallantry in connection with military operations against an opposing armed force while attached to the 37th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron (USAF), as rescue Crew Commander of an HH-3E helicopter in Southeast Asia on 2 July 1968. On that date Lieutenant Eagan penetrated a heavily defended area of North Vietnam to attempt the rescue of an injured downed pilot after three helicopters had previously been severely damaged and driven off by the intense, hostile ground fire. Lieutenant Eagan with undaunted determination, indomitable courage and professional skill established a hover and deployed a Pararescueman to assist the injured airman. Disregarding the hostile fire that originated from beneath his hovering helicopter, Lieutenant Eagan maintained a stable hover until the downed pilot and Pararescueman were safely recovered from the hostile area. By his gallantry and devotion to duty, Lieutenant Eagan reflected great credit upon himself and the United States Coast Guard.”

ERICKSON, Frank A., WWII, Rotary Wing Pioneer

FINCH, Florence, SN1, USCG, WWII, Medal of Freedom, (for acts committed prior to joining the Coast Guard) For meritorious service which had aided the United States in the prosecution of the war against the enemy in the Philippine Islands, from June 1942 to February 1945.  Upon the Japanese occupation of the Philippine Islands, Mrs. Finch (then Mrs. Florence Ebersole Smith) believing she could be of more assistance outside the prison camp, refused to disclose her United States citizenship.  She displayed outstanding courage and marked resourcefulness in providing vitally needed food, medicine, and supplies for American Prisoners of War and internees, and in sabotaging Japanese stocks of critical items. . .She constantly risked her life in secretly furnishing money and clothing to American Prisoners of War, and in carrying communications for them.  In consequence she was apprehended by the Japanese, tortured, and imprisoned until rescued by American troops.  Thought her inspiring bravery, resourcefulness, and devotion to the cause of freedom, Mrs. Finch made a distinct contribution to the welfare and morale of American Prisoners of War on Luzon. (Heroic acts were not done while in the Coast Guard, but she became one of us.)

FRITZCHE, Edward H. CAPT, USCG, WWII, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct, both in the preparation and execution of the amphibious assault on the coast of France June 6, 1944. Captain Fritzche was in command of a main group of the Assault Force, composed of a mixed fleet of American and British transports and American landing craft. He brought these ships and craft to their predetermined stations in the transport area, successfully effected their prompt and efficient unloading and expedited the assault troops and equipment to the designated beaches.—Gold Star in lieu of a second Legion of Merit, For meritorious conduct as commanding officer of a Coast Guard transport prior to and during the amphibious invasion of Southern France August 15, 1944. He efficiently organized and trained his ship and boat group to execute the assigned mission of loading transporting to the assault area and landing the embarked Army assault units on the invasion beaches. His able conduct contributed materially to the effective establishment of the beachhead and to the over all success of the invasion.

GISLASON, Gene R., LT, USCGR, WWII, Silver Star, For outstanding heroism as Commanding Officer of the USS LCI (L) 94, while landing assault troops in Normandy June 6, 1944. He successfully directed his ship through numerous beach obstacles to the proper beach, discharged his troops and retracted while his ship was seriously damaged from heavy enemy fire. Ship’s communications, engine telegraph and electric steering were disabled by direct hits on the pilothouse which killed three crewman and one screw and shaft were rendered inoperative by beach obstacles. By his coolness under fire and excellent seamanship, Lt Gislason overcame these difficulties and brought his ship off the beach on hand steering and one screw. He later supervised repairs and in four hours enable the LCI (L) to remain operative in the assault area for three weeks.

GOFF, Willis J., GM1, Vietnam War a crewman on board the cutter Point Banks on patrol in Vietnam,  was awarded the Silver Star for “his heroic courage and gallantry in action while engaged in armed conflict against North Vietnamese and Viet Cong aggressors in the Republic of Vietnam on Jan. 22, 1969.”  He and fellow Point Banks crewman EN2 Larry D. Villarreal volunteered to man the cutter’s launch to rescue a group of nine South Vietnamese soldiers who were trapped along a beach by two Viet Cong platoons.  Under continuous enemy fire, they made two landings on the beach to rescue successfully all of the South Vietnamese soldiers.  His citation read, in part: “. . .with courageous disregard for their own safety, Petty Officer Goff and his fellow crewmember were able to rescue nine South Vietnamese Army personnel who would have met almost certain death or capture without the assistance of the two Coast Guardsmen.  Petty Officer Goff’s outstanding heroism, professionalism, and devotion to duty and to his fellow man were in the highest traditions of the United States Naval Services.

HENLEY, Coit T., LTJG, USCGR, WWII, Normandy invasion, Silver Star, For heroism as Commanding Officer of the USS LCI(L) 85 while landing assault troops in Normandy, France, June 6, 1944. Lt Hendley successfully landed his troops despite the mining of his vessel, fire in three compartment and concentration of enemy fire while unloading. His courage and seamanship in directing repairs and retracting from the beach resulted in saving the lives many wounded aboard.

HICKEY, Eugene J., Lieutenant, Junior Grade, USCG, Vietnam War, Operation Markettime, Silver Star, “The President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star Medal to Eugene J. Hickey, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, U.S. Coast Guard, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while Commanding the U.S.C.G.C. POINT WHITE (WPB 82308), in action against the enemy in the Republic of Vietnam on 9 March 1966. In response to the Secretary of the Navy’s request for maintaining waterborne surveillance patrols of the inland and coastal waters of Vietnam, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Hickey was assigned as one of the first Commanding Officers to lead a contingent of Coast Guard 82 foot patrol boats assigned to the mission. In January 1966, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Hickey took command of U.S.C.G.C. POINT WHITE with additional duties as Chief Staff Officer for the new Division. Point White had not been in-country a month when she started patrols in a Viet Cong controlled area of the Soi Rap River in the Long An Province. Point White soon spotted a junk crossing the river and attempted to stop it. The junk had 14 Viet Cong aboard who opened fire with small arms and automatic weapons. Point White returned the fire and Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Hickey achieved decisive victory by ramming and sinking the junk. Point White killed eight Viet Cong and captured four. During the engagement, one of the prisoners fell overboard and Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Hickey dove over the side to rescue the wounded man.”

Official photograph of Vice Admiral James A. Hirshfield

HIRSHFIELD, James A., CAPT, USCG, WWII, Battle of the Atlantic, Navy Cross, For extraordinary heroism and distinguished service in action as commanding officer of the USCGC CAMPBELL of February 22 1943, when an enemy submarine was severely damaged and sunk and during the ensuing period when the CAMPBELL, which was damaged in the engagement, was towed safely to port. The CAMPBELL was engaged in escort operations when she caught an enemy.

