Defense Industry Defense Industry    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!          Defense Industry Forum Index -> Defense Industry View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Jonathan Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 7:24 pm    Post subject: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! "They stopped after ruining eight boats..." This is the company that is to rebuild our manned space program. Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Coast Guard's Deepwater program blasted By Maria Recio Seattle Times Nation and World Sun May 20, 2007 WASHINGTON - When the Coast Guard's first large cutter in 35 years was christened in November at Northrop Grumman's Pascagoula, Miss., shipyard, it was a gleaming symbol of the service's ambitious $24 billion Deepwater program to update its aging fleet. Six months later, Deepwater is listing under a storm of congressional criticism for design mistakes, cost overruns and lax oversight. A botched program to lengthen existing patrol boats from 110 feet to 123 feet has forced the Coast Guard to cancel the conversions and scrap eight ships. The Pascagoula-built National Security Cutter, at 418 feet the crown jewel of the Deepwater program, is under scrutiny for metal fatigue that critics say shortens its 30-year life to less than five years. Four government audits have criticized management of the project, which involves 91 new ships and 240 aircraft. Some of those vessels would be based in Washington state waters. "Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., calls the failed 110-foot conversion program "the poster child" of what's wrong with Deepwater. "They stopped after ruining eight boats," said Taylor, a former Coast Guard reservist who commanded patrol boats. "What angers me is we have eight ruined boats, $100 million spent and no one is held accountable. No one has been demoted." The 13-foot section added to lengthen the ships ended up causing the hull to buckle under the stress of rough waters." The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design modifications to the National Security Cutter. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003714405_deepwater20.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 7:36 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: "They stopped after ruining eight boats..." This is the company that is to rebuild our manned space program. Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Did you even read it? Quote: The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor kT Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 7:56 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! Jonathan wrote: Quote: "They stopped after ruining eight boats..." This is the company that is to rebuild our manned space program. Whatever did you expect? Stupidity, fraud, bankruptcy, incompetence, greed, theft and criminality are now America's, and indeed American's, most redeeming and endearing qualities, as evidenced by the actions of the Bush administration. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Andre Lieven Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 8:42 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! kT (cosmic@lifeform.org) writes: Quote: Jonathan wrote: "They stopped after ruining eight boats..." This is the company that is to rebuild our manned space program. Whatever did you expect? Stupidity, fraud, bankruptcy, incompetence, greed, theft and criminality are now America's, and indeed American's, most redeeming and endearing qualities, as evidenced by the actions of the Bush administration. This is also a serious rebuttal to the neocon loons who claim that only government agencies can fuck up like this. It shows up their knee jerk anti gov't ideology as being simple lunacy. Andre Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jonathan Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:16 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46b16ad0.1178471232@news.giganews.com... Quote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? That we should expect better work with Orion? Or worse work? When they can toss a hundred million bucks into the sea and no one is held accountable, no one gets fired, why should we expect any different with this project? In fact I'm counting on incompetence by Lockheed to delay Orion until a new administration is in power. Ya know that old saying, 'you have to hit bottom before you know there's a problem'. Applies here. NASA hasn't quite hit bottom yet. But after a couple more years of wasting money on a trip to nowhere, Congress will respond as with the Deepwater program...trash the whole thing and start over. An opportunity for a major policy swing is coming soon! Jonathan s Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jonathan Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:40 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46b16ad0.1178471232@news.giganews.com... Quote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow Did you even read it? Did you? Lockheeds response... "ICGS and its suppliers are meeting the terms contracted by the Coast Guard." Meeting the terms? Ya mean flushing $100 million to sink eight perfectly good boats was-in-the-contract??? Building eight of these http://www.uscg.mil/deepwater/gallery/nscgallery.htm with only a five year lifespan is meeting the terms? Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:50 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46b16ad0.1178471232@news.giganews.com... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb. What was your point, if not that? I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to: >Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:52 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:40:42 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46b16ad0.1178471232@news.giganews.com... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow Did you even read it? Did you? Lockheeds response... "ICGS and its suppliers are meeting the terms contracted by the Coast Guard." Meeting the terms? Ya mean flushing $100 million to sink eight perfectly good boats was-in-the-contract??? Building eight of these http://www.uscg.mil/deepwater/gallery/nscgallery.htm with only a five year lifespan is meeting the terms? I'm not defending Lockheed Martin (or Northrop Grumman, who is part of their team for this project). I'm simply pointing out that your question about whether they were the better selection for Orion is meaningless, in terms of this article. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor BradGuth Guest Posted: Sun May 20, 2007 10:59 pm    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On May 20, 11:16 am, "Jonathan" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote: Quote: "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglo...@org.trash> wrote in message news:46b16ad0.1178471232@news.giganews.com... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <w...