I've been spending too much time lately pondering what the future holds for the Coast Guard. I suspect some others have been doing the same thing so thought a discussion to compare or share views might be interesting. The fact that a CG ship recently clad the crew in desrt camouflage made me wonder if we are just pretending and deluding ourselves as to what the CG is today and what it might become.

I have to start out by saying I believe the move to DHS may well prove disastrous to the CG as we know it. At some point I think those running that huge bureaucracy are going to start looking at all the different organizations and wondering how they can be "streamlined".

A huge part of the CG's focus these days is on drug and migrant interdiction. At what point is someone in Washington going to come to the realization the the Customs folks do the same thing, only primarily on land? Should that happen I can see a potential merger. All of a sudden a VERY large part of the CG's missions could disappear.

Once that initial merger occurs, what might be next?

Will someone decide that the CG doesn't really need those 418 foot ships? Could they just proved CG LEDETs to seerve on Navy ships? Could the CG turn into a much smaller SAR focused service? Back to the days of the Lifeboat Service?

And the military component. How real is it actually? Certainly over the years the CG has managed to remove most of the weaponry that made it obvious the CG was a military service. The fact is, with maybe some relatively minor exceptions, the CG has not had any large scale participation in a war since Viet Nam. Since than the ships have been stripped of all ASW capability, and the newest ships, as far as armament goes, are even less capable than the 378's.....which are less capable then they were in 1970.

Look at this description of the 57mm mount.....I copied it from the Deepwater page:

quote:

Medium caliber deck gun (57MM) capable of
stopping rogue merchant vessels far from shore

This ship could not survive running across a patrol boat that many third world nations have. Despite what the US Code states, I do not believe the Coast Guard of today could actually function as a military service unless the Navy were there to protect our vessels. That's sad.

By the way, my family has served a total of over 100 years in the CG. Uncle chased rumrunners and served in WW II. Brother was on an 82 in Nam. I was on a 378 in Nam and then returned on a buoy tender. Nephew was in. Niece's husband spent over 20 in, primarily on small boat stations in Oregon. I'm only sharing this to show I have a deep and abiding love for the CG and I worry about it and what the future may hold.

OK, enough about my thoughts.....chime in, let's hear yours. I'm playing Devil's Advocate.

What about the Ice breakers, We got three but only two work. What's stopping the NSF from leasing Canadian or God Forbid Russian breakers to do testing in the arctic.
I forsee a much smaller CG in the future, as Iraq winds down and Congress starts looking to cut budgets, I belive they will start with us. It is a sad thing with all our 378's and 110's dragging around with one foot in the grave, they might find that it is cheaper to utilize LEDET Teams on Navy ships, instead of replacing aging platforms. How many jobs and salaries can they cut to fund their pork barrel projects.

More Devil's Advocacy

maybe that is why they are starting with the new weight standards. next they will add the PT test to get members ready to be migrated to the other services.

quote:

Originally posted by GrilledNBurnt:
It is a sad thing with all our 378's and 110's dragging around with one foot in the grave, they might find that it is cheaper to utilize LEDET Teams on Navy ships, instead of replacing aging platforms.

Chief, it's actually already happening. Even for DOMFISH enforcement...

<http://www.uscghawaii.com/go/doc/800/288975/>

I would'nt worry to much about the CG downsizing anytime soon. We have 11 core missions and a host of subsets to those missions; if anything we will probably take on additional responsibility in the not to distant future i.e. piracy at sea. I agree we are not much of DOD asset and its hard for us to keep up with the Navy. With that said we are much more econmoical service than any other and Congress recognizes that.

The 378' need to be replaced ASAP, however the 110' are in pretty good shape. Atleast the D-7 and PATFORSWA 110' are in good shape thanks to this new high optempo program. The 87' are pretty reliable assests; can't do as much as the 110' btu still a good asset. More than likely OPCOM will utilize the 175' and 225' a little more to complete task until the remaining Deepwater cutters are completed.

I guess this is the glass half full outlook on the future of the CG but who knows what will happen; should be interesting either way.

The four DOD Services are the police department. The Coast Guard is the fire department. Much respected for all we do, but we'll never be part of the police department.

I would go along with the original post, the transition into a new department will probably end up with the Coast Guard, as an armed force, being eliminated and re-emerging as maybe, one of the uniformed services. Under the military pay system you are probably a cheaper labor source. Wouldn't be surprised to see many of you offered transition to a DOD service if desired. Many could be transitioned into NOAA Corps type employment. I'd go with Customs, Border Patrol, and the other TSA agencies absorbing a good portion of the L/E type missions. Numerous other topics have discussed the other missions that can be farmed out/eliminated.

Homeland Security Dept may be the final nail to the CG as it exists today. Your upper level management from the mid 1980s onward started to hammer the nail in. Those upper level managers have allowed the material condition of the sea going fleet of one of the U.S. armed forces to deteriorate down to a level equivalent to some third world naval militia. The FRAMs to the 210 & 378 fleet in the 80s just took worn out assets then and prolonged a trip to the ship breakers, and made them OLDER worn out assets. The 110' magic wand service life extension from the original 10 years, up to 15 years, and they're still running them. Replacement of the fleet should have started then, not re-hab jobs. The curse of Semper Paratus really took hold. Upper management dabbled into their personal visions/projects and neglected the long range vision/condition of the service.

The portion of the CG I deal with today are more like civilian government bureaucrats, and no more military in mindset than I am anymore.

Those that have to work/sail in those derelict junkyards, the utmost respect to you for prevailing. As menbers of an armed force of the United States you shouldn't be hazarded in such a manner with such unsafe equipment.

