PDA

View Full Version : rank, appointments, stuff....



DeV
8th August 2015, 22:14
Have to agree with this and did suggest it from the outset. However it should be remembered that the ships themselves will need minor - medium refitting after every few months on station.

I do believe that it is quite feasible to deploy two vessels bearing in mind the gravity of the situation . However Crew rotation would then become an extremely important factor.

The thing to remember is that very soon Malta will be in position to deploy a very capable vessel to the area with a crew that will reflect the same type of capabilities we currently have on site.

Its going to get worse before it gets better, at least until someone can stop these people even getting into boats.

The NS have a large amount of vacancies at Lt, S/Lt and LS level

hptmurphy
9th August 2015, 01:04
The NS have a large amount of vacancies at Lt, S/Lt and LS level

Dosen't mean that the vacancies couldn't be filled. Depends what division the vacancies are in..Some one just has to sign off on the variation order to get people paid in the role.

na grohmiti
9th August 2015, 01:12
It doesn't have vacancies, it just has a delay in getting promotions approved.

DeV
9th August 2015, 01:19
Dosen't mean that the vacancies couldn't be filled. Depends what division the vacancies are in..Some one just has to sign off on the variation order to get people paid in the role.

To deploy an additional vessel to the Med (in addition to existing commitments)?

There are 11 NS cadets in training at the moment (ie they aren't fully trained), there is currently 10 vacancies for Sub/Lt's (that's 25% of the establishment that is currently vacant BTW). You therefore can't fill those vacancies currently (there is no one to fill them!!!).

There are 17 vacancies for Lt's at the minute (that's 20% of the establishment BTW). If filled, it would make the Sub/Lt situation worse (although that shouldn't be a reason not to fill them.

There are enough Seaman to fill the LS vacancies but that is assuming that they are all fully trained and qualified.

Then as you say are they from the right division.

hptmurphy
9th August 2015, 01:58
It doesn't have vacancies, it just has a delay in getting promotions approved.

hence whats known as a variation order


To deploy an additional vessel to the Med (in addition to existing commitments)?

But all the ships have their full compliments so the vacancies have no impact on sea going capability of ships.


There are 11 NS cadets in training at the moment (ie they aren't fully trained), there is currently 10 vacancies for Sub/Lt'

Cadets in training dosen't equate to vacancies as they still have to complete their watch keeping.


There are 17 vacancies for Lt's at the minute (that's 20% of the establishment BTW)

Again doesn't always equate to seagoing appointments, to go to sea all ships will have XOs and MEOs, all Lt appointments, so all seagoing appointments are filled.


There are enough Seaman to fill the LS vacancies but that is assuming that they are all fully trained and qualified.

Enlisted, being the terminology required again specific to role, requirement for 3 exec branch Leading hands for watch keeping, again specify the location of the vacancies.

MTD's could be short 10 leading hands, but isn't a ship stopper.

Huge difference between vacancies ,appointments, establishment in the NS vs Army. Army it really doesn't matter. NS unless they are ships stoppers they can always be back filled.

na grohmiti
9th August 2015, 02:31
There are plenty of subbies on the base that can't do an LTs job on ship because they have not been promoted. Instead they are getting bounced on GoHs and admin jobs that realistically are actually being done by the Senior Rate who works for them.
Look at the figures for yourself, compare them with crews. I note that there is a Commander overseas with Niamh, otherwise normal manning applies, in addition to the 2 Medics.
The Average ship has 5 officers.
Each ship is normally commanded by a Lt Cdr. The NS has 43. Only 8 are needed at sea.
The remaining 4 are Lt or S/Lt. The NS has 93. Only 32 are needed at sea.
As for an L/S, at sea few, as HPT says are shipstoppers. But the NS has 143 to chose from. Niamh/Roisin has (based on the crew list from L.E. Niamh's visit to asia in 2002) 6. 3 Seamans branch, 1 EMT, 1 Cook, 1 Steward.

ancientmariner
9th August 2015, 08:32
In interview an LE Niamh spokesperson said they had 56 crew on board. It seems they have extras for the deployment. The original agreed manning scales for all ships was 3 crews for each ship to keep all at sea 24/7. This covers leave, courses, sickness , other deployments etc. The maths are 7x46x3=966 seagoing personnel plus the Base manning and Training elements. Ships are job specific and cannot carry too many first trippers as it effects operations, particularly at nighttime boardings etc. Once the open door policy on recruitment ended there has been a concertina effect on departments with shortages building up and skills diluted when the next wave of sanctioned newbies arrive.

DeV
9th August 2015, 08:56
But all the ships have their full compliments so the vacancies have no impact on sea going capability of ships.

Again doesn't always equate to seagoing appointments, to go to sea all ships will have XOs and MEOs, all Lt appointments, so all seagoing appointments are filled.
Being filled by personnel on their shore rotation

Who is doing the jobs ashore (say in the Dockyards) while they are at sea?

This is effecting retention

Look at L/ERA's, they have had to take on 2/3 classes of DEs




Cadets in training dosen't equate to vacancies as they still have to complete their watch keeping.
Not what I said, there are 10 vacancies for Sub/Lt's but as there are at least 2 NS cadet classes still in training (with a total of 11 cadets) there is no possibility of filling the Sub/Lt vacancies immediately




The original agreed manning scales for all ships was 3 crews for each ship to keep all at sea 24/7. This covers leave, courses, sickness , other deployments etc. The maths are 7x46x3=966 seagoing personnel plus the Base manning and Training elements. Ships are job specific and cannot carry too many first trippers as it effects operations, particularly at nighttime boardings etc. Once the open door policy on recruitment ended there has been a concertina effect on departments with shortages building up and skills diluted when the next wave of sanctioned newbies arrive.

It has been 1.33 per crew since around 2000

ancientmariner
9th August 2015, 11:44
1.33 ratio won't, cannot work. Like owning 3 socks you'll never have a clean pair after first wear. On strenuous deployments whole crew change could be a requirement.

Jack Booted Man
9th August 2015, 16:19
I always thought the argument about the numbers and balance of offrs and NCOs in the navy was to allow a suitable sea/shore lifestyle and rotation, ie 2/3 years out 3/5 years in (or there and thereabouts) . I know that despite all the additional places allotted the navy weren't able to recruit enough cadets and retain junior officers in the last number of years, ergo vacancies in the establishment.... If the vacancies in the establishment exist ( which they do) and are held against shore based appointments then that means certain junior ranks ( LS and subbies/Lts ) are doing more at sea then they are supposed to.... i.e getting screwed. This no doubt will have an impact on retention which leads us back to the vicious circle...... Of more junior offrs and NCOs going on their ticket as the job places too high a demand on them. As the economy continues to improve, more and more well trained and valuable individuals will head off to the private sector..... We already have Aldi Batt , could we be looking at LE Lidl ?

The bottom line here is that we need to fill the vacancies in the establishment to ensure suitable manning levels at all ranks..... I know it was all much harder in our day ( Bulls wool and dodgy corvettes) but if we are to retain our levels of effectiveness in the navy we need to recruit and retain a new generation of junior officers and NCOs ....

