Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Navy MARS kaput?  (Read 40271 times)
CURIOUSHAM
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« on: May 17, 2009, 07:10:50 AM »

Reports are out that Navy MARS may be shutting down.  Any truth to this rumor?

Chuck
Logged
N9KWW
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2009, 07:15:21 AM »

"1. COMMANDER, NAVAL NETWORK WARFARE COMMAND (NNWC) HAS DECIDED TO
'SUNSET' THE MARS MISSION WITHIN NAVY AS OF 30 SEP 2009. NNWC HAS
REQUESTED ALL MILITARY BILLETS AND MY CIVILIAN POSITION BE DELETED
AND UNFUNDED AFTER THAT DATE. OPNAV HAS NOT YET APPROVED THIS
REQUEST."

This is the latest info i have, this came from chief MARS (navy)
Hoe this all plays out we do not know, but there is a big change comming...
Ron
NNN0VAG
Logged
CURIOUSHAM
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2009, 07:44:06 AM »

I guess this is the "change we can beieve in" we were told about.

ACORN must need more money.

Shame.
Logged
N9KWW
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2009, 07:55:14 AM »

DOD DIRECTIVE 4650.2 DTD 26 JAN 1998
DOD INSTRUCTION 4650.02 (PROPOSED) NOTAL

These are the two documents that pertain to the MARS program. Here is what happened based upon the documentation presented:
The administration asked the DOD to increase funding for the MARS program over the next 4 years. DOD in turn sent out a message to the services along with the new proposed instruction. The issue at hand is funding, each branch service funded their MARS program, with the new proposal to increase the funding and program size, the NAVY asked to be out of the new funding requirement. What the NAVY did was to shut down the program, in turn the funding issue goes away.  Now as I understand it, the ARMY and AIR FORCE both have taken funds from the weapons programs and redirected into the MARS program. I do not have hard documentation but this is what I believe happened.
This again is all based upon the above directives and other public documents.

   In the end it is a money game, if congress increases funding, I think the NAVY will continue the MARS program. If they are asked to take it out of some other program, I believe the Navy Marine Corps MARS will end. This much is fact; Chief NAVY MARS is shutting down all the MARS stations. “AREA DIRECTORS WILL CLOSE DOWN THEIR OFFICES AND TURN IN ALL EQUIPMENT TO DRMO NOT LATER THAN 30 SEP 2009”
I do not see much help in the near future, it sounds like the end is near.
Ron
NNN0VAG
Logged
CURIOUSHAM
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2009, 09:52:57 AM »

Oh yes, it was Navy's decision, to be sure, but the services are all being hit by cuts as a result of Obama's "massive" $17 billion in budget cuts (all of which is from discretionary spending and most of that from defense).  I'm sure Navy MARS funding is just a drop in the ocean (no pun intended) when compared to the massive pork being handed out by Obama as rewards to his supporters.
In the end, each service has to judge whether the program is justified, and in retrospect, Army MARS was wise...very wise..to enter into a 'reform' mode with its "MARS 101, The Road Ahead" program.
Keeping any 'marginal' defense program alive with the peacenicks in charge is going to be tough.  It's a shame that Navy couldn't hang in there until 2012.

Oh well, Army MARS should be the beneficiary of those who need a soft landing, at least for the present.
Logged
K3RKU
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2009, 01:13:56 PM »

Ron thanks for your informative answers. NNN0YXX here.
Logged
W3LK
Member

Posts: 5644




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2009, 01:38:21 PM »

<< Oh well, Army MARS should be the beneficiary of those who need a soft landing, at least for the present.>>

If Navy MARS is actually shut down, I doubt seriously that I will shift to either remaining MARS branch. I joined to support the Navy and Marine Corps.

Lon - NNN0OOR (Former MDE SMD, Deputy SMD, Assistant For Net Operations)
Southern New England Navy-Marine Corps MARS
Proudly Serving Those Who Serve
Logged

A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.
K3WVU
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2009, 05:42:01 PM »

Well, regardless of the reason, I'm sorry to see this happen.

73

Dwight AAR3DK (ex-NNN0TPR)
Logged
N9KWW
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2009, 05:54:46 PM »

If given a choice, i would go to the Air Farse... ARMY does not have any programs for ALE or any other cutting edge activities. I will have a hard time leaving the NAVY program. I joined the NAVY, Retired from the NAVY and still serve the NAVY.
Ron
NNN0VAG
Logged
K3WVU
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2009, 07:22:02 PM »

You need to look into Army MARS.  Right now, it's definitely the most proactive of any MARS services.  Lots of digital modes.  Of course, the membership,
training, and participation requirements are tougher now as well.  May not be for everyone.