IMLAY, Miles Hopkins, CAPT, USCG, WWII, Invasion of Sicily and Normandy, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct as Commander of the Reserve Attack Group during the Sicilian invasion campaign. With outstanding skill and expert seamanship, Captain Imlay brought the group under his command to the scene of action and with speed and precision dispatched them to the designated beaches, as they were required. Following the initial assault, he assisted in the support of the Army at Licata, and later was temporarily Commander of the Advance Base at Porto Empedocles, participating in the opening of that port while under enemy gunfire.—Gold Star in lieu of Second Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct as Commander of the LST convoy of a Major Task Force during the assault upon Italy in September 1943. Charged with the difficult assignment of brining the vessels under his command safely through the hazardous course between Bizerte, Tunisia , and the Gulf of Salerno, Italy, Captain Imlay (the Commander) performed his essential duties with outstanding skill, successfully reaching the designated assault beaches at the assigned time despite extremely adverse weather conditions and fierce enemy aerial opposition.—Silver Star, For conspicuous gallantry as Deputy Commander of an Assault Group participating in the initial invasion on the coast of France , June 6, 1944. Undaunted by heavy enemy fire, Captain Imlay courageously took station close to the shore on the early morning of D-Day and throughout the most bitter period of the fighting, coolly and promptly made spot decision on the reorganization, grouping and dispatching of craft to the beach, subsequently relieving the Task Group Commander of his duties when he withdrew his transport from the assault area, immediately thereafter, he was placed in charge of operations afloat as assistant to the naval Officer in Charge of one of the beaches and discharging the duties of this responsibility with distinctive professional ability, contributed essentially to the rapid clearing of the backlog of ships.

JARVIS, David Henry, first lieutenant (later Captain), United States Revenue Cutter Service. During the harsh winter of 1897–1898, Jarvis, then serving aboard the U.S. Revenue Cutter Bear, led the Overland Relief Expedition, bringing a three-man rescue team with a herd of about 400 reindeer across 1,500 miles of tundra and pack-ice to Point Barrow, Alaska, to bring needed food to 265 whalers whose ships had become stranded in the ice off the northern Alaska coast.

JESTER, Maurice D., CDR, USCG (ret.), WWII, Battle of the Atlantic, Navy Cross, For distinguished service as commander of the CGC ICARUS during a successful action on May 9, 1942, with a German submarine. His persistence, alertness, determination and judgment both during and after the attack resulted in sinking the enemy submarine and capturing the commanding officer one other officer and 31 crewmember. More here.

LEE, Fredrick, CO of the Revenue Cutter Eagle when attacked by HMS Dispatch.

McCAUSLAND, Francis, Lt(jg) USCG. WWII, Port Security, Lead firefighting effort on the SS El Estero, a ship loaded with ammunition that endangered New York and New Jersey. Seriously injured during the fire fighting effort. http://coastguard.dodlive.mil/2016/04/the-long-blue-line-s-s-el-estero-and-the-coast-guards-rescue-of-new-york-city-part-1/

McCORMICK, Nelson C., LCDR, USCG, WWII, Battle of the Atlantic, Legion of Merit, CO of USCGC Thetis when she sank U-157 Jun, 1942., “For exceptionally meritorious conduct as Commanding Officer of a Coast Guard Cutter during action against an enemy German submarine off the Florida coast June 11 to 13, 1942. Proceeding to the area where a hostile submarine had been located, he began a determined search in cooperation with Coast Guard patrol planes. The cutter tracked her target doggedly and forced the sub to remain submerged for long intervals until the appearance of continuing oil slicks debris and clothing gave evidence of the probable destruction of the hostile vessel. More here

MOSHER, Charles B., Lieutenant (Junior Grade), USCG, Vietnam War, Citation:
The President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star Medal to Charles B. Mosher, Lieutenant (Junior Grade), U.S. Coast Guard, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Commanding Officer of the USCGC POINT GREY (WPB-82328), Coast Guard Squadron ONE, engaged in Market Time Operations to interdict Viet Cong infiltration attempts near the mouth of the Co Chien River on 10 May 1966. While on patrol, the POINT GREY engaged an enemy trawler attempting to infiltrate arms and ammunition to the Viet Cong. After forcing the trawler to ground in shoal water near the shoreline, POINT GREY laid down an effective, intermittent barrage along the shore to prevent Viet Cong forces from removing the trawler’s cargo. Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Mosher twice drove his cutter through a withering blast of enemy gunfire in attempts to put a boarding party on the trawler, He ceased these valiant attempts to put a boarding party on the trawler only after three of his crewmembers were wounded. He then joined with newly arrived friendly forces in destroying the enemy vessel and confiscating part of its cargo. Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Mosher’s outstanding leadership and professional skill were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Coast Guard.”

First Lieutenant, Frank H. Newcomb, USRCS

NEWCOMB, Frank H., First Lieutenant, USRCS, Gold Medal, CO of the Revenue Cutter Hudson during the Spanish American War. Hero of the Battle of Cardenas. As I noted earlier I believe the first OPC should be named for Newcomb.

NIRSCHEL, Fred W. LCdr, WWII, Silver Star, As a member of a reconnaissance patrol transported to a Japanese held island in the Pacific Area during the latter part of December 1943, with no knowledge of enemy strength or the attitude of natives to the Allied Nations, and with limited means of escape, he went ashore in the face of certain danger, and, within a brief space of time secured information concerning the strength of Japanese forces and their equipment and had determined the most suitable beach for future landing as well as favorable sites for bomber and fighter strips. Discovered by the enemy and in danger of being captured by a hostile party possessing superior arms, he fought gallantly, assisting in ambushing, and killing three Japanese, wounding one and putting the remainder to flight before struggling back through heavy surf to the rendezvous with friendly craft.

“The Jaws of Death.” A photo by CPHOM Robert F. Sargent, USCG. A Coast Guard-manned LCVP from the U.S.S. Samuel Chase disembarks troops of Company E, 16th Infantry, 1st Infantry Division on the morning of 6 June 1944 at Omaha Beach. Coast Guard Photo #2343.

NIVENS, Delba L. as representative of all the USCG coxswains that piloted assault craft into the invasion beaches during WWII.

OXLEY, Gene E., Sea. 1c [ Seaman, First Class], WWII, USCGR, Silver Star, For gallantry while on the USS LCI(L) 85 during the assault on the coast of France June 6, 1944 and for extraordinary courage in volunteering and twice taking a line ashore, in the face of heavy machine gun and shell fire in order to assist troops unloading from the ship to the bench through chest deep water.

PETERSON, Carl Uno, LCDR, USCG, WWII, Legion of Merit (posthumously), For outstanding services as commanding officer of the USCGC ESCANABA while that vessel was engaged in rescue operations in behalf of an American transport, which was torpedoed and sunk on February 3, 1943. Proceeding through heavy seas in total darkness, LCDR Peterson under imminent threat of enemy attack, took immediate action that involved great skill with the result that 133 men were rescued from the sea.

PFISTER, Arthur F., LCDR, USCGR, WWII, Port Security, Navy & Marine Corps Medal, For heroic conduct as officer in charge of the fireboat Fleet, Port Security Command, Third Naval District, during fire fighting operations aboard the SS EL ESTERO, loaded with a cargo of explosives in New York harbor, New York, on April 24, 1943. Realizing the ever present danger of an explosion he boarded the burning vessel and skillfully directed the activities of three Coast Guard fireboats which assisted in controlling and extinguishing the fire. By his calm ad courageous leadership he inspired the personnel under his command and working tirelessly for hours contributed in large part to preventing an explosion which would have done incalculable damage to other vessels and vital installations in the harbor.

