How can CGA Achieve household recognition?

[LineInTheSand]

More funding = improved academic opportunities. More funding = modernized labs. More funding = capital improvements to buildings. More funding = more recruiting opportunities to non-traditional locations.

The Coast Guard is dealing with ships that require more and more maintenance with more and more missions being dealt on them. To improve the overall funding of the Coast Guard, people, and therefore their congresscritters, need to be more aware of what CG missions are, and demand funding to achieve those missions. CGA is a good start for focus, similar to the DoD academies.

Exactly. More funding is HUGE...not because they can just buy nicer flags.... or replant grass.... but much much more.


Luckily the Coast Guard Academy Alumni Association and the Coast Guard Foundation raise a good chunk of change as well.

 

[Luigi59]

Exactly. More funding is HUGE...not because they can just buy nicer flags.... or replant grass.... but much much more.


Luckily the Coast Guard Academy Alumni Association and the Coast Guard Foundation raise a good chunk of change as well.

Along with the CGA Parent's Association, who funded one of the new Leadership44 sailboats (at $700,000 each) used in the Coastal Sail Training Program.

The "needs list" is extensive, and can be viewed here:

2011 Margin of Excellence Needs List

 

[USNA1982BGO]

We've been around the CGA, well first in the late 70's, and then since 2001. The physical structure, appearance of the Academy grounds and updates since early 2001 are significant. Anyone remember the old CGX/liquor store, the old bookstore, old light posts, Dry Dock, bowling alley? During the past 10 years we have seen a beautiful new Alumni center built, an update to the football field, a new track and baseball fields constructed as well as the new flyover steps going to the fields. Parents have contributed to the liberty vans and the company day rooms which received new furniture and TVs a couple of years ago. IMHO, USCGA looks great and I am confident that in the coming years even more projects will be done that will further enhance the history and beauty of the CGA. Baby steps are better than no steps at all PS: The renovated Leamy auditorium is great...now on to renovating the ballroom area and maybe building a parking garage (we wish!)

 

[SamAca10]

We've been around the CGA, well first in the late 70's, and then since 2001. The physical structure, appearance of the Academy grounds and updates since early 2001 are significant. Anyone remember the old CGX/liquor store, the old bookstore, old light posts, Dry Dock, bowling alley? During the past 10 years we have seen a beautiful new Alumni center built, an update to the football field, a new track and baseball fields constructed as well as the new flyover steps going to the fields. Parents have contributed to the liberty vans and the day rooms for each company received new furniture and TVs. IMHO, USCGA looks great and I am confident that through in the coming years even more projects will be done. Baby steps are better than no steps at all PS: The renovated Leamy auditorium is great...now on to renovating the ballroom area and maybe building a parking garage (we wish!)

Right now they're working on renovating the Coast Guard Museum, which is in the library. I know Admiral Papp has a personal interest in this matter from one of the speeches he gave here.

You guys have the same line of thought that I had when I heard her say "national prominence". That has bigger potential than just being good for the CGA. If the CGA is more visible, it also increases the visibility of the Coast Guard at large. And if that happens we might, just might increase our funding through visibility.

 

[MemberLG]

Perhaps I need to ask different questions, based on the current National Security Strategy (we don't really have one) what is the mission of the Coast Guard and does Coast Guard need to grow? More funding usually results in better product or service, but do I need to buy a F 350 for commuting to work instead of a Ford Fiesta?

 

[SamAca10]

Perhaps I need to ask different questions, based on the current National Security Strategy (we don't really have one) what is the mission of the Coast Guard and does Coast Guard need to grow? More funding usually results in better product or service, but do I need to buy a F 350 for commuting to work instead of a Ford Fiesta?

For over two centuries the U.S. Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation’s maritime interests in the heartland, in the ports, at sea, and around the globe. We protect the maritime economy and the environment, we defend our maritime borders, and we save those in peril. This history has forged our character and purpose as America’s Maritime Guardian — Always Ready for all hazards and all threats.

Today’s U.S. Coast Guard, with nearly 42,000 men and women on active duty, is a unique force that carries out an array of civil and military responsibilities touching almost every facet of the U.S. maritime environment.

The Coast Guard's motto is Semper Paratus, meaning "Always Ready."

Missions
By law, the Coast Guard has 11 missions:

* Ports, waterways, and coastal security
* Drug interdiction
* Aids to navigation
* Search and rescue
* Living marine resources
* Marine safety
* Defense readiness
* Migrant interdiction
* Marine environmental protection
* Ice operations
* Other law enforcement

(listed in order of percentage of operating expenses)

Thus, we are military, multi-mission, and maritime.

A Military Service
The legal basis for the Coast Guard is Title 14 of the United States Code, which states: "The Coast Guard as established January 28, 1915, shall be a military service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all times." Upon the declaration of war or when the President directs, the Coast Guard operates under the authority of the Department of the Navy.

