Nice article in the Navy Times summarizing the critical need for CG Fleet modernization. Secretary Chertoff made it a case in point during his budget presentation last week as well.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/02/coastguard_oldboats_080206w/

BTW, the USCG budget summary statements (which is a record budget request for the USCG) can be found on the COMDT website...

http://www.uscg.mil/comdt/

I bet the CMDT didnt use a Magic marker to sign his request... what do you think 1110?

This was a really well written article that really hits home for me.

I believe within the next 1.5 years or so, you won't be able to walk to the exchange and back without hearing the term "fleet sustainment" at least three times. There's a big convention in April about making the WHECs last indefinitely. I guess the service finally admitted what the sailors have known all along.

Meanwhile, our drydock that was scheduled for Summer 2008 was pushed back almost a year (or who knows how long) due to a lack of funding. Considering that there are places in our bilges where our sailors won't step for fear that they will puncture the hull, some of us feel a bit disappointed.

So we are halfway through TACT on a cutter that had been tied to the peir for an exhorbitant amount of time over the past 2.5 years due to several major mechanical problems causing the ship's force to pretty much rebuild both MDEs with parts from FUIRP (seperate issue; no comment). We just got back from a winter ALPAT where we saw seas that were definitely above eye level on the bridge on this ship, and the crew did exceptionally. We brought a ship that had hardly been underway at all, went through CART in Kodiak in January with Women's Bay frozen over halfway through our patrol, then rolled into TACT less than 3 weeks after returning from the deployment. But, since our ship isn't currently capable of doing full power trials, we don't have a shot at a Battle-E. Knowing how far we've come, and what we ask of our people on my ship, I have to look all of my sailors in the eyes every day, knowing that we have no shot at this award, knowing how far we've come and how much effort we've put into preparing for TACT - it's tough. To my knowledge, none of the PACAREA WHECs have gotten the E this year; but the sailors keep these old ships running with parts from the junkyard, and get through whatever is thrown at us.

We get the job done, and we have pride, because we know what we've done, and we know what we are capable of. From my perspective, though, outside of the lifelines of my ship, things are not the way they should be. That's why reading that article hits so close to home for me. I hate to say the word resentment. I'm honored to serve with my sailors and command, and I'm proud of what we do, but at the same time I'm truly sad and disappointed about where our service has ended up with our major cutters, and in a way, I feel like a fool for serving afloat for as much time as I have.

quote:

Originally posted by cdaddy1556:
This was a really well written article that really hits home for me.

I believe within the next 1.5 years or so, you won't be able to walk to the exchange and back without hearing the term "fleet sustainment" at least three times. There's a big convention in April about making the WHECs last indefinitely. I guess the service finally admitted what the sailors have known all along.

Meanwhile, our drydock that was scheduled for Summer 2008 was pushed back almost a year (or who knows how long) due to a lack of funding. Considering that there are places in our bilges where our sailors won't step for fear that they will puncture the hull, some of us feel a bit disappointed.

So we are halfway through TACT on a cutter that had been tied to the peir for an exhorbitant amount of time over the past 2.5 years due to several major mechanical problems causing the ship's force to pretty much rebuild both MDEs with parts from FUIRP (seperate issue; no comment). We just got back from a winter ALPAT where we saw seas that were definitely above eye level on the bridge on this ship, and the crew did exceptionally. We brought a ship that had hardly been underway at all, went through CART in Kodiak in January with Women's Bay frozen over halfway through our patrol, then rolled into TACT less than 3 weeks after returning from the deployment. But, since our ship isn't currently capable of doing full power trials, we don't have a shot at a Battle-E. Knowing how far we've come, and what we ask of our people on my ship, I have to look all of my sailors in the eyes every day, knowing that we have no shot at this award, knowing how far we've come and how much effort we've put into preparing for TACT - it's tough. To my knowledge, none of the PACAREA WHECs have gotten the E this year; but the sailors keep these old ships running with parts from the junkyard, and get through whatever is thrown at us.

We get the job done, and we have pride, because we know what we've done, and we know what we are capable of. From my perspective, though, outside of the lifelines of my ship, things are not the way they should be. That's why reading that article hits so close to home for me. I hate to say the word resentment. I'm honored to serve with my sailors and command, and I'm proud of what we do, but at the same time I'm truly sad and disappointed about where our service has ended up with our major cutters, and in a way, I feel like a fool for serving afloat for as much time as I have.

