Lt - Lt Cdr Signal (not Norman!!!!)

#1
I am not Norman. I just wish to make this clear from the outset.....

If any one is in the position to PM the signal I'd be grateful; POTL is not conducive to reading my signal in-tray. And no, I'm not on it!!!

(and if you're new here, search for a thread with a similar title from last year, you may find out who Norman is...)
 
#4
Sgt - sheer curiosity, I'll know people on it, and frankly it's always good sport finding the compulsory "they let that idiot become a 2 and 1/2?!". If I was on the signal, I'd be frantically scouring it to make sure that person wasn't me...

Not - many thanks
 
#9
brigham600 said:
RN_Commando said:
IT GOT A PROTECTIVE MARKING OF RESTRICTED
Of course this means to an officer...

Post it everywhere so all my jolly wheez mates can see it. :lol:
I haven't seen it but if I remember correctly, ratings promotion signals are Restricted with ADA but officers are Unclas with a W sic.

Always wondered why the difference - anyone know?
 
#10
TheCommunicator said:
brigham600 said:
RN_Commando said:
IT GOT A PROTECTIVE MARKING OF RESTRICTED
Of course this means to an officer...

Post it everywhere so all my jolly wheez mates can see it. :lol:
I haven't seen it but if I remember correctly, ratings promotion signals are Restricted with ADA but officers are Unclas with a W sic.

Always wondered why the difference - anyone know?
For one thing, as with honours and awards, the names of officers selected for promotion must appear in the public domain London Gazette to make it official (i.e. 'be gazetted') but they are also printed fairly regularly in the Times and Telegraph.
 

Guns

War Hero
Moderator
#12
UNCLASSIFIED yes, but still with names of people in locations that sort of give away what they do. If you see what I mean.

Should have gone REST or at least got a cover location for the "cough cough" gentleman of Poole/Hereford.

Some interesting names on there. Also a lot of people due to start PWO course. The previous block on numbers seems to have worn off. A good selection of PWOs which is nice to see as frankly being a Lt PWO is just wrong.

Reading the Royal's list the locations reads as who's who of battlezones.

For those without access 77 Warfare (Subs and Surface) 36 WAFUS (incl ATC and AV) 70 Engineering 22 Loggies 3 IS 7 TM 36 Royal 3 MS 6 Nurses. So quite a few then, plenty of ammunition for Norman there I think.
 
#13
Apparently Warfare didn't take its full allocation of slots... Gives me hope!:) You did have to wonder why they thought a Lt Ops was appropriate, but it seems to have sorted itself out now.

Appreciate the possible PERSEC implications of Poole and Hereford, and I suspect when this list is placed in the Time it may not include them.

And many thanks to those individuals who helped me out.

Al
 

flippineck

Lantern Swinger
#15
alfred_the_great said:
Apparently Warfare didn't take its full allocation of slots... Gives me hope!:) You did have to wonder why they thought a Lt Ops was appropriate, but it seems to have sorted itself out now.

Al
Well that's brilliant news, except that i know at least two who weren't on the list.

Didn't take their full allocation of slots, very kind.
 
#16
Then to be brutal, they didn't deserve to be promoted - at least in the eyes of the board. Not necessarily the nicest thing I can say, but probably the truest. I would presume that they can receive feedback from their COs, and if they are in zone the Career Manager can tell them how they did on the board, and how to improve....
 
#17
Guns said:
gentleman of Poole
Like 1AGRM?

But I agree the point, there are a few things on there I would have thought should have been obfuscated.

For those without access 77 Warfare (Subs and Surface) 36 WAFUS (incl ATC and AV) 70 Engineering 22 Loggies 3 IS 7 TM 36 Royal 3 MS 6 Nurses.
And 19 reservists, although as they're by unit rather than specialisation it's difficult to see what they do.

A fair few names I recognised across the board, a couple of WTF and a couple of why not before now.

Well done to all listed though.
 

Guns

War Hero
Moderator
#18
1 AGRM are no longer at Poole but in the old SFM building on Weston Mill Jetty. Only the training sqn remains at Poole.
 

flippineck

Lantern Swinger
#19
alfred_the_great said:
Then to be brutal, they didn't deserve to be promoted - at least in the eyes of the board. Not necessarily the nicest thing I can say, but probably the truest. I would presume that they can receive feedback from their COs, and if they are in zone the Career Manager can tell them how they did on the board, and how to improve....
So on the one hand we're saying that Lt PWOs who become OPS should be Lt Cdrs, but then on the other hand we're saying that a seagoing Lt PWO in bracket for promotion and who is at OPS isn't good enough?

Well there's a double standard if ever I saw one. .
 
#20
flippineck said:
alfred_the_great said:
Then to be brutal, they didn't deserve to be promoted - at least in the eyes of the board. Not necessarily the nicest thing I can say, but probably the truest. I would presume that they can receive feedback from their COs, and if they are in zone the Career Manager can tell them how they did on the board, and how to improve....
So on the one hand we're saying that Lt PWOs who become OPS should be Lt Cdrs, but then on the other hand we're saying that a seagoing Lt PWO in bracket for promotion and who is at OPS isn't good enough?

Well there's a double standard if ever I saw one. .
In the final analysis, it must come down to the overall quality of the individual as to whether he/she is suitable for promotion, not the particular job they are doing. Or are you suggesting that a lower OJAR assessment should be ignored? Your argument reminds me of the old chestnut about the Chief Stoker who told a First Class Tiff, "You only got your buttons by merit. I had to put the time in to get mine."
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
F The Fleet 3
P The Fleet 25
boredwafu The Fleet 85

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top