As members of a military service, Guardians on active duty and in the Reserve are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and receive the same pay and allowances as members of the same pay grades in the other four armed services.

Your analogy doesn't quite apply to the Coast Guard. We're operating WWII era cutters. So think of it this way. "Do we need to buy new F-150's to replace the 50-60 year old trucks?" The answer to that should be obvious. Especially when we're expecting these "trucks" to perform well and keep up with others significantly younger than them...

 

[MemberLG]

Your analogy doesn't quite apply to the Coast Guard. We're operating WWII era cutters. So think of it this way. "Do we need to buy new F-150's to replace the 50-60 year old trucks?" The answer to that should be obvious. Especially when we're expecting these "trucks" to perform well and keep up with others significantly younger than them...

The answer is not obivious. If something is old and still works, do you still replace it. Must be a generation gap (coming from a guy who still uses a 5 year old laptop at home), doesn't matter how old it is if it works why get something new especailly when I have to pay for it.

Let me ask you a simple question, how much of the original equipment is still on those WW II era cutters? I don't know the answer and I hope I am not wrong, but my guess is that they have modern navgational equipment, new power plants, and have been refurbuished/refitted few times. We should have some intellectual discussions than just repeating media headlines or talkinging points you heard somewhere else.


Do you think Coast Guard is the only service with the old equipment? Did the US Navy buy new battleships because their current battleships were from WW II?

 

[Mongo]

If something is old and still works, do you still replace it.

Yes. The older it is, the greater the upkeep to operational ready ratio. The greater this ratio, the higher the manhour costs to keep it running. Also, the more unique and expensive the repair parts become. So, yes, somewhere along the line, it becomes more expensive to keep the old equipment running than it does to spend the money up front to replace the entire package. I would imagine this point has been reached with some of the old cutters.

 

[LineInTheSand]

Yes, because the things are old AND they don't work. The Coast Guard was the first service into Haiti after the earthquake. Of the 14 or so cutters that responded, three had failures that resulted in an emergency. Seven others had casualties that hurt it's ability to respond.

I went on to a DOD conference a few months ago, the Navy talks about replacing "Reagan era" ships. My cutter was pre-Reagan era, and isn't even scheduled to be replaced.

Some of the same, original equipment is on those cutters, not ALL, but a good chunk. There are 73Radars which aren't horrible, but are no where near advance.

These aren't "talking points" in the media. The media couldn't care less about the state of the Coast Guard. Coast Guard leadership has had some constraints on what it has been allowed to say. When you do see something from a Coast Guard commandant it's about being able to provide some of the same services Sam listed below.

One of the WWII era cutters we had was decommissioned. It was stationed in the Bering Sea AOR. During a patrol the screw (propeller) just FELL OFF. It was a single-screw vessel, aka, it would no longer move and had to be towed back into port.

There is nothing NEW about a Coast Guard cutter these days (with the exception of the lone two new ones).

My cutter went through its SECOND midlife, the first was in the early 1990s. The radio and CIC were combined, some new matrices were added for berthing, our vending machine was removed...


The U.S. Navy also does not use battleships, they are museums (although a few were used during Desert Storm in the 1990s.) And yes, the Navy has regularly replaced its ships. The two do not compare at all.


So, as someone who has been on the ships, and has seen the discussions regarding the state of the fleet....the Coast Guard will not be able to operate in the 96,000 sq. miles of coast line and inland waterways without a serious commitment and investment from the government. If that means cuts in the Army, Navy, Air Force or Marine Corps....I'm fine with that. The Marine Corps, with the smallest DOD budget, has a larger budget than the entire Department of Homeland Security, and the Coast Guard doesn't even have the largest budget in DHS.

 

[MemberLG]

Mongo/Lineinthesand,

Like your responses better. An internet forum sometimes is not the best way to have a discussion.

Any organization can use more funding to do whatever it is doing better. With government, we seldom ask if something is need or not if it already exists.

 

[LineInTheSand]

Anytime!


I fear for the Coast Guard's budget and I'm not in anymore. It's hurting far more than the general public understands.

 

[Luigi59]

The answer is not obivious. If something is old and still works, do you still replace it. Must be a generation gap (coming from a guy who still uses a 5 year old laptop at home), doesn't matter how old it is if it works why get something new especailly when I have to pay for it.

You're right. The P-51 Mustang can still fly and it's machine guns still work, the B-29 can still carry a bomb, the Sherman tank, M-1 Garand, and the steam-powered Ironclads of the Civil War all can still work no matter how old they are.

Why upgrade any military hardware as long as it still "works."

