We have a Coast Guard that has come a long way from the early days of the Wood Island Life Saving Station in the mouth of Portsmouth New Hampshire harbor. There is nothing intelligent in this current use of CG and Naval assets especially when they are all in short supply. By the way, not a blue water sailor here, the fore deck of the vessel in the photo looks like someone bugled their lunch on it. It is. Is so that scraping rust and applying a coat of paint are no longer able to be done at sea? Or in a port of call. Even cursory efforts? Asking for a friend. Also asking for a friend so we really need a combantant command in Africa? The Chinese apparently wish to colonize the sub Saharan continent, so why don’t we let them try? It’s worked out for everyone else who have tried…..
They no longer use paint. They use 'systems of coatings' that have a 400-step instruction sheet, once appropriate climactic conditions are met - temp, sunlight, humidity.
In “About Face,” David Hackworth made similar observations about our armed forces. Why does the Army have more boats than the Navy? Why does the Navy have aircraft? Is this type of redundancy beneficial, or wasteful?
Iʻm going to answer your question. The army has boats because the Army Corps of Engineers has statutory responsibility for harbors and navigable rivers. The Navy is content to let them do that. Those boats add nothing to combat capability.
The Navy has airplanes because the USAF requires BIG runways from which to operate and you canʻt move them around helter skelter. A CVN is four and a half acres of sovereign US territory any where, any time.
The Army has attack helicopters because the close air support that the USAF promised to provide to the Army is almost always lacking.
The USMC has airplanes and helicopters because they understand that combined arms works better when the operational commander actually commands all the combined arms.
David Hackworth is the last person I would turn to for any kind of insight into the military. Heʻs a talking head.
Tom: I would cast a wider net and blame our educational system for producing "adults" with little knowledge of history or geography. How many DC politicians could find the Red Sea and Yemen on a map?
Maybe, but, this example is a perfect example of why folks who don't understand what the government does, shouldn't be running their mouths off. It is easy to say, "why does the Army have more boats than the Navy," without understanding that the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 put the Army Corps in the navigation business, and that some of these "more boats than the Navy" are the John boats pulled up on land by the 1000 locks and dams the Army Corps is responsible for maintaining.
Our nation depends as much on riverine commerce as it does ocean navigation. Why does the Army have more boats than the Navy? Because the Army Corps of Engineers is essential to the inland navigation system, allowing billions of dollars of goods to flow into commerce.
Hackworth has been dead for two decades, which somewhat limits his ability to offer up-to-date commentary on recent issues concerning US military force structure and personnel policy in the Era of Trump.
" The USMC has airplanes and helicopters because they understand that combined arms works better when the operational commander actually commands all the combined arms. " yea, verily. Semper Fi
Ron, The Air Force has had A-10s since the late 70ʻs or early ʻ80ʻs. The Marines chose to rely on the F/A-18 for commonality with the Navy and the AV-8 for its ability to operate out of ad hoc locations.
I guess piss poor planning strikes again. When they dumped all those Perry Class FFG’s without replacement(LCS doesn’t count as a replacement) they sent the coast guard to the gulf. Yes, they sent cutters there every so often before, but they were Perry Class light in weaponry. Same fire control and gun as FFG-7’s. Using the LCS as Coast Guard has been rejected in the past. The USN tried to dump these white elephants on the puddle pirates after it became public knowledge of what a money pit they are.
If the mission is boarding and searching vessels at sea, then the USCG has the expertise to accomplish the mission. They are better at small boats than the Navy.
Good as a Navy Boatswain is at running small boats, his counter-part in the Guard is going to have five times as much experience at boarding and searching ships at sea. Rule of thumb: if you want the vessel boarded and searched, use the Coast Guard, if you want it sunk, call the Navy.
The larger point is we should have enough cutters to assist the Navy, and patrol the coasts.
To be fair the US Navy wrote the book on Boarding during Desert Shield / Storm. My frigate was the first to reach 100 boarding Centurion during that period. We were quite good at it. You could say great.
Coast Guard Cutters are designed for endurance and economical low-speed patrol. The LCS would be exactly the wrong ship for the Coast Guard and they were wise to reject it.
