Does the RN need the RNR?

[beer_bosun]

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:

already one step ahead of you

 

[beer_bosun]

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'.

Well in that case, yes I beleive they do.

 

[mazza_magoo]

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'.

Well in that case, yes I beleive they do.

See shippers, we do agree on something!

 

[beer_bosun]

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'.

Well in that case, yes I beleive they do.

See shippers, we do agree on something!

Didn't doubt it for a moment

 

[trehorn]

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.

Well Mazza, would you rather we lie about what actually happens in the RNR. The above comments are critsism of individuals who get the required ticks in the boxes without actually doing anything. How often do we hear the term "life in a blue suit", which is basically another way of saying TOUGH!!.

Just for the record i would put myself in bracket No 2. Keen as mustered, attend plenty of weekends but still dont feel competant in the job.

I remember being told by a 2 1/2 at the recruiting night "in six months time you could be flying over Gibraltar in a helicopter". Wheres the honesty in that bearing in mind your clearance normally takes six months to come through!

You may recall it was i who started a thread called STOP COMPLAINING, after which i came to the conclusion that we are entitled to complain considering the effort we put in.

Get your head out of the clouds and look around you. attend a training weekend and then tell me how competant you think the RNR are.

Thats not to say that competance could be achieved by most individuals if any length of time was spent doing the job in hand.

 

[mazza_magoo]

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.

Well Mazza, would you rather we lie about what actually happens in the RNR. The above comments are critsism of individuals who get the required ticks in the boxes without actually doing anything. How often do we hear the term "life in a blue suit", which is basically another way of saying TOUGH!!.

Just for the record i would put myself in bracket No 2. Keen as mustered, attend plenty of weekends but still dont feel competant in the job.

I remember being told by a 2 1/2 at the recruiting night "in six months time you could be flying over Gibraltar in a helicopter". Wheres the honesty in that bearing in mind your clearance normally takes six months to come through!

You may recall it was i who started a thread called STOP COMPLAINING, after which i came to the conclusion that we are entitled to complain considering the effort we put in.

Get your head out of the clouds and look around you. attend a training weekend and then tell me how competant you think the RNR are.

Thats not to say that competance could be achieved by most individuals if any length of time was spent doing the job in hand.

Right firstly there is a difference between dripping about a particular situation and running down people or generalisisng which is what most of your complaining centres around. With the amount of time i have spent in the rnr (22 years in fact) my head is far from in the clouds. i have and do spend many weekends training in my time, and have indeed seen the people you speak of, and it seems to me that they are now very few and far between, certainly in my unit and region where we have cut to the bone our numers and rid ourselves of all the hangers on, or perhaps your comment just applies to YOUR unit. And to support this comment about unprofessionalism, i draw your attention to your comment above about the 2and a half and your promised helicopter trip. I can say with complete honesty that these comments do NOT get bandied about at my unit.

As dubaipusser has said, if you have complaints about training etc, use the div system so that something can be done about it, i doubt very much if you will change anything by moaning and slagging people off in here.

Get down off your high horse and READ what i said. People will come in here and read what we post. You've indicated get involved with your recruiting at your unit, do you tell people at your recruiting events about all these unprofessional people you come across? If not, why not?.I doubt it that you do, so please think long and hard before you do it in here.

The point i was making and stand by is this: drip by all means, but please dont give people more ammo to slate us, leave them to do it with their misinformed comments, and try and bear in mind people will come in here and read what is written and you may put them off joining with your comments. The RNR really is in danger of becoming extinct due to lack of numbers, I wouldn't want it's demise on MY conscience.

 

[trehorn]

i tell people that i throroughly enjoy my time in the RNR, which i do. i also tell them that there are weekends which will frustrate you but the good (in my opinion) far outweighs the bad.

i tell them that their first few months will be the most boring time that they spend in the RNR because of their lack of experience, security clearance etc.

i tell them that they will get out of the RNR what they put in.

i can honestly say that there are every few people in the RNR which i do not like, regardless of unit. i think the training we get could be improved but - and this is the thing we agree on - if you make the effort and raise your concerns with the right people then most of them do tend to respond to them in a positive manner.

if you put the effort in on weekends you will get the rewards. Are you telling me that you havent seen the people who attend weekends and stand their not lifting a finger only to be the first in the queue to get there task book signed.

Its a fact.

 

[WarMonger]

Mazza..

This thread..does the RN need the RNR..!!!

The purpose of my comment was not to run down the RNR, or to discourage any one from joining and whilst you may consider some aspects to be generalised they are indeed sadly fact. I am too acutely aware of the situation we are currently presented with , with regard to recruitment and retention.

I would urge anyone to join both the RNR and the RN. It would be fair to say that over the last 14 years the RNR has changed my life..for the better..and I make no bones about that. However in order to rebuke the derisory comments from other RR members (RN bods) about our standards, then it is necessary to address issues such as this and we need to put certain elements of our house in order. Hiding from it doesnt help anyone....!!!

To say that my conscience would be troubled by the demise of the RNR is an understatement, to say that my urge to grab senior bods on an ever increasing basis would be an understatement, but most importantly watching an oppo get hurt or worse through lack of appropriate, relevant training that provided the right experience to take them forward is my primary concern.

Im sorry but thats the way I feel and I will not budge from that irrespective and I make no apologies for it either..!!

I will leave it at that but am willing to discuss the matter via PM

 

[mazza_magoo]

Trehorn/ warmonger please check your pm.

