It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas
The article calls him a "whistleblower" but at the same time he didn't come forward until after he was let go. Lockheed says for "financial" reasons he says it's otherwise ... but if he was really a whistleblower I would think he would of been making noise prior to his termination.
First off, money doesn't grow on trees. Cutting corners is common to stick with the budget.
Now, taking a look at some of the things that were wrong... first would be the blind spots.. Now, I don't know about you guys but I have been on many ships, and I'll tell you they do not float on water perfectly level and flat. They bob and weave all over the place in 3 dimensions. This kind of movement will most likely close the gaps a bit more in these blind spots. Also, these are just camera blind spots. What about the live humans on board? Their eyes cannot fill the gap? You can't rely on cameras alone, you must use your eyes.
Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Great philosophy. I'll remind you of this the next time I fix your car and give it back to you with one wheel and no engine. After all, I had to cut corners and provide you with less than you paid for, because of my own inability to do a good job. Would you be a happy customer?
Of course not. The difference between private citizens and the government is huge, because private citizens have no problems taking their business elsewhere. If I mangled your car, you wouldn't come to me for service again. The government continually patronizes these companies, despite the huge problems we've had in the past, and continue to have, because of the influence of the revolving door.
This situation destroys the single greatest argument for capitalism, and makes one wish for simpler days when corporations were chartered by the government, tasked with specific duties, granted only limited power, and answerable to taxpayers.
Originally posted by WyrdeOne
It's encouraging to see that you don't know what you're talking about - it makes me feel even better about holding the opinion that I do.
If you had taken the time to watch the video, and read the related material, you would know that the cameras are not necessary when the ship is underway, because of the presence of the crew. The cameras were pitched and paid for as a way of reducing overhead when the ship is docked.
They are in place to prevent tampering with the ship during times when the crew is not present. Usually a watch would be stationed to prevent tampering/theft, but these cameras were offered as a way of reducing the costs associated with having a permanent human presence on board.
Now the Coast Guard has to post a watch, just like they did before, but they also have the honor of paying for a redundant system. Yay for Lockheed Martin and the Coast Guard brass, eh?
Listen, and listen good.
Its not a hard concept to understand... to put it in layman's terms so your little head can grasp it, i will put it easily...
They Don't: Calculate costs, and then pay.
They Do: Pay, and hope the project manager can juggle the money the best he can.
First off, I am in the United States Navy and have had the honor to work with the Coast Guard in many different cases.
A few things you didn't understand;
1: They will never leave a boat unattended by at least 1 or more guards. They will never rely on cameras only, to do their job's. Cameras don't stop people, they just catch them in the act. They will always need a guard to prevent any wrong doing.
2: If some felon is going to try to vandalize or rob or steal a USCG ship, it would be near impossible to not be seen by the cameras, even with the blind spots. The felon would need to know exactly the perfect angle's of attack, even then, it would be impossible to board the ship at these angles. If the felon was trying to take the ship, he would need to walk in the camera's view's just to untie the tie straps off of the horn's on the docks, so he can float away. I can keep going on this subject with details, but its far much easier to say, even with these blinds spots the coverage is GOOD ENOUGH to do the job that needs to be done.
3: Even when the ship is docked, it still bobs and weaves on the water in 3 dimensions, probably giving the cameras a bit more angles of view.
4: Maybe the next time the USCG gets enough money for another upgrade, they can just add a wide angle lense to the camera in the back, to fill the gaps... They most likely will just screw on. A 180 degree wide angle (fish eye) would work just fine.
5: The guy in your video should be arrested for being a threat to national security. Giving away vulnerabilities in government ships is not good. Normally, the camera's and blind spots would work just fine because people wouldn't be able to visually see the blind spots. But since this guy is giving the info out for free, they now have a better chance at avoiding them. I say send him to jail.