The few that are left, most were sold or sunk as targets, have rusting for 20+ years. In the 1990’s their missile launcher was made inoperative and since decommissioning they’ve been used as a parts bin.
In WWII, the navy had this little thing called a patrol boat. It had six to seven men, several torpedo tubes, and JFK was the captain on one. They managed to sink ships and cause trouble to the Japanese. Why can't the navy bring these boats back and put them in the Middle East, while bringing our Coast guard back to the US.
If that's not viable, Doesn't the Navy have Corvettes, or ships smaller than a frigate? If not, then it's time to bring them back.
It wasn't good idea fairies (GIFs) who were fundamentally responsible for the fustercluck we know as the LCS, the Little Crappy Ship. If one reads the 2005 LCS requirements document -- a schizophrenic amalgam of conflicting performance and operational specifications -- one realizes the entire concept of the LCS was fatally flawed from Day One of the program, well before any GIFs could sink their teeth into the design process.
Not Sexy Syndrome at work. Something with a radar-controlled 57mm, couple NSM, and SeaRAM, maybe a few ASW tubes; "overpowered" Surface/Air radar and towed array; with plenty of storage for fuel and food (Pacific patrol requires more endurance); possibly a helicopter.
Sure it would be useful, but considered not worth it by the big brass.
Geez CDR, up to your 'ol blue Monday stuff,...er, no, this is Tylenol Tuesday then? (and I used to love me them white hulls-with-orange stripe guys most of all after my own USMC) Semper Paratus.......humph.
I live on the Oregon coast and my little village is home to two 47' surf boats while the Air Det is 10 miles South. My Best Man was a Coastie Helo guy (Academy O-6)
Unfortunately, the White House has insisted that border security is the highest priority, so the Coast Guard moved assets accordingly, immediately if not sooner.
Now, WHY the Coast Guard and the Navy have so few assets is a different question, but for that we have to go to Congresses over the last 25 years. Plenty of blame to go around
"...the White House has insisted that border security is the highest priority, so the Coast Guard moved assets accordingly, immediately if not sooner." The firing of the Coast Guard Commandant, for good or ill, was certainly a signal for the USCG. Let's see if White House wishes are backed up with support.
Task and purpose. Lack of definition reflects lack of leadership. The "incentive structure" of the system produces the type of leadership that is unable to define the type of task and purpose that supports the defense of the nation because they are "incentivized" to perform "fitrep bullets" vice actual productive activities. The leadership "incentive structure" needs an overhaul in order to reward productive activities and national defense. Given the deep rot in the structure, the new SecDef is facing a very steep hill with a fortified (self-interested) position on the high ground. I wish him luck, getting this fixed is critical to the nation, and time is short.
There are several LCS ships on the chopping block for budget concerns. All the need is some white paint and a reassignment to the Coast Guard instead of building new cutters.
LCS-1 class is the problem and its steel hull, aluminum superstructure. LCS-2 began their first MCM equipped deployments this week and plan will be to have 3 forward deployed this year with another 2 by next year. The all aluminum ship is fine.
Do you mean for DOGE to look into the feasibility of turning LCS's into prison hulks, Scott? There may not be enough of them. But it sounds like a good start. Fortunately, we have time, as no real arrests have been made yet.
the one useful place for the remaining LCS is as a gift to the PI Navy. They can run them up on various shoals to replace their rusty WW2 LSTs. as PI Presence ships
Yi-ow...gave me a flashback to the good ole Jimmy Carter days when the messdecks menu changed....rabbit, creamed corn, beets, chitlins, extruded potatoes. Gruelish.
To be fair, the Coasties could find all sorts of work off the coast of Yemen right now (and could have for the last couple years, though it seems they weren't really doing that much). That's ostensibly what they are there for. And likely better at it than the USN gray hulls.
That said, I don't think there are the Posse Commitatus issues off Yeman so USCG isn't all that necessary there. Maybe buck up ship's force with a MarDet and let them loose. That makes redeployment of cutters stateside viable.
The restrictions on using the US Army to enforce civil law, your Posse Commitatus concerns, end at the seashore.
