Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

RAF DEFECTOR!!!!!

No, no, no I do not think that 9 incidents are a simple trivialisation, I am trying to put it into context. Nine incidents over SIX years involving 500+ SM's worldwide is not a great strike rate, not when you compare it to the number of incidents our surface ships have on an annual basis (Green papers refer). As for the North Sea Vessels legally doing their buisness and getting dragged down, please tell me the incidents to which refer. I cannot think of a single one, and seeing as I'm in the community I'd have heard about them - unless of course you have some very high up friends who deem it necessary to tell you and you only of such incidents! Besides the fact the average SM (excluding UK, US and FSU SSBNS) does not weigh enough, nor travel fast enough (covert movement, anyone?) to drag these vessels down. However, I am open to be proved wrong - just post the evidence of it (not heresay and rumour, please) in my pm so that the press doesn't get hold of it!

As for the "quoted document issued from within" being a "self-prophecising sham", the document was drawn up in conjunction with fishermen themselves (or their representatives), the MCA, and the Scottish Proscurate Fiscal's Office and is a legally binding document. Therefore I think you can admit your wrong there!

As for intervening in warfare management issues I'm merely suggesting to aid the development of, at the most, one JUNIOR warfare officer onboard. Now, you may run a department and be trying to achieve the highest standards (of that I do not doubt), but to say that you are unwilling to do that is crass. It is incumbent upon the ENTIRE wardroom to help them develop and if that means a quiet word, bollocking or good kicking (metaphorically before anyone starts!), from outside of the Warfare Branch so be it!

And in going to back to the origin of this thread, I think the guy should join up as a Loggie..... and then go Submariner. That way he gets the benefits of the Loggies Branch, whilst also getting a chance to dip his toe into an OPERATIONAL warfare environment and do his steely stuff before leaving and continually drawing SM pay for the rest of his career (thanks to the Pussers of the old Supply Branch bending the rules of pay and accounting in their favour).
 
neveragainonbombers said:
It must be said that I have to totally agree with Geoffery - Levers you are utterly wrong and dare I say it, come across as a bit of a sanctimonious twat. True, SOME skimmer Warfare Officers are a bunch of promotion chasing cnuts who would crawl over their dying mothers to get promoted, BUT you have to admit that you have those in all branches. I can think of at least one skimmer ME officer I could name in that category, so don't think you hold the morale high ground in that area!

As an ex Seaman Officer, they didn't have warfare in my day, I would suggest that dear old leavers is floundering in the deep end and some one should throw him a line. The reality is that there are good and bad in all branches, probably in reasonably similar proportions, most of them are after all human. Choice of branch should be far more to do with what you want to do than others perceptions of the brand.

neveragainonbombers said:
As for your rant about not getting proper working kit on ships, may I please refer you to the personel who grace the haloed halls of Abbeywood? Yes, ME and WE Officers AND Senior Rates - these are the people who deem what kit we - on the front line - get and when. You obviously know nothing of Defence Procurement, such as it is, and how it works. Consequently if you have a gripe about the standard of gear floating around the fleet I suggest you pick up a phone, dial 192, and ask to be put through to the relevant IPT in Abbeywood and shout at one of your supposedly higher plane brethren before getting on the interent and gobbing off!

As both a customer of the DPA in a previous incarnation and now a supplier to them they have improved but they still have a lot to learn. They could have better kit, and it could cost less, but they have to work out how to do it, the present way certainly has some way to go.

Peter
 
Maxi_77 said:
As an ex Seaman Officer, they didn't have warfare in my day, I would suggest that dear old leavers is floundering in the deep end and some one should throw him a line. The reality is that there are good and bad in all branches, probably in reasonably similar proportions, most of them are after all human. Choice of branch should be far more to do with what you want to do than others perceptions of the brand.

