Posted on Mar 20, 2018
Rewrite the Playbook on Maritime Homeland Defense | U.S. Naval Institute
3.31K
6
4
2
2
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
As a former Weapons Officer on a pre-Fram 378, I favor bringing back ASW capabilities. The old 378's had anti-air, anti-submarine, electronic counter measures, and anti-surface systems. They were old and didn't work most of the time, but they were installed. It made be unnecessary to return to hull mounted sonars. What needs to be developed is a coastal SOSUS network that can be linked to cutters and their attached ASW helos to prosecute sub surface threats. Cutters can deploy mines or used passive SONAR to supplement SOSUS ranging.
Cutters should also have data linkage with shore based air search systems or AEGIS systems. Being electronically connected will speed response for air and surface contacts. With electronic interconnection, smaller cutters can be built to increase coverage and add flexibility to deployment schedules. Larger cutters can serve as mother ships.
Cutters should also have data linkage with shore based air search systems or AEGIS systems. Being electronically connected will speed response for air and surface contacts. With electronic interconnection, smaller cutters can be built to increase coverage and add flexibility to deployment schedules. Larger cutters can serve as mother ships.
(1)
(0)
They need to just slide the USCG over to DOD. Some will argue that they'll be effected by Posse Comitatus, but because of the way the USCG is written into USC, they won't be effected. Putting them in Homeland Security, the Justice Dept, Transportation, or Treasury just hurts them and their ability to function because those departments don't have the budgets.
(1)
(0)
SCPO (Join to see)
This is the oft-repeated solution of people who have not been in the USCG. The DoD is not the panacea. This USNI article addresses a somewhat new angle to bring the service's heaviest cutters into line with the Navy's DDGs. It's an interesting premise.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
Read This Next