We could use the Navy for lifesaving, and the other Coast Guard missions, it is just that we have a long, and very successful, tradition of placing the protection of our coasts in the hands of civilians and not the military.
Even the U.S. Army can be used at the border. Posse Commitatus concerns Law Enforcement (specifically invoked in 1877) to enforce 13 & 14th Amendment implementation in Southern States. Since the President has declared this an 'invasion', a case could be made that the border is not a 'Law Enforcement' mission, but Homeland Security/Defense.
The Army isn't the issue, it's the USN and USCG. From personal experience as well as reading, when the USN assists in in drug and migrant interdiction in the Caribbean and elsewhere they do NOT send sailors out to do the job. Rather they embark USCG details to do that. It's not because they can't train the sailors (who I am sure would be ready willing and relatively able to do the job) or use MAA or NCC personnel, it's because it is considered law enforcement and the USN can't do that.
Personally, I agree, once outside territorial waters, even in the EEZ, Posse Commitatus doesn't apply and it's range hot. But, it seems, the lawyers have decided to err on the side of caution so bleeding heart judges don't cut them free due to alleged illegal detentions.
AND, as noted elsewhere, as there is a declared state of emergency at the border(s) to repel invaders USN getting in on it should be as fine as letting the Army and Marines play on the Mexican border.
The original article indicates that coasties will be aboard to handle any boarding operations. I was reading an article indicating we are using a U-2 for surveillance along the border, also.
When Lex was still around, many times the commentariat remarked they didn't trust Coasties because they are cops. They're in a grey area because of their law enforcement duties.
One question. Does ANY US Coast Guard Cutter have an Aegis system onboard? That, I would think, would be the primary reason for using a Arleigh-Burke over a USCG Cutter.
NSC and OPC have Athena which is an Aegis based Common Source Library (CSL) combat system. They don't have CEC, but can integrate with a navy task force without being a burden.
Ok. I stand corrected. On X, I suggested that the DDG would be an effective way to introduce TLAM's to the Chinese Backed Narco Terrorists. But had not thought out the shortage of DDG's that were needed elsewhere. It does seem however that that the Coast Guard is in need of power projection capability as support for the Navy.
Thank you Transformation.
Good God is this the upside down world or what? How much would it cost to paint the lcs white and add an orange stripe?
Be careful what you wish for... Remember the infamous "Change Order No.1," which shreds cost controls on everything.
Coast Guard would be better off buying used fast supply vessels and offshore supply vessels and painting them white. By a sizable margin.
Don't saddle us with those pigs!
We have a Coast Guard that has come a long way from the early days of the Wood Island Life Saving Station in the mouth of Portsmouth New Hampshire harbor. There is nothing intelligent in this current use of CG and Naval assets especially when they are all in short supply. By the way, not a blue water sailor here, the fore deck of the vessel in the photo looks like someone bugled their lunch on it. It is. Is so that scraping rust and applying a coat of paint are no longer able to be done at sea? Or in a port of call. Even cursory efforts? Asking for a friend. Also asking for a friend so we really need a combantant command in Africa? The Chinese apparently wish to colonize the sub Saharan continent, so why don’t we let them try? It’s worked out for everyone else who have tried…..
They no longer use paint. They use 'systems of coatings' that have a 400-step instruction sheet, once appropriate climactic conditions are met - temp, sunlight, humidity.
In “About Face,” David Hackworth made similar observations about our armed forces. Why does the Army have more boats than the Navy? Why does the Navy have aircraft? Is this type of redundancy beneficial, or wasteful?
Iʻm going to answer your question. The army has boats because the Army Corps of Engineers has statutory responsibility for harbors and navigable rivers. The Navy is content to let them do that. Those boats add nothing to combat capability.
The Navy has airplanes because the USAF requires BIG runways from which to operate and you canʻt move them around helter skelter. A CVN is four and a half acres of sovereign US territory any where, any time.
The Army has attack helicopters because the close air support that the USAF promised to provide to the Army is almost always lacking.
The USMC has airplanes and helicopters because they understand that combined arms works better when the operational commander actually commands all the combined arms.
David Hackworth is the last person I would turn to for any kind of insight into the military. Heʻs a talking head.
