PDFORRA report "Life at Sea"

[Marius]

[QUOTE=hptmurphy;133828]

1.3 crew they dont have 1 . no the ships are sailing under Strength & this is majority of time ask any seagoing ns person the ship rarely sails with full Strength so this puts added pressure on personel who have to take up the extra work.

is this not a safety violation in itself!..amazing what discussions like this drag out of the wood work

No, it is not a automatically a safety violation. Please note in my example below that I have not given the real (operational) numbers.

A ship has an establishment and a strength (like any military unit) : it may have an establishment of 20 seamen. If 5 are on leave it has a strength of 15. It is safe to sail with 15. However if 5 more drop out, leaving 10, then the unit may be under strength and there may be a safety implication.

A decision on whether to sail under strength is the OCs although they will often clear it higher up and will often receive derogations from their sailing order depending on what type and rank of personnel are missing (for example a ship may be permitted to anchor more frequently etc.) Employment of the reserves has greatly increased the options regarding seamen but not for any other branches ....often when people refer to a ship sailing 'under strength' (guilty of this myself) the actually mean 'under establishment'

In the end the decision is a judgement call for the Officer Commanding...another tough decision. It is normal for a decision to sail under strength to be met with accusations of career driven subservience. But the truth is it is a carefully considered decision and the fact that a particular ship is under strength at any one time should NOT be advertised to the general public for obvious operational reasons.

[hptmurphy]

I agree with the above....obviously there is a comfort zone in numbers..and in fairness the employment of reservists has probably saved a bad situation from becoming worse.

In my last on the subject i should have term establishment as oppsoed to strenght. there is a difference between what a ship would ideally sail with..and what a ship can actually sail with safely..sorry for any confusion.Misinterpretation of terminology can often lead to confuson

I don't think there is a cavalier attitude towards this....in fact in fairness capatains of ships have prefferd to have the vessels tied up rather than going to sea undermanned.

What does trouble me slightly is a vacuum created by an exodus of expirience personnel because their conditions have become intolerable..applies to all ranks and rates..and it is the possibility of this occurence thats needs to dealt with because of the lasting implications it has in the past when it happened.

Accidents are a regretable feature of any high risk job such as the NS..but should not be contributed to by government and departmental policy on days at sea commitments.

I am fully aware of my pointed criticism of the situation that has been reported to prevail. I tend to react in defence of those who see them selves to be getting the sharp end of the stick. Please bear in mind my crticism is pointed at policy makers..and those who hide behind these policies rather than those who have to work with them.

There are several ways..in my opinion..that are options to some of these reported difficulties..and do not involve keel hauling or yard arms if anybody would care to at least discuss them.

[Dogwatch]

What does trouble me slightly is a vacuum created by an exodus of expirience personnel because their conditions have become intolerable..applies to all ranks and rates..and it is the possibility of this occurence thats needs to dealt with because of the lasting implications it has in the past when it happened.

There are several ways..in my opinion..that are options to some of these reported difficulties..and do not involve keel hauling or yard arms if anybody would care to at least discuss them.

Definitely agree with this. The NS has looked at many ways to retain people, most of them have been unsuccessful. One method I feel that hasn't been utilised fully, is (in my opinion I must stress) pay. If the NS had pay rates that made it viable to go to sea and earn more than the present PDA (Patrol Duty Allowance) of €40+ per day before tax, more people would go for it. Compare PDA to over night unaccommodated rates & then a few nights away at a careers exhibition suddenly equals a month's PDA!

I know this is most definitely not the only solution, but it surely can make seagoing more attractive. Food for thought!

[hptmurphy]

Unfortunately rates are fixed to army rates of pay and there is very little likehood of the DF introducing different subsidues just to keep people at sea.

if there was a way of seperating the two strauctures it might be an option. I would like into the option of removing crews from ships when they come along side and replacing them with dockyard crews and security parties ..getting rid of duties along side over prolonged periods and letting the crews actually be relieved of duties after say athree week patrol for up to ten days or so..just athought..

[ocean]

hpt - you are right, they need empty ships at the end of patrol, an accomodation block ashore near the ships is essential for those living onboard ship. Its been said a thousand times.

[Goldie fish]

Possible use for the Former irish Steel site....

[hptmurphy]

It was the case with the RN years ago with the ton class sweepers that at the end of a patrol there were accom blocks available for ships crews to live in while ashore. The peacocks were never designed to be lived in.....its just a concept that never cottoned on here.

Culturally the Irish DF has changed where living out is the norm rather than the exception.. Problem being if guys are living in aboard ships the tend to be easy targets for jobs atc or duties..that would have to cease immediately.

The duties along side have always been a bone of contention especially when a ship is berthed at its home port.

