The Coast Guard’s Acquisitions Directorate (CG-9) is reporting that
The Coast Guard awarded a $31 million contract to Lockheed Martin Aug. 21, 2014, to purchase equipment to upgrade the electronic systems known as C4ISR – or Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance – on three National Security Cutters and at the NSC C4ISR training facility.
This is part of a larger Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Project.
“The C4ISR upgrade focuses on improving “interoperability,” or the ability of Coast Guard operating units to share information and coordinate operations with each other, with shore-based command centers and with other government agencies and allies. Other components will allow cutters (and aircraft?–Chuck) to send and receive tactical information including sensor, navigational and planning data to other U.S. military units as well as tactical sharing with international assets.”
•For NSCs, networked communications, radio direction finding and other capabilities to integrate with Navy battle groups and the broader U.S. government intelligence community
•For NSCs, HC-144As and HC-130Js, an advanced C4ISR suite that includes a common baseline across assets and transitions to an open architecture system of Coast Guard-controlled components with government software data rights
•The OPC’s C4ISR suite will be derived from the baseline used for NSC and other new platforms
•For in-service cutters, installation of commercial satellite communications and AIS
•For 378-foot and 270-foot cutters, Seawatch C2 system”
All well and good, but does it include Link 16? If so why not say so? If not why not? It seems to be very common and affordable. It is installed on boats smaller than the Webber class and on a wide range of aircraft including helicopters so it is certainly doable.
Go back and look at why this is happening. Hundreds of millions spent on a C4ISR system that did not work and did not let them connect with DoD. Who provided it? Lockheed’s famous Aegis group. Yet another debacle that should be remedied by the performance guaranty. But no. The CG leadership rolls over again and sticks it to the taxpayer.
And for all you experts who give me grief about my involvement in the the 123 hull issue. PLEASE try to counter me regarding C4ISR. (The only reason I did not fix that system to was it was not part of Increment 0 for the 123s. Had it been and I saw it was a mess I would have added it to my list)
That didn’t take long!!!
Which means what? You agree or disagree? You’re anonymous – why not take at answering? Especially if you an officer or senior enlisted type. Have some stones.
Michael, I thought you had posted here that you were no longer pursuing your CG claims and had moved on. What gives?
There are no claims. So as far as that goes I moved on. As for caring and responding to news – that will not end until things change.
Pingback: “Connectivity Maketh the Cutter” –USNI | Chuck Hill's CG Blog