Every time I get disgusted with the comments and think about deleting, a nugget like this comes along. "Facts," as Adams said, "are stubborn things."
Our political debate around things military suffers because, unlike in past decades, folks don't serve in the military. Thank you. BZ.
Tom: I would cast a wider net and blame our educational system for producing "adults" with little knowledge of history or geography. How many DC politicians could find the Red Sea and Yemen on a map?
Maybe, but, this example is a perfect example of why folks who don't understand what the government does, shouldn't be running their mouths off. It is easy to say, "why does the Army have more boats than the Navy," without understanding that the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 put the Army Corps in the navigation business, and that some of these "more boats than the Navy" are the John boats pulled up on land by the 1000 locks and dams the Army Corps is responsible for maintaining.
Our nation depends as much on riverine commerce as it does ocean navigation. Why does the Army have more boats than the Navy? Because the Army Corps of Engineers is essential to the inland navigation system, allowing billions of dollars of goods to flow into commerce.
Wow! I really touched a nerve there!
Hackworth has been dead for two decades, which somewhat limits his ability to offer up-to-date commentary on recent issues concerning US military force structure and personnel policy in the Era of Trump.
Much of what he had to say about the military is still current.
" The USMC has airplanes and helicopters because they understand that combined arms works better when the operational commander actually commands all the combined arms. " yea, verily. Semper Fi
Was
I would note that the USAF, US Navy, and US Army, each have more aircraft than China.
Very well said, Guy.
Why do neither the Marines nor the Air Force have A-10s?
I'm going to save this tidbit for reference. I hope I remember to attribute it appropriately! :)
Thanks,
Ron, The Air Force has had A-10s since the late 70ʻs or early ʻ80ʻs. The Marines chose to rely on the F/A-18 for commonality with the Navy and the AV-8 for its ability to operate out of ad hoc locations.
Well said, Guy. I'm going to save this tidbit for later reference. I hope I remember to attribute it properly! :)
Why do neither the Marines nor the Army have A-10's? One of our best CAS a/c and the USAF is doing everything possible to eliminate it.
Thanks,
The vast majority of the Army's boats are made of rubber. Difficult to mount a 5" gun or VLS on them.
I guess piss poor planning strikes again. When they dumped all those Perry Class FFG’s without replacement(LCS doesn’t count as a replacement) they sent the coast guard to the gulf. Yes, they sent cutters there every so often before, but they were Perry Class light in weaponry. Same fire control and gun as FFG-7’s. Using the LCS as Coast Guard has been rejected in the past. The USN tried to dump these white elephants on the puddle pirates after it became public knowledge of what a money pit they are.
If the mission is boarding and searching vessels at sea, then the USCG has the expertise to accomplish the mission. They are better at small boats than the Navy.
Good as a Navy Boatswain is at running small boats, his counter-part in the Guard is going to have five times as much experience at boarding and searching ships at sea. Rule of thumb: if you want the vessel boarded and searched, use the Coast Guard, if you want it sunk, call the Navy.
The larger point is we should have enough cutters to assist the Navy, and patrol the coasts.
To be fair the US Navy wrote the book on Boarding during Desert Shield / Storm. My frigate was the first to reach 100 boarding Centurion during that period. We were quite good at it. You could say great.
I know a DDG skipper who's first command was a Cyclone PC, but his ship isn't Gravely. Great human being.
I know a number of Navy Chiefs who were very experienced in smuggling operations. FWIW
I know nothing! I hear nothing! I see nothing!
-GMC
Coast Guard Cutters are designed for endurance and economical low-speed patrol. The LCS would be exactly the wrong ship for the Coast Guard and they were wise to reject it.
I wonder if giving the remaining, decommissioned FFGs to the Coast Guard as ... hulls.
They don't really need the full suite electronics package, the ASW or USW gear. But for presence they should be fine?
The few that are left, most were sold or sunk as targets, have rusting for 20+ years. In the 1990’s their missile launcher was made inoperative and since decommissioning they’ve been used as a parts bin.
Under every rock.
In WWII, the navy had this little thing called a patrol boat. It had six to seven men, several torpedo tubes, and JFK was the captain on one. They managed to sink ships and cause trouble to the Japanese. Why can't the navy bring these boats back and put them in the Middle East, while bringing our Coast guard back to the US.