PRITCHARD, John A. Jr., LT, USCG, WWII, Distinguished Flying Cross (Posthumously), For heroism while participating in aerial flights as pilot of a plane which rescued Army fliers stranded on the Greenland Ice Cap November 28-29, 1942. After safely landing on the Ice Cap, he took aboard two of the injured men and, with superb airmanship, successfully took off for his ship, arriving safely. The following day, he again volunteered to resume rescue operations for remaining Army fliers. After getting one more on board, he started for his ship, but failed to arrive.—Navy & Marine Corps Medal, For heroic conduct while serving aboard the Coast Guard Cutter NORTHLAND during the rescue November 23, 1942, of three members of the Royal Canadian Air Force stranded on the Greenland Ice Cap for 13 days. Volunteering to lead a rescue party from the ship, lieutenant Pritchard reached the exhausted airmen and succeeded in bringing them safely to the ship.

RITTICHIER, Jack Columbus, Lt. USCG, Silver Star, Killed in Action (Vietnam) attempting to rescue a downed pilot.

ROOT, Charles S., Hero of the Galveston Hurricane of 1900, engineer, and founder of Coast Guard Intelligence organization.

SALMON, Robert M., LT, USCGR, WWII, Normandy invasion, Silver Star, For gallantry as commanding officer of a U.S. LCI (L) while landing assault troops in Normandy, France June 6 1944. He pressed the landing of troops despite the mining of his vessel a serious fire forward and heavy enemy gunfire. He supervised the unloading of troops, directed the fire fighting despite the loss of proper equipment and exhibiting courage of high degree remained with the ship until it was impossible to control the progress of the fire and it was necessary to abandon ship over the stern. After abandoning he directed a party searching for fire fighting equipment and subsequently fought the fire on another LCI (L) and assisted her commanding officer until she was abandoned.

SHOEMAKER, Charles Frederick, military head of the Revenue Cutter Service, March 1895 to March 1905, oversaw numerous reforms in the service and procurement of the modern cutters used in WWI. In 1878, after an investigation he had Richard Etheridge, appointed as the first African American keeper of Pea Island Life-Saving Station.

SMITH, Edward H., RADM, USCG, Distinguished Service Medal, “For exceptionally meritorious service as Commander of the Greenland Patrol and later SWEENEY as commander of a task force in the Atlantic Fleet from December, 1941 to November 1944. During the critical years organized and administered the naval bases and stations in Greenland and in the Arctic for the support of the Army in those areas and the Naval control of the North Atlantic. Under extremely difficult conditions the forces of his command successfully operated patrols and escorts, maintained a system of weather stations and provided full logistic and tactical support of the Army. As commander of a task force he directed vital weather, patrol and escort services which were of inestimable assistance in connection with the ferrying of aircraft and the operation of transport planes to and from the European theaters of war and effectively protected valuable convoys.”

PC545
Photo: USS PC-545, Commanded by Lt. String, At sea during World War II. Probably photographed in 1942-43, while wearing rather weathered pattern camouflage. Donation of Phil Wagner, 2001. U.S. Naval Historical Center Photograph.

STRING, John F. Jr., LT, USCGR, WWII, Anzio invasion, Silver Star, For conspicuous gallantry in action while serving as commanding officer of the USS PC 545 off Anzio, Italy on March 18, 1944. When an enemy motor torpedo boat was sighted at night. Lt. String immediately ordered the attack. With an expert display of seaman ship, he so skillfully maneuvered the ship that the first shots scored hits on the enemy craft before it was able to maneuver into position to effectively use its torpedoes and the resulting fire caused it to disintegrate in an explosion. This successful action against the enemy contributed materially to the protection of shipping in the Anzio area and to the successful maintenance of forces ashore.

STANLEY, John Theodore LCDR, USCG, WWII, Port Security, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct while serving as munitions Officer, Port Security Command. Third Naval District during fire fighting operations aboard the SS EL ESTERO loaded with a cargo of explosives, in New York Harbor on April 24, 1943. Realizing the ever present danger of an explosion, LCDR Stanly boarded the burning vessel and for three hours heroically directed a large detail of men engaged in controlling and extinguishing the fire. By his calm and courageous leadership, he inspired the personnel under his command and skillfully coordinated their activities, thereby preventing an explosion, which might have done incalculable damage to other vessels and vital installations in the harbor.

ULMER, Stephen T., Lieutenant (Junior Grade), Vietnam War, Operation Markettime, Citation: “The President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star Medal to Stephen T. Ulmer, Lieutenant (Junior Grade), U.S. Coast Guard, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Commanding Officer of the USCGC POINT LEAGUE (WPB-82304), Coast Guard Squadron ONE, engaged in Market Time Operations to interdict Viet Cong infiltration attempts near the mouth of the Co Chien River on 20 June 1966. While on night patrol, POINT LEAGUE engaged a 100-foot armed supply vessel attempting to deliver a large cargo of arms and ammunition to the Viet Cong. For hours, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Ulmer directed his command in a short-range gun battle with the infiltrator and forced her to ground on the beach. The enemy crew abandoned the vessel and made their way to the shore where they joined with Viet Cong forces. The fight then shifted to the beach where the Viet Cong forces, equipped with machine guns and heavier weapons, attempted to destroy the cutter and recoup the grounded vessel and its cargo. POINT LEAGUE, at first by itself and later joined by POINT SLOCUM and POINT HUDSON, raked the enemy forces with machine gun and mortar fire in exposing their positions to friendly aircraft support. Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Ulmer remained calm and in control despite his exposed position in the pilot house which took several hits, all of them penetrating the aluminum bulkheads. When a fire broke out in the grounded vessel, he organized a damage control party to suppress the flames to the point where POINT LEAGUE was able to come alongside and fight the fire. Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Ulmer’s valor, determination, and leadership were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Coast Guard.”

WALSH, Quentin R., CDR, (Retired as Captain) USCG, Navy Cross, For heroism as Commanding Officer of a U.S. Naval party reconnoitering the naval facilities and naval arsenal at Cherbourg June 26 and 27, 1944. While in command of reconnaissance party, Commander Walsh entered the port of Cherbourg and penetrated the eastern half of the city, engaged in street fighting with the enemy. He accepted the surrender and disarmed 400 of the enemy force at the naval arsenal and later received unconditional surrender of 350 enemy troops and at the same time released 52 captured U.S. Army paratroopers.

WILCOX, Robert, LCDR, USCG, WWII, battle of the Atlantic, Legion of Merit, “For exceptionally meritorious conduct as commanding officer of a U.S. DE [USS Joyce, DE-317] in offensive action against an enemy submarine. Proceeding to the area of an attack, he established contact and attached with such accuracy that the first depth charge pattern straddles the submarine, threw the enemy completely out of control and forced him to the surface. He immediately opened very effective gunfire on the U-Boat as its conning tower broke the surface. Combined attacks including concentrated fire from three destroyer escorts and final ramming attach by one of the attacking escorts completed the destruction of the helpless enemy submarine.”

