Our grand and glorious US Navee...what a bunch!


#1

the GAO has at em yet again for their stupendous project management abilities!

[B]GAO: Navy could learn from commercial shipowners [/B]

NOVEMBER 21, 2013 — A Congressionally mandated GAO report finds that the Navy is still accepting ships with large numbers of deficiencies and says that the Navy could learn some lessons from commercial shipowners.

The report says the Navy has experienced significant quality problems with several ship classes over the past several years.

It has focused on reducing the number of serious deficiencies at the time of delivery, and GAO’s analysis shows that the number of deficiencies—particularly “starred” deficiencies designated as the most serious for operational or safety reasons—has generally dropped.

However, says GAO, accepting ships with large numbers of uncorrected deficiencies is a standard practice and GAO found that there are varying interpretations of Navy policy with regard to when the defects should be resolved.

“Although the environment in which leading commercial ship buyers and builders operate differs in many ways from the Navy’s, some commercial practices aimed at helping to ensure that ships are delivered with a minimum number of deficiencies may be informative for the Navy,” says GAO. “Throughout the course of commercial shipbuilding projects, significant numbers of quality defects and instances of non-conforming work are identified. However, leading commercial ship buyers and shipbuilders make great efforts to ensure that these issues are resolved prior to delivery. Further, commercial ship buyers establish clear lines of accountability and hold their personnel responsible for ensuring the shipbuilder delivers a quality vessel. While commercial ship buyers focus on regularly witnessing in-process work through roaming patrols and impromptu inspections, Navy processes at the shipyards place less emphasis on in-process work. Moreover, leading commercial shipbuilders have strong quality management processes that track quality problems to the worker or supervisor level. Navy shipbuilding contractors have historically experienced difficulties in holding production workers and supervisors accountable for their work, but some of the shipyards reported they are making progress on increasing worker accountability.”

To improve the construction quality of ships delivered to the Navy, GAO is recommending, among other things, that the Navy clarify policy on when deficiencies should be addressed, provide guidance on contract quality requirements, and assess applicability of certain commercial practices to Navy shipbuilding.

Access the full report HERE

We’re ending up with ships that require shipyard periods immediately after being delivered!

NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF EFFING BLOODY BOZOS!


#2

Why is there never enough time to do the job right, but there is always time to do it over again later. Do it correctly, for the tax payers, the first time on time!


#3

When they built the SWATH hull T-agos ships I was a plankowner on the 4th one built. Usns Loyal. Each of the first three spent over nine months in a post delivery repair and remodel phase. Even though I was on the fourth one built, we also had to go through the same thing. I remember questioning why they just didn’t have the builder MacDermitt, make the changes as they went along. The builders weren’t allowed to make any changes to the design. Lots of time money and effort wasted because of that stupidity.


#4

Yes, the practice of building to original spec and then installing the TRANSALTS right after delivery is a horrifically wasteful practice and no commercial enterprise would do business this way. But we taxpayers foot the bill for this nonsense again and again.


#5

[QUOTE=catherder;124833]Yes, the practice of building to original spec and then installing the TRANSALTS right after delivery is a horrifically wasteful practice and no commercial enterprise would do business this way. But we taxpayers foot the bill for this nonsense again and again.[/QUOTE]

You think if I call this in to the Waste, Fraud, & Abuse hotline, I’ll get a percentage of the hundreds of millions of dollars saved? :rolleyes:

It’s because of the incredibly stupid contracts that have already been signed before the first ship’s keel was even laid. The shipyards would take the government to court, costing the government even more money while the shipyard gets the money regardless minus legal fees.


#6

[QUOTE=screwdriver;124880]You think if I call this in to the Waste, Fraud, & Abuse hotline, I’ll get a percentage of the hundreds of millions of dollars saved? :rolleyes:

It’s because of the incredibly stupid contracts that have already been signed before the first ship’s keel was even laid. The shipyards would take the government to court, costing the government even more money while the shipyard gets the money regardless minus legal fees.[/QUOTE]

I thought that was implicit in my comment! :smiley:


#7

Calling waste fraud and abuse hotline was a waste of time. We got gigged for not having some dramamine and the laminated rescue/survival book. Two 50 count bottles of Dramamine were delivered by Cavalier at a cost of $350 per bottle and the laminated booklets were $100 each. Keep in mind this was 20 years ago. Can’t imagine what they charge now. The 1AE and I called waste fraud and abuse and they basically told us not to waste their time with penny ante BS and hung up on us.


#8

[QUOTE=seadog6608;125145]Calling waste fraud and abuse hotline was a waste of time. We got gigged for not having some dramamine and the laminated rescue/survival book. Two 50 count bottles of Dramamine were delivered by Cavalier at a cost of $350 per bottle and the laminated booklets were $100 each. Keep in mind this was 20 years ago. Can’t imagine what they charge now. The 1AE and I called waste fraud and abuse and they basically told us not to waste their time with penny ante BS and hung up on us.[/QUOTE]

I’ve ordered parts for the MSC ship I’m on now. Every time I do, it reminds me that I’m in the wrong business.