If that's not viable, Doesn't the Navy have Corvettes, or ships smaller than a frigate? If not, then it's time to bring them back.
That's what the LCS was supposed to be, I think. Unfortunately, the good idea fairies swamped the design process on the thing.
It wasn't good idea fairies (GIFs) who were fundamentally responsible for the fustercluck we know as the LCS, the Little Crappy Ship. If one reads the 2005 LCS requirements document -- a schizophrenic amalgam of conflicting performance and operational specifications -- one realizes the entire concept of the LCS was fatally flawed from Day One of the program, well before any GIFs could sink their teeth into the design process.
Not Sexy Syndrome at work. Something with a radar-controlled 57mm, couple NSM, and SeaRAM, maybe a few ASW tubes; "overpowered" Surface/Air radar and towed array; with plenty of storage for fuel and food (Pacific patrol requires more endurance); possibly a helicopter.
Sure it would be useful, but considered not worth it by the big brass.
We had Mk VI PBs and they cancelled them immediately. Now 3 are back in service in Puget Sound. Others are being built new for Ukraine.
Geez CDR, up to your 'ol blue Monday stuff,...er, no, this is Tylenol Tuesday then? (and I used to love me them white hulls-with-orange stripe guys most of all after my own USMC) Semper Paratus.......humph.
They say we gotta go out. They don't say we gotta come back...
all honor to those who live by that credo!
I live on the Oregon coast and my little village is home to two 47' surf boats while the Air Det is 10 miles South. My Best Man was a Coastie Helo guy (Academy O-6)
Unfortunately, the White House has insisted that border security is the highest priority, so the Coast Guard moved assets accordingly, immediately if not sooner.
Now, WHY the Coast Guard and the Navy have so few assets is a different question, but for that we have to go to Congresses over the last 25 years. Plenty of blame to go around
"...the White House has insisted that border security is the highest priority, so the Coast Guard moved assets accordingly, immediately if not sooner." The firing of the Coast Guard Commandant, for good or ill, was certainly a signal for the USCG. Let's see if White House wishes are backed up with support.
Task and purpose. Lack of definition reflects lack of leadership. The "incentive structure" of the system produces the type of leadership that is unable to define the type of task and purpose that supports the defense of the nation because they are "incentivized" to perform "fitrep bullets" vice actual productive activities. The leadership "incentive structure" needs an overhaul in order to reward productive activities and national defense. Given the deep rot in the structure, the new SecDef is facing a very steep hill with a fortified (self-interested) position on the high ground. I wish him luck, getting this fixed is critical to the nation, and time is short.
Shocking to realize the US Coast Guard has more ships forward deployed than the Royal Navy.
That USCG is larger than RN. It also overshadows the Nation with the world’s largest coastline NAVY by a country mile.
that cued a RN solution to both the Houthis and LCS : )
Fire Ships 💥
Whoo Hoo! 'n Arther Brown!
In terms of people the USCG is larger than the Royal Navy or the French Navy, both of which also handle some of their countries coast guard functions.
But by that measure the Japanese, Indian, and Turkish navies are larger.
The RNLI enters the chat
The China CG has more ships than the USCG despite having a much smaller EEZ, but they have fewer people and small craft and very few aircraft.
depends on how you count the fisherman payroll
The Commemorative Air Force has more airplanes than many European countries, so not surprised.
There are several LCS ships on the chopping block for budget concerns. All the need is some white paint and a reassignment to the Coast Guard instead of building new cutters.
The LCS maintenance cost is almost certainly too steep for the USCG's budget. Well, for the USN too, those combining gears ain't cheap.
LCS has become the type of figurative white elephant you gift to those folks you don't like all that much.
then sink them after offloading the crew
They're aluminum, aren't they? Let's get scrap metal value at least. That's A LOT of soda cans per LCS!
LOL, the USN making money on anything? a Multimillion dollar contract to pay somebody to turn them into scrap
Or the usual $1 contract, where the scrapper keeps the scrap!
It ends up that way because of the cost of environmental remediation, especially for asbestos.