DeV
9th August 2015, 16:46
I always thought the argument about the numbers and balance of offrs and NCOs in the navy was to allow a suitable sea/shore lifestyle and rotation, ie 2/3 years out 3/5 years in (or there and thereabouts) . I know that despite all the additional places allotted the navy weren't able to recruit enough cadets and retain junior officers in the last number of years, ergo vacancies in the establishment.... If the vacancies in the establishment exist ( which they do) and are held against shore based appointments then that means certain junior ranks ( LS and subbies/Lts ) are doing more at sea then they are supposed to.... i.e getting screwed. This no doubt will have an impact on retention which leads us back to the vicious circle...... Of more junior offrs and NCOs going on their ticket as the job places too high a demand on them. As the economy continues to improve, more and more well trained and valuable individuals will head off to the private sector..... We already have Aldi Batt , could we be looking at LE Lidl ?

The bottom line here is that we need to fill the vacancies in the establishment to ensure suitable manning levels at all ranks..... I know it was all much harder in our day ( Bulls wool and dodgy corvettes) but if we are to retain our levels of effectiveness in the navy we need to recruit and retain a new generation of junior officers and NCOs ....

It's suppose to be 2 years at sea and 2 years ashore

Jack Booted Man
9th August 2015, 17:27
Depending on rank .... According to last set of pqs , 48 Lt Cdrs - 8 at sea..... 56 Lts - not sure how many at sea but 7 XOs at least .... Allowing for techies, Career cses, 'normal DF ' overseas.... At the higher ranks not so bad.....a lot worse for certain techies, and junior offrs/NCOs I would assume , the old adage of fecal matters susceptibility to gradient remains true.

Not wishing to drag ourselves off topic , I as a member of the army have been immensely proud of my naval colleagues in the last few weeks. The professionalism , from both crews, has been exceptional. The level of trauma they have been exposed to is significant and I hope we have learnt lessons from other traumatic experiences that other members of the DF have gone through in the last number of years ( Rwanda, Somalia, Grapes of wrath etc) . I hope the welfare of the crew is foremost in the minds of decision makers as they look at the duration of the Niamh's deployment and whether to extend or replace .....

hptmurphy
9th August 2015, 20:00
Who is doing the jobs ashore (say in the Dockyards) while they are at sea?

Certain ranks filling appointments in the dockyard etc have no function realistically other than being at sea.

Again its the division system.

Of the 143 leading hands, how many are executive branch?

Other than specific training role rank carrying members of this branch serve no practical role ashore!

Of the 'x' amount of Lt Cdrs again other than Executive branch who will be ships captains they have no formal role ashore other than administrration, same goes for the engineering branch

Reeling off figures without break down by branch is lie assuming all soldiers do the same job and have the same level of qualification. Not all S/Lts are qualified watchkeepers thus have no function at sea.


It's suppose to be 2 years at sea and 2 years ashore

it is that, but its a case of needs must, and putting ships to sea is the priority not worrying whether PO 'x' has done more time at sea than PO 'y'.

Believe it or not most people prefer to be at sea as opposed to being in the base, they are actually full filling the role the joined to do. In my time stints in the base other than on courses were like a death sentence especially for single men.


The bottom line here is that we need to fill the vacancies in the establishment to ensure suitable manning levels at all ranks


For several reasons yes, but its not a ship stopper and should be used as an excuse to not deploy a second ship if required.


noticeable how inappropriate the blue “undress” uniform is

the term is working dress as that is what it is. For safety reasons it is what is , Designer gear and sandals are not really appropriate for working aboard ship, where everything has the potential to maim or kill if not treated with respect ( especially the cooks)


It has been 1.33 per crew since around 2000

thats an establishment figure as opposed to an operational practised number.

Toolbox
9th August 2015, 22:55
God bless you all but your some waffle monsters at this point of the thread.

Two in two out has never been anything but assperational at least in the last 20 years.

Only the few in certain senior nco and officer ranks have longer ashore than two years (often far longer)

hptmurphy
10th August 2015, 03:00
God bless you all but your some waffle monsters at this point of the thread.

Two in two out has never been anything but assperational at least in the last 20 years.

Only the few in certain senior nco and officer ranks have longer ashore than two years (often far longer)

bear in mind only two from the group have every served on sea going naval vessel, one as a rating the other as......

na grohmiti
11th August 2015, 20:49
There is definitely one or two commanders I believe we could do without :)

ancientmariner
11th August 2015, 20:58
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!!

ancientmariner
12th August 2015, 08:32
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.

hptmurphy
12th August 2015, 13:42
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?

ancientmariner
12th August 2015, 14:59
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.

DeV
12th August 2015, 18:24
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).........

GoneToTheCanner
12th August 2015, 21:04
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.

na grohmiti
12th August 2015, 21:18
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.

hptmurphy
13th August 2015, 00:00
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:-D



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

ancientmariner
13th August 2015, 09:39
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.

DeV
13th August 2015, 09:45
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.

Medsailor
13th August 2015, 12:21
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.

DeV
13th August 2015, 15:02
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).

ancientmariner
13th August 2015, 16:22
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.

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.

ancientmariner
13th August 2015, 16:35
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.

na grohmiti
13th August 2015, 19:52
" In Ireland we have only two ports at most that can take ships at low water and provide a berth."
While in agreement with most of the sentiment expressed by ancientmariner I know of at least eight ports (excluding the tidal docks in Galway and Limerick) that could and have provided a berth for Irish naval ships at low water.

Can it hold any of them? Discount limerick because a ship cannot leave whenever it wants to.

ancientmariner
13th August 2015, 21:11
IRISH Ports to access all tides . 1. Dublin 2. Dun Laoghaire ,but weather constrained and yacht obstructed. 3. Rosslare, but no preferential berth all spoken for.4 Cork Harbour mainly at Naval Base. 5. Killybegs, up to Aisling size but not for long stay. 6. Rathmullen, but weather constrained. 7. Derry, but berth has no bollards and necessary to tie on to car park rails. 8. Belfast. There's 8 Ports but only two are tenable Cork and Dublin. I discount Foynes as it is too far up the Estuary and clogged with other traffic.
Can you list ports with 5+metres at LWS?

CTU
13th August 2015, 21:19
3. Rosslare but no preferential berth all spoken for.

What about berth 4 in Rosslare, Stena used it for the fast ferry but stoped that service a few years ago, And I have seen one of the P40s using it once.

danno
13th August 2015, 21:44
It can be quite expensive to dock/tie up in commercial ports.

GoneToTheCanner
13th August 2015, 23:01
I presume the daily watch duration and timing is changed to suit circumstances; a friend who was RN said that they went 7,5,5,7 for actions like the Balkans during ops in the Adriatic

hptmurphy
13th August 2015, 23:32
Waterford, but given the city docks are so far from the mouth of the harbour its a nightmare,but Belview is very capable New Ross is quite capable as well

ancientmariner
13th August 2015, 23:43
I did NOT know that Large ships ie more than 10,000 tonnes could get into Killybegs but I see they have done port development to cater for 40,000 and 12 metres draft. That is good news. In such a harbour we should book a naval berth with water and access to fueling facilities at least by truck.
We need more progress like this in case there is a need to base a unit on the West Coast for a period.

