NSC Projected Delivery

NSC #3 STRATTON was delivered to the Coast Guard on Sept. 2, and is expected to depart INGALLS shipyard in Pascagoula on Saturday.
Expected delivery for NSC #4 is November 2014 and Sept. 2015 for NSC #5. If the Coast Guard does manage to get funding for one ship a year in 2013, 2014, and 2015, presumably we can expect the program to be completed, with the delivery of the eighth ship, at the end of FY2018.

15 thoughts on “NSC Projected Delivery

  1. Whoever told you Saturday not correct.

    For that matter, even if you were right on the sailaway date, why are you publishing attempting to publish cutter movements?

  2. @ Nobody Important: I understand the concern about security, but I think that there is a greater value in demonstrating the worth of this asset to the American public. It would be one thing if the article said “CGC XXX spent the day 100 miles off the west coast of Panama looking for drug runners”, but he didn’t. The taxpayers have given our service billions to buy these ships. Showing them what they got for their money is the least we can do.

    Do you know the reason in the 2 year gap? I haven’t followed the NSC saga very closely except at the most macro level, so I don’t know why we would be getting one a year followed by a two year gap.

    Bradley Soule

    • Bradley, Thank you. Yes, loose lips sink ships, but the Stratton is still not even fully commissioned. It is nice to see some progress on the replacements.

      Actually it is a three year gap. This was reportedly due to the switch from Integrated Coast Guard Systems running the program to the CG running it and a desire to build up in house procurement expertise before awarding another contract. Are they on track now? Looks like a lot of progress has been made, but time will tell. Still a lot of rough sledding through the Congress before we have a full new generation of ships.

    • Brad, if Chucky wants to blog about my profession and try and pretend to us he is somehow keyed into CG issues when he is not, the least he can do is get his facts straight.

      Heck he even tries claiming the cutter is “still not fully commissioned” as if that somehow excuses his poor judgement and lack of professionalism for posting an (albeit incorrect) underway date. While we have seen that sort of nonsense/B.S./shennanigans in the past here from some of the non-Coastie and wanna-be Coastie “contributers” here, it is not the type of behavior I would expect from someone who claims to be a retired O5.

      • As for BS, I think the readers can recognize it when they see it. They can “vote with their mouse.” You can cast your vote simply by not showing up. In that respect the blog is doing well. Readership is up.

        As for being “keyed in,” “I only know what I read in the newspapers” (or internet). I have very few contacts in the active Coast Guard and make no pretensions otherwise. I referenced Stratton’s departure only to mark progress in the NSC program, and for that purpose whether they departed Friday or Saturday makes little difference.

        If I have endangered security, CGIS will not have a hard time finding me, because I use my real name. Still I don’t expect a knock on the door any time soon. I use my real name because I’m not ashamed of anything I say here and I don’t treat the opinions of others with such disrespect that I would not want to meet them face to face. If you are so proud of your opinion, use your real name.

      • No reason to “use (my) real name” Chuck. I don’t need people to listen to me in order to feel relevent, but you, that’s what you are obviously looking for.

        I put more stock in what an a Coastie with actual experience in what he is talking about has to say, while you appear to put more stock in what “real names” are. Thus, I’m sure neither of us really care what the other thinks….do we?

        Irrespective of your above admission and history of factually incorrect call outs of Coasties and the programs they manage on this site, it’s fairly obvious to anyone who knows anything, that you are no longer in the “know”. I am glad we agree on that though.

      • Chuck,

        I concur, thank you for what you are doing. I am in the Coast Guard and people that angrily and ignorantly argue over the internet (which is called “trolling,” which is a pathetic approach to use in anything), don’t represent the entire CG personnel demographic. I have been stationed on an NSC and they certainly have a lot of potential, but unfortunately they have a lot of flaws (design, building, organizational, support, and administrative flaws). Hopefully Northrop Grumman has rectified the first two; BERTHOLF, WAESCHE, and SFLC rectified the second two; and STRATTON’s command has fixed the last one. We desperately need these cutters at full power so that we can retire the aging fleet. Sadly “aging fleet” is a gross understatement.

        Unfortunately the Coast Guard’s website is not user-friendly at all, so I’d much rather get my updates from blogs such as yours. As for OPSEC, as everyone knows it is short for OPERATIONAL security, and, which you correctly stated previously, STRATTON hasn’t even been commissioned, let alone been evaluated as “Ready For Operations.” So OPSEC doesn’t apply here (even if it did, the only thing you did was release the date that it got underway from the builder’s dock, not where it was going or its deployment schedule). I see what some of these people are getting at though, and there is a fine-line which usually is the difference between announcing why a cutter is getting underway and where the cutter is going (i.e. Why: “to perform Law Enforcement operations” (good to announce); Where: “performing counter-drug operations off the coast of Central America” (bad to announce)). There is still another year at the very least (probably closer to two) until the cutter needs to be worried about OPSEC. Heck, if it were a target, it was public knowledge where the cutter was being built over the past two years.

        Nobody Important, is clearly a no one and I’m glad to see that you dealt with this troll maturely. Thanks for the updates!


      • Uh-oh, Matt – didn’t you get the word? Nobody Important is the official spokesperson for all Active Duty posters here. Did you clear your post with him before you posted? šŸ˜‰

  3. “This ship has tremendous capability. In fact, with the exception of ice breaking, she’s able to accomplish every Coast Guard mission that exists out there. And if you think about the missions the Coast Guard has to conduct, that’s rather impressive,” said Program Manager Derek Murphy.

    Its nice to be proud of their product, but that statement is rather absurd. I just don’t see the Sratton working A to N, or all the small boat rescue work the CG does, the MST work, etc., etc.

  4. if they were worried about opsec they wouldn’t be showing it off to everyone and their brothers, even worse congressional staffers, might as well hire a blimp!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s