As a prior white hull sailor I commend all of you for what you do with the little you have.

Maybe, just maybe the issue is widespread enough for someone to do something about it.

Semper Gumby my friends, Semper Gumby!!

quote:

Originally posted by cdaddy1556:
From my perspective, though, outside of the lifelines of my ship, things are not the way they should be. That's why reading that article hits so close to home for me. I hate to say the word resentment. I'm honored to serve with my sailors and command, and I'm proud of what we do, but at the same time I'm truly sad and disappointed about where our service has ended up with our major cutters, and in a way, I feel like a fool for serving afloat for as much time as I have.

Keep your head up and your men motivated as best you can WEPS. ADM Allen and the 'new regime' are working hard to make things better, but it's going to take years to undue the mistakes of the past.

I know you have a great crew...that alone is worth it's weight in gold and, when it comes down to it, is what really matters.

Hang Tough,
Surface Force

Just kind of wonder if they ever learn at Buzzards Point.

There is an article from Navy Times, over at FredsPlace mentioning a pending new $30 million overhaul for the Polar Star. The ship is past its 30 year projected life. Hasn't anything sunk in when it comes to boondoggles. Extending the life of 210' WMECs, 378' WHECs 110'/123'WPB ****boxes. Pizzing away $30 million to keep some moron politicians happy.

If Icebreaking/polar ops is a new focus would that 30 million be better spent building a new icebreaker/ice capable vessel. Is another polar class really needed ?? A smaller/handier ice class vessel for the Arctic operations ??

Somebody go down the road from Bollingers and ask the boys at Edison Chouest how long it takes to build an icebreaker/ice class vessel. They puked out the Nathanial Palmer and the Lawrence Gould in fair time frames. Dig out and dust off the WIND class plans. At 270', 6500 tons, diesel electric, all in all a fairly cheap date I'd bet.

Credibility is slipping even lower.

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

I read that same article you reference BOSN.

Surface Force had made a recommendation to the PACAREA staff almost 5 yrs ago now that, given the increasing age of the platforms, the workup/maintenance/yard cycle for the 2 WAGBs the CG had for Antarctic ops (HEALY is not one) was on the verge of being untenable and that future acquisitions should ideally plan for six (6) total if they desired to maintain capablity for both Arctic and Antarctic missions: two (2) u/w conducting the mission, two (2) in the yard (Todd) and two (2) in a workup/trng cycle/CART/TRAV/TSTA/TRA/FEP.

Might be a good idea for some Young Turk/eager beaver out there in Alameda to locate, dust off, update and submit that position paper to the Division Chief for endorsement to CGHQ under their own name.

I imagine, if it wasn't round filed, it's sitting somewhere in some dead files related to what once was called the POF (Operational Forces) division.

A retired CG Officer that I work with passed along that he was part of another survey/evaluation on the Polar Star just a bit over a year or so ago. They were looking at what it would take to overhaul the vessel to newer minimum manning/engineering operations.

He relayed that it was a pretty intensive look see,then just kind of withered on the vine.

quote:

Originally posted by Mastersmate:
A retired CG Officer that I work with passed along that he was part of another survey/evaluation on the Polar Star just a bit over a year or so ago. They were looking at what it would take to overhaul the vessel to newer minimum manning/engineering operations.

He relayed that it was a pretty intensive look see,then just kind of withered on the vine.

No $$$$ available , plus the COMDT at the time (ADM Collins) was trying to play hardball with the National Science Foundation to pony up funding which is why POLAR STAR was placed in layup/in commission special status.

The good thing is that the hulls are still sound if they do decide to go now go through on a comprehensive overhaul/FRAM as a stopgap.

I'd say that the Ivan's planting their flag on the North Pole was one of the best things to get attention for the CG Polar Icebreaking mission in years.

Is a hull that sized really needed for those operations up there. A look at the ten fathom curve on the north slope shows a lot of skinny water to be operating in.

Is the new Mackinaw design or the 225' WLB, beefed up a bit, more in line with the patrol/presence type operations ???