YOST, Paul A., Jr., Admiral, USCG, two Distinguished Service Medals, the Silver Star, the Legion of Merit Medal with combat “V”, with a gold star, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Combat Action Ribbon, the Korean Service Medal, and the United Nations Service Medal. He also received the Cross of Gallantry with Silver Star (RVN), the Presidential Unit Citation, the Navy Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Distinguished Service Medal (RVN). Citation for Silver Star: “The President of the United States takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star Medal to Paul Alexander Yost, Jr., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving with naval forces engaged in armed conflict with the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Communist aggressors in the Republic of Vietnam. On 12 April 1969, Commander Yost was Officer in Tactical Command of a PCF (Patrol Craft Fast), UDT and Vietnamese Marine Corps movement unit into the Duong Keo River in An Kuyen Province as part of Operation SILVER MACE II. The five boats inserted their embarked troops at the mouth of the river and commenced a sweep up the river while the remaining eight boats proceeded up river to insert their embarked troops at a point several kilometers north of the first troop insertion. Commander Yost was embarked in PCF 31 in the second group of boats. As the PCF’s were proceeding up river in a column formation, they encountered an enemy ambush. The enemy forces used claymore mines, recoilless rifles, B40 rockets, 50 caliber machine guns and small arms. The two lead boats took severe damage but all boats returned fire until clear of the ambush area. Upon discovering that PCF 43 had lost control and was aground in the middle of the ambush site, Commander Yost personally returned to rescue the UDT personnel and crew of PCF 43 with two boats while the remaining boats beached out, set a defense perimeter and called in Medevac helicopters. Upon arriving at the point where PCF 43 was aground, Commander Yost discovered the survivors engaged in battle with enemy forces only 20 feet from their positions. In spite of heavy enemy fire, he brought the two rescuing PCF’s to the river bank and brought aboard the survivors and the bodies of the Officer in Charge of PCF 43 and one UDT Chief Petty Officer who had been killed in the action. Upon clearing all personnel from PCF 43, a series of explosions totally destroyed the craft. Commander Yost returned to the area where a perimeter defense had been set up, coordinated a Medevac for the wounded and dead and prepared his forces for the completion of the mission. Commander Yost exhibited tenacious and inspirational leadership. His valiant actions under fire saved the lives of the fifteen USN personnel rescued from PCF 43 and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.”

OTHERS WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION

ANDERSON, Langford, LT, USCGR, Navy & Marine Corps Medal, For extremely heroic conduct in effecting the rescue of survivors from the torpedoed SS DORCHESTER 3 February 1943. When benumbed survivors of the DORCHESTER were unable because of heavy seas and freezing winds, TO MAKE ANY EFFORT TO CLIMB ON BOARD THE RESCUING SHIP, Lt. Anderson was the first to volunteer for the dangerous task of going over the side and working in the rough freezing water in order to assist the exhausted and helpless survivors in reaching the safety of the CGC COMANCHE. He worked in and out of the water aiding survivors until he was physically exhausted and required assistance to return on board his ship. Largely inspired by the courage a number of men followed his leadership and volunteered for the performance of sillier duty. As a result of the combined efforts of the rescuers under Lt. Anderson leadership a total of 93 survivors were saved.

BARTLETT, David H., CDR, USCG, Legion of Merit, “For meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer of a Patrol Frigate in action against a Japanese submarine. Through skillful maneuvering and sound attacking fundamentals, he was instrumental in the destruction of the submarine.”

BROWN, FLETCHER W., First Lieutenant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S.S. Seneca, Date of Action: September 16, 1918, Citation: The Navy Cross is presented to Fletcher W. Brown, First Lieutenant, U.S. Coast Guard, for distinguished and heroic service in the line of his profession as officer of the U.S.S. Seneca in volunteering to lead a party of men to board the British steamer Wellington, following the torpedoing of that vessel on September 16, 1918, and her abandonment by her crew. Lieutenant Brown and the men form Seneca’s crew, with a few of the original crew of the Wellington, persisted heroically in their attempt to save the Wellington, and finally abandoned the ship only when she was on the point of sinking in a heavy sea.

BURKE, Richard Leon, CAPT., USCG, Two Distinguished Flying Crosses

BUTCHER, Reginald W., LCDR, USCG, Legion of Merit, For outstanding services as commanding officer of U.S. Coast Guard cutter in offensive operations against enemy forces north of the Arctic Circle during the period from July until September 1944. He utilized the limited combat capabilities of his ship to the fullest extent in inflicting major damage on the enemy. Despite the difficulties of traversing sections of the Polar Ice Pack he put ashore a formidable landing force, which located and destroyed an important enemy installation. Later while conducting a patrol in an isolated area, a unit attached to his command sighted a small-armed enemy speed and maneuverability. After a 70-mile chase through ice fields he successes in outmaneuvering the enemy closing effective gun range and forcing the enemy to surrender and scuttle.

Campbell, Hugh G., Quasi-war with France, CO of Revenue Cutter Eagle, that captured or assisted in the capture of 22 vessels. http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/e1/eagle-i.htm, and while he was US Navy, he also was apparently a Revenue Cutter Service Officer. http://www.semperparatus.com/usrcs_officers.html It does not hurt that this would continue the name Campbell in Coast Guard service, even if the namesake was different.

Cantillon, Matthew P. Lieut. (jg) USCGR, Silver Star, As a member of a Navy Beach Party in the amphibious attack on Biak Island, Schouten Group, Dutch New Guinea, on 27 May, 1944, when members of the party landed on Green Beach and were subjected to severe hand ground fire from Japanese troops in two caves in the cliff near the beach, he procured hand grenades, a weapon with which he was unfamiliar, from a soldier, returned to the cliff area, and by ground fire eliminated the enemy resistance, killing the four Japanese in the caves.

A photo of Coast Guard Port Security forces.

CARDEN, Godfrey L., Capt. USCG. During World War I, CAPT Godfrey L. Carden, commander of the Coast Guard’s New York Division, was named COTP in that harbor.  The majority of the nation’s munitions shipments abroad left through New York.  For a period of 1 1/2 years, more than 1,600 vessels, carrying more than 345 million tons of explosives, sailed from this port.  In 1918, Carden’s command was the largest single command in the Coast Guard.  It was made up of 1,400 officers and men, four Corps of Engineer’s tugs and five harbor cutters.  His pioneering work defined the Coast Guard’s port security mission for the next 60 years.

CLARK, George C., LTJG, USCGR, British Distinguished Service Cross, During the landing of Commandos at Quistreham by LCI (S) on 6 June 1944 Lt. Clark’s cutter was detailed to act as escort to LCI (S). HM LCI(S) 524 on clearing the beach after landing troops received a direct hit and blew up in a sheet of flames leaving a mass of blazing Octane petrol on the water. Although his cutter burned Octane petrol, he did not hesitate to street is craft into the flames and rescue the commanding officer and some of his men.

