Does the RN need the RNR?

Does the RN need the RNR?

  • Yes, but changed from the way it is today

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, a waste of money and valuable training time

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    178

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
Whilst its easy to say "forget the RNR where were they on Highbrow" the fact remains that it is fleet which identifies the billets that need manning. In the case of highbrow there were a number of deeply specialised slots which needed bodies quickly and which got bodies quickly.

To slag off the RNR because the MW branch or something similar weren't there is a bit pointless, I assume you'll be saying that because only 6 ships were involved, we only need 6 in the RN becuase they couldnt get to the Op in time?
 

flipflop

Midshipman
In todays operational clement, the RNR are getting more and more out of their depth which in theatre is a particular concern. Having managed 5 RNR’s in Iraq and still manage a large portion of FTRS personnel my concern is purely ATTITUDE. I agree that there is and always will be a need for the RNR and they do a sterling job, however I am concerned that many approach FTRS with memories of the past and are simply ‘past it’. This is not necessary a result of age but a result of modernisation and education. You mention weekends (Friday afternoons and Wednesday M&Ms) well consider 2SL PFS and the CWW. That will answer that question without mercy.
Somehow we need to recruit the right person for the job and train accordingly.
 

GCYZ

Lantern Swinger
flipflop said:
.........I am concerned that many approach FTRS with memories of the past and are simply ‘past it’. This is not necessary a result of age but a result of modernisation and education.
Sadly true of many regular reservists on FTRS as well as RNR's.
 

flipflop

Midshipman
bunnyjumper said:
all_purple_now said:
nelsons_blood said:
I reckon a few of you blowing the RNR trumpet need a bit of a wake-up call!! There is so much I would like to reply to, however for starters....
I recall a previous thread in which Nelsons Blood started sounding off about the RNR.

May I suggest DNFTT?

APN
Obviously someone who calls himself Nelsons Blood, will be unable to function outside of the RN. Suggest therefore he is probably likely to want to join the RNR. Perhaps then he will change his views. :wink:

Or perhaps he will be able to give us the benefit of his experience.
Nelsons blood, Come out of the clossit.
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
flipflop said:
bunnyjumper said:
all_purple_now said:
nelsons_blood said:
I reckon a few of you blowing the RNR trumpet need a bit of a wake-up call!! There is so much I would like to reply to, however for starters....
I recall a previous thread in which Nelsons Blood started sounding off about the RNR.

May I suggest DNFTT?

APN
Obviously someone who calls himself Nelsons Blood, will be unable to function outside of the RN. Suggest therefore he is probably likely to want to join the RNR. Perhaps then he will change his views. :wink:

Or perhaps he will be able to give us the benefit of his experience.
Nelsons blood, Come out of the clossit.
Whats a clossit? 8O
 

Jim30

Lantern Swinger
With FTRS its worth noting that the vast majority (IIRC in excess of 80%) are ex regular and nothing to do with the RNR.
 

trehorn

War Hero
In MY opinion,

1. A small percentage of the RNR are what can be called competant in their allocated branch.

2. A very large percentage of the RNR are really keen to (AND REALLY NEED TO) learn more to become more competant in their allocated branch.

3. A small percentage of the RNR think that they are alot more competant than they actually are and assume that every one else in the RNR either is or should be.

I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU ALL TO DECIDE WHICH BRACKET YOU PUT YOURSELVES IN.

But i get quite annoyed by people rabbiting on about how competetnt the RNR are when from personal experience i can say there is only a small percentage who can honestly say that.
 

WarMonger

War Hero
Trehorn I think you missed a category...!!

4) A small percentage that are completely incompetant and despite continued efforts never seem to improve.

In my experience it is category 3 that does the most damage and these along with number 4's are where we should be concentrating our efforts.

I would also like to add...

Im sure a large degree of our problem seems to be the complete farce that is the process of getting people to trained strength. Throughout my time my task book was a record of the jobs done and the experience acheived i.e. it was necessary to do the job more than once before you were considered competant. Admittedly this has meant it has taken me a longer period of time to get to where I am as a result however I would consider myself to be far more competant as a result. It now seems that if you complete a weekend for example letting go and weighing and anchor on the AJAX barge your are suddenly competant in that task..This is not the case..!!!

Another classic example is a the example of a leading hand that was promoted to such whilst having never served on an RN warship ever!!!..I would challenge anyone to explain how it was it possible to complete a seamanship task book on that basis..!!

We need to get back to advancing people based on practical skills and experience rather than the current tick in the box mentality that we seem to be fostering in order to get our statistics right for the powers that be.!!
 

trehorn

War Hero
Bravo Warmonger,

i couldn't have put it better myself.

Even better than that are the people who stand around on the Ajax barge (or wherever you are training) and dont lift a finger all day and still get a signature in their task book.