LCS-1 class is the problem and its steel hull, aluminum superstructure. LCS-2 began their first MCM equipped deployments this week and plan will be to have 3 forward deployed this year with another 2 by next year. The all aluminum ship is fine.
I wonder if DOGE will look into the. LCS program?
Do you mean for DOGE to look into the feasibility of turning LCS's into prison hulks, Scott? There may not be enough of them. But it sounds like a good start. Fortunately, we have time, as no real arrests have been made yet.
the one useful place for the remaining LCS is as a gift to the PI Navy. They can run them up on various shoals to replace their rusty WW2 LSTs. as PI Presence ships
Only if we can use the prisoners like Ben Hur. We keep them alive to serve the ship!
Yi-ow...gave me a flashback to the good ole Jimmy Carter days when the messdecks menu changed....rabbit, creamed corn, beets, chitlins, extruded potatoes. Gruelish.
To be fair, the Coasties could find all sorts of work off the coast of Yemen right now (and could have for the last couple years, though it seems they weren't really doing that much). That's ostensibly what they are there for. And likely better at it than the USN gray hulls.
That said, I don't think there are the Posse Commitatus issues off Yeman so USCG isn't all that necessary there. Maybe buck up ship's force with a MarDet and let them loose. That makes redeployment of cutters stateside viable.
The restrictions on using the US Army to enforce civil law, your Posse Commitatus concerns, end at the seashore.
We could use the Navy for lifesaving, and the other Coast Guard missions, it is just that we have a long, and very successful, tradition of placing the protection of our coasts in the hands of civilians and not the military.
Even the U.S. Army can be used at the border. Posse Commitatus concerns Law Enforcement (specifically invoked in 1877) to enforce 13 & 14th Amendment implementation in Southern States. Since the President has declared this an 'invasion', a case could be made that the border is not a 'Law Enforcement' mission, but Homeland Security/Defense.
You might be correct, the border is subject to entirely different rules than the rest of the nation.
The actual border is a 50' wide strip of federal land with a fence on one edge.
Not where I live, it's a sandy beach with palm trees.
Army here.
Army has only a few Posse issues on the CPB mission on border.
Big issues in interior ICE missions
Well....
The Army isn't the issue, it's the USN and USCG. From personal experience as well as reading, when the USN assists in in drug and migrant interdiction in the Caribbean and elsewhere they do NOT send sailors out to do the job. Rather they embark USCG details to do that. It's not because they can't train the sailors (who I am sure would be ready willing and relatively able to do the job) or use MAA or NCC personnel, it's because it is considered law enforcement and the USN can't do that.
Personally, I agree, once outside territorial waters, even in the EEZ, Posse Commitatus doesn't apply and it's range hot. But, it seems, the lawyers have decided to err on the side of caution so bleeding heart judges don't cut them free due to alleged illegal detentions.
AND, as noted elsewhere, as there is a declared state of emergency at the border(s) to repel invaders USN getting in on it should be as fine as letting the Army and Marines play on the Mexican border.
The original article indicates that coasties will be aboard to handle any boarding operations. I was reading an article indicating we are using a U-2 for surveillance along the border, also.
When Lex was still around, many times the commentariat remarked they didn't trust Coasties because they are cops. They're in a grey area because of their law enforcement duties.
One question. Does ANY US Coast Guard Cutter have an Aegis system onboard? That, I would think, would be the primary reason for using a Arleigh-Burke over a USCG Cutter.
no
Until the USCG is tasked with BMD, that answer will be no…
However, the radars and other systems, I would think would be effective for CSIR-T vs the cartels, correct?
Yes, ample.
Yes, but do we really want the cutters to be equipped with AEGIS? Seems to be max overkill.
NSC and OPC have Athena which is an Aegis based Common Source Library (CSL) combat system. They don't have CEC, but can integrate with a navy task force without being a burden.
Ok. I stand corrected. On X, I suggested that the DDG would be an effective way to introduce TLAM's to the Chinese Backed Narco Terrorists. But had not thought out the shortage of DDG's that were needed elsewhere. It does seem however that that the Coast Guard is in need of power projection capability as support for the Navy.