Bravo20
14th August 2015, 08:44
MOD: For those of you reading this who are a bit confused, looking at the thread title and then trying to work out what deep ports have to do with rank or appointments. Those posts fall under the theme of "Stuff"

Truck Driver
14th August 2015, 16:53
....the term is working dress as that is what it is. For safety reasons it is what is , Designer gear and sandals are not really appropriate for working aboard ship, where everything has the potential to maim or kill if not treated with respect ( especially the cooks)...

Brilliant... :-D

danno
17th August 2015, 18:54
Waterford, but given the city docks are so far from the mouth of the harbour its a nightmare,but Belview is very capable New Ross is quite capable as well

Low water transiting to 'Ross can be about 3-4m in spots.

hptmurphy
17th August 2015, 21:03
Low water transiting to 'Ross can be about 3-4m in spots.

They got CPVs in there in the past

ancientmariner
18th August 2015, 01:06
They got CPVs in there in the past

New Ross would not be an ideal Naval Port. Usually quick access to the sea without locks, bridges, or sand bars is the ideal. The CPV has a draft of 2.7m but would find the Bar at Duncannon difficult at low water in adverse weather.

ancientmariner
25th August 2015, 08:49
More stuff. Our side sank a derelict two masted motor sailer off the ssw coast recently. Any forensics? Or just Davy Jones? Name? Where built? Any Docs. on board. Where from. Interpol. Any History?

Toolbox
25th August 2015, 11:47
Petite D'Eau.

Adrift from Bahamas.

Owners contacted.

Hazard to shipping removed.

ancientmariner
25th August 2015, 11:54
Just asking. Insurance own the boat, if they paid up.Hazard no more.

Dogwatch
26th August 2015, 20:38
More stuff. Our side sank a derelict two masted motor sailer off the ssw coast recently. Any forensics? Or just Davy Jones? Name? Where built? Any Docs. on board. Where from. Interpol. Any History?

Think ur asking the obvious..... which won't be answered here

DeV
23rd March 2017, 01:52
http://www.defence.ie/WebSite.nsf/FOI_DL65

na grohmiti
23rd March 2017, 09:52
Am I missing something? Table bears no connection to foi request.

Bravo20
23rd March 2017, 10:28
Am I missing something? Table bears no connection to foi request.

I was thinking the same thing

DeV
23rd March 2017, 12:58
It was more the info contained in the table I was interested in

As at 30/6/16, the NS was critically short of Lts, S/Lts, POs and LSs

ancientmariner
25th March 2017, 09:48
It was more the info contained in the table I was interested in

As at 30/6/16, the NS was critically short of Lts, S/Lts, POs and LSs

It's a pity that unvarnished truth is always scarce but in any event the vacancies from WO down to L/S must be given an accumulated figure and added to any vacancies in the overall A/B rates. You cannot be down over 70 NCO's and claim NO vacancies in junior seaman of various Branches. If you declare that you are short 46 L/S then you can ONLY find them in your NON NCO strengths subject to training. It is the same maths for commissioned ranks which relies in strengths within Cadet, Ensign, and Sub-Lieutenants, to eventually fill vacancies on promotion. In other words Recruit and Train.

DeV
25th March 2017, 11:27
It's a pity that unvarnished truth is always scarce but in any event the vacancies from WO down to L/S must be given an accumulated figure and added to any vacancies in the overall A/B rates. You cannot be down over 70 NCO's and claim NO vacancies in junior seaman of various Branches. If you declare that you are short 46 L/S then you can ONLY find them in your NON NCO strengths subject to training. It is the same maths for commissioned ranks which relies in strengths within Cadet, Ensign, and Sub-Lieutenants, to eventually fill vacancies on promotion. In other words Recruit and Train.

Absolutely

ancientmariner
12th September 2017, 09:58
Absolutely

We are going to have up to three depletion's in Senior Officer ranks imminently. All in Haulbowline. I wish them well in their retirement, and their replacements a bright industrious future taking the Navy forward.

na grohmiti
12th September 2017, 18:18
Interesting times ahead. The age profile at the upper three levels has dropped by 10-15 years in one go.

ancientmariner
12th April 2018, 10:57
Interesting times ahead. The age profile at the upper three levels has dropped by 10-15 years in one go.

Always interesting to see what will happen next and to figure reasoning and expectations of those promoting and being promoted. The only inevitability is that all will eventually enter the uncertainty of shifting PENSION zones. The current long term pensioner scene is crushing with costs of all non-food services increasing, against a diminished pension ( FEMPI) overlaid with additional taxes, and no basic pension increase in the last 10 years.
The PDF pension generally has to support, eventually, two elderly people, who had their medical cards removed at an increased cost of 1728 Euro, plus on going excesses payable on Hospital charges. Times seem to be more challenging for some.

DeV
12th April 2018, 12:36
It's a pity that unvarnished truth is always scarce but in any event the vacancies from WO down to L/S must be given an accumulated figure and added to any vacancies in the overall A/B rates. You cannot be down over 70 NCO's and claim NO vacancies in junior seaman of various Branches. If you declare that you are short 46 L/S then you can ONLY find them in your NON NCO strengths subject to training. It is the same maths for commissioned ranks which relies in strengths within Cadet, Ensign, and Sub-Lieutenants, to eventually fill vacancies on promotion. In other words Recruit and Train.

Not forgetting of course there are direct entry S/Lt’s and LSs

Auldsod
13th April 2018, 13:38
Actually, back on topic about rank - did the SCPO rank insignia change sometime back in about 2012?

I remember just before I left the NS overhearing a discussion new rank insignia for a senior enlisted rank. Have the stripes been replaced with a Warrant Officer style insignia or are they both in use?

The rank table available on military.ie hasn't been updated anyway!

Fantasia
13th April 2018, 13:52
Actually, back on topic about rank - did the SCPO rank insignia change sometime back in about 2012?

I remember just before I left the NS overhearing a discussion new rank insignia for a senior enlisted rank. Have the stripes been replaced with a Warrant Officer style insignia or are they both in use?

The rank table available on military.ie hasn't been updated anyway!

Yes they have changed as you described but I do not know when

ancientmariner
13th April 2018, 20:15
Yes they have changed as you described but I do not know when

In the last few years I've noticed the emergence of what I would call WO1 and WO2 in the NS. The former has two thin sleeve rings with gold wired FF badge and the latter has one sleeve ring with FF badge.