Indeed. There are good and bad in all. However, when it comes to understanding the workings of technology and the impact aged machinery can have upon the royster-doyster mentality of some (not all, I hasten) then the Warfare branch take the biscuit. We, both ME and WE, hoist in a truckload of knock-on effects connected to our decisions and foibles. Warfare branch mandarins are largely bred from birth to accept no reasoning and anything other than a Type 42 being as effective and shiny as the day it slid down the slipway into the Tyne is reprehensible. I use T42s metaphorically - it's like that across the board as ship emerge from sub-standard refits and pushy twats with no CDF lambast the technicians and drive them into their PVR. It would be a refreshing breeze of wonderment to know that the top-cover is switched-on, well-briefed and shows some acumen and we, as engineers across the board, can approach them with credible solutions rather than face a one way conversation filled with poorly-chosen, angular comments and sly digs. It is our mission to provide. We do so from VHF to shithouses and everything in between. I admire a select few Warfare branch officers. They show peerless management skills, are very rarely ruffled and have the ability to know when circumstances are racked against them. Maybe these are the ones who were suitably briefed by us engineers as youngsters, as you state, back when the navy wasn't quite so high tempo.

As both a customer of the DPA in a previous incarnation and now a supplier to them they have improved but they still have a lot to learn. They could have better kit, and it could cost less, but they have to work out how to do it, the present way certainly has some way to go.

Peter

You won't find me disagreeing there. Currently the onus is on savings and best-value, but underneath it all lies a disturbing amount of chicanery and sharp practice, baised firmly in the favour of a select few contractors who serially shake hands with their fingers crossed. The amonut of overspend on contracts is astounding and the penalties are ridiculously paltry, yet we as a nation trust our Procurement executive to go back to these sharks and ask them for more. And no one bats a ******* eyelid. Nimrod MR4 upgrade, al-Yammah project, Chinook, Type 45 ... all overspent, over time and obsolete by the time they are operational.

Levers
 
My God, it would appear that Levers you and I are both in agreement!! Having had the misfortune of taking 2 submarines out of refit - ah sorry wrong again, LOP(R) - I can vouch for the fact that there are alot of very sharp practices going on, all in the name of cost cutting and providing the contractor (the Haliburton sponsored DML) with the maximum amount of cash. The fact that both of the Units I was involved with over ran, came in vastly over budget and DML did not pay any pently clauses is unbelievable! Add to the fact that a vast amount of the work that was done had to be concessed by the respective DA or IPT in order to enventually get the boat back to sea, rankles even more.
 
Levers_Aligned said:
GJT59 said:
Thanks for the reply.

Call me cynical, but are the RN 'always' looking for warfare types because the chop rate is high or ppl decide they dont like it once in???

Had considered the loggie side, but i fancy a new direction. Any ideas on whether i would be expected to do the full dartmouth course?

Cheers!

The Warfare Branch does have a healthy throughput, but that is largely due to the fact that the branch is a competitive ******'s oasis, full of boorish ***** who believe that emerging from the hellish pupal stage of junior Warfare Officer (in which they are subjected to all sorts of dehumanising Tom Brown's schooldays japes and hatred) suddenly makes tham into steely-eyed destroyer captains-elect. It's bollocks, of course, because no sooner have they gained their thin stripe than they are tugging their forelocks to a grander **** in the Captain's chair who will destroy any compassion and guile and create a neighing, ******** who has only regard for one thing, that is itself. Sometimes there are exceptions to this rule and decent human beings emerge ... one whom for you would gladly sit in a section base in Fearnought waiting for the next raid. These are the realists ... they have the conviction that they wouldn't be where they are now save for the three hundred or so similar humans struggling with the shit and corruption down below their feet. Aside from all of this is the pointless scrambling for promotion ... the unadulterated flattery and cocksucking that takes place and the venal backstabbing of colleagues. I could accept it if it was covert, but most of the ship's company detect when a Warfare Officer is in zone.

