Cutters That Didn't Make the Cut

[LTGunner]

The USCG has had a sorted history of developing cutters for various missions.  Some made it & some didn't.

Here are a few USCGC NEVERBUILTs & USCGC DIDN'TCUTITs:

Joseph Henry, 1972 WHEO-701 (a.k.a. CGC Never Built)



History:

The Coast Guard began planning for a new marine science research vessel in 1966 to replace the Evergreen and in response to a 1965 memo that circulated through Coast Guard Headquarters regarding the service's "ill-defined" oceanographic program.  By the time that each Coast Guard office had decided what should be on or in the cutter the cost estimates had reached 15 million dollars.  Funding was procured in FY 1969 legislation and a projected completion date was set for sometime in 1972.  The Design Agent was M. Rosenblatt & Son, Inc.  A publicity brochure published by the Coast Guard noted that the WHEO (Coast Guard Oceanographic Research Ship) was designed to support Coast Guard and "other national oceanographic programs" and would be:

. . .the first multi-discipline American research ship especially designed and outfitted for near-polar, high-sea-stated operations.  While she will be capable of in-depth research in each of the oceanographic disciplines, capability for biological, geological, physical, chemical, and geophysical studies were particularly emphasized in the data system. . .[the cutter would be] the most flexible and sophisticated oceanographic research vessel in modern times.  Emphasis has been placed on highly automated and reliable systems to provide a very high degree of operational effectiveness.  In particular, the ship has fully automated steam propulsion, radio and ocean data systems.

She was projected to serve 30-percent of each year on International Ice Patrol missions, 10-percent on water-mass studies, and 5-percent each on physical oceanographic studies, marine geological studies, marine geophysical studies, marine biology studies, and marine chemistry studies.  Her crew quarters were all forward with the scientific spaces and quarters for scientists aft so that there would be "minimum interference" between the two.  Her propulsion plant was scheduled to be a singe-cylinder turbine of 10,000 shaft-horsepower driving a fixed propeller through a double reduction gear.  This machinery plant was designed "for fully unattended operation."  She was also designed with a bow thruster.  The above specifications reflect the compromises agreed to between the various offices involved in the ship's design.  These specifications were listed in the "Notice of Ship Construction Requirement" issued by the Coast Guard in early 1969.

With the advent of NOAA, however, whose mission competed directly with the Coast Guard oceanography program and other Coast Guard budget priorities of the time, including an increase in the law enforcement missions of the service, the funding for the new cutter was cut and the plans shelved in 1969.   

Source: http://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/Neverbuilt701.html

Design appears to be from the original WHEC 715 HAMILTON Class Cutter:



"Artist's concept of the 378-foot USCGC HAMILTON (WHEC-715)."  photo no. 11-26-65; 26 November 1965; artist/photographer unknown.
Thirty-six of the new 378-foot cutters were envisioned but budget realities and the reduction of the ocean station program cut down the total number constructed to twelve.  Nevertheless these multi-mission cutters have been a great bargain to the taxpayers as each is still in commission after 30 years. 

Source: [urlhttp://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/WHEC_Photo_Index.html][/url]

[EX-CG-GM]

Interesting.  Lines look quite similar to the Bertholf.

[LTGunner]

120' Heritage Class Patrol Boat

First of the Heritage Class to be named USCGC LEOPOLD after the Coast Guard-manned USS Leopold (DE-319) of WWII
Abstract : Construction of the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Leopold, the lead ship of the 36m (120ft) Heritage Class, is discussed. A new Structural Critical Aluminum-Steel Transition (SCAST) product, Duratemp II, was selected for the welding transitions between the aluminum deck house and steel deck. The explosion bonded material's higher strength and toughness permitted use of lighter, narrower transition joints (1cm (0.375in) wide x 2cm (0.75in) thick) than are permissible with traditional materials. The unique heat resistance of the material permitted cutting and welding of the small section joints without overheating. The need for corner butt joints was reduced due to the product's reliable bendability. Welding procedures and Quality Assurance procedures are discussed in detail.  http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADP023045&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

In 1979, the Department of Transportation (DOT) approved a project to replace Coast Guard patrol boats nearing the end of their service lives.  By 1987, the Coast Guard had determined that in addition to replacing these boats, it needed to increase its patrol boat fleet from 87 to 96 vessels by the year 2000.  After assessing several patrol boat designs, the agency selected a 120 foot “Heritage Class” design in 1988.  To provide the fleet complement of 96, the Coast Guard planned to begin acquiring 47 Heritage vessels in 1990.  http://archive.gao.gov/d19t9/144562.pdf

A drawing of the Heritage Class Patrol Boat was highlighted in the Mar 27, 1987 (p. 2) Commandant's Bulletin . Anybody have a copy or Pic?