Fantasia
13th April 2018, 21:48
I think it started in around 2015 but I am open to correction

hptmurphy
13th April 2018, 22:42
It was changed getting rid of he ringed chevrons with the capbadge to either a single or double bar at the forearm but without the divisional flash using the cap bage instead. The eight button jacket has been retained.

na grohmiti
13th April 2018, 22:57
I suppose it just brought naval ranks in line with the equivalent Air Corps and Army BSM and BQMS uniforms. While not technically equal to a BQMS, the SCPO as an OR-8, should always have been wearing a rank marking similar to a WO.

na grohmiti
13th September 2018, 20:11
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Delighted to present the Senior and Junior Command &amp; Staff Courses with their awards up to Masters level at the <a href="https://twitter.com/defenceforces?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@defenceforces</a> Conferring Ceremony in the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MilitaryCollege?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MilitaryCollege</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DFTC?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DFTC</a>. Well done to the students, staff and families on this momentous day <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/strengthenthenation?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#strengthenthenation</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/MaynoothUni?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MaynoothUni</a> <a href="https://t.co/MAqxZrZVSP">pic.twitter.com/MAqxZrZVSP</a></p>&mdash; DF Chief of Staff (@DF_COS) <a href="https://twitter.com/DF_COS/status/1040210794410123265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 13, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Can anyone tell me what insignia the Naval Lt Cdr is wearing? Looks wrong for both dolphins and parachutes.

Rhodes
13th September 2018, 20:20
Can anyone tell me what insignia the Naval Lt Cdr is wearing? Looks wrong for both dolphins and parachutes.

Explosive Ordnance Disposal Badge.

Rhodes
13th September 2018, 20:29
Gold for Officers and silver for NCO's and Privates.

http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8588&d=1536863261

ancientmariner
16th July 2019, 09:06
We are going to have up to three depletion's in Senior Officer ranks imminently. All in Haulbowline. I wish them well in their retirement, and their replacements a bright industrious future taking the Navy forward.

I have heard that VADM Mark Mellet has been nominated by the Government for the vacant post of Chairman of the European Military Council ( EUMC ) in Brussels or wherever that body is based. It means , if he is appointed by the EU , that he will vacate his current post. Will be interesting to see the overall effect on Naval prospects.

Fantasia
16th July 2019, 09:21
Will be interesting to see the overall effect on Naval prospects.

Cannot be any worse than they currently are!

The man has done NOTHING for the Defence Forces since he was appointed.

If he has been nominated, he won't get it unfortunately.

It has been a long time since we had a Chief of such low quality.

Bravo20
16th July 2019, 10:00
Was this not rumoured the last time it was vacant?

Anzac
16th July 2019, 11:16
Was this not rumoured the last time it was vacant?

Is this going to be again vacant? General Claudio Graziano was only appointed last November and has over 2 years to run on his appointment. The Director General of EU Military Staff is coming vacant and is a 3 Star slot and is essentially the senior admin role. I would say that is a more likely position for VADM Mallet. A 3 Star is eligible for the Chairmans role but usually a 4 star is selected from a large full spectrum military.

Bravo20
16th July 2019, 11:19
https://www.thephoenix.ie/article/cos-mellett-to-head-eu-military/

Excuse the paywall but this is the only article I could find. Yes that position was open in 2017.

na grohmiti
16th July 2019, 11:23
Cannot be any worse than they currently are!

The man has done NOTHING for the Defence Forces since he was appointed.

If he has been nominated, he won't get it unfortunately.

It has been a long time since we had a Chief of such low quality.

Could it be a case that a tradesman can only work with the tools he has, and the CoS has some of the worst tools in a long time to work with.

Bravo20
16th July 2019, 11:35
Could it be a case that a tradesman can only work with the tools he has, and the CoS has some of the worst tools in a long time to work with.

That leaves you open to "a bad tradesman blames his tools".

There is an element of truth in both statements. VADM Mellet has been underwhelming, there was certainly an expectation that he would be another Dermot Early. That being said I don't think that even Dermot Early would have been able to influence the current system, where the politicians have wiped their hands of defence and handed control over to the Sec Gen of DOD.

Fantasia
16th July 2019, 11:59
That leaves you open to "a bad tradesman blames his tools".

There is an element of truth in both statements. VADM Mellet has been underwhelming, there was certainly an expectation that he would be another Dermot Early. That being said I don't think that even Dermot Early would have been able to influence the current system, where the politicians have wiped their hands of defence and handed control over to the Sec Gen of DOD.

When he took over, he was very keen to be seen to be "leaning in" (his words) to the DOD, thinking that by being overly flexible and cooperative that he would win over DOD. The problem was that he made us lean in so far that we ended up bending over and being shafted

hptmurphy
16th July 2019, 16:32
When he took over, he was very keen to be seen to be "leaning in" (his words) to the DOD, thinking that by being overly flexible and cooperative that he would win over DOD. The problem was that he made us lean in so far that we ended up bending over and being shafted

I think you are spot on in your appraisal of his management style, but the problem being those who were too eager to please and allowed such changes to happen without running the scenarios and realising the potential outcomes.


there was certainly an expectation that he would be another Dermot Early

Dermot Early entered the game on his way to the top when the country was awash with money so in effect he was handed the DF when everything was good, but within months both that and his health failed, so we'll never actually know how it would have played out. he was willing to sacrifice the reserve in order to keep a 3 brigade structure. Given the numbers now, the retention of that structure only holds appointments open rather than having the man power available to operate three brigades.

So the current CoS is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't by what is certain, what is current is not working.

apod
16th July 2019, 16:36
Sounds like the Government are just trying to get rid of him.
The question is who would replace him?

DeV
16th July 2019, 17:35
Sounds like the Government are just trying to get rid of him.
The question is who would replace him?

Based on advise by DoD ?

DeV
16th July 2019, 17:41
When he took over, he was very keen to be seen to be "leaning in" (his words) to the DOD, thinking that by being overly flexible and cooperative that he would win over DOD. The problem was that he made us lean in so far that we ended up bending over and being shafted


I think you are spot on in your appraisal of his management style, but the problem being those who were too eager to please and allowed such changes to happen without running the scenarios and realising the potential outcomes.



Dermot Early entered the game on his way to the top when the country was awash with money so in effect he was handed the DF when everything was good, but within months both that and his health failed, so we'll never actually know how it would have played out. he was willing to sacrifice the reserve in order to keep a 3 brigade structure. Given the numbers now, the retention of that structure only holds appointments open rather than having the man power available to operate three brigades.

So the current CoS is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't by what is certain, what is current is not working.

Was the leaning in to get the voice of the DF heard?

Was it to make the DF more relevant to wider society (eg the ESS and working with industry etc) - and therefore not seen as an unnecessary expense?

The COS can say what he likes to DoD they still hold the purse!


I’m not knocking Dermot Earley but people seem to forgive the barracks closures - Letterkenny, Lifford, Monaghan and Longford - 650 personnel having to move posts with approx 4 months notice. Didn’t they only find out during the Budget speech?
It was an extraordinary time requiring extraordinary measures.


IMHO that should have been done in the 2nd phase of barrack closures

Fantasia
16th July 2019, 18:37
One of Mellet's most damning legacies was that we should embrace the opportunity to prove that we can do more with less.

He threatened to releave the FOCNS of his command last year when he highlighted the crisis in the NS. Now the same man is the hero for having the courage to do the same thing.

Remember his Late Late interview when he said there was no crisis in terms of personnel in the organisation?

He essentially has 2 roles, PR and strategic policy. If he had a pair of balls he would have been shouting from the roof tops 3 years ago about how things were stretched beyond breaking point. Instead we had "consolidation" whilst taking on loads of extra new stuff and expanding overseas.

trellheim
16th July 2019, 22:24
Sounds like the Government are just trying to get rid of him.
The question is who would replace him? I am a huge follower of military twitter .... never seen anything like whats going on at the moment. I think they are finding it wasnt a sheep they were bullying

ancientmariner
17th July 2019, 09:13
One of Mellet's most damning legacies was that we should embrace the opportunity to prove that we can do more with less.

