Can you help me identify this vessel?

[asnrobert]

Recently I have been scanning a number of my photos (35mm, 110 and 126) to my computer, and a number of them were 35 mm photos taken in Savannah in October 1995. While I was able to identify this vessel as the USS Black Hawk MHC 58:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3627/3338995719_8df3076c96.jpg

I took several photos of a patrol boat and am at a loss to identify her. Here are some pics below:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3375/3339824148_9e14114890.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3597/3339823858_c54e87f6f9.jpg

Help in identifying this ship would be greatly appreciated.

[old_pop2000]

Recently I have been scanning a number of my photos (35mm, 110 and 126) to my computer, and a number of them were 35 mm photos taken in Savannah in October 1995. While I was able to identify this vessel as the USS Black Hawk MHC 58:

I took several photos of a patrol boat and am at a loss to identify her. Here are some pics below:

Help in identifying this ship would be greatly appreciated.

Robert:
That is a Cyclone class Coastal Patrol Boat. They were based on British Vosper Thornycroft Ramadan design. Used as a SpecOps transport and for patrol, drug enforcement duties. There are 13 of these ships.

http://www.hazegray.org/features/nato/us/cyclone/

As of Aug. 2008, Monsoon and Tempest were being returned to the Navy by the Coast Guard. Tornado, Shamal and Zephyr will be returned in 2011.

Your picture is of the USS Typhoon PC-5, built at Bollinger Shipyards in Lockport, Louisiana, ordered in 30 August 1990, commissioned on 12 February 1994.
She is currently stationed at Manama, Bahrain

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=2000&ct=4

[asnrobert]

Thanks Dennis! I did some additional digging, and according to wiki, she was commissioned in February 1994 (so she was less than 2 years old when I saw her) and is currently in Bahrain.
The pics on wiki show her with a plain gray paint job, so they must have painted out the cammo scheme she was sporting in Savannah.

[Scott Chisholm]

Thanks Dennis! I did some additional digging, and according to wiki, she was commissioned in February 1994 (so she was less than 2 years old when I saw her) and is currently in Bahrain.
The pics on wiki show her with a plain gray paint job, so they must have painted out the cammo scheme she was sporting in Savannah.

Robert,

She is, in fact, in Bahrain with 3 (?) of her sisters. They perform routine patrols of the Gulf Oil Platforms (GOPLATS).

I believe all of the PCs that were given to the Coast Guard have been returned to the USN earlier than planned.

When originally built, the PCs were not intended to be commissioned - ie, they were not going to be named or have commanding officers. Instead, they were going to be crewed entirely by enlisted sailors under the charge of a Chief Petty Officer Craft Master.

However, the decision was made to commission them as Lieutenant commands (as in commanded by Lieutenants) in response to pressure to "allow" Naval Officers to have command earlier in their careers. That led to the ships being individually named after weather events.

On a side note, amongst the ground forces there is a misconception that Naval Officers do not "get" command (or meaningful leadership responsibility) until late in their careers when they are selected to command ships and are given the title "Commanding Officer". In the USA/USAF, officer in charge of Platoons and Companies are called "Commanding Officer", where as Naval Officers are called "Division Officer" or "Department Head". Even though we are in charge of up to 150 people in those positions, we are not considered "Commanding Officers" with commesurate Title 10 responsibility. Consequently, Junior Officers in the ground forces tend to think we in the USN do not exercise leadership responsibilties.

Embarking a ship for the first time can be an eye-opening experience for those folks. When I was Navigator on TARAWA, we embarked USARCENT (United States Army Central Command) Actual - the General - to observe some inter-service helo ops. He was completely flaberghasted at the fact a LTJG was the Officer of the Deck making everything happen. The fact that an officer that young was directly responsible for the care and feeding of 2000 people (and his 6 CH-47s that were embarked) floored him. "I'll slap the next one of my officers who says Naval Officers don't get responsibility early."

I think that's a direct quote....

[djcyclone]

It might be the Cyclone Class, but if not the Navy has recently developed a Patrol Boat that is capable of crossing the Atlantic by itself, and is also capable of 65 + knots making it able to out run any homing torpedo.

I was able to speak to a Quartermaster who had been assigned to one of them, and he told me quite a few things about the new boats.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Robert,

She is, in fact, in Bahrain with 3 (?) of her sisters. They perform routine patrols of the Gulf Oil Platforms (GOPLATS).

I believe all of the PCs that were given to the Coast Guard have been returned to the USN earlier than planned.

When originally built, the PCs were not intended to be commissioned - ie, they were not going to be named or have commanding officers. Instead, they were going to be crewed entirely by enlisted sailors under the charge of a Chief Petty Officer Craft Master.