[LTGunner]

$4.5 million for a boat that nobody wanted

The 85' Guardian Marine Patrol Boat



In 2002, Senator Patty Murray (D) Washington State earmarked $4.65 million for the Coast Guard to purchase and evaluate a Fast Patrol Boat built by Guardian Marine International – the vessels hull was built in Tacoma and was outfitted in Vancouver. With top speeds of up to 40 knots, it may assist the Coast Guard in intercepting drug smugglers and support homeland security missions.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., attacked Murray's earmark.
"The Coast Guard did not request this vessel, does not need this vessel, nor does this vessel meet the Coast Guard's requirements," he said on the Senate floor. "The Coast Guard's resources are already stretched thin and this will only hamper its ability to meet its new challenges since Sept. 11."
The bill passed with all its pork intact.
After several evaluations, the Coast Guard concluded it couldn't use the Guardian boat. It didn't need it to chase drug smugglers because it uses helicopters to do that more easily and safely.
"It's a fine boat for what it is," said Lt. Cmdr. Bill Brewer, who led some of the testing. "It didn't fit well into what the Coast Guard operates."
The Coast Guard gave it to a sheriff's office that uses it to patrol San Francisco Bay.



At a ceremony in Oakland, CA. the former Coast Guard cutter 85291 became the county's patrol boat and was christened Susan M, and Plummer, whose real title is Alameda county sheriff, joked that a submarine would be next.

Sources: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003948586_favorfactory14m.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20051203/ai_n15906002

[BuoyJumper]

Interesting thread Tim, thanks for starting this. A while ago I had posted an article on the Guardian 85 on the Current News thread.

How about this little number ....... USCGC High Point (WMEH 1) a 110-foot Patrol Boat
Commissioned ........ 04 April 1975
Decommissioned .... 05 May 1975

                   Specifications: Displacement 110 t; Length 115'; Beam 22'; Depth 17' (with foils down); Speed 30+kts. (maximum
                       48 kts.); Complement unknown; Armamant one 40mm; Propulsion two General Motors 12V71 diesel engines and two 
                       LM2500 gas turbines, two shafts.

[BuoyJumper]

Then there was the USCGS FLAGSTAFF an 82-foot Patrol Boat that didn't cut it either.
8 November 1974 Commissioned USCGS Flagstaff (WPBH 1) at San Diego, CA
18 February 1975 Returned to U.S. Navy
29 September 1976 Reacquired by the Coast Guard Placed in commissioned (Special)
2 March 1977; Placed in commission (Active)
17 July 1977; Decommissioned
30 September 1978 and returned to U.S. Navy; Scrapped in 1978.

                             Specifications: Displacement 67 t.; Length 82' (overall); Beam 21' 6"; Draft 4' 4" (foils retracted),
                               18' (foils extended); Speed 45+ kts. (foil-borne), eight kts. (hull-borne); Complement 12; Armament
                               one 40mm gun mount, four .50 cal. machine guns and one 81mm mortar (Small arms only while in
                               Coast Guard); Propulsion one Rolls Royce Tyne gas turbine with super cavitating propeller (foil-borne)
                               and two General Motors diesel engines with two water jet
                               pumps (hull-borne). 

[LTGunner]

Sea Fighter FSF-1 (a.k.a. X-Craft & Fast Sea Frame)



On February 5th, 2005 the U.S. Navy christened a new experimental ship, the “Sea Fighter.” The 1,000 ton catamaran is 262 feet long, 72 feet wide and can operate in as little as 12 feet of water. The ship is meant to test concepts and technologies planned for use in the larger Littoral Combat Ship. But “Sea Fighter” might prove useful enough to be the model for a new class of coastal combat ships. For that reason, the U.S. Coast Guard is participating in the test effort, and may use a version of Sea Fighter for their regular operations. The Sea Fighter has a crew of 26 (16 navy, ten coast guard), and room below and on the deck for twelve cargo containers. These containers can are called "mission modules" and hold weapons, electronics or robotic air, surface or undersea vehicles for jobs like mine clearing, anti-submarine warfare or delivering commandoes. The vessel is very fast, with a top speed of 100 kilometers an hour. Even in rough seas (with up to seven foot waves), the ship can do about 70 kilometers an hour. This is partly the result of using a T shaped hydrofoil. The deck is broad enough to handle two helicopters. There is a dock in the rear for launching boats. The ship can stay for sea about eight days at time (cruising at 36 kilometers an hour, it can travel 7,200 kilometers using its diesel engines). The ship is also powered by two LM-2500 gas turbine engines (generating 33,600 horsepower each) for high speed operations.
http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/20052816.aspx



USCG Solicitaion For Test Crew:

R 202000Z SEP 04 ZUI ASN-A00264000041
FM COMCOGARD PERSCOM ARLINGTON VA
TO ALCGPERSCOM
BT
UNCLAS
ALCGPERSCOM 078/04
SUBJ: SOLICITATION FOR UNIQUE JOINT CG/USN OPERATIONAL TESTING &
EVALUATION OF X-CRAFT
A. G-O CG DECISION MEMO 3501 DTD 08SEP04
B. PHONCON CG STAFF (CGPC, G-OCU)/USN STAFF (SURFPAC/PCO OF X-
CRAFT) ON 17SEP04
1. AS PER REF A AND AS DISCUSSED REF B, THE COAST GUARD IS
PARTNERING WITH THE US NAVY TO CONDUCT THE OPERATIONAL TESTING AND EVALUATION (OT&E) PHASE ABOARD THE 262 FOOT X-CRAFT. THE X-CRAFT IS AN EXPERIMENTAL, 1400-TON, HIGH SPEED, ALUMINUM HULL CATAMARAN WITH AN ANTICIPATED CREW SIZE OF 26.
2. THE COAST GUARD WILL PROVIDE TEN CREWMEMBERS FOR THE OT&E PHASE, INCLUDING THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ONE CPO. DUE TO BERTHING CONSTRAINTS THIS PLATFORM IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR MIXED GENDER CREWS.
3. POSITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING PAYGRADES MUST BE FILLED:
A. 1-LT (PRIOR 110'/225'XO EXP)
B. 1-ET1 (IFF/TACAN EXP)
C. 1-OSC (270/'378' CIC EXP)
D. 1-MK1 (270'/378' EXP)
E. 1-BM1/2 (DECK EXP)
F. 1-MK2 (MTU EXP PREFERRED NOT REQUIRED)
G. 1-IT2 (LAN EXPERIENCE)
H. 1-GM2 (SMALL ARMS INSTRUCTOR, INDEPENDENT DUTY SCREENED)
I. 1-EM2 (270/378 EXPERIENCE)
J. 1-OS3.
10. INTERNET RELEASE IS AUTHORIZED.




Additional Pictures & Comments (bottom of page) on how the Sea Fighter Performend: http://www.pbase.com/picchick/seafighter

Additional Information on Sea Fighter:

X-Craft: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/x-craft.htm

Navy Fact File, Fast Sea Frame:  http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=1200&ct=4

[vftb]

If you look close, you can see the Flagstaff as she was in '69:

The hydrofoil parked in front of her was the Tucumcari.

[LTGunner]

Great Pic Hans!

Actually, there's a gaggle of Cutters & Patrol Boats in that pic. 

Here's some details on the USCGC / USS Flagstaff (PGH-1) and USS High Point (PCH-1) :

Cutter History:

In the mid-1970s the Coast Guard explored options to replace the aging 95-foot cutters.  There was also considerable interest in developing new "high-speed ways" to combat narcotics smuggling by sea, conduct search and rescue operations, fisheries enforcement, and marine environmental protection.  The Coast Guard, of course, looked for the most inexpensive way to test new platforms and when the Navy offered the use of some of their hydrofoils at "virtually no cost," the Coast Guard jumped on the opportunity.  The Navy loaned the Coast Guard both the USS Flagstaff (PGH-1) and USS High Point (PCH-1) for a short period beginning in late-1974.  The Flagstaff was scheduled for evaluation first and the High Point was scheduled for evaluation in early 1975. 

The Flagstaff was developed by the Navy as an experimental vessel and was built by Grumman Aerospace Corporation of Bethpage, New York.  She was delivered to the Navy in September of 1968.  After an operational evaluation period she was deployed to South Vietnam with her sister ship USS Tucumcari (PGH-2).  She conducted patrol missions there until 1970.  Upon her return to the U.S. in 1970, she was assigned to the Amphibious Forces of the Pacific Fleet where she participated in numerous readiness trials and training exercises and was also used as a test-bed for various craft subsystems, for the Navy's Advanced Hydrofoil Development Program. 

Both the Flagstaff and the High Point were scheduled for evaluation by the Coast Guard Hydrofoil Test and Evaluation Team, under guidance from the Coast Guard Research and Development Center, which was formed on 15 August 1974 and remained in existence until 6 May 1975.  The Coast Guard commissioned Flagstaff on 8 November 1974 after having her hull painted white and the Coast Guard hull-stripe added.  Her first commanding officer was LT Douglas F. Gehring, USCG.  She operated out of San Diego and other California ports during the Coast Guard's evaluation. 

During her evaluation, the Flagstaff was involved in a number of search and rescue cases.  She was dispatched from Long Beach to investigate a report of a burning boat about 50 miles away.  In about one hour the ship was on scene and quickly located a family of three who had jumped into the water to escape a flash fire which had engulfed the cabin of their 40-foot boat.  The Flagstaff's speed in arriving on scene was "a major factor in saving the lives of the three."

