Posted on 12/01/2006 4:14:26 PM PST by devane617
KEY WEST - The U.S. Coast Guard, one of the key lines of defense in the Florida Straits on homeland security, drug smuggling and migrant interdictions, took eight of its 10 Key West-based patrol cutters out of action indefinitely Thursday because of structural problems.
The decision, announced by the Coast Guard's top commander, Adm. Thad Allen, who flew to Key West to tell crews personally, will create a hole in surveillance and law enforcement of the Florida Straits at a potentially critical time, with the failing health of Fidel Castro.
''I would say there is no good time for this,'' said Commander Brendan C. McPherson, a spokesman for the admiral.
Allen, the commandant of the Coast Guard and former commander of District 7, which includes Key West, said a contingency plan is in the works to ensure that the hole is filled.
''We know we require a credible presence in the Straits of Florida,'' he said. ``No matter what happens [with the fleet], there will be a credible presence in the Straits of Florida.''
The eight cutters -- the Atty, Manitou, Matagorda, Metompkin, Monhegan, Nunivak, Padre and Vashon -- were tied up at the Key West Coast Guard base Thursday. Allen said he did not know if the cutters will sail again.
Their crews -- the cutters normally carry 16 -- will be reassigned, many to double up with crews on other boats, Allen said.
''These are really proud sailors and to have their cutters tied to the dock is a hard thing to take,'' said Chris O'Neil, Coast Guard spokesman for District 7. 'But we are a military organization and take our orders, say `Aye, aye' and press on. We're there to save lives and protect the country and we're going to do that regardless of the platform available to us.''
Allen said he knows firsthand that under normal circumstances there can't be a drop in patrolling of the waters between the United States and Cuba, Haiti and the Dominican Republic. A sudden mass migration, he said, would be a ''totally different scenario'' and the Coast Guard and other agencies would deploy all necessary resources to the area.
UPGRADE AT FAULT
The eight patrol boats were part of the Coast Guard's $24 billion modernization program called Deepwater, which replaces or updates the aging fleet of boats and aircraft.
The 110-foot cutters were converted to 123 feet, to add an automated small-boat launch and make room for additional communications and navigation systems. The plan was to convert all 49 of the 110-foot cutters.
McPherson said the modifications were meant to tide the Coast Guard over while new patrol boats are designed. ''These patrol boats were already at the end of their life cycles,'' he said.
But the conversions stopped in June 2005 when problems began to show up: decks cracked, hulls deformed and shafts became misaligned shortly after they came out of the repair yards in 2004.
Coast Guard engineers, joined by counterparts from Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, which were awarded the Deepwater contract, tried to correct the problems. During this time, the boats' use in heavy seas was limited.
But when additional problems began to crop up, Allen decided to dock the boats for a more thorough review.
''This is kind of a bittersweet moment for us,'' he said. ``These cutters were converted as part of the initial Deepwater project and have the technology and capability on them that the folks down here love.''
PROTECTION PLANS
The patrol boats serve multiple missions, including search-and-rescue, migrant interdiction, drug interdiction, fisheries enforcement, general law enforcement and recreational boating safety.
Allen said each cutter was expected to operate about 2,500 hours a year. Now Key West is left with just two operating cutters, an 87-footer and a 110-footer. But cutters from other areas of the country routinely patrol the Florida Straits.
Options to pick up the slack include relocating vessels, authorizing more hours for other boats and increasing air surveillance.
The Coast Guard has about 250 cutters and 200 aircraft around the country, with 52 cutters and 39 aircraft assigned to District 7, which covers Florida.
I would imagine their other cutters are otherwise occupied.
They don't have to. The Navy has had ships assigned to drug interdiction patrols for years now.
They own the largest shipyards on the East Coast in Newport News and Pascagoula, and already build most of the Navy ships we order. It sounds like shoddy design and construction work to me.
Thanks for the insight. Do remember when this contract was being bid, the hull had to be a "Proven Design." (Hull and propulsion plant had to been put together before). The problem was this type craft had not been built since the early 60's or before.
Like you mention the fuel issue. The hull was a "Proven Design," that was unchanged, but the CG completely changed the load of the vessel. The reason for the "Proven Design" was the CG has a terrible reputation of designing and buying camels (designed by committee) failures. This was to solve the problem. From personal business they have one of the most inept Engineering/Naval Archetecture groups on the planet. Personally would much rather deal with Navy contacts then ever get their spec. They create their own disasters.
We don't have the production capabilities we did in WW2. Uncle done shut down a very sizable portion. Newport News Ship Building/Dry dock is a good yard though actually the best we have. These were the boats that should have never been built to start with. Complicating this is Ship alts of that magnitude to an already troubled designed is begging for more trouble but it was Uncle who asked for the trouble to start with.
I'd say the yards weren't exactly jumping for joy to do the work but rather was a result of some political arm twisting related to other contracts. The boats anyway they went would be a liability to them because if the conditions were as CWO stated you can't fix junk especially a weakened hull design by adding more stress to it. Fixing it period is highly questionable. Everything gets thrown out of kilter.