He threatened to releave the FOCNS of his command last year when he highlighted the crisis in the NS. Now the same man is the hero for having the courage to do the same thing.

Remember his Late Late interview when he said there was no crisis in terms of personnel in the organisation?

He essentially has 2 roles, PR and strategic policy. If he had a pair of balls he would have been shouting from the roof tops 3 years ago about how things were stretched beyond breaking point. Instead we had "consolidation" whilst taking on loads of extra new stuff and expanding overseas.

Such a pity, so much conjecture , not much proven or provable, least said soonest mended. Naval tradition is-- once somebody is alive on a gun mount, even though wounded, it should keep firing. The man I know will always tell it as it is to those that should know.

hptmurphy
17th July 2019, 13:16
One of Mellet's most damning legacies was that we should embrace the opportunity to prove that we can do more with less.


Theoretically you could...... if you remove a lot of the structures that the older systems was built in and adjust and prove the systems of work before you attempt any change anything, but doing more with less shouldn't mean that you need to cut it to the bone.

Often to make savings in the long term you need to spend cash in the short term, target the people you need to retain, up skill and pay them enough to stay on . And you certainly don't try to adjust how the thing is run during an episode of fiscal restriction.


Instead we had "consolidation" whilst taking on loads of extra new stuff and expanding overseas.

Point in case


The man I know will always tell it as it is to those that should know.

In the current age of social media , everyone who tunes in is the potential listener, the CoS must be factual and realistic about the state of his force and above all listed to the men he commands. he is the link between the DoD, the minister and the money, he has to be both the CoS and the voice of the people in the ranks.

ancientmariner
17th July 2019, 15:10
In the current age of social media , everyone who tunes in is the potential listener, the CoS must be factual and realistic about the state of his force and above all listed to the men he commands. he is the link between the DoD, the minister and the money, he has to be both the CoS and the voice of the people in the ranks.

First off, in Military Orgs. there is unlikely to be a twitter account , NOR should there be. Leading is usually from the front and those that are mobile follow. Galley radio feeds upwards and gets to the ears of GS Branch. I just do not believe NOTHING is being done.

trellheim
17th July 2019, 15:16
First off, in Military Orgs. there is unlikely to be a twitter account , NOR should there be. Leading is usually from the front and those that are mobile follow. Galley radio feeds upwards and gets to the ears of GS Branch. I just do not believe NOTHING is being done. you are not a follower of Military Twitter ... its huge

Bravo20
17th July 2019, 16:14
First off, in Military Orgs. there is unlikely to be a twitter account .

Welcome to the world of modern communication. If you interact with the public you need the various social media accounts. These are just the ones I follow.

The official accounts
@dfreserve
@DF_COS
@DFPRB
@PeterOHalloran1 (the current ACOS)

Representatives and Veterans
@oneFuchsia
@RDFRepAssoc
@RACO_PDF
@RACO_DF

ropebag
17th July 2019, 16:38
Welcome to the world of modern communication. If you interact with the public you need the various social media accounts. These are just the ones I follow.

The official accounts
@dfreserve
@DF_COS
@DFPRB
@PeterOHalloran1 (the current ACOS)

Representatives and Veterans
@oneFuchsia
@RDFRepAssoc
@RACO_PDF
@RACO_DF

We have the same thing over the water - all the senior bods have twitter accounts, every ship has one, every unit from Regt/Bn level, and some Bty/Coy level, have them.

Few ever say much that's controversial, but it's a way for interested hacks and politicians to keep up with who's doing what.

It's the world now, you may as well complain about how unfair rain is...

DeV
17th July 2019, 18:11
The British Army found out about some big thing (can’t remember what it was not) just before Christmas leave on a YouTube video on Facebook.

The military has to adapt to the modern generation

trellheim
17th July 2019, 22:27
most US military twitter is the only way I have at the moment in keeping up with doctrine its fking amazing and wonderful

DeV
18th July 2019, 00:14
The British Army found out about some big thing (can’t remember what it was not) just before Christmas leave on a YouTube video on Facebook.

The military has to adapt to the modern generation

Found it

This is how the politicians announced it - https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2016-12-15/HCWS367/

Here is CGS's response - https://twitter.com/i/status/809488237643333632

"Ring your duty officer" ...... over Christmas

ancientmariner
18th July 2019, 09:16
Found it

This is how the politicians announced it - https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2016-12-15/HCWS367/

Here is CGS's response - https://twitter.com/i/status/809488237643333632

"Ring your duty officer" ...... over Christmas

These restructurings are caused by reduced numbers. It is also hastened by barrack movs. It will also be affected by required mobility, especially if you use terms like immediate and strike. In the old days they had the 16th Air Assault Brigade ( my son had the privilige of being it's BSM). How will new units be deployed with their hardware-sea-air-land ? and how do the Marines fit in to the offensive picture, or is it all cutbacks?

Auldsod
18th July 2019, 09:50
These restructurings are caused by reduced numbers. It is also hastened by barrack movs. It will also be affected by required mobility, especially if you use terms like immediate and strike. In the old days they had the 16th Air Assault Brigade ( my son had the privilige of being it's BSM). How will new units be deployed with their hardware-sea-air-land ? and how do the Marines fit in to the offensive picture, or is it all cutbacks?

Your son must have had quite the career. 16 AA brigade is still a going concern is it not? Just no more Royal Irish involvement as in Iraq 2003.

DeV
18th July 2019, 10:22
These restructurings are caused by reduced numbers. It is also hastened by barrack movs. It will also be affected by required mobility, especially if you use terms like immediate and strike. In the old days they had the 16th Air Assault Brigade ( my son had the privilige of being it's BSM). How will new units be deployed with their hardware-sea-air-land ? and how do the Marines fit in to the offensive picture, or is it all cutbacks?

They are caused by the need to reduce cost

The point, in the context of this, is that the head of the army used a video on Twitter to communicate directly to his soldiers

They also occasionally use their YouTube channel.

It’s a comms tool, yes everyone in the world can see it but it means everyone in the intended audience can access it, unlike the “town halls” where everyone available in a particular location is invited to attend to hear the senior staff speak and ask questions.

Auldsod
18th July 2019, 10:57
They are caused by the need to reduce cost

The point, in the context of this, is that the head of the army used a video on Twitter to communicate directly to his soldiers

They also occasionally use their YouTube channel.

It’s a comms tool, yes everyone in the world can see it but it means everyone in the intended audience can access it, unlike the “town halls” where everyone available in a particular location is invited to attend to hear the senior staff speak and ask questions.

I think social media is a great tool being honest. I have watched a few of the youtube and twitter videos put out by senior personnel in the British Army over the last year and while you should take it with a pinch of salt and not be naive; they do seem more direct and straight to the point actually responding to some of the big issues facing the force. Now it is all heavily filtered but better than nothing.

