FlyWright, there are a number of studies that suggest that ATC performance has suffered over the years. One report presented to congress implied errors were up by 50% 2009 to 2010. It is however a complex issue with few if any fixed points of reference against which meaningfull data can be analyzed. As a user since 1967, my statement was predicated mostly on personal observations more than recorded statistics. It's not all personnel issues - far from it. Antique equipment and infrastructure issues are major contributors to questionable trends. Most VORS still is service are vacuum tube technology - being retired when parts are no longer available - that's a fact - and poor management! (Thanks to space program for large scale integrated circuits and the GPS.)
Over all IMHO ATC does excellent work. The question is what does the trend line look like - and why.
However - I think we were talking about voice over radio communications techniques. The effectiveness of training and discipline at many of the communications intense services and agencies including CG, is/was the issue. Why is that I wonder. The FAA's "human factors" study in ATC errors might offer some explanations. It might also apply to CG.
Lastly, my comments about putting the CG back in the Navy had more to do with the NAVY's strong commitment to "BASIC" training and strong discipline than cost effectiveness, core missions, or historical development of the service. My experience, once you get past the "shave tails" on the radio, they do a great job.
Lets just clean up the radio work guys and gals !!
I have no idea what your source of information is on the state of our National Airspace System, and "vacuum tube VORs" but it's seriously dated and incorrect. Please post your reference link. While there may still be a few privately owned and maintained VORs with non-solid-state or digital guts, the FAA maintained sites have all converted over many, many years ago. It was called the 2nd Gen Conversion and IIRC, took place in the 1990s and early 2000s. TACANs and VORTACs have also been converted from spinning drum antennae to
digital Low Power TACAN Antennae.
Here's a link to info on the retirement of many of these VORs.
A little background on my experience... 40 years pilot and flight instructor starting in 1973. Aeronautical Engineering degree, FAA Air Traffic controller and ATC trainer, National Airspace System Inspection Pilot for FAA and Flight Inspector trainer until the end of 2012.
As an FAA ATC trainer, there was special emphasis placed on speech delivery rate, inflection, enunciation and the use of standard phraseology. It's almost a religion in some ATC facilities and some carry it to the nth degree. I agree that some USCG radio operators could improve their rate and enunciation but would avoid painting them all with the same brush.
Sometimes the onus falls on the listener to be ready to hear what is being transmitted. It also helps to understand the phraseology and sequence of standard reports. When I was a kid growing up in Westchester, IL, I was the parish bell ringer and had unfettered access to the church steeple. As I was starting to learn to fly as a 16 year old kid, I had a problem understanding the radio so I bought an aviation band radio to listen to the transmissions of the aircraft coming and going at Chicago O'Hare. I found that if I brought my radio to the top of the steeple, I could get better reception and see many of the aircraft being routed for landing sequence. I would sit there for hours watching and listening with my Airman's Information Manual Glossary to figure out what was being transmitted and who might have been doing the talking.
The only word I couldn't find, but almost all pilots ended with, was "g'day". I rifled through my books looking for a clue. I eventually learned that it was a friendly, non-sanctioned "good day" wish before changing frequency to the next controller down the line. I learned that sometimes the simplest, non-official answer is the right one.