CONE, Burtis P., LT, USCG, Navy & Marine Corps Medal (Posthumously), For heroic conduct as executive officer of the USS LEOPOLD when that vessel was sunk by submarine in the Atlantic March 9, 1944. Unmindful of his own danger and refusing to save himself while members of his crew were still in danger, LT Cone worked desperately to assist his companions and remained in the water with them when an enemy vessel forced the rescue ship to retire from the scene.

CULLEN, John C., B.M. 2c [Boatswain’s Mate, Second Class], USCG, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct while on patrol at Long Island, New York, on the night of June 13, 1942. When several Nazi saboteurs bearing boxes of TNT and other destructive apparatus landed on the beach at Amagansett Cullen, unarmed and helpless against their menacing threat cleverly allayed their suspicions and thwarted their subversive intentions by promptly accepting a proffered bribe then sounding an alarm that led to their eventual capture. Subsequently volunteering as member of a searching party, he remained on the beach all night and after apprehension of the enemy agents. Furnished vital and incriminating testimony before a special military commission conducting trial. His keen presence of mind and discerning judgment in a grave emergency undoubtedly prevented the successful culmination of hostile intrigue designed to sabotage our national war effort.

CURRY, Ralph R., CDR, USCG, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct as Commanding Officer of the USS PRIDE during an attack on an enemy submarine of the Algerian coast in May, 1944. When a sound contact was established indicating an enemy submarine in the area, Commander Curry maneuvered his ship so skill fully that his actions greatly assisted in the search and the delivery of successful depth charge attack, which forced the submarine to the surface. The enemy was forced to scuttle and abandon ship. (U-371—USS Joseph E. Campbell, the French destroyer escort Sénégalais and the British escort destroyer HMS Blankney also participated in the sinking. 3 dead and 49 survivors.–Chuck)

EMERSON, Robert E., LTJG, USCG, Silver Star, For gallantry in action during the assault on Eniwetok Atoll, Marshall Islands , February 17-22, 1944, as boat group Commander, he led his landing boat group, under fire, in three separate attacks upon islands of Eniwetok Atoll. His cool and skillful direction, initiative and efficiency contributed materially to the successful participation of his ship in the assault.

GILL, Warren C., Lt (jg) USCGR, WWII, Sicily and Salerno invasions, Legion of Merit, citation, “For meritorious conduct in the. pre-assault training of officers and men for small boat operations, and as Commander of an assault force during the assault on Sicily. His effort and enthusiasm inspired in the small boat flotillas a spirit of determination that was largely responsible for their success.”

Navy Cross, citation, “For extraordinary heroism as commander of an assault flotilla during the amphibious invasion of Salerno, Italy, in September 1943. Although severely wounded by heavy enemy gunfire while directing the lowering of small boats from his ship, Lieut, (then Lieut, (jg)) Gill steadfastly remained at his post, carrying on his vital duties with dauntless courage and outstanding efficiency and giving important last minute instructions to his officers and men before collapsing as a result of his injuries.”

Goldman, Robert, HM2, Bronze Star

GOLENIECKI, John V., B.M. 1c [Boatswain’s Mate, First Class], USCGR, Legion Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct while attached to a U.S. Transport during the assault on and occupation of French Morocco, November 8-11 1942. When the members of his support boat landing northeast of Fedala, were attacked by hostile planes and ground forces, consequently being cut off the from the other landing groups. Goleniecki volunteered to man a rubber boat in order to contact our forces and obtain assistance. With the aid of a shipmate he affected a daring escape despite difficult conditions and hostile fire and reaching his objective the same evening, furnished the Attack Force Commander with the first information of the beleaguered group.

Graham, CDR Stewart, the 2nd U.S. Coast Guard helicopter pilot, credited with many helicopter firsts, including the first wartime anti-submarine patrol requiring him to perform the first take-off and landing from a vessel on the high seas

HARWOOD, Charles W., CAPT, USCG, Legion of Merit, For outstanding services as commander of a Naval Task Group during the amphibious assault on the Island of Sicily. In addition to his duty as commanding officer of the USS JOSEPH T. DICKMAN, Captain Harwood commanded the Naval Task Group, which landed battalions directly on the beaches fronting Gela, Sicily. By his sound judgment in planning, thorough indoctrination of his forces, and by his cool and skillful leadership under fire the assault battalions were expeditiously landed and supported, thereby greatly contributing to the success of the invasion.

HEMINGWAY, Henry George, Captain, USCG, in 1928,  awarded the Gold Lifesaving Medal

HIGBEE, Frank D., CAPT, USCG, Legion of Merit, For distinguishing himself by exceptionally meritorious conduct while in command of a group of ships. He displayed seamanship and leadership of the highest order while commanding echelons in the assault landing s on enemy territory and on numerous re-supply echelons. His services contributed materially to the successful conclusion of an important campaign

HOYLE, Robert, LTJG, USCG, Silver Star, For conspicuous gallantry in action against the enemy at Engebi and Parry Islands, Eniwetok Atoll, Marshall Island, where he landed with the assault waves February 18 and 22, 1944 under devastating enemy fire and without regard for his personal safety he immediately and continuously exposed himself to enemy fire in order to perform his duties and beach master. On both Engebi and Parry Island he acting on his own initiative, made his ay through heavy enemy fire to relation urgent messages to the Landing Team commander.

Peterson, Clarence H. Captain, USCG, Silver Star, As Commander of a Task Unit of Landing Ships Tanks during action against enemy Japanese forces at Cape Gloucester, New Britain, December 26, 1943, and at Saidor, New Guinea, January 2, 1944, subjected to a withering hostile air attack during departure from the beach at Cape Gloucester, Captain Peterson fought his command aggressively and inflicted severe losses upon the enemy with a minimum of damage to his own units. A cool and proficient leader despite extremely difficult conditions, he skillfully organized and guided succeeding echelons throughout the vital re-supply of these two important strongholds. More here.

POLLARD, Francis C., LCDR, USCG (Ret.), Navy & Marine Corps Medal, For heroic conduct as commanding officer of the USCGC NORTHLAND during the rescue of three members of the Royal Canadian Air Force from the Greenland Ice Cap on November 23, 1942. Upon receiving the message that an A-20 bomber with three crew members were marooned on the Ice Cap LCDR Pollard immediately proceeded to the position given and for four days through heavy fog and snow storms, stood off and on position. Finally when the fog lifted and the latitude could be determined by sunlight, he maneuvered his ship through dangerous ice and with the aid of a volunteer crew from the ship directed the perilous operations, which resulted in the rescue of the stranded man, who might otherwise have perished.