The DF here are doing a lot lately but it would be great to see us move beyond the (impressive to be fair) videos of soldiers/sailors/airmen in action with exciting music in the background to something more substantial for the benefit of those already in.

DeV
18th July 2019, 11:04
I think social media is a great tool being honest. I have watched a few of the youtube and twitter videos put out by senior personnel in the British Army over the last year and while you should take it with a pinch of salt and not be naive; they do seem more direct and straight to the point actually responding to some of the big issues facing the force. Now it is all heavily filtered but better than nothing.

The DF here are doing a lot lately but it would be great to see us move beyond the (impressive to be fair) videos of soldiers/sailors/airmen in action with exciting music in the background to something more substantial for the benefit of those already in.

And of course the audience (intended or not) isn’t just those seeking a career in the DF

The public, politicians and others (DoD don’t have interest in the DF so they don’t) watch it. She what the job entails, what the DF do on a day to day basis.

COS had a speech that he has delivered countless times to countless various audiences on YouTube a few years ago. Excellent speech if only DoD would resource it.

ancientmariner
18th July 2019, 11:52
Your son must have had quite the career. 16 AA brigade is still a going concern is it not? Just no more Royal Irish involvement as in Iraq 2003.

He had despite being Royal Corps of Signals 216 (para). He was always a mainland soldier. Got commissioned as a QM but wilted as a bean counter . Retired to Europe. The 16th still has an address at Colchester but was always THE ONLY immediate unit for Rapid deployment. He did Afghanistan with them. The UK Army was bigger then but to upsize to a 3 brigade movable Division now is aspirational especially with Forces in Europe and in overseas training areas like Batuk and Canada.

ancientmariner
5th January 2020, 12:02
[QUOTE=hptmurphy;468993]Theoretically you could...... if you remove a lot of the structures that the older systems was built in and adjust and prove the systems of work before you attempt any change anything, but doing more with less shouldn't mean that you need to cut it to the bone.

Often to make savings in the long term you need to spend cash in the short term, target the people you need to retain, up skill and pay them enough to stay on . And you certainly don't try to adjust how the thing is run during an episode of fiscal restriction. (Quote)

I think also treating our dead retired comrades in an appropriate fashion is important. What kind of send off would you give a Senior Technical NCO that lived in the Garrison with his family ALL of his service life? His funeral was in the Garrison Church with all of his family present, a huge cortege of elderly retired comrades and their wives. A handful of elderly officers who were grateful for the many times the CHIEF fixed their electrics, other than a bearer party, where was the official service?For my own part I would have put the Base Flag at half mast while the funeral and service was in the Garrison. RIP PJ. ar Dheis De etc.

ancientmariner
5th January 2020, 15:10
[QUOTE=hptmurphy;468993]Theoretically you could...... if you remove a lot of the structures that the older systems was built in and adjust and prove the systems of work before you attempt any change anything, but doing more with less shouldn't mean that you need to cut it to the bone.

Often to make savings in the long term you need to spend cash in the short term, target the people you need to retain, up skill and pay them enough to stay on . And you certainly don't try to adjust how the thing is run during an episode of fiscal restriction. (Quote)

I think also treating our dead retired comrades in an appropriate fashion is important. What kind of send off would you give a Senior Technical NCO that lived in the Garrison with his family ALL of his service life? His funeral was in the Garrison Church with all of his family present, a huge cortege of elderly retired comrades and their wives. A handful of elderly officers who were grateful for the many times the CHIEF fixed their electrics, other than a bearer party, where was the official service?For my own part I would have put the Base Flag at half mast while the funeral and service was in the Garrison. RIP PJ. ar Dheis De etc.

By way of clarification the SNCO was retired aged 94 and a great-great-grandfather. Official Service representation was minimal and not of a send off variety.

na grohmiti
5th January 2020, 16:43
By way of clarification the SNCO was retired aged 94 and a great-great-grandfather. Official Service representation was minimal and not of a send off variety.

I think the problem is, as the service gets younger, the link between serving and retired passes. I think it would be fair to say there are few left serving today, who served under you at any stage, which in my book is still relatively recently, let alone someone who may have retired from the service a Generation ago.
The average service for officers at present seems to be 15 years, maybe 21 for Senior rates.
During a past command the Island opened its doors frequetly to all exers, and their families, at least once a year, and not just to those who were members of one of the retirees associations. This seems to have passed out of favour with subsequent flag officers, and as a result the service may not be as open to those who served it in their prime.
We don't treat our exers well in this state. Those in command have a priority to treat thos still serving as best they can, due to the lack of respect the state has for those still serving.
At the end of the day, I assume their was a breakdown in communication somewhere, and the person whose job it would be to deal with this protocol, may have been unaware of what was happening in the Garrison Church, given that their duties could have taken them to the other end of the Garrison completely, presuming they were even ashore, such is the situation with double jobbing.

DeV
5th January 2020, 19:51
https://www.military.ie/en/public-information/defence-forces-ceremonial/state-and-military-funerals/

batterysgt
5th January 2020, 20:59
https://www.military.ie/en/public-information/defence-forces-ceremonial/state-and-military-funerals/

Good post Dev. Explains it very clearly...

hptmurphy
5th January 2020, 21:43
By way of clarification the SNCO was retired aged 94 and a great-great-grandfather. Official Service representation was minimal and not of a send off variety.

A lot of the problem being those who served with him are dead and buried and most of those in charge of such events have no idea who the man was.....but thats not to say he shouldn't be given the accolades he was entitled to at his rank.

The NS tends to be a more transient than the army where very few live their lives in the local area after minimal periods of service and indeed those who do stick around afterwards usually have retired after quite an amount of service have an affiliation to persons they have served with.

Now the issue of representation, funerals etc, Ireland has changed and a funeral may not be the vent it was in former years, I don't do them, not even for family , in my service days I hated them as I remember as a rating being detailed to attend funerals of people whom I had no knowledge of, just to 'represent the navy'.... I probably hated the deceased regardless of ever knowing them as a result.

IMHO, if the respects due are rendered by the service as laid down well and good, but the day of detailing people to attend funerals is long past and should remain so.

I attended the funeral of a relative of mine back in 2000 , a former Lt Cdr, and while there were some there who did respect him and were his friends, there were also a large portion in attendance who were checking he had actually died. The pall bearers were ratings standing around in the rain on a sunday morning who had absolutely no interest in the event.

Funerals are for the families, the deceased won't know!

ancientmariner
6th January 2020, 10:59
A lot of the problem being those who served with him are dead and buried and most of those in charge of such events have no idea who the man was.....but thats not to say he shouldn't be given the accolades he was entitled to at his rank.

The NS tends to be a more transient than the army where very few live their lives in the local area after minimal periods of service and indeed those who do stick around afterwards usually have retired after quite an amount of service have an affiliation to persons they have served with.

Now the issue of representation, funerals etc, Ireland has changed and a funeral may not be the vent it was in former years, I don't do them, not even for family , in my service days I hated them as I remember as a rating being detailed to attend funerals of people whom I had no knowledge of, just to 'represent the navy'.... I probably hated the deceased regardless of ever knowing them as a result.

