I concur on the "optimal manning" concept. During one "non-standard" patrol, most crewmembers stood "2 in 3" - two different 1-in-3 watches - which meant that you had, at most, two 4-hour blocks a day to sleep, eat, shower...and do all of your multiple collateral duties.

Optimal manning seems to be built around some strange concepts, more suited for a commercial fleet in many ways:
1. Nobody will ever take leave
2. Nobody will ever go to training
3. Nobody will ever PCS to a new unit
4. Everyone on board will always be fully qualified
5. Nobody will ever get sick, pregnant, have to care for family members, or otherwise have to miss a patrol
6. The ship's primary mission is its only mission; it will never be called upon to perform any mission or task out of the ordinary
7. The ship will have extensive shoreside forces to take care of all special maintenance, and most routine maintenance (to include sanding, painting, etc.)
8. All crewmembers will be mature, seasoned professionals with several years of experience
9. Nobody will require any general or specific professional development not specifically related to the ship's daily mission; there will be no collateral duties
10. The vessel will never operate in a war zone or combat role, and will never interact with other military vessels

Who supports this warped mentality? I find it particularly strange because so many of the top brass were groomed as cadets to believe "underway is the only way".

This is not why piracy continues in the Gulf of Aden. Authority, jurisdiction, and endgame all come to mind...

Merchant vessels seem to love AIS...now they can call each other by name on Ch. 16 or 13 to propose passage. Which is incredibly useful, as trying to hail some of these ships outside the 3NM line in the middle of the night can be well-nigh impossible (they just don't respond).

Most countries, particularly outside the "first world" nations, don't have a navy. What they do have is a coast guard.

you beat me to it...

I used TA to take some Spanish courses, which directly benefited the Coast Guard (i.e. during SOUTHPATs & migrant ops) as well as provided professional development for me. I was not pursuing a degree (I already have an advanced degree) and there was no payback that I can recall - which was huge incentive to use it, and to take the classes. I probably wouldn't have taken the classes otherwise.

I won't be using TA anymore until the policy changes. I don't think many officers will. On the other hand, the new GI Bill policy is great. I just wish we could get our $1200 back that we paid into the system, since now it's free for everyone, even for Academy grads that got their undergrad degree gratis.

I concur with many of your points, but particularly with the one about having the appropriate resources to carry out the assigned missions & responsibilities. We are being stretched thinner & thinner, despite recent pushes to add billets and convert staff to operational billets.
Many watch rotations are so thin that it is difficult for members to take leave or go to a medical appointment, to say nothing of running frequent, large-scale exercises. That's why people often don't get the formal training / schools they should, and why others are pushed to get qualified before they're ready. Reservists & Auxiliarists are used to fill the gaps, and could probably be used more widely, but there should not be so many gaps.
There is also not the push from HQ to standardize or mandate many aspects of training, staffing, or funding; and it is also rare to see HQ use (or fund & then use) academic research to develop policy, which is then promulgated uniformly in the field.
In the effort to please everyone and do more with less, I worry that we're creating lots of "jacks of all trades, masters of none". And in the effort to empower the deckplate level with maximum authority and flexibility, HQ abdicates its responsibility to provide centralized leadership and direction.
While your post dealt with SAR, it could as easily be applied to many different aspects of the Coast Guard. This is not to discount the tremendous dedication, hard work, sacrifice, and expertise of Coasties - only to point out that the system needs reform.

I see the ME rate as a great resource for providing base security at the ISCs (or the BSUs that will replace them)...replacing billets currently held by collateral duty watchstanders, contract security guards, CG police forces, BMs/GMs, and a variety of out-of-rate petty officers. Also, many BMs who want to focus solely on an operational LE career path (TACLET, MSST, LEDET, etc.) now can, without worrying that they are losing proficiency in legacy QM skills or having to rotate in and out of LE billets, having to keep re-qualifying. What provided a solid BM career path was not conducive to pursuing the LE side of the house, which has made it difficult to counsel members who wanted to pursue the types of billets that will be in the new ME rate.

I was always trying to get out on deck! Shooting the tube is so much more fun than standing on an ice-cold enclosed bridge watching people scrape buoys. I'd venture to say the river tender guys & ANTs encounter some pretty nasty stuff when dealing with shore aids - poison oak, rodents, etc. Dead migrants are never fun, nor is a fish hold in Alaska...there are definitely dirtier jobs than buoy tender work.

Jim, I would draw on the general format of the Chiefs' Academy as well as the recent comments/focus from MCPON Joe Campa on 1st class PO leadership & roles. In the CG, we put even more authority & responsibility on the shoulders of our incredibly capable 1st class POs. Because of our small units and decentralized management, PO1s have a lot expected of them, and I feel a two-week resident course would help them network as well as make the "leap" from PO2 (skilled worker) to PO1 (deckplate leader). I feel this is particularly important as some rates have been moving quickly, resulting in relatively junior PO1s.

I would also like to see a "mid-level management" 1-week resident course for O-4s as they transition from JO to "gotta hit 20 years" to senior officer.