Ultimately the evaluation demonstrated that she showed promise in both anti-smuggling operations and as a rapid response search and rescue vessel.  But machinery breakdowns, a lack of spare parts for her Rolls Royce turbine, and a collision with a gray whale off the Point Loma Lighthouse that caused $250,000 in damage to her aft strut gearing assembly (and killed the whale) soured the Coast Guard's hopes for her use.  It was continually noted in reports that her operation was more like that of an airplane than a ship, particularly her wiring systems which were actually like the wiring used in aircraft.  Concerns about weight, habitability, fuel consumption, and overall costs were also prevalent.  Her evaluation period ended on 18 February 1975 and she was returned to the Navy.

The Coast Guard once again acquired the Flagstaff from the Navy on 29 September 1976 in San Diego for further evaluation "in a fully operational environment."  She was transported to the East Coast for testing in the "adverse weather conditions" that prevailed in the waters off the New England in the hope of having her conduct actual operational missions.  She was home-ported at Woods Hole, Massachusetts.  The emphasis for this evaluation was to test her capabilities to enforce the new 200 mile fisheries economic zone, in addition to the traditional Coast Guard missions.  The testing period was initially set to last 12 months.

After arriving on the East Coast, she required numerous repairs to her aging machinery, which was done in Boston.  She was placed "In-Commission-Special" status as a Coast Guard cutter (WPBH-1) on 2 March 1977 after again receiving the Coast Guard livery.  Her commanding officer was LT Terrance Hart, USCG.  Two days later she transited from Boston to Woods Hole.  She was under the operational control of the First District and the plan was to have her operate as a "normal district resource."  It was thought that such use would permit comparison of her capabilities to the other District resources, i.e. HH-52As, HU-16Es, and surface craft.  USCGC Flagstaff was placed "In-Commission Active" status on 17 July 1977.

Her use this time, however, was more problematic than the first testing period in 1974.  She continually suffered mechanical breakdowns, including problems with her turbine, and the lack of spare parts forced the Coast Guard to extend her period of evaluation from 12 months to 16 months.  Her crew spent most of their time attempting to repair her rather than patrolling and one officer likened her operation to that of an aircraft, requiring frequent repair.  The difference being that an aircraft has a flight crew to operate the aircraft and a maintenance crew for its upkeep.  The crew of the Flagstaff, however, had to do both, and were "overwhelmed with the maintenance workload, " and their morale consequently suffered.  From 26 May 1977 until 27 October 1977, the Flagstaff only managed 305.2 hours of operating time, including only 71.6 hours of foil-borne time.  In March of 1978 she suffered a transmission failure and the nail in her coffin was the deterioration of her turbine.  The only solution to the latter problem was to replace the turbine, and the cost of that was prohibitive.   The Coast Guard decided to decommission her due to "the high cost of repairs and the fact that the CG feels sufficient information has been gained from the E.P. [Evaluation Period]."

She was decommissioned at Woods Hole on 30 September 1978 and returned to the Navy.  The Coast Guard noted that: "sufficient information on the use of hydrofoils has been gathered from the evaluation program."  The escalating costs of repair, and the fact that she needed an engine replacement too, figured into the decision to return her to the Navy.

http://www.uscg.mil/history/webcutters/Flagstaff_1977.html

[vftb]

Good history Gunner.  FYI, that picture was taken in Da Nang; according to GMCM Wells the Flagstaff did have a foil collapse on a run, from then on they referred to her as the USS Fallflat.  I got the opportunity to look on board both, and the "****pit" definitely more resembled an aircraft than the pilot house of a boat.

[BuoyJumper]

Here's one I haven't seen before that I found at fredsplace.  It looks like something developed by Magnum Marine in the 1980s
as a high speed cigarette type pursuit boat.  I can't find anything else on this boat.

[EX-CG-GM]

Buoy-

I've seen pictures of that before.  I think it may have been a confiscated boat that the CG used.  Not sure though.  Seems someone on military.com knew something about it.

[BuoyJumper]

Buoy-

I've seen pictures of that before.  I think it may have been a confiscated boat that the CG used.  Not sure though.  Seems someone on military.com knew something about it.

I don't think so EX ... looks like from the photos at freds there were at least four identically prepared patrol boats of this type.

I think they were a cuddy cabin version of the 27 or 28-foot Maltese Magnum from the mid-1970s.

[sparky]

too bad that Fred's place doesn't include the names of the picture donors like they do on the groups picture page...anyway, Fred does a great job. I saw those pics yesterday on Fred's and I think I've seen them somewhere else but can't recall where. I've been viewing Freds for many years and I just don't remember all them little details.

[Jack]

I seem to recall that back in the late 70's or early 80's that as part of the drug interdiction program the CG went to the builder who was suspected of having built go-fasts for the bad guys and had him make a group of boats to be used to chase the go-fast possibly BMCM Wray(ret) knows more about them.