IMHO, if the respects due are rendered by the service as laid down well and good, but the day of detailing people to attend funerals is long past and should remain so.

I attended the funeral of a relative of mine back in 2000 , a former Lt Cdr, and while there were some there who did respect him and were his friends, there were also a large portion in attendance who were checking he had actually died. The pall bearers were ratings standing around in the rain on a sunday morning who had absolutely no interest in the event ,

Funerals are for the families, the deceased won't know!

For all the reasons you mention, including inconvenience, the Services should honour their dead. It reflects ethos and demonstrates the nature of Service Life and honour due to those that served or are serving. Other Nations do it well and our service people should get their due honour specifically and annually.

hptmurphy
6th January 2020, 18:17
For all the reasons you mention, including inconvenience, the Services should honour their dead. It reflects ethos and demonstrates the nature of Service Life and honour due to those that served or are serving. Other Nations do it well and our service people should get their due honour specifically and annually.

Those who died are remembered annually by various events held by the state and as these are state events they need the attendance of the various arms of the defence forces, no problem here.

But detailing youngfellas to attend funerals of former servicemen who served 40 years ago is a non runner. There may be volunteers or guys released from duties to attend certain events such as burials during the working day, again all fitting... but the day of a fifty two seater coach full of the various' courses' detailed to attend the funeral of someone they never heard of is wrong especially if the various ranks above them are more noticeable by their absence than their presence.

Flamingo
6th January 2020, 20:33
The American system is worth looking at, where all eligible veterans are entitled to a military funeral (and headstone). My brother in law (an ex National Guard chaplain) officiates at quite a few.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_funerals_in_the_United_States

DeV
6th January 2020, 22:23
With all due respect to the dead, their families and their service it probably should be done

But there isn’t sufficient personnel to do current operational tasks without overburdening already underpaid and overburdened serving personnel with a resultant effect on retention

Bravo20
7th January 2020, 11:08
But detailing youngfellas to attend funerals of former servicemen who served 40 years ago is a non runner. There may be volunteers or guys released from duties to attend certain events such as burials during the working day, again all fitting... but the day of a fifty two seater coach full of the various' courses' detailed to attend the funeral of someone they never heard of is wrong especially if the various ranks above them are more noticeable by their absence than their presence.

I disagree with you, the provision of funeral honours to retired members is an important part of demonstrating respect for the service and goes someway to demonstrating to these youngfellas that they are part of a larger family. Even if they do not realise it at the time they will in later years. I have carried many a stranger's coffin while in uniform and it is really only now when I am off the age that relatives and friends begin to pop off that I realise the importance of such displays of respect are to the family. You should not be forgotten when your time in uniform is over.

Now the uniform representation does not have to be more than is required per the regulations.

ancientmariner
7th January 2020, 11:18
I disagree with you, the provision of funeral honours to retired members is an important part of demonstrating respect for the service and goes someway to demonstrating to these youngfellas that they are part of a larger family. Even if they do not realise it at the time they will in later years. I have carried many a stranger's coffin while in uniform and it is really only now when I am off the age that relatives and friends begin to pop off that I realise the importance of such displays of respect are to the family. You should not be forgotten when your time in uniform is over.

Now the uniform representation does not have to be more than is required per the regulations.

A balanced view.

Poiuyt
7th January 2020, 12:05
I prefer the US Military solution - a dedicated unit whose job it is to deal with graves and funerals. Such a thing could easily be done in Ireland if we had the manpower etc. but is a big ask in the current climate.

A dedicated Section including Sergeant & officer who would do a 4/6 month stint, they would do their normal day to day job, but have no duties other than to be on standby for funeral and related duties. After 4/6 months, it would be passed onto the next section.

Then again, given the manpower crisis, this is just wishful thinking.

na grohmiti
7th January 2020, 14:59
That strikes me as a bit depressing. These people joined to be soldiers, sailors or airmen, not pall bearers.

Fantasia
7th January 2020, 15:08
Ordinarily, once a family express their desire for the DF to be involved in a funeral, usually through friends or contacts in their old unit, the Bde RSM would look after the rest. In the NS, I would assume this falls on the Master at Arms.

Even token attendance is greatly appreciated by the families.

However, there has to be a line in the sand somewhere. It is 20 / 21 years service.

A man that was a recruit for a week and left and dies 70 years later should not be afforded the same levels of respect as someone with 42 years service.

However, the burden of responsibility must fall on the family to initiate the process by making contact. Not every exer wants to have military at their funeral and the organisation cannot be responsible for monitoring if someone that retired 30+ years ago has passed away.

Bravo20
7th January 2020, 15:23
That strikes me as a bit depressing. These people joined to be soldiers, sailors or airmen, not pall bearers.

There is no difference between this and carrying out a guard of honour for some ambassador presenting his credentials.

na grohmiti
7th January 2020, 15:54
True, but those who do GOH for ambassadors get to do other duties too.

hptmurphy
7th January 2020, 17:55
[
QUOTE]However, there has to be a line in the sand somewhere. It is 20 / 21 years service.

A man that was a recruit for a week and left and dies 70 years later should not be afforded the same levels of respect as someone with 42 years service

There is the crux of the issue, why should the man who turned up got paid for 42 years get any more than the man who decided it wasn't for him, the guy who was in for 42 years could have been a waste of space while the other man could have achieved great things beyond the DF

You should not be forgotten when your time in uniform is over.[/QUOTE]

99% are and of that 99% , 100% of them have never voiced an opinion or care.. because they are dead!



There is no difference between this and carrying out a guard of honour for some ambassador presenting his credentials.

Huge difference in that GoH s are carried out within the working day where as most funeral attendances are outside normal working hours . Few will remember but there was a time when units in the Southern Command during the late 70s and early 80s were at funerals two and three times per week as they had served in the War of Independence or Civil War and more blank ammunition was expended at gravesides than in annual unit exercises. It was fitting but it ate into man power so much that they could have established a permanent funeral party

Will they turn up when I'm gone...no

Would I want them there ......no

For the amount of service I gave should my family request a presence..again no

na grohmiti
7th January 2020, 19:35
Cork used to have a Land rover just to tow the Gun Carriage on which a coffin would sit.

DeV
7th January 2020, 20:48
If someone joined at 16, 21 years service and dies at say 75.

There will be very very few still serving who will have served with that person.

That isn’t to say that they shouldn’t get Something but that is reality.

apod
7th January 2020, 21:07
It still does. Maintained by the BAR.

It is only used for personnel who die while in service. Once you retire(if you have your 20 done) you are entitled to a bearer party and a dressed coffin that's it. And that's should be enough. The bearer party will have been detailed and chances are won't know the exer but if you have a good Sgt I/C he/she will have them rehearsed to death before hand to make sure we give that Exer a good send off.After all at some stage you reap what you sow.

I have done more Military funerals than I have had decent dinners in the cookhouse.Everyone from former Thaoisigh to young lads who died in service and everything in between. ALL deserved the highest standard of drill and deportment and it makes a HUGE difference to the families. I don't agree with detailing young soldiers to be mourners at family funerals but having buried members of my own family looking down from the pulpit when delivering a eulogy and seeing a "green sea" sitting at the back of the church was a big comfort AND was commented on favourably afterwards by other family members.