It would appear that just watching someone else do a revolution can qualify you to do the job. If thats the case why dont we just watch videos of other people working??
 

WarMonger

War Hero
Absolutely.....

I feel a new thread coming on...

"Training by Video" The fast track approach to training and promotion..RNR style!!
 

hammockhead

Lantern Swinger
flipflop said:
In todays operational clement, the RNR are getting more and more out of their depth which in theatre is a particular concern. Having managed 5 RNR’s in Iraq and still manage a large portion of FTRS personnel my concern is purely ATTITUDE. I agree that there is and always will be a need for the RNR and they do a sterling job, however I am concerned that many approach FTRS with memories of the past and are simply ‘past it’.
The vast bulk of the FTRS lot are regular RN who come to the end of their commissions and are kept on. As for reservists who take on FTRS slots, I hate to say this but they are not exactly reflective of most of the RNR as the rest of us have civilian careers to get along with.
 

beer_bosun

Lantern Swinger
WarMonger said:
Another classic example is a the example of a leading hand that was promoted to such whilst having never served on an RN warship ever!!!..I would challenge anyone to explain how it was it possible to complete a seamanship task book on that basis..!!
I know exactly where you're coming from, one of our "GSSR" (spit) POs hasn't the first clue about seamanship, GSSR or anything else for that matter. They consistently fail their WHT so I have to ask why/how are they a PO if they cannot get the basic right and more worringly, what use are they to GSSR (spit).

Surely they cannot be expected to instruct in something they cannot do themselves...
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
well, i personally would like to congratulate warmonger, trehorn, and now beer bosun, for giving the RN lots more ammunition to use in the slanging matches that go on in here, as if they didn't have enough to say about us, do you really feel the need to give them more?.

I'm starting to feel that membership of this forum is a waste of time, if it's not the RN slagging us off its you guys doing the job for them!.
Oh, and while we are at it, here's my two penneth, you've missed a category. Those members of the RNR that feel the need to come into public forums pigeon holeing other members of the RNR with broad sweeping statements, without actually telling anyone which of their categorys they themselves fall into.I know where my money is going.

At the time of my posting, this particular thread had over 1300 views, shame on all three of you, you should try and remember that your not sat all three of you round a table in your local pub having a chat, its a public forum, and you could be doing untold damage to an organisation that i personally believe is fantastic and has a real job to do as part of the wider Royal Navy, and this damage being done to a service that is already struggling for numbers.

I only hope that potential members of the RNR dont come in here to see what we are all about, what a fantastic job you are doing for our recruiting figures!
 

dubaipusser

Lantern Swinger
mazza_magoo said:
well, i personally would like to congratulate warmonger, trehorn, and now beer bosun, for giving the RN lots more ammunition to use in the slanging matches that go on in here............you should try and remember that your not sat all three of you round a table in your local pub having a chat, its a public forum, and you could be doing untold damage to an organisation that i personally believe is fantastic and has a real job to do as part of the wider Royal Navy,......
I am not sure that how individuals in the RN view us is really the most pressing worry - enough of our people work alongside the RN (during ORT and on Operational tours) and demonstrate that they really are good enough to do the job.

As always there is a small minority (and the RN has its' own share of underperformers if the issue ever has to degenerate to a slanging match) who need extra help - and it comes right back to training, ensuring that the operational role is understood and the training to meet that role is well defined, well delivered and continuously reviewed to ensure appropriate QC standards are maintained.

[quote="WarMonger
Another classic example is a the example of a leading hand that was promoted to such whilst having never served on an RN warship ever!!!..I would challenge anyone to explain how it was it possible to complete a seamanship task book on that basis..!![/quote]

[quote="beer_bosun
I know exactly where you're coming from, one of our "GSSR" (spit) POs hasn't the first clue about seamanship, GSSR or anything else for that matter. They consistently fail their WHT so I have to ask why/how are they a PO if they cannot get the basic right and more worringly, what use are they to GSSR (spit).

Surely they cannot be expected to instruct in something they cannot do themselves...[/quote]

If any of us undertake training and believe that we are being 'led by the blind' we need to pass that back up the line - In my current billet I operate a Feedback process for all trainees (sent back to COMMARRES, FLEET, Lead School, RTO and Unit) but if there is no formal feedback process at the point of training delivery then there needs to be something in-Unit or in Lead Schools - and if push comes to shove the Divisional System was designed for this sort of 2-way communication.