#9

[QUOTE=c.captain;124816]the GAO has at em yet again for their stupendous project management abilities!

We’re ending up with ships that require shipyard periods immediately after being delivered!

NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF EFFING BLOODY BOZOS![/QUOTE]

Damn c.captain I’ve read a lot of your posts all bashing the navee (Navy), You got a piss poor attitude. Off your meds or what?

Retired Chief, U.S. NAVY .


#10

[QUOTE=kf5er;140954] Off your meds or what?[/QUOTE]

How about just not drinking the Kool Aid. How could any rational adult not ridicule the fraud, waste, and criminal squandering of tax money by incompetent morons who exist only to ensure the system continues to exist?


#11

[QUOTE=Steamer;140961]How about just not drinking the Kool Aid. How could any rational adult not ridicule the fraud, waste, and criminal squandering of tax money by incompetent morons who exist only to ensure the system continues to exist?[/QUOTE]

Ever hear of constructive criticism? All this bitching and whining about problems won’t solve anything. Put your little minds
together and come up with a solution. That is how rational adults react.

BTW my favorite Kool Aid is grape… whats yours?

Retired Chief U.S. NAVY


#12

[QUOTE=kf5er;140964]Ever hear of constructive criticism? All this bitching and whining about problems won’t solve anything. Put your little minds
together and come up with a solution. That is how rational adults react.

BTW my favorite Kool Aid is grape… whats yours?

Retired Chief U.S. NAVY[/QUOTE]

This is a forum where people come together to discuss many issues pertaining to this industry. If it involves some healthy kvetchin’ and bitchin’ then so be it. I wouldn’t be so quick to come in here swinging fist with your post count. It’s not neighborly.


#13

Sounds like some of the language we use around here might be a bit salty for your taste. We offer a wide variety of constructive criticism. But it’s all in the spirit of improving our nation’s maritime world. I’m sure you you’re self can attest to some of the messed up waste of resources that occurs.


#14

[QUOTE=kf5er;140964]Ever hear of constructive criticism? All this bitching and whining about problems won’t solve anything. Put your little minds
together and come up with a solution. That is how rational adults react.

BTW my favorite Kool Aid is grape… whats yours?

Retired Chief U.S. NAVY[/QUOTE]

Here’s some constructive criticism. As Catherder says. Vote NO Incumbent ! They distract morons that can vote by talking BS about abortion, illegal immigrants, socialism etc while they pick the pocket and screw over taxpayers in multiple other ways by allowing BS like lousy ships to be built because it enriches the people they truly work for, Lockheed Martin etc. There are tanks being built that the US Army doesn’t even want, ships being built that the US Navy doesn’t even need a new fighter that is WAY past budget and doesn’t even work. Is it any wonder the USA spends more on its military than all other countries combined? Any so called representative of the the people that calls themselves a fiscal conservative or a representative of the people and puts up with this crap should be roasted on a slow fire. Millions and millions spent on investigating Benghazi but not a dime for putting people in prison for crap like this or the banks that are “too big to fail” ? Rational adults eventually see the light, you would think. I have moved part time to a so called banana republic but I swear the USA is worse as far as corruption. Actually rational adults should get together and build gallows in front of the Washington Monument and start marching some of these bastards towards them at the end of a pitchfork. You could start in Congress and work your way to K street where all the ex-Congressmen are making millions screwing us all while making themselves and their friends rich.
The end of a rant from a rational adult offering constructive criticism. :slight_smile:


#15

Don’t forget on top of all the waste active duty personnel being laid off yet we still have $5,000 toilet seats in abundance…


#16

[QUOTE=tengineer1;140973]You could start in Congress and work your way to K street where all the ex-Congressmen are making millions screwing us all while making themselves and their friends rich.
[/QUOTE]

You’ve got that backwards. Start at K Street and work back to the criminals in their office buildings. Let them stew as they watch the theater of their benefactors riding the tumbrel.

The history of the French revolution should be required reading before anyone is allowed to sit in Congress or any other elected or appointed position in government.


#17

[QUOTE=kf5er;140964]Ever hear of constructive criticism? All this bitching and whining about problems won’t solve anything. Put your little minds
together and come up with a solution. That is how rational adults react.

BTW my favorite Kool Aid is grape… whats yours?

Retired Chief U.S. NAVY[/QUOTE]

Thats what gcaptain is, pissing and moaning like true merchant mariners…a site for us, by us! If you happen to be retired navy, then thanks for your service, and if you’re not merchant marine, then you should know…all this forum is is a virtual galley table where one bitches and moans about the “bayoo mafia,” “the navee,” kings point, unions, pay, and the NMC!