However, the decision was made to commission them as Lieutenant commands (as in commanded by Lieutenants) in response to pressure to "allow" Naval Officers to have command earlier in their careers. That led to the ships being individually named after weather events.

On a side note, amongst the ground forces there is a misconception that Naval Officers do not "get" command (or meaningful leadership responsibility) until late in their careers when they are selected to command ships and are given the title "Commanding Officer". In the USA/USAF, officer in charge of Platoons and Companies are called "Commanding Officer", where as Naval Officers are called "Division Officer" or "Department Head". Even though we are in charge of up to 150 people in those positions, we are not considered "Commanding Officers" with commesurate Title 10 responsibility. Consequently, Junior Officers in the ground forces tend to think we in the USN do not exercise leadership responsibilties.

Embarking a ship for the first time can be an eye-opening experience for those folks. When I was Navigator on TARAWA, we embarked USARCENT (United States Army Central Command) Actual - the General - to observe some inter-service helo ops. He was completely flaberghasted at the fact a LTJG was the Officer of the Deck making everything happen. The fact that an officer that young was directly responsible for the care and feeding of 2000 people (and his 6 CH-47s that were embarked) floored him. "I'll slap the next one of my officers who says Naval Officers don't get responsibility early."

I think that's a direct quote....

Scott:

Weren't most PT boats commanded by ensigns or Lt JGs in WWII? They never were named, merely numbered.

[john964]

Scott:

Weren't most PT boats commanded by ensigns or Lt JGs in WWII? They never were named, merely numbered.Ed, Most PT's were skippered by ENS LTjg and Jr LT's with divisons commanded by LT and LCMD. PT Boat sqaudrons were commanded by Commanders

[Jittery]

It might be the Cyclone Class, but if not the Navy has recently developed a Patrol Boat that is capable of crossing the Atlantic by itself, and is also capable of 65 + knots making it able to out run any homing torpedo.

I was able to speak to a Quartermaster who had been assigned to one of them, and he told me quite a few things about the new boats.


They have been around for a while, VSV's... aka: Very Slender Vessel I saw one on Port Phillip ages ago and thought it was a capsized yacht whilst out fishing. When we went over to see it, it then speed off at a million miles an hour (really really fast). Well i think it was one, could be a variation of one, either way it led me to find out about it via the net.

http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/vsv.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/vsv.htm

[Scott Chisholm]

Scott:

Weren't most PT boats commanded by ensigns or Lt JGs in WWII? They never were named, merely numbered.

Ed,

"Command" in this sense has a very specific meaning. Commissioned vessels have Commanding Officers; with that comes a set of privileges and responsibilities.

Small craft are not commissioned vessels and do not rate a Commanding Officer. Instead, the person in charge of the vessel is called a Craft Master, and while responsible for the safety and operation of the vessel, is not in "command". He's more of a steward.

I guess in a way it is sort of like aircraft in a squadron. The squadron has a Commanding Officer, and his subordinates are responsible for the care and feeding of the aircraft.

Don't fret: it confuses those of us who have spent the majority of our lives living it.... ;)

[Ed Rotondaro]

Ed, Most PT's were skippered by ENS LTjg and Jr LT's with divisons commanded by LT and LCMD. PT Boat sqaudrons were commanded by Commanders

John:

That's what I thought. Maybe the size of the new boats required them to be named rather than numbered?

[Ed Rotondaro]

They have been around for a while, VSV's... aka: Very Slender Vessel I saw one on Port Phillip ages ago and thought it was a capsized yacht whilst out fishing. When we went over to see it, it then speed off at a million miles an hour (really really fast). Well i think it was one, could be a variation of one, either way it led me to find out about it via the net.

http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/vsv.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/vsv.htm

Jittery:

Wow those things look like "Cigarette Boats" on an anorexic diet! Cigarette boats, in case you don't know are slender high speed sporting boats that were popular with drug runners in the 1980s. (Think Miami Vice here)

[Ed Rotondaro]

Ed,

"Command" in this sense has a very specific meaning. Commissioned vessels have Commanding Officers; with that comes a set of privileges and responsibilities.

Small craft are not commissioned vessels and do not rate a Commanding Officer. Instead, the person in charge of the vessel is called a Craft Master, and while responsible for the safety and operation of the vessel, is not in "command". He's more of a steward.

I guess in a way it is sort of like aircraft in a squadron. The squadron has a Commanding Officer, and his subordinates are responsible for the care and feeding of the aircraft.

Don't fret: it confuses those of us who have spent the majority of our lives living it.... ;)

Scott:

I think I can understand the difference. Thanks for the insights sir.;)

[asnrobert]

Scott, the minesweeper in the first link is the USS Black Hawk, an Osprey class minesweeper. In another thread weren't you saying that the Navy had a lot of problems with them (or was it another class)?