MM

 

[phil1972]

I do think that this is the most important question of the moment, the repeated changes to Branches and Training are a symptom of the fact that parts of the RN hierachy do not see a clear need for the RNR and hence the jibe that we are Really Not Required.

Some of our RN colleagues when they actually get to work with us do see us a competent and useful but as we get used pretty infrequently, it can be possible (even in our ever smaller RN) for RNRs not to be seen much and the discussions elsewhere about making it more difficult to identify us as different from the RN when we are serving, will add to this.

I guess we survive because once we are gone, it is felt, we cannot be resurrected again very quickly and previous man power shortages have also made the ability to stick someone in to fill gap, even when their training was not all that, was considered desireable.

So what to do? For the RNR they just have to stick at it and do the best we can and as long as we manage to weed out to TW*TS that give us a bad reputation from within our numbers, that is all we can do. For the RN, if it decides that the RNR are a waste of time and money, then you had better hope there isn't a real crisis that needs an "extra pair of hands" any time soon as training up a new matelot is a LOT more expensive and has a far greater lead time (if you can find people willing to fill the posts).

The comment I have heard repeatedly from RN personnel that if we as RNR are serious we should join up full time is a non-starter for a number of us, as I could not live on an AB1s salary and would end up divorced if I went in full time. I do not consider however that I take my commitment to serve my country any less seriously and I wish more people would join the forces in general and perhaps we would have less soul searching, as is the fashion at the moment, about our national identity etc.

 

[alfred_the_great]

Who-ever made the TA comment is unfortunately not comparing like with like. The Army "equip the man" whereas we "man the equipment". What does this mean in a real sense?

It is quite easy to get a group of lads together (say 200), in an open space and practice attacking one-another. It may require a small amount of technical knowledge, but it is not dependant upon the provision (s/fast time and physical space) of material.

It is not easy to get together an Ops room/SCC/Fwd tracker office to allow a RNR individual to gain knowledge on his or her specific piece of equipment. To even get to a point where you can correctly operate it takes a period of time undertaking PJTs (from 3 or 4 weeks for an OM acting as a picture compiler to 6 months or more for a WE PJT) and then you have to ensure that you keep current in the correct procedures etc. It's hard enough keeping a TOPMAST JR on top of his or her game when they are dedicated extensive time to the job; trying to keep an RNR JR current would take more time than the great majority of you are willing to put in.

There can never be a part time RNR WE, ME or Warfare, not because you are good enough but because there is not enough time to keep you in a state where you are able to do the job. To have been any use on my current deployment you would've had to have joined us nearly 9 months ago, having already completed all your PJTs. This is simply not achievable, and the time and effort required would probably be better allocated to a regular we could then use over and over again.

This is not to say you cannot contribute away from the FF/DD/PP/MM community, however this immediately cuts down the number of RN personnel who have visibility of you. QARNNS(R) spring immediately to mind (as a branch close to my heart!); it is very possible that they can add to our capability, they utilise skills they already have and add a "dark blue tint". Unfortunately, the great great majority of Matelots will never ever see their contribution, and thus don't realise what they do. This in turn will mean that any impression they do make of you will be based on a small sample, possibly non-representative of the RNR. I'm sure the JMOTS staff think highly of the RNR, but frankly those of us bouncing around Cape Wrath couldn't care less who's working in Faslane as long as our mail and OPDEF stores arrive on time!

I'm sorry if this view from the tactical weeds of the front line doesn't chime with your wishes or desires. I know that you all work hard, and this seemingly dismissive atitude from us regulars does not reflect how we regard you personally.

 

[DingDong]

nelsons_blood wrote:

4. Early RNR involvement in Op Highbrow was minimal. If the RNR cannot be called up and expected at work the following day, then they are not much use at all for short notice / immediate response operations. Highbrow? Eca

What exactly was the requirement in OP Highbrow for RNR?? From where I was we were doing fine

 

[Manny]

4. Early RNR involvement in Op Highbrow was minimal. If the RNR cannot be called up and expected at work the following day, then they are not much use at all for short notice / immediate response operations. Highbrow? Eca

What exactly was the requirement in OP Highbrow for RNR?? From where I was we were doing fine

MTO in Northwood was manned by 4 RNR at anyone time - about 6 officers and ratings were involved. Initial arrival was 4 days after start, remainder in place within 7 days - far faster than mobilisation could deliver.

Recall paperwork arrived after endex!

 

[Jim30]

"Early RNR involvement in Op Highbrow was minimal. If the RNR cannot be called up and expected at work the following day, then they are not much use at all for short notice / immediate response operations. Highbrow? Eca"

The RNR provided exactly what was required of it for HIGHBROW - short notice augmentation in some highly specific areas. Thats what was needed, thats what was supplied.

To assume the RNR is a failure because it didn't mobilise en masse overnight for a minor NEO is a facetious argument. The rest of the RN was just as stretched as we were to get things sorted.

 

[FlagWagger]

To assume the RNR is a failure because it didn't mobilise en masse overnight for a minor NEO is a facetious argument.

Yet this was just the type of argument used a few years ago to effectively kill the Comms branch/specialisation - "you weren't available for mobilisation when required, which means that you weren't used on Telic, so as of today you're GSSR - take this green suit and SA80."

 

[Jim30]

There was no need for mass mobilisation for HIGHBROW - it was a minor operation, with less than 1% of the armed forces involved.