USS_Newell_(DE-322)

SCHLESINGER, Rudolph T., C.Ph.M. [Chief Pharmacist’s Mate], USCGR, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct while serving on the USS NEWELL on 20 April 1944, in the Mediterranean. Subsequent to an enemy air attack on an allied convoy the USS NEWELL was engaged in picking up one hundred and nineteen survivors of the USS LANSDALE. During and after this rescue operation, Schlesinger and pharmacist’s mates aboard his ship administered all medical treatment without aid of the doctor. Several of the survivors where unconscious and had to be resuscitated [while] several others had fractured limbs; others were stretcher cases; and all of them had been in oil polluted water for a period of one the four hours. In addition Schlesinger organized the wardroom as a dressing station with such thoroughness that it was converted into a virtual hospital with great dispatch. By his able and expeditious treatment of survivors suffering from shock, immersion and minor injuries, his efforts undoubtedly contributed to the saving of many lives.

THOMAS, Charles W., CAPT , USCG, Legion of Merit, For exceptionally meritorious conduct as Commander of a Greenland Patrol task unit and commanding officer of a Coast Guard ice breaker during the fall of 1944. Captain Thomas, operating north of the Arctic Circle, inflicted severe damage on enemy installations and outposts in Northeast Greenland . He landed a force, which destroyed a Nazi weather station and later captured an enemy armed trawler.

Thompson, Barham F., III, Lieutenant (Junior Grade), Silver Star, CO Point Slocum (WPB-82313), “The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Silver Star to Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Barham F. Thomson, III, United States Coast Guard, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Commanding Officer of the U.S.C.G.C. POINT SLOCUM (WPB-82313), Coast Guard Squadron ONE, engaged in Market Time Operations to interdict Viet Cong infiltration attempts near the mouth of the Co Chien River on 20 June 1966. POINT SLOCUM went to the assistance of Coast Guard Cutter POINT LEAGUE, which was engaged in a fierce fire fight with a vessel attempting to infiltrate 100 tons of arms and ammunition to the Viet Cong. Upon arrival on the scene, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Thomson found that the infiltrator had been forced aground by POINT LEAGUE and that Viet Cong forces concealed on the shore were attempting to drive off the cutter so that the cargo could be retaken. When friendly air support arrived, he made passes close to the shoreline in order to draw enemy fire and force the Viet Cong to disclose their positions to the aircraft. During these valiant maneuvers, POINT SLOCUM received several hits from small arms fire and two near misses from recoilless rifles. When the grounded trawler was set afire, Lieutenant, Junior Grade, Thomson put POINT SLOCUM along side and proceeded to extinguish the fire. His bravery and skill in risking his vessel, first to draw the enemy fire, and then to save the captured ship and its cargo greatly contributed to the United States efforts against insurgent forces in the Republic of Vietnam and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Armed Forces.

TILLMAN, William N., ENS, USCG, Bronze Star (deceased), For heroic service while serving as assistant gunnery and torpedo officer aboard the USS LEOPOLD during the sinking of that vessel in the Atlantic on March 9, 1944. Unmindful of his own danger, ENS Tillman courageously remained in the after section of the ship following the attack and working desperately to effect all possible safety measures, continued his valiant efforts until the LEOPOLD went down. His inspiring devotion to duty in the face of grave peril was in keeping with the highest.

VANN, George D., Sea . 1c [ Seaman, First Class], USCG, Navy & Marine Corps Medal, For heroic conduct while service aboard a destroyer escort during the rescue of survivors of the torpedoed LEOPOLD in the North Atlantic March 9, 1944. Courageously volunteering to assist in the rescue activities, Vann went over the side into ice, oil-covered waters and secured life lines around exhausted survivors.

VERNON, Albert, LTJG, USCGR, Bronze Star, For meritorious service as Commanding Officer of a Coast Guard Cutter in rescuing survivors of the invasion off the coast of France June 6, 1944. During D-Day, his cutter rescued 97 men. Each rescue was effected in the face of constant enemy fire from the beach which was in no way allowed to deter the splendid rescue operations.

Von PAULSEN, Carl C., CAPT, USCG, Legion of Merit, For outstanding service in position of great responsibility in the Greenland Patrol. During period from late July 1941 to mid September 1943. Captain von Paulsen as commanding officer, USCGC NORTHLAND and later as Commander Northeast Greenland Task unit, conducted tactical operation against enemy outposts in Northeast Greenland and by his detailed supervision and execution of these operations materially strengthened U.S. naval control over these regions. He was responsible for careful reconnaissance and surveying of the east coast of Greenland, thereby obtaining accurate hydrographic information of then little know East Greenland waters. In addition as Senior Officer Present, Afloat, Greenland , Captain von Paulsen made important contribution to organization and coordination of the activities of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet in the Greenland Area.

VYN, Arend, Jr., LTJG, USCGR, Silver Star, For gallantry in action as commanding officer of USS LCI 91 in the assault on the cost of France June 6, 1944. LTJG Vyn beached his ship and discharged the Army elements therein the face of murderous fire and a labyrinth of obstacles and mines. In spite of the fact that his ship was mined and repeatedly struck by artillery fire and small arm fire, he continued to land the army load in the face of certain loss of his ship. his determination to put the Army ashore was in keeping with the highest traditions of the offensive spirit of the U.S. Naval Service.


U.S. Coast Guard: Priorities for the Future–CSIS/USNI

$
0
0

The video above records an recent event, a “Maritime Security dialogue” presented by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the United States Naval Institute (USNI) featuring Admiral Paul F. Zukunft, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, for a discussion on the “U.S. Coast Guard’s future priorities.”

Despite the title, don’t expect a recitation of Coast Guard priorities. Most of the material is familiar, but there were a few interesting comments, including some that might be surprising. A number of things the Commandant said here made news.

  • That the NSCs could be made into frigates.
  • That the Polar Icebreaker would cost less than $1B
  • His support of transgender CG personnel.

I’ll give a quick outline of what was talked about. At the end I will rant a bit about some of my pet peeves.

The Commandant’s prepared statement is relatively short beginning at time 2m45s and ending about 11m.

6m00 In our listing of missions, the Commandant said Defense Operations should be listed first. He noted that there are 20 ships chopped to Combatant Commanders including eleven  ships operating under SOUTHCOM.

Q&A begins at 11:00.

16m20s The Commandant noted there is a Chinese ship rider on a USCG cutter off Japan and that Coast Guard aircraft are flying out of Japan.

17m30s Boarder protection/drug interdiction

20m Called the OPCs “light frigates”

22m As for priorities the Commandant noted a need to invest in ISR and Cyber

23m Cyber threat.

24m Expect return to sea duty because of length of training.

26m30s “Demise of the cutterman”/Human Capital Plan–fewer moves–removed the stigma of geographic stability

29m25s Highest percentage of retention of all services–40% of enlisted and 50% of officers will still be in the service after 20 years

30m Law of the Sea. Extended continental shelf in the Arctic.

32m30s Need for presence in the Arctic.

36m ISR, 38m15s Firescout. An interesting side note was that the Commandant seemed to quash any possibility of using the MQ-8 Firescout. He noted when they deployed on a cutter 20 people came with the system.  He called it unoccupied but not unmanned.