The work request would have came from D.O.T either via a general fund or designated funds from congress. Navy wise the Pentagon approves and disapproves ship alts some requiring congressional approval funding.
There's been a lot of cost cutting over the past 15 or so years as far as ships go. Sadly it usually results in many things needed replaced or repaired given band-aid repairs. As CWO says it's cheap. It's happened to the Coast Guard and the Navy. A Captain of a ship can request certain shipyard work be done during routine down time. The request are generally the consensus from the lower ranking NCO's up through Captains and squadron commanders. Then it goes to the Fleet Commander {Navy}, and the Pentagon where the yes or no is given.
You'll never hear of these request being turned down as Joe Citizen but if the work is turned down and the ship has major failures because of it then it is the ships Captain who pays with a ended career. More band-aids are passed out and life goes on so does the ship if it still floats.
Murphy's Law applies. At the worse possible times what can go wrong will go wrong. This example with the Coast Guard and Two carriers in 2001-2002 with the Navy. In the mean time congress both parties will strut like roosters crowing about the money saved. Well a huge bill is fixing to come due and some tired ships more worn than what they noramlly should be are fixing to start showing the cause and effect. Warnings were sounded in the late 90's and in 2000. Such thing as this went unanswered.
The problem is this isn't 1970's defense manufacturing capable USA anymore and the fixes aren't gonna be quick at this point. Wisest move for D.O.T. and congress would still be to bite the bullet and built it right to start with. Let NNSBDD design it and build it keel up then you will see a vast improvement.
BTW two years from now likely 5 years from now we can come right back here and the plans won't be on the drafting table nor a new keel laid. But there will be a decrease in aviable cutter and ships. Both houses haven't exactally been in a national defense upsizing or upgrading mood in over a decade now. It's not gonna get better soon either.
The paperwork process takes 6 to 8 years just to get approval.
The Republicans should have been on top of this problem as so we are not at the place we are today
Florida Keys ping
Maybe now is the time for the Conch Republic to declare independence?
You can see this with the F-22. They are only going to build about 150, when they orginally wanted to build over 400 of those birds. Also, delivery has been slow.
This is almost an understatement. Unfortunately Coast Guard Naval Engineering is in the hands of the inbred staffs at Headquarters and the two MLC's (Maintenance and Logistics Commands). That society is pretty much confined to a small select group of officers and civilians who have punched the right tickets and arrived...and live in a world thoroughly insulated from reality. To complicate matters, instead of operators (ship drivers who should have a great deal of input) and field engineers (the folks who still have honest dirt under their nails and don't have daily racket ball sessions), they're influenced by the latest study group and bean counters.
You want a shinning example of that look at their latest crowning achievement, the CGC HEALY. The HEALY was built to compliment the two Polar Class icebreakers. It's design incorporated all sorts of initiatives designed to make it an effective platform with lower operating costs: in reality it is undermanned to the point of endangering the crew, it is underpowered and handles like a pig, and is incapable of independent heavy ice operations.
I'll just concentrate on the manning side for illustration. It was deliberately designed to be heavily automated and needed a crew about a 4th the size of a contemporary vessel. The theory was, if everything is automated you won't need so many grunt workers (unqualified people right out of boot camp) to wipe up oil, wash dishes, scrub decks, help qualified people on watch (while learning a specialty), etc. Also, if everything is automated instead of needing twelve people to stand watches in a particular section you only need three. And why have all those extra people to wash dishes when you can serve airline like meals...might as well cut morale down three-quarters while we're at it.
Sounds good in theory and the costs savings obviously looked good on paper, but missing was any touch of reality.
1) People don't just walk on board knowing their jobs on a highly specialized, one of a kind, ship... but on the HEALY they need to know the job when they walk on board. The Coast Guard's answer was to create alternating crews that undergo full training in port on high dollar simulators, etc. That's been a real dud.
2) All those "extra" bodies weren't just there for the ride. While their normal duties may have seemed unessential they were very essential for other needs. For those that don't know, when an emergency occurs on a ship, all those nonessential people go to assigned locations where they can be quickly dispatched to fight fires, fix damage, control flooding, etc...all of which they've been trained to do. These damage control parties are what save ships...not automated systems. A major casualty (damage, flooding, fire) on the HEALY will most likely be disastrous.
3) Automation might allow you to reduce watchstanders in a section from twelve to three, but it can't do anything when one of those three catches the flu...instead of eleven sharing the extra load it's just two.
4) Decks still get dirty, trash still needs emptying, oil still needs wiped up, etc. Now, instead of those nonessential personal, you have essential people (already over worked) having to do menial housekeeping chores as well. Don't get me wrong, I personally don't mind if officer and chiefs have to make their own beds, but it ticks me off that the third class petty officer who has worked hard to move up is now doing scud work again...and his/her new duties. In response, HEADQUARTERS ACTUALLY PROPOSED that normal housekeeping be skipped.