Hamilton was flailing around up there this summer. The Canadians do a very good job with their smaller icebreakers (basically WIND class), and Storis and 2 180s did the NW Passage back in the mid 1950s. Polar Star just looks like another "Money Pit".

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

1110 - your position paper is probably still sitting in someone's middle inbox - you know the one that is neither an inbox or outbox; it is just a box. A box to nowhere!

What is it going to take before Congress gives the Coast Guard the necessary funds? I hope it isn't a Class A Mishap or even worse. I served in VENTUROUS back in 85-88. Her forecastle was like swiss cheese under the 42 layers of primer and paint; of course at the same time I heard that the "Mighty MO" supposedly had enough holes in the hull that they had pumps running all the time.

I do pray and hope that nothing serious ever happens to the fleet and the men and women who sail them but the danger is real.

quote:

Originally posted by Nobodyaskedmebut:
1110 - your position paper is probably still sitting in someone's middle inbox - you know the one that is neither an inbox or outbox; it is just a box. A box to nowhere!

I'm certain if it is still in existence it is indeed in a box. After all w/ all the Area staff reorganizations in 2005, I know they did move to better digs in what used to be the JIATF West (secure) spaces.

BTW, hope things are still going well w/ you Tim.

Respectfully,
Surface Force

any body find the paper?

Maybe I posted too early back in August, concerning Dallas going to Georgia..

"Probably all the Head Guarders are breathing a collective sigh of relief at Buzzards Point that the thing didn't break down enroute, breach her hull, or discharge a trail of bilge slops the length of the Black Sea."

From the CGHQ Web Site, Dec 2008.

All Hands Messages
WHEC Sustainment

To the Men and Women of the United States Coast Guard:

I want to update you on measures to address the declining readiness of our High Endurance Cutter (WHEC) fleet. Last July, the Atlantic Area Commander removed the GALLATIN from a patrol to resolve multiple casualties. Upon return to homeport, the cutter underwent an intensive inspection that revealed a high level of corrosion and structural deterioration. The damages were so severe that the Area Commander ordered GALLATIN to remain in its homeport. As GALLATIN was being repaired, DALLAS was completing an historic Black Sea deployment in support of the U.S. European Command. This mission involved delivering humanitarian supplies to the Republic of Georgia as part of Operation Assured Delivery following the South Ossetia conflict.

DALLAS’ deployment was highly successful and lauded by the Department of Defense, but it came at a high cost. The crew overcame severe mechanical casualties, including several fires, just to complete the mission. While this reflects the crew’s professionalism and dedication to duty, it was symptomatic of the deteriorating condition of the entire WHEC fleet. Upon its return to homeport, DALLAS underwent an inspection similar to GALLATIN’s that also revealed excessive deterioration. Based on these findings, the Atlantic Area Commander directed both ships to remain pierside until full repairs are completed. I just finished a conversation with VADM Papp who has held an “all hands” meeting with both crews. I fully concur with this decision and want to outline our intentions moving forward.

Both DALLAS and GALLATIN are more than 40 years old and beyond their anticipated service lives. The structural deterioration, including excessive corrosion of the longitudinals and holes in the bulkheads behind insulation, has reduced the watertight integrity and structural strength of the vessels to the point where they need immediate repairs. While still operationally effective, we have known that the readiness of our WHEC fleet has been declining sharply during the past several years. This has been reflected in increasing maintenance costs and lost operational days. Since all of the WHECs are either over or close to 40 years old, we are reassessing the readiness of the entire class and developing a plan to keep these ships operational until the National Security Cutters (NSC) and Offshore Patrol Cutters (OPC) come on-line.

Our Coast Guard must be ready for all threats and all hazards. In my first SITREP as Commandant, I pledged that we would obtain the most capable fleet of multi-mission ships, aircraft, boats and command and control systems available. DALLAS and GALLATIN no longer meet this standard. By making these urgent repairs, we will ensure both cutters are ready to deploy for operational missions in all sea states, all weather, world-wide. It will take approximately six months following contract award to complete. I have also approved the infusion of additional funding to better support the ten WHECs in Pacific Area. These urgent repairs to DALLAS and GALLATIN will be part of an integrated WHEC sustainment plan that will ensure we can meet our operational commitments until our fleet is recapitalized. We will be assessing several options for longer term sustainability in the coming weeks.

