Comments on: Coasties Stripped of Acquisition Power

By: Chief Houston

Chief Houston — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:01:11 +0000

It is great to hear so many comments about the USCG. Maybe if we had this kind of attention before we would not be in the current
situation. Situational Leadership has to be taught first hand. Broad strokes of criticism is light banter. I like the solution side
better, how about you?

By: Joseph Melbourn

Joseph Melbourn — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:02:32 +0000

Just who is anybody kidding. Who, DHS is a mess already. From a to z their best grade has been a B-!
After all ‘who’ is on first base still.

By: Gman

Gman — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 01:59:11 +0000

U2recon — Are you smoking crack? Seriously?

By: Not So Old Salt

Not So Old Salt — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 05:08:12 +0000

The trends of the 90s played out here in the 21st century. Industry convinced the leadership that they could do everything better, faster and cheaper. So we let the “old salts” who knew how to build ships retire and let the hot shots of industry take over thought leadership. Letting an integrator take over every aspect of recapatilizing the CG was the capstone of a decade of knowledge draining. Now there is scant few left in the Navy or the USCG with the waterfront know how to keep the contractor’s honest during ship construction or any other major production effort. Look at NG’s LPD 17 lube oil system failures in Bahrain. That ship is going to be a dock queen lasting half it’s planned service life.

The decisions of the 90s are now manifesting themselves in the present. We turned over the keys to industry so we are going to continue to pay for these past sins.

By: chris

chris — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:33:50 +0000

why is the CG trying to go deepwater and the navy shoreline at the same time anyway? too many roosters in the henhouse.

By: U-2 Reconnaissance

U-2 Reconnaissance — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 14:59:58 +0000

We have excellent federal law enforcement that guard our coast better that USCG. The mentality of “deterrence” doesn’t work! You catch bad guys, sent them to jail for 30yrs and enforce all the weight of the LAW. And then we talk. Putting a big, slow cutter in front of the bad guy and the bad guys making loop around the cutter. That doesn’t cut it. But obviously is easer to claim stats that way.

By: Chaff dispencer

Chaff dispencer — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:58:27 +0000

Basic power grab by DHS but the Gruman folks knew they were taking the USCG for a ride at the start. I watched it happen from afar.
Lots of good people working to fix this issue. Again ; DHS has its hands full with managing acqusition permissions for NRO, AF and now USCG.
There must be lots of job openings at DHS.

By: U2 reconnassaince

U2 reconnassaince — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 20:07:48 +0000

P. Lamn! Please get out of the box. CG have to piggyback on other real law enforcement to do their job. Now theY “want” to do overseas ops. GIVE ME A BREAK. DOD can do the job if simple mind people get out of the way. Let passed this Act bull… and take all our resources and putted together for the benefic of our nation. Is a shame to the CG when I see from up high that you guys are not even close to the interdiction area and been so low, you claim stats… What low can you go!

By: Alex.Vasiliu

Alex.Vasiliu — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 19:55:37 +0000

I am a member of the USCG Auxiliary and I worked in another country on Acceptance testing for large ships
The idea to transfer decision power for ship building programms to AN AGENCY WITH NO EXPERTISE IN HANDLING SHIPS is equivalent to the Air Force letting the State Department decide what capabilities we should have in the F22 fighter programm.
Maybe clearer minds will prevail before the mayhem from Tihuana spills on the Los Angeles streets

By: Mark Bigelow

Mark Bigelow — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 12:04:17 +0000

This predates DHS; anyone remember the mess we got from the 1980’s? The HU-25 jet, the HH-65 helicopter and the 270′ WMEC cutters? They did not do what they were supposed to do, did not work as well as the equipment they replaced and required hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades and repairs to keep in the fleet. The problem is the admirals and civilian leaders decide what they want from the beginning, the days of competition from contractors to provide the best product are gone. The few defense contractors such as Northrup-Grumman and General Dynamics are in bed with the military leadership and they work together to maximise profits (and to make sure retiring flag officers get well paid jobs) rather than provide our forces with the best gear.

By: P. Lamm

P. Lamm — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:19:31 +0000

Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits our military from conducting police duties to protect our nation. By letting the CG “guard our pools” we arre leaving our coastline undefended. The Squids can’t do it because it’s illegal.

By: becks

becks — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:44:09 +0000

The rise in private contracting seems a slippery slope where corporations acquire more influence and strategic decisions are profit driven..my country vs my corporation.

By: John E.

John E. — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:43:36 +0000

You are only allowed to get something significant done once during your entire career. After that higher powers will insure that never happens again. It’s the American way. Suck up a paycheck and watch the clock, it’s what the other 99% are doing.

By: duaneluke

duaneluke — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:26:32 +0000

This is another put down for the people that know what there needs are to get the job done and keep us safe

By: Mac

Mac — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:51:15 +0000

Obama will only make things worse.

By: U2 reconnassaince

U2 reconnassaince — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:37:16 +0000

Just for the record! I am not Navy neither CG.

Ps. I just watch everything from up high.…

By: U2 reconnassaince

U2 reconnassaince — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:28:53 +0000

Tbe CG was just another agency for draft dodgers during Viet Nam and that's the best thing I can say for them...How many times have I seen them bootleg FLIR and radar images from legitimate law enforcement agencies. And as far as Richard producing kids from Mr. Coleman's wife...it's the only way homosexual's can reproduce...The CG was the primary reason for the "don't ask don't tell policy". Richard..put on your leather helmet, get on the short bus and go home

By: griffbuff52

griffbuff52 — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:06:14 +0000

I agree with CB. Don’t post something unintelligible, it does not make you sound like a “pro”! As far as contractors taking military jobs, that’s asinine. There are only so many military billets on the books and if a military service needs more people or more expertise that is not available through current manning, the military service has to get contractor support to fill those gaps. I have to agree, though that the systems acquisition contractors working with the Coast Guard were given a blank check and there was very little government oversight at the beginning. That has changed. Despite the report and recommendation by the GAO, the Coast Guard has made huge improvements in acquisition management structure, acquisition personnel levels, acquisition experience levels, and acquisition training. Coast Guard acquisition program management is ensuring that the best systems for the best price with the right support are being acquired.

By: Justin Richards

Justin Richards — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:41:33 +0000

Mr. Coleman. You must be a Navy man sir. Shallow water…There is a reason your in the Navy..You could not pass the entrance exam for the Coast Guard..By the was how is your wife and my kids?

By: iggle

iggle — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:15:00 +0000

therabbit has it right. Give it to DHS to make the problem worse. The only thing worse would be to give it to the “shipbuilding professionals” at the Navy. The 6 years ago the CG wrote a bad contract based on acquisition reform — the Navy writes bad contracts every day based on no reform. The over-runs aren’t bigger in the CG than the Navy — look at the LCS. GAO reports about 50–100% overrun projects all the time, and there’s only been one from the CG. CG acquisitions has to improve, but it is. They’ve gone back to some of the more-proven, less-trusting ways of doing business, and the new patrol boat contract will be a success — whether Bollinger builds it or Marinette’s protest is successful.

CB — the shiphandlers change their mind every week, but never wanted the 123. That has nothing to do with the 123 failure. And if the CG gets a chance to look at the LCS, it’ll find it just as expensive as the NSC, faster, but built for the Navy (not the CG). But, I agree that the CG needs to look at the other available ships out there for future acquisitions, and that’s what they just did with the patrol boats, and are doing with the mid-level cutters (opc).

Give it time!