Mazza_Magoo, I appreciate your point about RR being perhaps an inappropriate forum for this sort of thing and would commend 'constructive comment' via the internal RN/RNR processes more effective than RR dripping
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
I agree dubaipusser, criticism is acceptable, provided that it is as you have said constructive. I also agree that there are 'numpty's' out there that do show us in a bad light, and also that these people exist in all walks of life the RN/RNR being no exception. But i stand by my comments that potential recruits will come here and read what we are saying, and if i was one i'd run a mile after some of the comments that have been posted by some rnr's on here, coupled with the comments that others such as nelsons blood have added.
Hopefully they will have the sense to go to the RTU's and see for themselves what we are all about, and not form their own opinions from what is fast turning into a 'drip fest'.

MM
 

beer_bosun

Lantern Swinger
mazza_magoo said:
I only hope that potential members of the RNR dont come in here to see what we are all about, what a fantastic job you are doing for our recruiting figures!
Is this a recruitment site? Oh sorry.
 

beer_bosun

Lantern Swinger
mazza_magoo said:
I agree dubaipusser, criticism is acceptable, provided that it is as you have said constructive. I also agree that there are 'numpty's' out there that do show us in a bad light, and also that these people exist in all walks of life the RN/RNR being no exception. But i stand by my comments that potential recruits will come here and read what we are saying, and if i was one i'd run a mile after some of the comments that these three have put on here, coupled with the comments that others such as nelsons blood have added.
Hopefully they will have the sense to go to the RTU's and see for themselves what we are all about, and not form their own opinions from what is fast turning into a 'drip fest'.

MM
Hmm, let me see.

My contributions on this thread are:

beer_bosun said:
nelsons_blood said:
5. There is obviously a requirement for the RNR, however, I suggest that the mindset of the RNR needs to be altered with expectations lowered as to what the RN will require from you. GSSR etc is a good idea, however if your training is not up to spec then you cannot expect to be sat around the table negotiating the solution to the middle-east problem.
Agree with most of what you say, but I cannot see many in the RN being sat around a table negotiating middle east peace either :)
This seems to be a fair argument to the previous point - doesn't seem to be controversial, but you seem to think it is. Strange.

beer_bosun said:
GCYZ said:
Aggree completely. When MW training took place at Dryad the RNR where on the key list for Coniston Building. We opened up Sat and Sun, conducted training as required, even cleaned ship on sunday PM. Now at Collingwood we need a babysitter, who comes in and gets on with his own thing, does not contribute (or is required to ) to training. (Those involved are happy to volunteer as it takes them off the weekend duty roster.)
Ah memory lane, the heady days of MW in Coniston. That would be when we got the same training as the RN lads just over weekends. Excellent weekends, well attended and worthwhile.

Shame we couldn't retrain on the new hunting technology. Would have given us a few options including "SPO".
This is based on actual experience so cannot see how it is dripping. Merely remniscing over past good times and suggesting a potential future usage of RNR personnel. Yep its anti-SPO but I couldn't give a rats backside.

beer_bosun said:
WarMonger said:
Another classic example is a the example of a leading hand that was promoted to such whilst having never served on an RN warship ever!!!..I would challenge anyone to explain how it was it possible to complete a seamanship task book on that basis..!!
I know exactly where you're coming from, one of our "GSSR" (spit) POs hasn't the first clue about seamanship, GSSR or anything else for that matter. They consistently fail their WHT so I have to ask why/how are they a PO if they cannot get the basic right and more worringly, what use are they to GSSR (spit).

Surely they cannot be expected to instruct in something they cannot do themselves...
Again based on actual events.

Are you perhaps suggesting that we should simply hide the way things are? Doesn't sound like a forum to me, more like another "rose tinted" view of the world.

Shame on you. When something happens that I feel is good, rest assured I will be posting, but until then, I reserve the right to pass on as much cynisism, and rant as I feel is justified.
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
beer_bosun said:
mazza_magoo said:
I only hope that potential members of the RNR dont come in here to see what we are all about, what a fantastic job you are doing for our recruiting figures!
Is this a recruitment site? Oh sorry.
Well if we're nit picking, i thought the title of this thread was 'does the RN need the RNR?' and not 'please post examples of your experiences of poorly performing members of the RNR'.
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
beer_bosun said:
WarMonger said:
Another classic example is a the example of a leading hand that was promoted to such whilst having never served on an RN warship ever!!!..I would challenge anyone to explain how it was it possible to complete a seamanship task book on that basis..!!
I know exactly where you're coming from, one of our "GSSR" (spit) POs hasn't the first clue about seamanship, GSSR or anything else for that matter. They consistently fail their WHT so I have to ask why/how are they a PO if they cannot get the basic right and more worringly, what use are they to GSSR (spit).

Surely they cannot be expected to instruct in something they cannot do themselves...
If you feel that the GSSR branch is so poor that you cannot even say it without spitting, perhaps you might find better use of your spare time than the rnr, as you obviously dont enjoy it anymore...... :wink:
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top