#18

[QUOTE=kf5er;140964]BTW my favorite Kool Aid is grape… whats yours?[/QUOTE]

Hey kf5er…here’s some nice haze gray colored cool aid for you to enjoy this morning…

[B]GAO Report Reveals LCS Risks[/B]

By MarEx July 14, 2014

The USS Freedom deployment provided beneficial data on operational support and sustainment concepts for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), but these data have limitations, and the Navy still lacks key data on LCS ships and concepts. The USS Freedom deployed for 10 months with a surface-warfare mission package, and the Navy collected data on items such as systems reliability and crew sleep hours. However, several factors limited the operational lessons learned. For example, mechanical problems prevented the ship from spending as much time at sea as planned. Further, the Navy continues to lack operational data for key operational and warfighting concepts, such as deployment with the other mission packages—mine countermeasures and antisubmarine warfare—and data on the other LCS variant which, under current plans, will comprise half the ship class.

Although the Navy is adjusting some operational support and sustainment concepts, it has not yet addressed risks that remain in executing key concepts.

Manning: The crew experienced high workload and fell short of the Navy’s sleep standards despite adding personnel for the deployment.

Training: Gaps remain in fully training LCS sailors prior to deployment.

Maintenance: The Navy is adjusting maintenance requirements and has not yet determined the optimal mix of contractor and crew workload to perform preventative maintenance.

Logistics: The Navy is reallocating duties among crew and shore support, but the infrastructure needed to support both variants is incomplete.

Without fully analyzing risks in key concepts, the LCS may have operational limitations, deficits in personnel and materiel readiness, and higher costs.

The Navy has produced life-cycle cost estimates for the LCS seaframes and mission modules. Although those estimates contain uncertainty and there are inherent difficulties in comparing the life-cycle costs of ships with differing capabilities and missions, the best available Navy data indicate that the annual per ship costs for LCS are nearing or may exceed those of other surface ships, including those with greater size and larger crews, such as frigates.

Annualized Life-Cycle Cost Estimates of LCS and Navy Surface Ships

Why GAO Did This Study

The LCS was intended to be a low-cost surface combatant that uses innovative operational concepts, such as minimal crew size, to lower operations and support costs. In 2013, the Navy deployed USS Freedom , one of two LCS variants, to Singapore to “prove its concept,” demonstrate operational capabilities, and collect data on the ship’s manning, training, maintenance, and logistics needs.

The House report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 mandated that GAO analyze the Navy’s sustainment plans for its LCS program—including lessons from the USS Freedom deployment. This report addressed (1) the benefits and limitations of the operational data that have been collected on LCS ships; (2) the extent to which the Navy has evaluated risk in its operational support and sustainment concepts for LCS; and (3) how LCS life-cycle cost estimates compare with those for other surface-ship classes. GAO analyzed documents from the 2013 deployment, and LCS and surface-ship life-cycle costs, and interviewed program officials and USS Freedom crews.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is emphasizing its prior recommendations that, before buying more LCS ships, the Navy (1) conduct and consider the results of a risk assessment and (2) collect additional data and update cost estimates. The Department of Defense expressed concerns that its life-cycle cost data are not comparable across ship types. GAO believes the analysis provides a reasonable comparison using the best available data from the Navy, as discussed in the report.

GODDAMED TINPOT TOY BOATS which cost damned near what a full destroyer costs over its lifecycle…a overpriced ridiculous excuse for a warship without any real clear ability to be able to fight its way out of a wet FUCKING paper sack!

You display yourself here a man without a very wise or circumspect manner to just jump into our den and start throwing little pebbles at us. Your great and glorious Navee has become a massive bloated overpriced organization of politically correct paper pushing managers who have no concept what real fighting or combat is… Their mission is to look sooper with all their expensive toys but for their very lives cannot build a proper warship worthy of the name and cannot control the cost of their projects.

I hope somewhere in the afterlife, Bill Halsey snorts down his nose at your type and curses what his once great navy has become! Once the USN was a real naval power with real naval ships lead by real naval leaders!

Now, if this is too brusk for your delicate sensibilities then you are obviously not cut from the same cloth as those REAL men who won WWII…

good day to you now…


#19

Ooh sorry ‘top contributor’ didn’t know yer skin was so thin. Discussing is what I was doing, the problem seems to be
I was totally against the dribble ya’ll been posting about the Navy. Some of it is true, I know that, but to keep on hammering
and hammering seems kinda sick. Ya’ll can dish it out, but don’t seem to be able to take it.

Retired Chief U.S. NAVY


#20

[QUOTE=kf5er;140994]Ooh sorry ‘top contributor’ didn’t know yer skin was so thin. Discussing is what I was doing, the problem seems to be
I was totally against the dribble ya’ll been posting about the Navy. Some of it is true, I know that, but to keep on hammering
and hammering seems kinda sick. Ya’ll can dish it out, but don’t seem to be able to take it.[/QUOTE]

all I can say is whatever to you Mr. “gCaptain greenhorn”

if you don’t like our unkind manner here in this forum go find one which is all RAH! RAH! GO NAVY! I am sure there are many to pick from.

In the meantime, we will keep bashing away at the farce that your service has become whether you like it or not!

cheers little man