I think your days in your present configuration are numbered.

quote:

The Coast Guard is the fire department. Much respected for all we do, but we'll never be part of the police department.

I think you need to look to the CG's history in WW II and Vietnam and than ask what the hell happened? In WW II the CG sank submarines, shot down airplanes and escorted convoys. In Vietnam the CG sank ships, provided NGFS, initerdicted vessels attempting to run weapons into S. Vietnam......amongst other things. So, they used to (to use your analogy) act like cops. Now all the CG is capable of doing is "playing" cop, because someone took their guns away.

quote:

We have 11 core missions and a host of subsets to those missions; if anything we will probably take on additional responsibility in the not to distant future i.e. piracy at sea.

Frankly it is downright stupid to expect the U.S. Coast Guard to be chasing down pirates on the other side of the world.

I don't know specifically what "11 core missions" you are referring to, but who is to say some of those could not/would not be transferrablre?

At some point some bureaucrats are going to start wondering why they need redundant assets. Why build 418 ft cutters when you can get the job done using Navy ships with LEDETS on board? And do those LE missions really need to be performed by CG personnel, or are there other federal agencies that could provide the bodies?

I see that no one other than Mastersmate has chosen to address whether or not the Coast Guard still could realistically be considered as a military service anymore. Unfortunately his views and mine are in strong agreement.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ex_CG_GM,

quote:
Originally posted by GrilledNBurnt:
It is a sad thing with all our 378's and 110's dragging around with one foot in the grave, they might find that it is cheaper to utilize LEDET Teams on Navy ships, instead of replacing aging platforms.


...Chief, it's actually already happening. Even for DOMFISH enforcement...

Yes sir,
I should have written it as "More LEDET Teams".

Thanks

Oh and let's not forget about ATON. I hear there are already civilian firms and Army COrp of Engineers doing bouy work on the Mississippi.
There is another cut into the CG Pie.

quote:

Why build 418 ft cutters when you can get the job done using Navy ships with LEDETS on board?

I have been asking myself the same question for years. Why not more smaller platforms? Something a little more capable than the 270s but not the size of a modern DD.

Replacing the 110s would also be a great idea.

My very first duty station 21 years ago was an ANT team in south LA. The "official" scuttlebutt at that time was that it was going civilian or ACOE. It was a done deal. All signed and sealed.

The Chief at that time told me... When he came in 25 years PRIOR to that, the same type conversations had been going on.

This is nothing new. For at least 50 years, there has been the self-inflicted rumor that all manner of things are going to befall us: going over to Navy.... going away completely... going to get split up. The sky is falling... And as long as I've been hearing it, guess what? NONE OF IT HAS HAPPENED!

I know this makes good fodder. But probably not very good for planning purposes. We ain't going no where.

You gotta admit that playing "Chicken Little" with the Conspiracy Theorists is a great way to get all sorts of ideas pulled into a topic. And it's kind of fun too.
I sure hope to Heck that the CG isn't going to go away, I still have some years to put on before I retire. It is a great job, that I wish I had known about before joining the Army.

Put the shoe on the other foot, think about how we came to acquire 11 core missions since 1915 and maybe the Coast Guard either merges with or absorbs Customs, Border Patrol, and the other TSA agencies.

Of course we'll need a new name. The Coast and Boarder Security Service?

quote:

I sure hope to Heck that the CG isn't going to go away, I still have some years to put on before I retire. It is a great job, that I wish I had known about before joining the Army.

It won't go away (I think) but it COULD change so dramatically that many that have served previously would no longer recognize it.

Think like bureaucrats.....if I am the head of the Dep't of Transportation, might I benefit (get a bigger piece of the pie) if I took over all the licensing the CG does?

If I'm the head of Customs could I get a LOT bigger if I took over ALL drug and migrant interdiction duties?

If I'm NOAA should I get the icebreakers?

Some stuff may not be attractive to other groups, or be such a core piece of the Coast Guard's ideentity that it could not be taken away. SAR certainly is what the CG has always been known for. As for A to N, the question would be who wants it?

The last administration (specifically Cheney) bore no love for the CG's participation in military matters. Now the CG is further emasculating itself by building vessels incapable of even defending themselves, much less performing a more aggressive role such as was done in Vietnam and other wars.

The CG may need some pretty good sized ships for SAR purposes, but they do not need to be 350 or 400+ feet long. They need to be sturdy, powerful ships that can handle the roughest weather, but they don't need to be what Deepwater has on the drawing boards. Think updated Tamaroa type vessels. Ships that can make it through the roughest weather to perform long range SAR.

Might as well start changing your ideas as to what the CG is, because one thing is for certain....it is an armed military service in name only these days.

quote:

Put the shoe on the other foot, think about how we came to acquire 11 core missions since 1915 and maybe the Coast Guard either merges with or absorbs Customs, Border Patrol, and the other TSA agencies.

Gawd, that thought gives me nightmares!

And would not happen. The CG is still a "maritime" service.

quote:

The last administration (specifically Cheney) bore no love for the CG's participation in military matters.

I was privileged to attend CGA's 2008 Commencement where Vice President Cheney delivered the keynote address. That's not the impression he left me with.

quote:

The CG is still a "maritime" service.

We could be that and so much more too.

quote:

I was privileged to attend CGA's 2008 Commencement where Vice President Cheney delivered the keynote address. That's not the impression he left me with.

I don't recall the details now, but there was some discussion and posting of his comments on here some years back regarding negative comments he made about the CG and its military role.

Certainly he would not stand up and bash the CG while speaking at a graduation of cadets.

quote:

Certainly he would not stand up and bash the CG while speaking at a graduation of cadets.

Agreed. In fact he was downright charming. I've added him to my list of people I'd like to have a beer, but never go hunting with.