Nothing like deploying to an Arctic region for six-nine months on a dirty ship, over worked and eating airline food.
I happened to be there when that committee "side launched" the HEALY into the Mississippi River. For those who don't know, that means sliding the ships sideways into the water.
Many of us "driver types" took one look at the high flat sides of the HEALY and left the seating area for higher ground. At the appropriate moment the HEALY slid into the river, it's high flat side pushing out many tons of water, which came rushing back to submerge the entire reviewing area. Most of the spectators became sick after swallowing New Orleans Mississippi River water...one spectator, an elderly lady, was smashed by a large piece of floating wood and later died.
But what do us "drivers" from the real world know?
I retired at the right time.
CWOJackson, Thanks for the great information, and thank you for your service. The US Coast Guard deserves better equipment.
My G-d, what has happen to our country?
That was my first thought as I was reading this article! Some things should just never be in the news.
Ever been to Key West? When you fly into/out of Key West Int'l Airport, you fly right over Boca Chica NAS....it is right next door. Similarly, when you drive over to Fort Zachary Taylor, you drive right past a very secure listening post (one in which if you happen to be on the post, you are accompanied by two armed Marines at all times). Likewise, you can see the Coast Guard station from the bight.
In other words, its kinda hard to hide the fact that 80% of your resources are tied up to the pier, and 150 of your men have been "reassigned" to other ships....particularly when the whole problem is that the ships are not seaworthy (which, btw, the crews would already be aware of, since the ships had already been limited in use to fair seas).
As part of the Lockheed-Northrop program, the Coast Guard initially planned to upgrade 49 patrol boats but stopped in 2005 after noticing problems with the hull and cracks in the deck. At that time, the eight ships already converted were put on restrictive duty that forbade them operating where the waves were higher than eight feet.
Then earlier this month, the Coast Guard's chief engineer, Rear Adm. Dale Gabel, began inspecting the ships after buckling in the structure underneath the main engine was reported on one of them. He found similar problems on other patrol boats as well as signs of hull weakness, Carter said. The Coast Guard was "not willing to put the crew's safety in jeopardy," he said.
This problem is well known....the sin is that 80% of USCG Station Key West's cutters were the very ones with problems.
Ramius, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this article and the thread comments.
Also, isn't there a USCG ping list?
Spent time on an 82' and a 270'(anyone ever find that missing 100 ft?). Plastic lifelines (4 MOB in 3yrs),thin skin. CG enginering milestones; the maiden voyage of the Bear, short trip. HH65 tupperwolf, "just change the engines", 270', enough said, 110' upgrade, "Captain we just lost the fantail", 41' pitchpole "issue" in following seas (Sta Rockaway 41301). An on and on. However, 82, 95's tough boats, the old 40 boats,beasts! 44's, wet, beat the stuffin' out of you, a screaming 11 kts, but you're gonna get home! HH52, slow single engine flying breadtruck, but it was reliable and it floated (usually).
Ah, the good old days
These island class boats were coming into service while I was a coastie in the late 80's. The ship I was on was a WWII era WLM class buoy tender, several decades past it's service life. It wasn't fun.
It doesn't seem right for a boat only 20 years old to have reached it's service life.
I have a very good friend who TRIED to drag Coast Guard Naval Engineering into the 20th Century. His last assignment was the Naval Engineering Support Unit (NESU) in Seattle. While he was there he tried to move the spec writing/bid process off paper to CD.
He also wanted to automate shipyard contract management. For instance, right now if the yard finds a problem with the plans it can take over a week for the "paper intensive process" to review the problem and proposed resolution, then give the yard the go ahead or give them different plans. These issues could be resolved in hours if we used computer media based specs/plans, digital imaging, the internet and common software (make it a condition of the bid process that the yard have the necessary hardware/software). You would have thought he'd recommended going back to sails.
Like I said, he was a great engineer with some common sense and could think outside the box...in other words he was totally at odds with Coast Guard Naval Engineering. Then he committed the ultimate sin...he turned down Captain (0-6) and retired instead. Holland-America offered to him the position of being in change of maintenance and construction for their worldwide fleet. The big incentive was he could do it "his way". One thing about Holland-America; profit is the bottom line. He's now a VP; not many American's get there.
The funniest thing is, many of the same people who did everything they could to stifle his innovations in the Coast Guard ended up going to him to ask for jobs...the answer really shouldn't have shocked them.
The original concept was for them to have a ten year service life. The difference between your old boat and the Island Class is all in the original construction; your ship was made of steel, the Island Class is aluminum...light aluminum...overstressed aluminum.
If you were to ask me if I wanted to go into a major storm in the Gulf of Alaska on a WLB (WWII, slow, single screw, 180' buoy tender...kind of like a big tug for those who don't know) or a brand new Island Class, I'd take the WLB in a heart beat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.