Now here is the but.

I am serving. Those people were and are my comrades.They serve with me and know me.They were there to support me and mine,not because they knew my deceased family members. There is NO way people should be detailed to attend a funeral of someone they never served with,who was retired at the time of death unless they are part of the actual funeral ceremony. Period.

Now having said that I have put it in my will that if I die while in service I want certain people to carry my coffin and I want full Military honours. And the funeral will be on...........



A Saturday.:-D:-D:-D

Flamingo
7th January 2020, 23:21
When I die, I want to be taken to the icecreamatorioum, for a traditional sundae service...

(David Sedaris)

Bravo20
8th January 2020, 09:35
I think we are all in agreement that people shouldn't be detailed to be mourners. The bearer party & firing squad :) are another matter.

Getting back to the funeral in question, I spoke with a few people who attended it and they were very complimentary of it and the bearer party. Mostly it was the sight of the full church that reminded them of when they lived on the island.

na grohmiti
8th January 2020, 11:57
My organisation, a government agency, has a particularly strange tradition. Some of us are uniformed, most are not. Many rotate through uniform during their career.
If a member, who worked at any time in a uniformed capacity, dies, their colleagues attend in uniform, even if their current duties are no longer uniformed.
The result is those attending leave the funeral with the impression that my organisation has way more uniformed members than it actually has....

ancientmariner
8th January 2020, 20:26
My organisation, a government agency, has a particularly strange tradition. Some of us are uniformed, most are not. Many rotate through uniform during their career.
If a member, who worked at any time in a uniformed capacity, dies, their colleagues attend in uniform, even if their current duties are no longer uniformed.
The result is those attending leave the funeral with the impression that my organisation has way more uniformed members than it actually has....

The navy at this time is suffering from a shortage of trained personnel to take , or keep ships at sea. This is not a unique situation, as our neighbours have 30 operational ships but also have the same number of laid-up surface ships and submarines cluttering up a number of naval bases, that may never go to sea again. They do have a refurbished destroyer, Hunt class MCV and another single role minehunter all used for Static live seamanship and ship training for reserves, cadets, and general service training. The idea would be refurbish P31 and reinstate her flight deck and use her for general training alongside and flight training at anchor in the lower harbour. Then subject to a negative survey take her out and conduct a sinkex. However I believe she could last another 25 years. Conduct all training as if she was at sea, with full catering and night exercises where required.

A/TEL
9th January 2020, 22:07
The navy at this time is suffering from a shortage of trained personnel to take , or keep ships at sea. This is not a unique situation, as our neighbours have 30 operational ships but also have the same number of laid-up surface ships and submarines cluttering up a number of naval bases, that may never go to sea again. They do have a refurbished destroyer, Hunt class MCV and another single role minehunter all used for Static live seamanship and ship training for reserves, cadets, and general service training. The idea would be refurbish P31 and reinstate her flight deck and use her for general training alongside and flight training at anchor in the lower harbour. Then subject to a negative survey take her out and conduct a sinkex. However I believe she could last another 25 years. Conduct all training as if she was at sea, with full catering and night exercises where required.

P31 will not last another 25 years. Her hull and systems are outdated and engines are on their last legs.

The money is simply not available to support 10 seagoing ships.

I do agree it should be retained alongside as a training ship, similar to the RN training ship HMS Bristol.

It could then last 25 years easily enough, Just turn her around every year for a clean and drydock her every 4-5 years.

DeV
10th January 2020, 09:38
Why when there are existing simulators in NMCI which would be far more cost effective?

ancientmariner
10th January 2020, 09:41
P31 will not last another 25 years. Her hull and systems are outdated and engines are on their last legs.

The money is simply not available to support 10 seagoing ships.

I do agree it should be retained alongside as a training ship, similar to the RN training ship HMS Bristol.

It could then last 25 years easily enough, Just turn her around every year for a clean and drydock her every 4-5 years.

That is exactly what I would recommend and give an edge to personnel in shipboard training before voyaging.

na grohmiti
10th January 2020, 17:22
Why when there are existing simulators in NMCI which would be far more cost effective?

Simulators can only go so far. Nothing beats having an actual ship under your feet when you are learning basic seamanship. Same is true for all branches. NMCI is set up mainly for the Merchant marine, but many of the systems NS trainees would be expected to use are unique to the NS.
While the ship is there, use it as a floating classroom, equipped with the same equipment sensors and systems found on all other naval vessels.

DeV
10th January 2020, 19:08
Simulators can only go so far. Nothing beats having an actual ship under your feet when you are learning basic seamanship. Same is true for all branches. NMCI is set up mainly for the Merchant marine, but many of the systems NS trainees would be expected to use are unique to the NS.
While the ship is there, use it as a floating classroom, equipped with the same equipment sensors and systems found on all other naval vessels.

Never been in it but it is a joint venture including the NS so why not (or at the Naval College).

What use would it be tied up permanently? Take it out and put it ashore and then you don’t have to deal with the upkeep of the hull etc?

golden rivet
10th January 2020, 19:42
we are all going for the pints...

ancientmariner
10th January 2020, 20:09
Never been in it but it is a joint venture including the NS so why not (or at the Naval College).

What use would it be tied up permanently? Take it out and put it ashore and then you don’t have to deal with the upkeep of the hull etc?

A Static Training ship has been a tradition in Navies for many a century. It gives the trainee shipboard experience without going to sea. The ship must be up to date so that the experience is as real as possible. The NMCI gives Academic , Technical, Communications, and Simulated Navigation and Engineering training to junior ranks such as Ratings, cadets and Officers under training. There is also real time training for all ranks in Safety at Sea and Firefighting plus escape drills for those required to fly in Helicopters ( Dunking Course ). All of these courses are subject to examination and certification.
The RN refurbished HMS Bristol , a destroyer, and use her and two MCV's as static training ships. I would prefer to do that than sell our ships into a market of unknown eventual owners. Ships are NOT routinely "put ashore". The only downside I can see is provision of a permanent berth and dealing with the disposal of the contents of her Sewage Tank. Everything costs money and so would this. The big advantage is the ship and it's systems are real and will be transferable to operational ships.

hptmurphy
10th January 2020, 22:58
we are all going for the pints...

ratings mess bar open? Can we have a tab like the old days? 50p a pint....:n:)

ancientmariner
11th January 2020, 09:45
ratings mess bar open? Can we have a tab like the old days? 50p a pint....:n:)

AFAIK No pints or alcohol are routinely available ashore or afloat except by specific authorisation by higher authority for a sanctioned occasion.

na grohmiti
11th January 2020, 10:34
Never been in it but it is a joint venture including the NS so why not (or at the Naval College).

What use would it be tied up permanently? Take it out and put it ashore and then you don’t have to deal with the upkeep of the hull etc?

But the upkeep of the hull is about 90% of what seamanship is all about.

hptmurphy
13th January 2020, 12:33
AFAIK No pints or alcohol are routinely available ashore or afloat except by specific authorisation by higher authority for a sanctioned occasion.

OK shut up whinging we'll bring you and buy you a pint!:n:)