40m Icebreakers

43m30s Comments on transgender members

45m15s Icebreakers–will drive the price down below $1B.

47m NSC as frigate–no conversations with the Navy about this. Performance of Hamilton.

49m50s Count the NSCs toward the 355 ship Navy.

50m30s Illegal migration and virulent infectious disease

53m35s CG training teams in the Philippines and Vietnam to provide competency to operate platforms to be provided by Japan. Two patrol boats going to Costa Rica. Other efforts to build capacity.

56m DHS is the right place for the CG.

The Commandant touched on a couple of my pet peeves, specifically

  • He called the OPCs “Light Frigates,” so why aren’t they designated that way? WMSM and WMSL are just wrong in too many ways.  Give our ships a designation our partners and politicians can understand. A WLB is a cutter and also a buoy tender. The OPC can be both a cutter and a light frigate. I have suggested WPF. Maybe WFF for the Bertholfs and WFL for the Offshore Patrol Cutters. If we want to be thought of as a military service, we need to start using designations that will be seen and understood as military.
  • He mentioned the possibility of including the Bertholfs in the 355 ship fleet total. Coast Guard combatants should be included when the country counts its fleet. No, the cutters are not aircraft carriers or destroyers, but the current fleet of about 275 ships includes about 70 ships that have no weapons larger than a .50 cal. These include eleven MCM ships and about 60 ships manned by civilian crews such as tugs, high speed transports, salvage ships, underway replenishment ships, and surveillance ships. Counting the Cutters as part of the National Fleet would raise  our profile as a military service. The Navy might not like it, but it does give a better idea of our actually available assets for wartime, which is the point of such a listing.

 

 



Marine Protector class WPB replacement? Its Time!

$
0
0

33 meter Damen designed patrol boat

Bairdmaritime brings us news of a new patrol boat being built for a private security company that is protecting Nigeria’s offshore oil industry. Looks like a possible replacement for the 87 foot Marine Protector class WPBs. Yes it is bigger, but all our vessels have gotten bigger. It is also faster, but the crew is no larger, although more accommodations are provided.

Is it too early to start looking at a replacement class? Actually we may already be a year or two late starting the process.  

Our 73 Marine Protector class 87 foot WPBs were commissioned over an eleven year period from 1998 to 2009. If we want to replace them when they reach 25 years old, the first new cutters should be commissioned in 2023. If it were possible, it could fit well into our shipbuilding program since it appears likely the last of the programmed 58 Webber class will be funded in FY2020 and the first of the new class could be funded in FY2021.

Additionally we probably would want to start with an initial low rate production until the bugs have been worked out, and we get DHS approval to enter full-rate production. At that point, we should enter into a Multi-year Procurement. We don’t want to get into a situation where we have to rush a crash program to replace overage vessels.

Unfortunately it looks like we are once again “behind the power curve.” It takes us ten years to procure a large ship. Maybe we can move a little faster on these smaller vessels, but if you look at the way we are doing ship contracts,

  • there will be a year for market research/requests for information
  • a year of competition to select three preliminary designs
  • a year to refine and select from among the preliminary designs
  • a year to complete the winner’s detail design
  • at least two years construction before the first ship is commissioned.

That is six years, meaning we needed to start the contracting process in 2018, but there is nothing in the FY2018 budget that would move us toward a WPB procurement.

Even before the procurement process begins, we really need to look at what characteristics the new WPBs should have. I think the documentation is still called ROC and POE, for Required Operational Characteristics and Projected Operating Environment.

Surely we would want a better ship’s boat (the same 26 foot over the horizon boat used on the Webber class) and probably more speed and greater range.

Is it going to be just a SAR and LE asset, or will we consider Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security (PWCS) and our newly remembered Defense Readiness missions?

If so, I would suggest that they provide at least one Mk38 mod3 mount with provision for mounting a second Mk38 mod3, a guided weapon (which might be on the Mk38 mount) to deal with small, fast, highly maneuverable threats, and weight and space for a pair of tubes for light weight torpedoes to deal with the largest terrorist threats and . We might also consider a pilot house armored against small arms, like that on the Nigerian boats.

We ought to be able to get all that in a boat less than half the displacement of a Webber class, eg, about the same size as the Island class 110s.

 

 


OPC Derived Frigate? Designed for the Royal Navy, Proposed for USN

$
0
0

Babcock’s Arrowhead 120 proposal for the Royal Navy’s type 31e frigate

Earlier I suggested that a derivative of the Offshore Patrol Cutter might fill the role of a frigate.

It now appears that a ship with the OPC’s DNA has been proposed as a frigate for the Royal Navy and has been offered to the US Navy. The Babcock Arrowhead 120 is the latest of five candidates for the Royal Navy’s Type 31e (the other four are outlined here).

The common thread is Vard designs. The family tree looks like this.

  • Róisín-class patrol vessel, two ships, 1500 tons, 79 meters (259 ft) in length, 23 knots, built by Babcock, commissioned into the Irish Naval Service in 1999.
  • Protector-class offshore patrol vessel, two ships, 1900 tons, 85 meters (279 ft) in length, 22 knots, built by BAE Systems Williamstown, Australia, for the New Zealand Navy, the first commissioned in 2010.
  • Samuel Beckett-class offshore patrol vessel, three ships completed and a fourth under construction, 2256 tons, 90 meters (300 ft) in length, 23 knots, built by Babcock and commissioned into the Irish Navy Service in 2014.
  • USCG Offshore Patrol Cutter, 4,000 tons, 110 meters (360 ft), to be built by Eastern in the US with the first expected to be commissioned in 2021.

OPC “Placemat”

NavyRecognition has the most complete description of the ship I have seen so far, and also has three protos of a model of the proposed ship.

Arrowhead 120 has a length of 120 meters, a breadth of 19 meters for a displacement of 4000 tonnes. Its speed is 24+ knots and range is 6000 nautical miles at 15 knots. Crew complement is 80 (plus 40). The vessel was design with commercial standard with applied naval engineering standards.

Missions bays: Space for numerous containerized units within the optimally located mission bays. Facilities for launch & recovery of UXVs. Flexible, reconfigurable infrastructure.

Missile options: Deck space for up to 8 surface to surface guided weapons. Up to 16 cells VLS.

Small calibre guns: Design provision for SCGs up to 30mm with associated EO sensors and magazine arrangements. Weapons can be fitted at a number of upperdeck positions.

Medium calibre guns: Design provision for MCG up to 5 Inch (127mm) with associated infrastructure.

Aviation: Flight deck sized for AW-101 Merlin/MH-60 Seahawk. Hangar capable of accommodating a medium organic naval helicopter (e.g. Seahawk or NH90) or a lighter helicopter plus a VTOL UAV (e.g. AW-159 Wildcat & MQ-8C Firescout). Design can accommodate all envisaged customer naval aircraft.

Type 31e, outline of requirements (click on to enlarge)

Babcock is offering the design to meet the US Navy’s frigate requirement.

