United States Navy To Put Contractors On Combat Ships To Avoid Personnel Costs

[unhappycamper]

unhappycamper note: Since the ‘Pentagon’ (DoD? Gannett?) has ‘requested’ that I only post one paragraph from articles on Army Times, and Airforce Times, To keep in that same (new) tradition, I will also do the same for for articles on Navy Times, Marine Corps Times, stripes.com and military.com.
To read the article in the military's own words, you will need to click the link.

Read all about Fair Use here. It sure is beginning to smell like fascism.

unhappycamper summary of this article: It appears the US Navy is now outsourcing its personnel.






Navy officials are planing to test out civilian mariners on amphibious ships next year. Above, a landing craft air cushion enters the well deck of the amphibious dock landing ship Carter Hall Nov. 5 after conducting amphibious training exercises in Djibouti.


Civilians to join the gator fleet next year
By Sam Fellman - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Nov 22, 2010 6:09:16 EST

The Navy’s top officer has announced that the service, after some study, will embark a detachment of civil-service mariners on a yet-to-be named amphibious ship during the next year. The trial will test the feasibility of “hybrid crews” aboard amphibious ships, a drastic change under consideration as the Navy tries to cut runaway manpower costs.

[somone]

1. Future headline: U.S. Navy cuts costs by hiring Indians with H-1B visas

using the corporate logic

[asjr]

3. In the future we might see an ad on tv that

states USA for sale--call toll free at xxx-xxx-xxxx for details. Operators are standing by!

[Tippy]

2. K&R.....No more outsourcing

[nilram]

11. +1

[w8liftinglady]

4. how do they anticipate cutting costs?

I'll simply refer you guys to the Military Industrial Complex.
Someone will get rich here.It just won't be the sailors.

[Turbineguy]

5. Actually

these will be Military Sealift Command people. A lot of auxiliary ships are already run this way. The unrep oiler I was on, 2 people (an Engineer and a Fireman) replaced 11 Navy Sailors on watch in the Boiler room. Since the Navy has 4 watches and the civilians 3 it meant a reduction from 44 to 6 people.

The Navy is interested how civilians can run a ship the size of an aircraft carrier with 7 people in the Engine Dept. It's actually quite simple. Most of the work done by Navy people is generated by the fact that they have so many people, not by the machinery.

[baldguy]

7. But you don't need more than 7 people to run the dept day to day in peacetime.

You need more than 7 people to run the dept, and keep it running under all conditions while the ship is in combat. That's the critical difference.

[Turbineguy]

8. You are correct but auxiliaries are not combatants.

[baldguy]

10. If they're not combatants, why would we put them on a combat vessel?

If you don't expect anyone ever to attack your carrier, then having a minimum crew & civilians in critical functions is fine. But that reduces your $15 billion warship to the effectiveness of a parade float good enough only to look pretty & show the flag.

The old adage is, you train how you fight. If you need 40 people in your engine room to produce power while the ship is being attacked and taking damage, then you need to train 40 people to be in your engine room.

[GoCubsGo]

6. They want to save money using contractors?

Who are they kidding? Having lived nearly 25 years near a federal facility that is operated primarily by contractors, I can assure you that the contractors get paid much, much more than any of the federal and state workers there. What a joke.

[lonestarnot]

9. No shit!