 

[MemberLG]

You're right. The P-51 Mustang can still fly and it's machine guns still work, the B-29 can still carry a bomb, the Sherman tank, M-1 Garand, and the steam-powered Ironclads of the Civil War all can still work no matter how old they are.

Why upgrade any military hardware as long as it still "works."

Okay, let me rephrase "meets the mission requirement."

What is the real threat we face and what military hardware we need to meet those threats? Can DoD or so call military experts give us honest assessment? Is there any operational or production threat aircraft that out performs our F16/15/18 that we need to spend $$$ develop and produce F22and F35? Is there a real viable peer competitor to M1 Abrams tank? Do we real need a nuclear attack submarine for SEAL insertion?

My point is that we need to be honest with ourself - our needs are endless, but we cannot fund all of our needs.

 

[LineInTheSand]

The Coast Guard honestly needs new cutters, needs to replace the very very old cutters its has that are breaking down at an increasing rate. Of course, I'm no budget person, but the Coast Guard is a deal, a number of services at a low rate. That low rate of course, results in various ship-board fires, leaks, and damage.

 

[Mongo]

DoD always has reasoning for new equipment due to changing threats and changing mission requirements. Since the CGs mission has basically been the same since it's inception, they can not use this reasoning for new equipment. Therefore being worn out is the only real reason to get new equipment. And we are all trained to do more with less to the point of doing everything with nothing. It is easier when balancing the budget to spend a million on another rework, modernizing comms and radar, than it is to spend infinitely more on a new platform.

 

[LineInTheSand]

Some components of DOD have a "changing threat" reason...to spend billions. I can think of a few services who have reached beyond their typical mandates to justify that increased funding.

The Coast Guard's missions has not stayed the same of the past 221 years, anymore than the Navy's have. In fact, a fairly major shift was made in 2001. That's in addition to a number of new missions tacked on over the years.

What's the difference? The Coast Guard doesn't have the defense contractor friends with lobbyists that the larger services have.

What new threat is there that the Navy needs an LCS (including TWO versions of the LCS)? Nothing new....but billions to create a new hull, in a area the Navy has plenty of frigates to meet.

 

[BR2011]

Forgive me if I'm repeating what's already been said (I skimmed the last page of responses). The Coast Guard NEEDS new cutters. over 3 months on a 378' as a 3/c cadet I saw 3 major engine room fires that required AFFF dumps. On my current cutter (a 110') we've had to pull back in for repairs 2 out of the 4 patrols I've been on. It's not a want for more advanced technology, it's a simple need to have cutters that can reliably move through the water for an entire patrol.

 

[MemberLG]

Lets go back to the original question.

I am convinced that Coast Guard needs new cutters.

Can we establish a direction connection between the CGA's desire to achieve national prominence to funding for new cutters?

FYI

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2011/02/navy-coast-guard-budget-021411w/

The Coast Guard’s $10.3 billion budget request for fiscal 2012, unveiled Monday, includes full funding for the fifth national security cutter and upgrades to the service’s aging shore facilities.

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp has stressed for months the need to field the new national security cutter; $77 million of the $1.4 billion set aside in the request for acquisitions will go to the fifth NSC. The service previously announced in January that it was buying materials for the cutter.

 

[SamAca10]

Forgive me if I'm repeating what's already been said (I skimmed the last page of responses). The Coast Guard NEEDS new cutters. over 3 months on a 378' as a 3/c cadet I saw 3 major engine room fires that required AFFF dumps. On my current cutter (a 110') we've had to pull back in for repairs 2 out of the 4 patrols I've been on. It's not a want for more advanced technology, it's a simple need to have cutters that can reliably move through the water for an entire patrol.

Which 378' were you on BR? I was on the Dallas this summer and things worked out...okay. They were missing one of the MDE's and had to run everything off of turbines. A lot of the engineering equipment wasn't working. On the bridge side of things we were working with 70's era navigation equipment

Lets go back to the original question.

I am convinced that Coast Guard needs new cutters.

Can we establish a direction connection between the CGA's desire to achieve national prominence to funding for new cutters?

sorry my previous answer wasn't very clear. I was in a rush because I had to hurry off to class.

But having the CGA be a house hold name creates awareness for the larger Coast Guard's problems. If we can get the American people to recognize the CGA then more people in Congress will also recognize the problems of the Coast Guard. If the Coast Guard can receive more funding, then that leads to maybe some lobbyists for the Coast Guard in acquisition, which continues the funding cycle...

I read the article you attached, and it points out that we have almost no operational capacity in the arctic regions. Oil companies are taking an interest in drilling for oil in this previously untapped resource. Could you imagine the consequences if we had another Deepwater Horizon but no cutter capability to respond to the incident?

 

[BR2011]

I was on Dallas too, it's next to be decommed though. I'm surprised the turbines worked. When I was there they were a guaranteed fire.