Should Coast Guard have diesel subs?

Kapt Z · 09-17-08, 07:13 PM

Read a article in the August edition of Proceedings that mentioned the idea of equiping the Coast Guard with foreign built diesel attack subs to cover the US coast. Interesting idea. Just wondered what you all thought about it.

Sailor Steve · 09-17-08, 07:22 PM

Don't know, but I do wonder what they'd use them for.

fatty · 09-17-08, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Don't know, but I do wonder what they'd use them for.

For waterspace management and maritime domain awareness/surveillance, subs can't be beat

So I imagine a coastie sub would spend a lot of time loitering off the US shores, monitoring comings and goings and occasionally snapping photos of the bad guys. That said I vote no because it's a waste of time to develop a capability from scratch that another service (the USN) is already a world leader in.

baggygreen · 09-17-08, 07:55 PM

Not that it matters much to me, but i vote no - why fork out the billions in training etc, when aircraft can cover a significantly larger area than any sub, and cover it much more quickly

joegrundman · 09-17-08, 08:29 PM

I say yes, but only if they have straight-running torps and manual TDC!

Edit! and no automatic map contact updates either!

SUBMAN1 · 09-17-08, 08:44 PM

I vote yes, but with either US built versions or some AIP subs from Germany or something. The coast guard should be guarding under the water as much as it does on top. Weapons being minimal. Just a surveillance platform or so.

-S

Kapt Z · 09-17-08, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

I vote yes, but with either US built versions or some AIP subs from Germany or something. The coast guard should be guarding under the water as much as it does on top. Weapons being minimal. Just a surveillance platform or so.

-S

I recycled the magazine so I don't know for sure, but I think they were talking about German or Scandinavian designs until we could come up with our own. I also agree with Fatty though that it seems quite an expensive proposition. I wonder if the Navy would ever consider looking into it.

geetrue · 09-17-08, 09:56 PM

I say yes indeed it's way overdue, plus Canada needs the same units with a buddy buddy defense department deal the USA could purchase them for America and Canada then allow Canada to train the men that will run them with a secret coast guard submarine training base in the north we would be ready for them Russkies when they come a hunting.

Make sure they can lay mines in war time to protect harbors or straits (do we have any?)

CG (SS)

Wolfehunter · 09-17-08, 11:25 PM

They would most likely use them against the drug trade? Thats my best guess. Problem is I hope they don't abuse there powers....:hmm:

JHuschke · 09-17-08, 11:46 PM

No...very bad idea. Who is the first to think of this!?

bookworm_020 · 09-17-08, 11:54 PM

Do you want some sare Collins class subs from Australia? We just can't get enough people to crew them!

UnderseaLcpl · 09-17-08, 11:58 PM

What the hell for!?!?

To conduct a course de guerre ? Against who?

To fight the drug war? A war we have yet to make any real progress in?

To fight terrorism that will just find a non-naval means of infiltrating the country?

Subs are expensive to maintain and I won't help to pay for coast guard subs.

Who the hell came up with this ridiculous idea!?

diver · 09-18-08, 12:03 AM

Subs for the coats guard, isn't that a bit elaborate?
And could the USN really afford to have so many of it's submariners poached? (and rest assured, in the first decade at least, they will be)

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

Do you want some sare Collins class subs from Australia? We just can't get enough people to crew them!

Well complaining doesn't help the situation.

Thunder · 09-18-08, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

Do you want some sare Collins class subs from Australia? We just can't get enough people to crew them!

Yeah

, we got three we got from Germany with the same kinda problem...lol, someone said all the personell went to Australia...

headcase · 09-18-08, 01:36 AM

Man, to me it seems like one a critter that sounds a lot better on paper than it would work out to be. High cost to get in the game. High cost for recruitment. High dollar training. Big money keepin' it up. Retro-fit existing CG Cutters with high speed hard lined sonobouys. Fer weepin out loud! For the manpower available and the mission the CG is at this moment doing a Doggone outstanding job. Giving them "Boats" would overtask way too many things. You want non-surface vessels patrolling territorial waters? The USN has the capability. Just make Congerss authorize funding to bring a few of the " not in Service but not ready for scrap" Boats back on the line.

Or Here's a wacky idea. Give the CG 25% of the money Diesel Boats would cost. Spend it on equal parts recruiting, training, highspeed intercept vessels, and drone A/C. You are welcome to

A) Do the math.