73

Dwight
Logged
CURIOUSHAM
Member

Posts: 17




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: May 18, 2009, 07:24:38 AM »

"I will have a hard time leaving the NAVY program. I joined the NAVY, Retired from the NAVY and still serve the NAVY."

_____________________________________

Unfortunately, the NAVY is leaving YOU.  I'm sorry it's happening.

73
Logged
W7TUT
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: May 18, 2009, 09:09:41 AM »

I wouldn't go jumping ship yet, the CMB 03-09 was
probably a good tactic.  DOD 4650.20 says each
military service (not MARS) will establish a MARS program
under their service, D of Army, D of Air Force, and
D of Navy.  Each service secretary is responsible for
establishing the MARS program.

Under the Navy, the Naval Network Warfare Command doesn't
want to increase funding, but end the program.  Problem
is, the program is mandated under DOD 4650.20.  Any
cancellation to the program can probably only be done
by the Sec of the Navy (SECNAV).  Plus this cancellation of MARS hasn't even been approved by the
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), also is OPNAV in the message.

Will I jump ship, no, what I've seen is theres nothing
better than NMC MARS in Region Ten.
...Randy/NNN0FHA/GBP/AS0 FOUR...

Logged
N9KWW
Member

Posts: 86




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2009, 07:34:16 PM »

You are right Navy MARS is not dead yet, but I think it is on the way out. In the Navy’s interest MARS does not fit into the fleet role like it did years past. Before sat phones and free telegram service MARS was the only way to go. Now we are ECOM, but even ECOM only goes so far, the question is where does MARS fit into the role of the fleet? At the end of the day I think that is how they look at things.

   I HOPE MARS continues to operate for years to come, but for that to happen we need a new role. What that role is I do not know. For now MARS from the sound of things, is on life support. Not dead yet but in need on intensive care.
Ron
NNN0VAG
Logged
W7TUT
Member

Posts: 10




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: May 18, 2009, 08:25:14 PM »

Yes, but what does "Army MARS" do for the "Army"?  TSA,
in Portland the Army MARS TSA station operates off a roof as TSA doesn't want them inside their area.  In Seattle its operating on a table in the hallway.  Does
TSA need them or is it all political.  Every holiday, Navy MARS runs ship to shore phone patches for hours.  Unless your on a carrier you don't have access to email technology.  Even in Iraq they have email, if you want to wait 1-2 weeks for access.  In Oregon we work closely with the Oregon State Police, NNN0WLK, National Weather Service, NNN0NPX and US Coast Group North Bend, NNN0NTT.
Do we do anything directly to the Navy Dept, no, but I
don't think any other MARS group does either.  Hang in there, a change is coming.
Randy/FHA/GBP/AS0 Four
Logged
AL7QL
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: May 19, 2009, 12:17:12 AM »

I agree with Randy. NAVMARCORMARS may have been dealt a blow but we are not yet down for the count. However, when discussing funding I find it difficult to believe that much funding finds its way to NAVMARCORMARS. At least over the last 13 years of my association with NAVMARCORMARS I have not seen a pay raise and I am a NMO1 soon to be Chief unless the program is axed. FYI, in 1996 my compensation for MARS participation was $0.00 and I still receive $0.00 for service rendered to Navy MARS. However, a little perspective is needed here. If funding really is the issue perhaps the Navy could cancel an order for one fighter jet. The 30 or so million dollars saved, not including the flight crew, pilot, maintenance costs and fuel costs could fund NAVMARCORMARS for many years to come. Would the Navy miss one jet? The answer is a resounding no. Taking the next step, the miniscule amount of funds needed to maintain a viable Navy MARS program is completely overshadowed by the magnitude of funding poured into the economy to bail out failed auto makers and poorly run banks and other financial institutions. Certainly the Navy MARS program can't amount to a hill of beans when compared to the bailout, the DOD budget or the Navy Department budget. The budget for Navy MARS isn't even a blip on the Navy's radar or sonar screens. As such I suspect it will take more funding to sunset the program than to maintain it. So, I think "something else is afoot" as Sherlock Holmes would have said. Perhaps NAVAL NETWORK WARFARE COMMAND doesn't know what NAVMARCORMARS is or does. Maybe they just want to see the program go away. So, sunsetting Navy MARS to save funding doesn't appear to be the product of rational thought processes. If funding is not the true issue then what is the issue? Remember, we are a cadre of volunteers. We receive no compensation and most of us provide our own equipment to advance ECOM capabilities in support of the uniformed services. Perhaps it is time to cut funding for $600.00 toilet seats and $400.00 hammers. The Heritage Foundation summed it up pretty well. Visit http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/NationalSecurity/bg2212.cfm   Respectfully submitted, Peter NNN0SKL // NNN0GAB TWO.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!