Chefs

dapperdunn

War Hero
Book Reviewer
Ah, so no stewards but we need a PTI. Pray tell why? Why not just nominate a suitable Offcr/SR to conduct fitness testing? Do we really need a 30k a year PTI onboard to run flight circuits?

Im not saying I agree with the above one way or the other but you cant have it both ways. Stewards are just as much a key enabler as a PTI. The difference is it doesnt fit with your reverse snobbery world-view.
What the flying fuck has that got to do with anything? I was replying to MG's post asking who would man the SSFAP. Nothing whatsoever to do with reverse snobbery
 

danny

War Hero
Ah, so no stewards but we need a PTI. Pray tell why? Why not just nominate a suitable Offcr/SR to conduct fitness testing? Do we really need a 30k a year PTI onboard to run flight circuits?

Im not saying I agree with the above one way or the other but you cant have it both ways. Stewards are just as much a key enabler as a PTI. The difference is it doesnt fit with your reverse snobbery world-view.

And wait for all the claims to come in when the navy is injuring people by unqualified people taking PT. That 30k a year will look like a drop in the ocean.
 

bon mot

Midshipman
Danny - my point was more general than that. PTI was just an example of someone else onboard who might be considered to be a 'nice to have'. But, to briefly indulge in some thread creep - why do we need someone onboard ship to conduct circuits for the minority of people onboard willing/able to participate*? Passing an RNFT is an individual responsibility after all. I we can do away with the 'perks' of having wardroom 'servants', why cant we do away with the perks of having an expensive personal trainer onboard?

* I know this isnt 'just' what a PTI does. But neither is hoovering and dusting 'all' a steward does.
 

dapperdunn

War Hero
Book Reviewer
And wait for all the claims to come in when the navy is injuring people by unqualified people taking PT. That 30k a year will look like a drop in the ocean.
Its not just the club swinger that takes circuits, all manner of people take them. Not heard of a personal injury claim taken out yet.
 

MG Maniac

War Hero
The regulating staff and the PTI perhaps?

Its possible however aren't they on the wheel or something similar??? I think the issue is that if stewards etc are not on board then manning the SSFAP would be down to people who would be better employed fighting/driving/manning ship systems - I suppose that in normal peace time cruising it wouldn't become a major issue however in an Action State then you are going to take people away from fighting the ship/damage control - and the Doc cannot do it on his own.
 

mikh

MIA
I love navynet - I can see why all the serious threads end up on arrse. Views on the 'RN class system' offered by someone almost 20 years out of date. Mikh - ships are lean manned enough without trying to make further 'manpower savings'. Furthermore, UY/SUYs are commonplace in the wardroom to an extent where their presence is completely unremarkable. In my experience stewards are treated with courtesy and respect onboard and the notable few officers who try to lord it over and given short shrift by the rest of us.

Another who does not read the full post! I take it you did fail to see

"or use the bunks for another branch, with the extra hands taking up the 1st Aid duties normally carried out by the stds"

throw in, I have never mentioned anything about the RN Class System or UY/SUY. Your attention to detail leaves a little to be desired, but do not let facts get in the way of your argument, after all you are trying to defend an antiquated area of the RN

you mentioned lean manning, out of interest, can you tell me how many Stewards are on a Type 23 or 45 in comparison to the OLD & BOLD 42s and 22s???? I am betting that there will not be much difference between the old and the new!

BTW, I am not having a did at the Stewards, who in general work hard and take a fair amount of crap

edited to add a few extra points
 
Last edited:

mikh

MIA
Well it looks like Alfred and bon cannot answer the question, so is there anyone out there who knows how mant Stewards serve on A) Type 23 Frigate. B) Type 45 Destroyer.
 

mikh

MIA
Cheers Alfred,

So if my memory was serving, numbers of Stds have been reduced from 7 to 6, but a batch 1 T22 had a compliment of 222, a T23 of 185 and a T42 (again batch 1) Compliment of 253 and a T45 191. this means than in the current climate of lean manning, the Std branch has suffered remarkably lightly in number reduction at sea, considering they are a branch that is not required to Run, Fight or Maintain the ship.

digger84, an extra couple in the Ops dept and ME dept could make a difference. I left in 95, If I had stayed in my next draft would have been a 23 (Going Global or so I was led to believe :() but, the manning on a 23 had been cut to the bone in some departments, and they were struggling.
 

New Posts

Top