|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
...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/htm...epwater20.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "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? 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. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
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. -- Get A Free Orbiter Space Flight Simulator : http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/orbit.html |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
kT ) writes:
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 **** up like this. It shows up their knee jerk anti gov't ideology as being simple lunacy. Andre |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" 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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" 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? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:16:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" 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? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
On Sun, 20 May 2007 14:40:42 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" 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. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
On May 20, 11:16 am, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 May 2007 11:24:00 -0400, in a place far, far away, "Jonathan" 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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters!
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message ... 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 |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
...Lockheed Ruins Eight 123' Coast Guard Cutters! | Jonathan | History | 14 | May 21st 07 05:42 AM |
On Coast-to-Coast radio show tonight -- Aldrin and Hoagland | Jim Oberg | Policy | 3 | August 5th 06 09:20 PM |
Nancy Lieder (Planet_X Lady) On Coast To Coast AM on Tuesday! | Rudolph_X | Astronomy Misc | 89 | September 6th 05 08:32 PM |
WALTER CRONKITE SLAMS C-CRANE CRANK RADIO ON COAST TO COAST! | Lon 742212 | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 28th 05 03:26 AM |
ANYONE CATCH Richard Hoagland on Coast to Coast on Wednesday Night | Gordon Gekko IDCC on the Nasdaq | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | September 1st 03 09:16 PM |