Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

rank, appointments, stuff....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    There is definitely one or two commanders I believe we could do without
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

    Comment


    • #17
      Any qualified officer, NCO, or seaman can do the job of appropriate appointments above him. So a Sub with a watchkeeping certificate can do a lieutenants job etc.Not promoting people shouldn't stop the job but it p---es off those concerned no end who are doing the work but not getting paid. Technically everybody , in emergencies, has the Field Marshall's baton in his knapsack!! It's petty penny pinching under some Agreement with Civil Service Unions. Things are tight and everybody must suffer or be embarrassed like soldiers I saw today driving a 97-D- truck!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Under the heading of "stuff". During the rescue missions down south I was very impressed at the number of Deepwater ports particularly around Sicily eg Catania, Palermo, Augusta, Messina etc. We, in this country need to develop something similar. I would suggest that all new port developments, like lower Harbour in Cork should have a dedicated Naval Berth for our ships and Visiting Naval vessels. Other than Dublin and Cork we have done nothing to develop the Marine possibilities at a commercial level-- just hard to get at Fishery Harbours.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by whirlywind
          Could anybody tell me (without breaching OPSPEC rules) why is the establishment of 45 Lieutenant Commanders and indeed 13 Commanders required for the functioning of an 8 vessel flotilla.

          Is it necessary that purely administrative and non-military duties (aside from that undertaken by civil servants) be done by military personnel in the defence forces or, if it is, does it have to be done at such an inflated rank? Would not senior NCO’s be quite able and competent to perform such tasks?

          Naval officers quite rightly control the operational requirements, planning, manning and performance of the fleet but is a seven fold hierarchy required? Can this total number of 58 be justified when training (non-military), educational, engineering, and maintenance could be achieved with civilian staff. Sea going appointments in the above mentioned ranks would be, allowing for sea/shore rotation, in the order of 18-20; what do the other 40 do?

          If there is a valid reason other than military hierarchical mind-set for such an establishment? Would the effectiveness of the Naval Service be diminished by a reduced military presence in its non-military administrative function or, dare I say it, could the converse be true?
          Its based on the army system where there has to be an appointed head of each department or sub department with a laid down establishment structure.

          The Naval system of command on ships is departmentalised with each department having an officer in charge, solely based on rank,

          Think of it army terms of having a Lt Cdr in charge of a unit slightly bigger than a Platoon.

          roughly 1 Lt Cdr commanding 45 people a Lt as XO and Lt as MEO a S/lt for Guns and Nav and an understudy MEO

          6 Officers with 37 crew remaining..again not to mention Officers under training such as Ensigns
          1 CPO Coxn 1 X PO Bosun, CPO ERA, PO MECH, PO RRT, SPO DUSTY PO COOK PO Commop PO EA PO Chippy (or L Shipwright)

          this would be the typical structure with each department having its L/hands

          Lot of stripes and bars in the mix but thats the way ships have been manned.

          It could be argued that ships could be captained by Lts, wouldn't wash obviously but no reason why

          The figures above are the ideal from memory and may vary slightly.

          I do remember at one point in the 80s Eithne had 13 officer appointments outside of the AC

          out of 100 poeple in the NS 175 were officers, again this was 30 years ago, has it changed much?
          Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

          Comment


          • #20
            In general the picture as you describe would be true. I would add in the 3 PO/ERA's for watchkeeping. I think your ratio is a typo , so I'm reading 1000 for 100. Whirlywind's point about replacing Service persons with civilians would scupper the sea to shore ratio's and would doom security and GOH's and make training, range practices, and overseas participation difficult. In my time we were never in a situation of sitting on our hands. It's never like a fire brigade with nothing to do until the fire starts, Mess Audits, Boards of Survey, UN duties, courses, training etc. To work at sea all the time, you need an off crew at home for each ship, and relieve on a back to back basis, with a cadre of spare reliefs for those dropping out for various reasons. It would take 736 personnel to man 8 ships and if you add in contingencies you are close to 1000 with the shore side still to be manned.

            Comment


            • #21
              Current establishment is 183 officers out of total of 1083.

              All 8 (saying JJ and WBY have been delivered), at sea or available to go to sea (I think the KPI is 90% of fleet within 8 hours or something) - this means 40 officers & 269 enlisted (total of 309 (28% of the establishment)).

              Factor in the running of Haulbowline (eg stores, transport, guards, resting off, admin, logs, NSDS, range practices, training/Naval College/NMCI, workshops, dockyard, other (non-NS) courses, etc etc.

              Factor in that 7% of the year of an individual should/will be on leave (over 11% if sea going).........

