Proactively “From the Sea”; an agent of change leveraging the littoral best practices for a paradigm breaking six-sigma best business case to synergize a consistent design in the global commons, rightsizing the core values supporting our mission statement via the 5-vector model through cultural diversity.
Ever wonder why NAVSEA has its own tag at CDRSalamander?
The situation regarding which of NAVSEA's two SUPSHIP offices oversees the LCS is somewhat confusing. The Lockheed Martin team is building its ships at Marinette Marine, in Marinette, Wis., while the General Dynamics ships are built at Mobile, Ala. But the territorial demarcation lines are drawn on a rough north-south axis: the SUPSHIP office in Bath oversees the Mobile operations, while the SUPSHIP operation based in Pascagoula - about 40 miles from Mobile - is responsible for the Marinette operations.
You can't make this stuff up.
In the same article though is a great demonstration of what will make having a politician as SECNAV so much fun.
Levin had just finished remarking about the LCS program's cost growth. Although he did not mention that one of the first two ships had passed the $700 million mark, he questioned if the service can meet the $460 million cost cap imposed by Congress on the ships the Navy is asking for in 2010.
"Is there a realistic prospect that you'll be able to do it?" Levin asked.
"I think there's a realistic prospect we can strive toward that goal," replied Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who cited the lack of a cost escalation provision in the congressional spending limit on LCS, despite rising labor costs and inflation, which "have frankly made that less realistic."
Translation contest. The above quote - please translate into clear, taxpayer English.
Over at WaPo's "Leadership Page," Co-founder of the leadership-focused consulting firm, Cambridge Leadership Associates, and teacher at the Harvard Kennedy School, Marty Linsky (who also blogs at Linsky on Leadership), threw this bit out there,
The country is moving into new terrain with General Motors. This is a high risk experiment, and no one knows whether it will work. If GM was too big to fail before, the downside is even worse now.
No, we have been down this road before. Remember the promises, good intentions, and fudge that went into the Government Sponsored Enterprises Freddie and Fannie? They became, over time, nothing but a patronage op - giving millions to political insiders who didn't know squat about mortgages. They became nothing but political.
I have trouble that Marty cannot make the connection when he smells it all over the place.
The danger is that GM will be politicized and become part of the pulling, hauling and horse trading that happens among all of the issues facing the country. The federal government now has a conflict of interest. As a dominant shareholder, there is a huge stake in a quick turnaround. But there are also compelling and competing stakes in other issues, like labor contracts, environmental concerns and international trade relations.
If the administration really means what it says, it will put the best possible people in key roles, protect GM from the pressures inside the Beltway to micromanage its operations and expose it to the pressures of the consumer marketplace and Wall Street.
Obama will have a tough time keeping his "hands-off" commitment when good business decisions come crashing into favorite policy positions. He's already succumbed to some of those pressures: naming an insider as CEO, giving the unions a big ownership role and decreeing what kind of cars GM must build, commercially viable or not.
This will not end well for anyone but those in gov'munt who are able to get an ego boost from power, or a bonus check for trying.
... or maybe they cold be smart and hire smart, well meaning people from such places like ... ohhhh .... I don't know; Cambridge Leadership Associates? What do you think Marty?
Yes, more Harvard Leadership is exactly what this nation needs. After all, they formed such a core of the banking and investment industry in NYC - with that resume filler - they must be the one.
I think all of us would nod our heads to the usual clear-headed Danish response to piracy.
Danish group Shipcraft said putting armed guards on its vessels travelling through the Gulf of Aden was a deterrent and also a means of protecting its crews despite the risks involved.
"They (pirates) do not like to be there when the guards are there," said Shipcraft's chief executive Per Nykjaer Jensen.
"As long as the politicians don't make up their minds, then we have to act ourselves," he told Reuters.
I did say "clear-headed," didn't I?
Well - get out the woolies.
The debate over whether to allow armed guards on vessels has gathered momentum and the U.N.'s shipping agency, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), has taken it up.
Peter Hinchliffe, marine director with industry association the International Chamber of Shipping, told an IMO meeting on piracy last week there were concerns over the "proliferating private armies of security guards", who were also unregulated.
"These relate to issues of legality and liability for the use of lethal force, collateral damage and shipboard safety," he said.
"There is a danger that the carriage of armed guards in merchant ships may lead to an arms race with criminal pirate gangs who may be able to obtain ever more potent fire power."
What bureaucratic comfy-chair laden parallel universe does this guy come from?
As usual, we have the weak blaming the strong for taking action and blaming others for their own lack of performance in their job. The last part is the same mentality we saw with the SANE/FREEZE gaggle during the Cold War. That type of mentality was wrong in the '30s and the Cold War - and it is wrong now.
When it comes to the A-1H Skyraider vs. Mig-17s, most are familiar with the first one as covered in the videos below. There was a second one though - one that involved the pilot we discussed in one of last month's FbF and pictured in the pic on the right, Lt. Pete Russell on the right, with LtJg. Tom Patton on the left as they discuss,
LCDR Leo Cook and his wingman LTJG Wiley were the lead section of Skyraiders working to locate and hopefully rescue a downed US pilot in North Vietnam. While maneuvering at low altitude between ridges and cloud layers, they were jumped by what turned out to be two sections of MiG 17s. Calling out the attack on their common radio frequency, Cook and Wiley fought for their lives. LT Pete Russell and LTJG Tom Patton soon arrived in the area and immediately gained a position of advantage on the MiGs. The details of this encounter were taped by the intelligence officer on board the Intrepid after the incident.
On May 21, a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California dismissed a complaint filed by a woman who said she had purchased "Cap'n Crunch with Crunchberries" because she believed "crunchberries" were real fruit. The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only recently learned to her dismay that said "berries" were in fact simply brightly-colored cereal balls, and that although the product did contain some strawberry fruit concentrate, it was not otherwise redeemed by fruit. She sued, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated consumers who also apparently believed that there are fields somewhere in our land thronged by crunchberry bushes.
According to the complaint, Sugawara and other consumers were misled not only by the use of the word "berries" in the name, but also by the front of the box, which features the product's namesake, Cap'n Crunch, aggressively "thrusting a spoonful of 'Crunchberries' at the prospective buyer."
Working off yesterday's post --- here are the rather selections from the music side of the house. Again, nothing huge or shocking, but an eclectic mix. I think it was E40 or OMC going after all that EuroPop stuff with the umlauts.