Among companies vying for the Type 31e design contract is Babcock International, which this week unveiled proposals for a 120-meter, 4,000-ton rapidly reconfigurable warship with multiple mission bays; deck space for eight surface-to-surface missiles, 16 vertical launch cells and a 5-inch gun; a flight deck large enough for a V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and hanger for MH-60 Seahawk helicopter; and launch/recovery facilities for unmanned vehicles.

Babcock claims that its Arrowhead 120 design will reduce through-life costs by embedding real-time equipment health monitoring sensors during the build process, allowing information about key systems to be gathered during deployments to inform subsequent maintenance periods.
With transatlantic exports in mind, the company also points to its collaborative venture with Florida-based Eastern Shipbuilding to design a new offshore patrol cutter for the U.S. Coast Guard. (emphasis applied–Chuck)
Craig Lockhart, the managing director of Babcock’s Naval Marine business, said that an advisor for U.S. naval procurement had expressed interest in the Arrowhead design, and specifically its innovative ‘iFrigate’ platform monitoring system, at the DSEI event.

The length is up ten meters compared to the OPC, as I thought might be the case, but I am a bit surprised at the reported beam, 19 meters. Since the OPC is 4,000 tons full load and the Arrowhead proposal is both ten meters (33 ft) longer and 2.5 meters (8 ft) greater in beam, the full load displacement of the Arrowhead would likely be considerably greater. The 4,000 tons reported may be a light displacement, meaning this ship is actually larger than the FFG-7 class.

Given the relatively small stacks and the 24+ knot speed, this is obviously an all diesel ship. It will be economical to run and have a long range at relatively high cruising speeds. While I think 24+ knots may be enough, most of the ships to be escorted make 20 knots or less, a speed well below the 29 knots of the FFG-7 class will be a hard sell to the US Navy.

NavyRecognition also has news of another of the Type 31e competitors, the BMT Venator-110 also apparently being proposed to meet the US Navy requirement.

Meanwhile BAE is also offering the much larger and more expensive Type 26 to the USN as well, however with its size and cost (U.S. $4.9 billion for the first three British ships) approaching that of a Burke class DDG, I think that is a long shot.

By contrast the Type 31e is being designed to a price of 250M Pounds or about $340M. That much lower price may be the Type 31e’s best selling point.


Article 0

$
0
0

USCGC Polar SeaThe US Naval Institute reports the Coast Guard has issued a draft Request for Proposals for a new Heavy Icebreaker with options for two more.

Certainly good news to see the process moving along, but it is also important to remember what it is not.

It is only a draft. “Responses to the draft RFP are due Dec. 11, and the Coast Guard and Navy will release a final RFP early next year, to support a Fiscal Year 2019 contract award.”

Like all of our contracts so far, there is no apparent consideration of a block buy that would lock Congress into funding the entire program–three ships in this case. Perhaps an astute shipbuilder will include that in their ultimate response, in case the Congress wants to commit for all three.

Unfortunately I can’t comment on the draft because of its limited distribution. Hopefully because,

“…Polar icebreakers enable the U.S. to maintain defense readiness in the Arctic and Antarctic regions; enforce treaties and other laws needed to safeguard both industry and the environment; provide ports, waterways and coastal security; and provide logistical support – including vessel escort – to facilitate the movement of goods and personnel necessary to support scientific research, commerce, national security activities and maritime safety.”

They will be provided with the means to be upgraded to allow them to exercise both self-defense and a modicum of offensive capability.

 


Coast Guard Cutter Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress–Nov. 30, 2017

$
0
0

OPC “Placemat”

The Congressional Research Service has issued an updated report on Coast Guard Cutter procurement by Specialist in Naval Affair, Ronald O’Rourke. It is available in pdf format here or you can read it on the US Naval Institute site here.

Quoting from the Report,

Summary

The Coast Guard’s acquisition program of record (POR) calls for procuring 8 National Security Cutters (NSCs), 25 Offshore Patrol Cutters (OPCs), and 58 Fast Response Cutters (FRCs) as replacements for 90 aging Coast Guard cutters and patrol craft. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY2018 budget requests a total of $794 million in acquisition funding for the NSC, OPC, and FRC programs.

NSCs are the Coast Guard’s largest and most capable general-purpose cutters. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $695 million per ship. The first six are now in service (the sixth was commissioned into service on April 1, 2017). The seventh, eighth, and ninth are under construction; the seventh and eighth are scheduled for delivery in 2018 and 2019, respectively. As part of its action on the Coast Guard’s FY2017 budget, Congress provided $95 million for procurement of long lead time materials (LLTM) for a 10th NSC. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY2018 budget requests $54 million in acquisition funding for the NSC program; this request does not include additional funding for a 10th NSC.

OPCs are to be smaller, less expensive, and in some respects less capable than NSCs. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $421 million per ship. The first OPC is to be funded in FY2018 and delivered in 2021. On September 15, 2016, the Coast Guard announced that it was awarding a contract with options for building up to nine ships in the class to Eastern Shipbuilding Group of Panama City, FL. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY2018 budget requests $500 million in acquisition funding for the OCP program for the construction of the first OPC, procurement of LLTM for the second OPC, and certain other program costs.

FRCs are considerably smaller and less expensive than OPCs. They have an estimated average procurement cost of about $65 million per boat. A total of 44 have been funded through FY2017. The 24 th was commissioned into service on October 31, 2017. The Coast Guard’s proposed FY2018 budget requests $240 million in acquisition funding for the procurement of four more FRCs.The NSC, OPC, and FRC programs pose several issues for Congress, including the following:

  • whether to fully or partially fund the acquisition of a 10th NSC in FY2018;

  • whether to fund the acquisition of four FRCs in FY2018, as requested, or some other number, such as six, which is the maximum number that has been acquired in some prior fiscal years;

  • whether to use annual or multiyear contracting for procuring FRCs;

  • whether to use annual or multiyear contracting for procuring OPCs;

  • the procurement rate for the OPC program;

  • planned procurement quantities for NSCs, OPCS, and FRCs;

  • the cost, design, and acquisition strategy for the OPC; and

  • initial testing of the NSC.

Congress’s decisions on these programs could substantially affect Coast Guard capabilities and funding requirements, and the U.S. shipbuilding industrial base.

SNA Symposium, Virtual Tour

$
0
0

airbus ds trs 4D SNA 217

If you were unable to attend the Surface Navy Association Symposium, but would like to see what you missed, NavyRecognition offers a series of videos. They include a number of systems that have been discussed here including, smart projectiles for the 57mm, unmanned surface vehicles, the LRASM Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, SeaRAM as a replacement for Phalanx, TRAPS Towed Reelable Active Passive Sonar, MK20 Mod 1 Electro-Optical Sensor System (EOSS), TRS-3D Baseline D multi-mode radar (MMR) ordered for the ninth NSC.

If you want to look primarily at the frigate proposals as well as the proposed weapons modules for the LCS which might also be applicable to the icebreaker, there is this composite video. 

Incidentally why was there no mention of this symposium on the National Cuttermen Association Chapter, Surface Navy Association website?

Viewing all 462 articles
Browse latest View live