Three day rotation of duties alongside is the worst possible scenario as two of the tree days are commited to duty or resting off...and if this falls over a weekend..guys may never even get out of the basin! It was only through the attitude towards swaps of duties in different ports that many enlisted ABs etc got home at all when alonside in haulbowline.

ok so its not a nine to five monday to friday job

How about a shift rotation of well say three weeks along side where every one get sta least one weeks leave and the rest of the crew work shifts of days or night so thsy at leats they know that for the remaining period they willhave a week of nights or week of days...at maximum.

The crews off ships is a nice theory,,but would only work if there are sufficient people to work ship in their absecence..are ships alongside for ten days still on 4 hrs sailing notice...is there sufficent personnel in the base to put ship to sea in an emergency..not looking for answers..just these would be considerations in the implementation of such as sytem.

This is where thoughts on looking at other industries comes into play..how to high level intensity civil type employments..with production quoatas deal with out side of normal trading hours shift work..maybe a model should be studied from this area.

Its very hard to move on from what are yaers of accepted practises...but if the service is to survive without confontation somebody will have to take a very bold move forward..and I truly know that there are very good people on both side of the rank divide who are willing to at least propose and try to make soem of these things viable.

[mikeym]

I read the suggestions part of the pdforra report and here are some of the suggestions.

• More time off
• No duties to be done when ship is alongside hire civilians/watchmen
• Provide a creche or subsidised childcare facilities
• Anchoring near spike island is ridiculous when the oil wharf is not in use
• 2 week patrols
• More money
• Officers should behave like human beings
• The commodore should resign
• The tax man should do a 3 week patrol :D

Theres more than that but im not going to include them all.

[Marius]

Possible reasons for anchoring near Spike rather than proceeding a/s Oil Wharf include:

a. berth booked for another naval vessel not yet returned from patrol (for refuelling)
b. ownship mechanical problems restricting manoeuvrability
c. expected delivery of fuel to the base
d. adverse tide/ flood/ wind conditions expected (it may be safer to remain off the wall)

I don't think anybody anchors their ship in sight of Cobh merely in order to be mean to the crew.

[hptmurphy]

I read the suggestions part of the pdforra report and here are some of the suggestions.

• More time off
• No duties to be done when ship is alongside hire civilians/watchmen
• Provide a creche or subsidised childcare facilities
• Anchoring near spike island is ridiculous when the oil wharf is not in use
• 2 week patrols
• More money
• Officers should behave like human beings
• The commodore should resign
• The tax man should do a 3 week patrol :D

Theres more than that but im not going to include them all.

from the sublime to the ridiculous......half of what is posted is credeble..the other half is drivel......as for the anchoring off...can't beleive that is happening again..it used to be the case when a ship was due along side of a friday a captain might anchor off late on thursday evening to get alongside early on friday ...thought that was a good thing..

getting rid of the commodore..why not just get rid of everybody you don't like

Officers do behave like human beings..all though they might not like to be seen as such..most of them want improvements as well...

2 week patrols.....yeah ok....

more money..you have to increase productivity to warrant that ..so theres the two week patrol thing gone out the window

more time off....again this shatters the reduced patrol time scenario...

the rest is too ridiculous to comment on..

[Farel']

mikeym is qouting from the report - I suspect that the report probably needs to be given to an experienced qualitative researcher to check on the qualitative or quantitative methods used to acquire the data and then to access the academic rigour applied to developing the findings - if these stand up then so be it and we all need to be alarmed - if there is a weakness then I wouldn't like to be either in the shoes of the principals associated with the report or any consultants or other agents promoting the report - so any qualitative academics out there ready to do a peer review!

[Vice Admiral]

If I was in charge:



* More time off Agreed
* No duties to be done when ship is alongside hire civilians/watchmen NSR are prohibited from doing duties to relieve regular crews unless attached.
* Provide a creche or subsidised childcare facilities Get real
* Anchoring near spike island is ridiculous when the oil wharf is not in use Marius answered this one
* 2 week patrols Patrols to start monday and end friday alternating 2week/3week patrol
* More money You can't have all of the above and this
* Officers should behave like human beings Officers are human beings and enjoy being away for 23 days at a time just as much you do
* The commodore should resign For pushung productivity?
* The tax man should do a 3 week patrol :D Why not get the C+A from DoF and DoD out instead

[Buddy]

creche

Ha a creche on a ship would be funny, imagine all the sick children from stormy seas

[mikeym]

Just to remind ye they were suggestions by different people and not me.

I wouldnt agree with all of them but from what i read theres a lot of hate towards the top brass and the non seagoing personnel.

[hptmurphy]

Never even suggested that they were your own..thanks for posting them. Just find some of them to be totally unbelieveable.