@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in The Coast Guard has responded to the hammering from lawmakers by taking oversight of Deepwater from the contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems (ICGS), a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman; canceling the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? That we should expect better work with Orion? Or worse work? When they can toss a hundred million bucks into the sea and no one is held accountable, no one gets fired, why should we expect any different with this project? In fact I'm counting on incompetence by Lockheed to delay Orion until a new administration is in power. Ya know that old saying, 'you have to hit bottom before you know there's a problem'. Applies here. NASA hasn't quite hit bottom yet. But after a couple more years of wasting money on a trip to nowhere, Congress will respond as with the Deepwater program...trash the whole thing and start over. An opportunity for a major policy swing is coming soon! Jonathan What part of our government has not been operating pretty much exactly like Hitler's Third Reich, and otherwise on behalf of their Jewish minions? You do realize that our mutually perpetrated cold-war was 100+% hocus pocus, as in orchestrated, don't you? Besides all the mostly innocent dead folks, how many all-inclusive trillions per decade did that phony cold-war fiasco cost all of us? Is there something about our government that's actually the whole truth and nothing but the truth? - Brad Guth Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jonathan Guest Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 1:17 am    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46bf981d.1190068628@news.giganews.com... Quote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bell the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb. What was your point, if not that? I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to: Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Get your facts straight please. There were initially eleven bidders, three finally submitted bids and Grumman was partnered with Boeing. t-space, that included Rutan, was the third bidder. Although Nasa seems to be rather secretive about whether t-space submitted a bid or not. http://www.comspacewatch.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14924 For starters, you're blind to the obvious that this bid was rigged from day one. And you're also blind to the kind of products corruption produces. The $24 billion Deepwater project I just posted about is what we can expect more of with the CEV. Face it, NASA is saddled with an ignorant goal created by and for a corrupt conglomerate. Your beloved NASA is being raped and you don't even know it. Jonathan s Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Rand Simberg Guest Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 2:14 am    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On Sun, 20 May 2007 17:17:48 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Quote: "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46bf981d.1190068628@news.giganews.com... On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bell the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb. What was your point, if not that? I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to: Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Get your facts straight please. I did. Quote: There were initially eleven bidders, three finally submitted bids and Grumman was partnered with Boeing. t-space, that included Rutan, was the third bidder. Although Nasa seems to be rather secretive about whether t-space submitted a bid or not. http://www.comspacewatch.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14924 None of that obviates the hilarious fact that you used this to beat up on LM alone, when it was clearly a joint LM/NG fiasco. But you'll continue to flounder and defend it, because you incapable of admitting error. Quote: Face it, NASA is saddled with an ignorant goal created by and for a corrupt conglomerate. Your beloved NASA is being raped and you don't even know it. My "beloved NASA"? You're even more of an idiot than you've previously played. Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Jonathan Guest Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 3:10 am    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46c5c3a0.1201207825@news.giganews.com... Quote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 17:17:48 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message news:46bf981d.1190068628@news.giganews.com... On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" <write@bell the conversions; and making design ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There were only two bidders for Orion--Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. So your statement of fact means what? It means that the notion that Northrop Grumman would have been a better selection, based on your "evidence," is hilariously dumb. What was your point, if not that? I see you snipped this part, because it was what I was responding to: Was Lockheed the better choice, or were they just better connected? Get your facts straight please. I did. There were initially eleven bidders, three finally submitted bids and Grumman was partnered with Boeing. t-space, that included Rutan, was the third bidder. Although Nasa seems to be rather secretive about whether t-space submitted a bid or not. http://www.comspacewatch.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14924 None of that obviates the hilarious fact that you used this to beat up on LM alone, Their name is first. It's their baby. And yes I was bashing Lockheed since they deserve it. Even you, an unabashed NASA apologist, admitted their actions are hard to defend. Yet attempt to defend Lockheed by diverting the debate to a rigged bidding process. That I find rather amusing, and I'm happy to start a new debate over that particular process if you like. As I'm certain that debate will uncover all sorts of new material with which to highlight the emptiness and corruption behind the "Vision". Quote: when it was clearly a joint LM/NG fiasco. But you'll continue to flounder and defend it, because you incapable of admitting error. And you got that fact, a joint LM/NG project, from my original post. Quote: Face it, NASA is saddled with an ignorant goal created by and for a corrupt conglomerate. Your beloved NASA is being raped and you don't even know it. My "beloved NASA"? Say something negative about NASA, come on, I dare you~ Quote: You're even more of an idiot than you've previously played. And you argue with me just for the sake of it, not on merit. Which is why you always lose these debates. Hint: the loser is the one that ends up shouting personal insults. Jonathan s Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Borderline Guest Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 5:59 am    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! On May 20, 11:42 am, d...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) wrote: Quote: It shows up their knee jerk anti gov't ideology as being simple lunacy. Andre I am sure that you are aware since you post some really good stuff "elsewhere" Naval wise that USNI PRoceedings has had some very very good information on this...including for full members some interviews with some of the USCG officers who were a part of the "fiasco". It truly is a fiasco. There are problems from the government end, but LM just really shafted the USCG...the Commandant is just about beside himself on this. Robert Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Pat Flannery Guest Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 8:42 am    Post subject: Re: ...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! Borderline wrote: Quote: I am sure that you are aware since you post some really good stuff "elsewhere" Naval wise that USNI PRoceedings has had some very very good information on this...including for full members some interviews with some of the USCG officers who were a part of the "fiasco". It truly is a fiasco. There are problems from the government end, but LM just really shafted the USCG...the Commandant is just about beside himself on this. It hit "60 Minutes" tonight, BTW. Pat Back to top   Ads Advertising Sponsor Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         Defense Industry Forum Index -> Defense Industry All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum Defense Industry----------------Defense Industry  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum 122 Attacks blocked Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group