              Comment


              • #22
                Ancient mariner, Italy's deepwater ports have existed since WW 1...i'm sure any firefighters reading this would disagree with the notion that they have nothing to do but wait til a fire kicks off. These days, they are more paramedic than firefighter, yet have to be good at both.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                  In general the picture as you describe would be true. I would add in the 3 PO/ERA's for watchkeeping. I think your ratio is a typo , so I'm reading 1000 for 100. Whirlywind's point about replacing Service persons with civilians would scupper the sea to shore ratio's and would doom security and GOH's and make training, range practices, and overseas participation difficult. In my time we were never in a situation of sitting on our hands. It's never like a fire brigade with nothing to do until the fire starts, Mess Audits, Boards of Survey, UN duties, courses, training etc. To work at sea all the time, you need an off crew at home for each ship, and relieve on a back to back basis, with a cadre of spare reliefs for those dropping out for various reasons. It would take 736 personnel to man 8 ships and if you add in contingencies you are close to 1000 with the shore side still to be manned.
                  Delighted to hear recently that PO/ERAs now hold the appropriate civilian Engineer ticket for fourth, third & second engineer, as they progress. CPO/ERA will have earned a civilian 2nd Engineer qualification. The Engineering officer has become a more engineering supervisory and management role than in the past. Indeed many Navies are moving away from the whole engineering officer completely. The majority of MEO work is ashore these days.
                  For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I would add in the 3 PO/ERA's for watchkeeping. I think your ratio is a typo , so I'm reading 1000 for 100.
                    It is indeed, thank you

                    These days, they are more paramedic than firefighter
                    Only in Dublin

                    Current establishment is 183 officers out of total of 1083.
                    Percentage wise hasn't changed much then

                    Whirlywind's point about replacing Service persons with civilians would scupper the sea to shore ratio's and would doom security and GOH's and make training, range practices, and overseas participation difficult.
                    The shore side needs lean manning applications in the middle and senior management and could probably be somewhat more efficient if there was a civillian input.Plus it would free up persons for seagoing reducing duration of rotations.

                    Factor in the running of Haulbowline (eg stores, transport, guards, resting off, admin, logs, NSDS, range practices, training/Naval College/NMCI, workshops, dockyard, other (non-NS) courses, etc etc

                    Ah recruit a few Aldi managers.. they seem to have the right back round


                    Factor in that 7% of the year of an individual should/will be on leave (over 11% if sea going).
                    In the old days being posted to ship doubled your annual leave entitlement so if that is still the case the percentage of those on A/L on ships should be higher.

                    To work at sea all the time, you need an off crew at home for each ship, and relieve on a back to back basis,
                    But for various reasons it never worked this way in reality
                    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Indeed, Gone to the Canner, they existed decades before that into the early ages, but Augusta did not become one of Italy's, and Sicily's, biggest Ports except through development and the foresight of an island state. Here in Ireland we are stuck in first gear as far as maritime developments are concerned. Even in the Naval sphere we are under resourced on berths capable of being identified as Naval berths. We are , except for individual port companies efforts, where the Brits left us, soon maybe with no National Drydocks.
                      Last edited by ancientmariner; 13 August 2015, 09:43. Reason: omission

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                        Under the heading of "stuff". During the rescue missions down south I was very impressed at the number of Deepwater ports particularly around Sicily eg Catania, Palermo, Augusta, Messina etc. We, in this country need to develop something similar. I would suggest that all new port developments, like lower Harbour in Cork should have a dedicated Naval Berth for our ships and Visiting Naval vessels. Other than Dublin and Cork we have done nothing to develop the Marine possibilities at a commercial level-- just hard to get at Fishery Harbours.
                        Cost benefit?
                        What return will they make for the cost?

                        There is ports that can take NS vessels without the need for a Naval berth.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          Cost benefit?
                          What return will they make for the cost?

                          There is ports that can take NS vessels without the need for a Naval berth.
                          Its not just a case of investment. We are talking about harbours in a non-tidal, non estuary environment that are naturally deeper than ports subject to the silting associated with tides and rivers. In addition, Sicilian (and indeed Italian) ports are run by the Capitaneria del Porto (basically part of the Italian Coastguard) which in turn is subordinate to the Navy. Thus the need for occasional moorings for military/coastguard vessels is something that they factor into their planning from day one. Finally, not all is as rosy as it looks. In Augusta Naval BAse, limited quay space means that the vast majority of the vessels are on Med Moorings with no possibility of loading heavy gear alongside. Having visited Haulbowline, I would say that you are far better off.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Apart from jobs and the NS it isn't a strategic asset.

                            If it loss making (don't know if it is), then the jobs are probably unsustainable in the long term.

                            The NS wouldn't use it enough to just its retention alone.

                            If the NS was to recommission the one in Haulbowline the same applies.

                            NS scheduled dry docking requirements would be 37 days annually (assuming a 7 day working week).

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                              Ancient mariner, Italy's deepwater ports have existed since WW 1...i'm sure any firefighters reading this would disagree with the notion that they have nothing to do but wait til a fire kicks off. These days, they are more paramedic than firefighter, yet have to be good at both.
                              They are probably there even longer, however the ports are developed to meet and match all modern requirments. Augusta in Sicily is one of Italy's bigger ports coming in at No.5 , which means there are 4 others with even bigger capacity. Sciliy on its own has expanded many ports and has at least 5 that can take our ships alongside. In Ireland we have only two ports at most that can take ships at low water and provide a berth. Marine wise we are short on berths and dockyards, with an overall weak maritime planning and governance.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                One final point about crewing on Naval ships. There is a factor that drains a ships competence. If the ship is in action mode, where most crew are required, to man stations, as in action, or assist in major emergencies all lasting beyond 24 hrs, then bigger crews are a must. Corvette wartime crew was as high 80/90 depending on type, to cover 24/7 availability.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X