B) Call me crazy

C) Both

View Poll Results: Should Coast Guard have diesel attack subs
yes	8	33.33%
no	11	45.83%
don't know	5	20.83%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

09-17-08, 07:13 PM	#1
Kapt Z Grey Wolf Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: ...somewhere in the swamps of Jersey. Posts: 909 Downloads: 157 Uploads: 0	Should Coast Guard have diesel subs? Read a article in the August edition of Proceedings that mentioned the idea of equiping the Coast Guard with foreign built diesel attack subs to cover the US coast. Interesting idea. Just wondered what you all thought about it.

09-17-08, 07:22 PM	#2
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	Don't know, but I do wonder what they'd use them for. __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

09-17-08, 08:29 PM	#5
joegrundman Ocean Warrior Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,689 Downloads: 34 Uploads: 0	I say yes, but only if they have straight-running torps and manual TDC! Edit! and no automatic map contact updates either! __________________ "Enemy submarines are to be called U-Boats. The term submarine is to be reserved for Allied under water vessels. U-Boats are those dastardly villains who sink our ships, while submarines are those gallant and noble craft which sink theirs." Winston Churchill

09-17-08, 08:44 PM	#6
SUBMAN1 Rear Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 11,866 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I vote yes, but with either US built versions or some AIP subs from Germany or something. The coast guard should be guarding under the water as much as it does on top. Weapons being minimal. Just a surveillance platform or so. -S __________________

09-17-08, 07:55 PM	#4
baggygreen Sea Lord Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canberra, ACT, Down Under (really On Top) Posts: 1,880 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	Not that it matters much to me, but i vote no - why fork out the billions in training etc, when aircraft can cover a significantly larger area than any sub, and cover it much more quickly

09-17-08, 09:56 PM	#8
geetrue Cold War Boomer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Walla Walla Posts: 2,837 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I say yes indeed it's way overdue, plus Canada needs the same units with a buddy buddy defense department deal the USA could purchase them for America and Canada then allow Canada to train the men that will run them with a secret coast guard submarine training base in the north we would be ready for them Russkies when they come a hunting. Make sure they can lay mines in war time to protect harbors or straits (do we have any?) CG (SS) __________________

09-17-08, 11:25 PM	#9
Wolfehunter Crusty Capt. Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,752 Downloads: 40 Uploads: 25	They would most likely use them against the drug trade? Thats my best guess. Problem is I hope they don't abuse there powers....:hmm: __________________

09-17-08, 11:46 PM	#10
JHuschke XO Join Date: May 2008 Location: Munich, Germany Posts: 432 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	No...very bad idea. Who is the first to think of this!?

09-17-08, 11:54 PM	#11
bookworm_020 Navy Seal Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Sinking ships off the Australian coast Posts: 5,966 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	Do you want some sare Collins class subs from Australia? We just can't get enough people to crew them! __________________ "There is always one person in any organization who knows whats going on, That person must be fired"

09-17-08, 11:58 PM	#12
UnderseaLcpl Silent Hunter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Storming the beaches! Posts: 4,254 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	What the hell for!?!? To conduct a course de guerre ? Against who? To fight the drug war? A war we have yet to make any real progress in? To fight terrorism that will just find a non-naval means of infiltrating the country? Subs are expensive to maintain and I won't help to pay for coast guard subs. Who the hell came up with this ridiculous idea!? __________________ I stole this sig from Task Force

09-18-08, 01:36 AM	#15
headcase Sparky Join Date: May 2007 Location: The wrong side of the tracks, Neverland Posts: 157 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	Man, to me it seems like one a critter that sounds a lot better on paper than it would work out to be. High cost to get in the game. High cost for recruitment. High dollar training. Big money keepin' it up. Retro-fit existing CG Cutters with high speed hard lined sonobouys. Fer weepin out loud! For the manpower available and the mission the CG is at this moment doing a Doggone outstanding job. Giving them "Boats" would overtask way too many things. You want non-surface vessels patrolling territorial waters? The USN has the capability. Just make Congerss authorize funding to bring a few of the " not in Service but not ready for scrap" Boats back on the line. Or Here's a wacky idea. Give the CG 25% of the money Diesel Boats would cost. Spend it on equal parts recruiting, training, highspeed intercept vessels, and drone A/C. You are welcome to A) Do the math. B) Call me crazy C) Both __________________ It's like the Blues. You can't play em if you haven't lived em. GWX 3.0 DID