The hull corrosion and poor materiel condition of DALLAS and GALLATIN have been compounded over time. They represent symptoms of larger systemic problems we are addressing through the Coast Guard modernization effort. Our current logistics, budgeting and support processes have not kept pace with the increased operational demands of this aging fleet nor will they be adequate for our new assets being delivered to the field. We must commit to better business practices and I believe we are moving in the right direction.

In January 2009, we will stand-up both the Surface Forces Logistics Center (SFLC) and the 378’ WHEC Product Line. Consistent with the stand-up of the Small Boat Product Line in October, these events will align the naval engineering community to directly support specific assets. This new product line approach will provide a single point of contact for mission support services, standardize business processes, and create clear lines of accountability. It will significantly limit the burden of asset support from our field operators and enable them to focus more directly on mission execution.

I appreciate all the hard work that Coast Guard men and women dedicate to the Nation every day. While we face many challenges in sustaining our current fleet and modernizing for the future, I am confident we can achieve our goals by working together. Thank you.

Admiral Thad Allen
Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard

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

That's a sad letter. I served on both GALLATIN and DALLAS. It's a shame they are in such bad shape. It's time to show these ladies some much needed love and respect, and retire them before they have to retire themselves.

They want to modernize well one good quick start is taking over many USN frigates, coastal patrol boats, and destroyers that aren't that old yet have been de-commed and rusting in reserve

The other Coast Guard information site, usmilnet dot com, has a good article referenced from the 31 Jan. issue of NAVY TIMES.

In a nut shell, again, acknowledging that the cutters are in poor condition and that after these little band aid repair jobs, homeports will be changed to assign them to operating ares with less extreme sea conditions.

Now that tends to give one a warm fuzzy feeling on the sea worthy status of your cutter.

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

I have a fair share of sea stories from my time on the 378' Chase. My Boat had a INCREDIBLE crew. But after the recent drydock that we went through, all the trouble that was associated with that business, and then in the back of my mind having a decent working knowledge of what a gigantic Charlie Foxtrot the DeepWater Program devolved into, I am seriously worried right now. Every Damage Control Class that I have ever sat in on that was conducted by the Navy, when the fact was passed that we (myself and the rest of the 378' sailors in attendance) worked on 40 year old platforms usually garnered looks of shock and awe, but not for the reasons that you would wish.

When my jobtitle was discribed to me from my superiors as "Caretaker of a Floating Museum" I seriously prayed that this was something that the Brass in HeadQuarters was working to ammend. And then my eyes were opened to the Deepwater program; the late and grossly overbudget National Security Cutter that I have been told is not rated to take beyond 15 Foot seas, the FAILED 123' conversion of the 110's, amoungst other shining examples of failed engineering and program MisManagement.

I have come to the Realization that in 5-10 Years, the USCG is either going to need to be well on its way to a SERIOUS fleet modernization delivery package that is well managed, or I don't doubt it is going to become seriously bantered about in congress to assimalate us into the Navy.

It is no question that the USCG boasts some of the Proudest, most knowledgeable Sailors in the Services. I want to know when am I going to see equipment that reflects that? I can tell you one thing, the 378' fleet is well on its way to becoming sinking Museums. They are no longer Prized Billets, but considered some of the worst Billets in the Coast Guard. "Giant White needles of death", unfortunatly if I don't see more of a new class of cutter to come in and replace them, the Death that is going to be refering to is the death of both the USCG'S off shore mission, as well as numerous sailors.

I want to know what is going to keep these moneys' from being mismanaged and this modernization "program" from becoming another copy cat of the DeepWater Failure? How about giving a comprehensive request to not only Congress, but to us Guardians as well, showing us how things are going to be different.

I don't want to just see money, more importantly I want to see that someone in Headquarters is taking this seriously, to help me put a little more faith back into our Chain of Command in the higher levels.

quote:

the late and grossly overbudget National Security Cutter that I have been told is not rated to take beyond 15 Foot seas,

Would hope that is "mess deck scuttlebutt". When the first one was being built, there was some comment about the hull girder not being quite up to expectations. Possibility of hull failure in some sea conditions was mentioned.