Tuesday, April 22, 2008

The BIG EIGHT for the BERTHOLF
Posted by Peter A. Stinson

I asked recently what the eight major descrepancies on the BERTHOLF were. Over at Defense Tech they list them:

- Machinery Control Monitoring System: a computer system that enables automated or manual operation of main propulsion and electrical systems.

- Line Shaft Bearings-These bearings support and align the ship's propeller shafts. The bearings require maintenance and re-alignment.

- Starboard Anchor-The anchor machinery requires additional lubrication.

- Mooring Line Controllers-The Navy recommended modifying these line controllers for portable operation to improve crew safety.

- Gantry Crane Hoists-Designed to raise and lower the NSC's cutter boats (Short Range Prosecutor and Long Range Interceptor), the hoists require adjustment to the wire ropes and swivel hooks.

- 57mm Ammunition Hoist-The ammunition handling system's brake must be repaired for safe operation.

- Incinerator-Requires repair for testing.

- Flight Deck-The Navy wants the Coast Guard to correct 14 deficiencies before BERTHOLF earns certification for naval flight operations. These deficiencies include: removing hoses from the flight deck; installing sound power communications between stations on the flight deck; installing additional tie downs; correcting flight deck markings for the Aircraft Ship Integrated Secure and Traverse (ASIST) system, etc.

Nothing about TEMPEST.

Michael DeKort, who us much more right than he is wrong, posted earlier today a comment on this blog:

Remember the CG said instrumented TEMPEST testing began 4/14 (This implies it has never been run before. That is not true, this is the final round and possibly the first one the CG "runs" as opposed to witnessing before signing the DD-250). The thing bothering me here is why the CG only mentioned that one reference to TEMPEST in that release.

Now I think I know why.

They were able to release the status of the NSC and list all of the KNOWN critical items without having to include TEMPEST. That means that should the tests fail they will not feel the need to update the data and add items beyond the original 8. This will make it easier to hide the problem and the waiver - when it comes time to sign the DD-250. Remember the CG has stated that TEMPEST is a major issue and may impact delivery (of course they change that story at will and when they think it is convenient to do so). How did they know it was a problem if they never ran the instrumented tests? (Of course they know because someone has run the instrumented and visual tests a long time ago and they have the docs from the Navy saying there were 350+ critical TEMPEST design flaws).

Also - notice the article mentions the "trial card" discrepancies. When I was on the project they didn't include C4ISR items as "trial cards" at this stage of the game on the 123s. They were kept on a separate open item list in a separate database. Are there no C4ISR issues in the "8 starred items" because they are separating trial cards from open items?

What we need to know - on the date of DD-250 signing - is what are ALL of the open issues, what criticality did they have, which ones did the Navy recommend fixing and how were they handled - fixed or waived.

If this is, indeed, so -- or even nearly so -- the accusations of perjury before Congress and lies to the media & others are more than accurate.

At the very least we're all being played with and misled. At the worst... well, figure it out yourself.

Perhaps it's time for the department to start an investigation. Or Congress. Or some NGO. Or the MSM.

Or, perhaps it will be left to the bloggers to get to the bottom of this tempest and find the truth.

And, as an aside, I'm frankly, not sure which is worse: the USS STOUT or the CGC BERTHOLF.

Posted on 4/22/2008 08:21:00 PM
   

Labels: by Peter Stinson

7 comments:

At Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:01:00 PM EDT Michael DeKort said...

I hope the day of the DD-250 signing the parties involved think long and hard about what they are doing. I hope they think long and hard about what is being accepted, rejected or waived. I hope they think about the evidence being created and the ability of the public to gain access to it. I hope they think about the government organizations, private parties, individuals in their own organizations and members of the press watching them. I hope they think about their careers, the oath they took or the commitment they made regarding the ethical standards of their respective organizations. Most of all I hope they think about those who will use this boat or be affected, positively or negatively, by it's use. The hole they have dug themselves in to is probably too deep to come out of unscathed. They may very well end their careers by doing the right thing and telling the complete and "transparent" truth this late in the game. It would however be the ethical, morale and professional thing to do and something that will be positively felt by many after this event, their careers and even our time here has passed.

 

At Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:06:00 PM EDT Surface Force said...

The perjury accusations will most likely not involve LM (or at least stick to them). One of my sources tells me that Moosally arranged to give his "testimony" while NOT UNDER OATH to Congress.

 

At Wednesday, April 23, 2008 1:20:00 AM EDT leesea said...

This comment is cross-posted from DefenseTech.org.
It is normal procedure to do a "conditional acceptance" of a vessel (check box lower left hand corner of DD250) and attach ALL the trial card deficiencies to the form. The shipbuilder is still liable for correction which could take as long as to the Post-Shakedown Availability.
IF TEMPEST involves any GFE then its a shared responsiblity, also not an unusual situation.
The PMRep meets with builder and crew to assign trial card responsiblities. He probably already has?

I see nothing nefarious in what the USCG is doing. Been there myself on about a dozen ships deliveries.

This process gets the ship into the govt's hands for workups which yard cannot do.

The length of time to IOC is debatable.

 

At Wednesday, April 23, 2008 6:58:00 AM EDT Michael DeKort said...

leesae
While technically correct you are a bit naive and not very well informed.

If you followed these events since the 123s you would know the extent that the CG and ICGS have gone to lie and cover up major deficiencies. The 123s had missing info on their DD-250s and each delivered with he same glowing public comments. Then we found out that 8 123s were buckling and each had a massively defective C4ISR system. The system failed TEMPEST testing (those were illegally and wrongfully waived) and MOST of the C4ISR topside equipment would not survive harsh elements (etc). Of course I have proof of all of this so please feel free to contact me if you would like to understand what is really going on.

 

At Friday, April 25, 2008 10:08:00 PM EDT leesea said...

The INSURV report on the USS Chosin is obviously far worse. An current fleet asset with all the funding the Navy has to do M&R declared unfit is far more significant than some TEMPEST problems with a first of class ship.
Of much more interest is what the CG engineers reported on the hull strength and what CG-9 is doing about that.

 

At Monday, April 28, 2008 5:38:00 PM EDT Michael DeKort said...

leesa
I assume from your answer that you do not understand TEMPEST very well. The NSC has several voice and data communications systems that are secure. The one I want to mention specifically is SIPRNET - the government wide secret internet. If this circuit is compromised EVERY government agency that uses it is compromised. If the TEMPEST issues are severe enough - which it looks like they are on the NSC (and were on the 123s) those ships can broadcast out secure information in the clear. Which means they don't need to be unscrambled. Also - our enemies could record the scrambled and unscrambled versions and have the information needed to break our codes. Of course our enemies wouldn't admit to either. In that case they could intercept all of our secret traffic for years. Some users of that system - all of DoD, FBI, DEA, CG etc. Information on these circuits - troops movements, peoples names, supply information, plans, success and failure info etc. While the loss of a boat would be bad it doesn't come close to this.

 

At Monday, April 28, 2008 5:39:00 PM EDT Michael DeKort said...

I got a letter from the Navy FOIA group telling me
they have asked Naval Sea Systems Command to provide
info to me on all the contract docs and communications
they have had relative to the Deepwater effort and their communications with the CG and ICGS.

Wonder what Naval Sea Systems Command thinks of that.
They are the group who was represented by Admiral
Sullivan at our hearing. He is the one who said they
advised the CG not to waiver the 123s TEMPEST
failures.

I am sure they know they are being watched
relative to the NSC.

 

Post a Comment