[Scott Chisholm]

Scott, the minesweeper in the first link is the USS Black Hawk, an Osprey class minesweeper. In another thread weren't you saying that the Navy had a lot of problems with them (or was it another class)?

Robert,

The last of the MHCs were decommissioned on 01 December 2007 - I was Mine Countermeasures Squadron TWO's Decommissioning Coordinator for the decommissioning of all twelve of them. Two were sold to Egypt (USS RAVEN and USS CARDINAL), and two to Greece (USS HERON and USS PELICAN).

Two were stripped for parts: (USS OSPREY and USS ROBIN).

The remaining six, including USS BLACKHAWK, were mothballed for potential foreign military sale (FMS). Originally, two were supposed to go to Lithiuania, Turkey and Taiwan, respectively, but those sales were cancelled by the incoming Congressional Majority immediately after the 2006 elections, much to our dismay as we thought we were going to be required to keep them.

The MHCs were really good at what they were intended to do: Coastal mine hunting. Unfortunately, Big Navy never really embraced the concept of "coastal", and treated them as ocean-going assets. They were never that robust to be used in that capacity.

Materially, and operationally, they were one-trick ponies. One engine per shaft, one weapons system with absolutely no reduncancy. For instance: they only had one sonar. If it broke, they became a 174-foot shrimper. If the OK-520 sonar winch broke - back to shrimping. If the SLQ-48 Mine Neutralization Vehicle broke: shrimping.

If the Umbilical Handling System for the SLQ-48 broke: shrimping.

If a main engine broke: they'd lose half of their propulsion and about 60% of their steering capability (Voith Schneidner vectored thrust propulsors).

Most of the time, by the standards we used, they were not "fully mission capable". Half the time, they were barely "partially mission capable".

I actually felt guilty being involved with the sale of HERON to the Greeks. She'd taken a lightning strike a couple of years prior to the sale and fried her Engineering Control System. Up until the day we sold her, we were still trying to chase all the gremlins out of that system.

It's probably a good thing they had a Greek Orthodox Priest bless her the day they recommissioned her as a Hellenic Navy Ship.... ;)

[Jittery]

Materially, and operationally, they were one-trick ponies. One engine per shaft, one weapons system with absolutely no reduncancy. For instance: they only had one sonar. If it broke, they became a 174-foot shrimper. If the OK-520 sonar winch broke - back to shrimping. If the SLQ-48 Mine Neutralization Vehicle broke: shrimping.




LOL, how good were these boats at shrimping, thats what i want to know now.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Robert,

The last of the MHCs were decommissioned on 01 December 2007 - I was Mine Countermeasures Squadron TWO's Decommissioning Coordinator for the decommissioning of all twelve of them. Two were sold to Egypt (USS RAVEN and USS CARDINAL), and two to Greece (USS HERON and USS PELICAN).

Two were stripped for parts: (USS OSPREY and USS ROBIN).

The remaining six, including USS BLACKHAWK, were mothballed for potential foreign military sale (FMS). Originally, two were supposed to go to Lithiuania, Turkey and Taiwan, respectively, but those sales were cancelled by the incoming Congressional Majority immediately after the 2006 elections, much to our dismay as we thought we were going to be required to keep them.

The MHCs were really good at what they were intended to do: Coastal mine hunting. Unfortunately, Big Navy never really embraced the concept of "coastal", and treated them as ocean-going assets. They were never that robust to be used in that capacity.

Materially, and operationally, they were one-trick ponies. One engine per shaft, one weapons system with absolutely no reduncancy. For instance: they only had one sonar. If it broke, they became a 174-foot shrimper. If the OK-520 sonar winch broke - back to shrimping. If the SLQ-48 Mine Neutralization Vehicle broke: shrimping.

If the Umbilical Handling System for the SLQ-48 broke: shrimping.

If a main engine broke: they'd lose half of their propulsion and about 60% of their steering capability (Voith Schneidner vectored thrust propulsors).

Most of the time, by the standards we used, they were not "fully mission capable". Half the time, they were barely "partially mission capable".

I actually felt guilty being involved with the sale of HERON to the Greeks. She'd taken a lightning strike a couple of years prior to the sale and fried her Engineering Control System. Up until the day we sold her, we were still trying to chase all the gremlins out of that system.

It's probably a good thing they had a Greek Orthodox Priest bless her the day they recommissioned her as a Hellenic Navy Ship.... ;)

Scott:

It's sad to see that the USN doesn't think that any ship smaller than a FFG deserves the same kind of respect and design attention.

[Ed Rotondaro]

LOL, how good were these boats at shrimping, thats what i want to know now.

Jittery:

Ask Forrest Gump LOL!:D