*****. All of them.

Levers

Well now - this is exactly the sort of stuff that does us no favours whatsoever. Grow up Levers or 'Leave us'
 
fido said:
Levers_Aligned said:
GJT59 said:
Thanks for the reply.

Call me cynical, but are the RN 'always' looking for warfare types because the chop rate is high or ppl decide they dont like it once in???

Had considered the loggie side, but i fancy a new direction. Any ideas on whether i would be expected to do the full dartmouth course?

Cheers!

The Warfare Branch does have a healthy throughput, but that is largely due to the fact that the branch is a competitive ******'s oasis, full of boorish ***** who believe that emerging from the hellish pupal stage of junior Warfare Officer (in which they are subjected to all sorts of dehumanising Tom Brown's schooldays japes and hatred) suddenly makes tham into steely-eyed destroyer captains-elect. It's bollocks, of course, because no sooner have they gained their thin stripe than they are tugging their forelocks to a grander **** in the Captain's chair who will destroy any compassion and guile and create a neighing, ******** who has only regard for one thing, that is itself. Sometimes there are exceptions to this rule and decent human beings emerge ... one whom for you would gladly sit in a section base in Fearnought waiting for the next raid. These are the realists ... they have the conviction that they wouldn't be where they are now save for the three hundred or so similar humans struggling with the shit and corruption down below their feet. Aside from all of this is the pointless scrambling for promotion ... the unadulterated flattery and cocksucking that takes place and the venal backstabbing of colleagues. I could accept it if it was covert, but most of the ship's company detect when a Warfare Officer is in zone.

*****. All of them.

Levers

Well now - this is exactly the sort of stuff that does us no favours whatsoever. Grow up Levers or 'Leave us'

'Us'?

Levers
 
all_purple_now said:
[
You sure about your numbers? AFAIK the medical brass are:

Surg V Adm Lawrence,
Surg R Adm Farquarson-Roberts
Surg R Adm Raffaelli
Cdre Reed

which is rather more than one flag officer... :)

APN

Surg V Adm Lawrence does not exist - there is SVA Jenkins, though. The 2 SRAs are correct, as is Cdre Frank Reed, who, incidentally is the only ex-ranker in the history of the RN Medical Branch to make it so far.

There are others though, Surg Cdres Tolley, Douglas-Riley, Sykes, Bevan, Morrison and Jarvis.

You have to understand, though, that it is the God-given right of doctors and dentists to reach pennant and flag rank in all 3 Services. More admirals than ships - how many more senior grunt doctors than Service hospitals?

If you want to save money Mr Browne, here's your starter for ten, because if you think there are too many in the RN, just have a squint at the other 2!
 
asst_dep_to_dep_asst said:
Surg V Adm Lawrence does not exist - there is SVA Jenkins, though. The 2 SRAs are correct, as is Cdre Frank Reed, who, incidentally is the only ex-ranker in the history of the RN Medical Branch to make it so far.

There are others though, Surg Cdres Tolley, Douglas-Riley, Sykes, Bevan, Morrison and Jarvis.

You have to understand, though, that it is the God-given right of doctors and dentists to reach pennant and flag rank in all 3 Services. More admirals than ships - how many more senior grunt doctors than Service hospitals?

I stand corrected. In answer to the question re: nos. of flag-ranked doctors vs nos. of service hospitals, 'any' is still more than none (unless you count Headley Court, PMRAFH in Cyprus, RNH Gib & the mighty BMH Shaibah) - this is, however, an entirely different can of worms.

I don't, however, feel that the comment regarding the medical 'God-given right' is fair, indeed I think it might be reasonable to assume that practising clinicians are very unlikely to reach flag rank - I am, as always, more than happy to be corrected on this assumption.

The RNMS apparatus is, in any case, a lot larger than one might think (including the vast Occupational Med setup, as well as primary & secondary care) - is there any reason why, say, engineers or loggies should have flag-level representation if the medics should not? In addition, I understand that Surg V Adm Jenkins is in a tri-service billet, otherwise we would not have a doctor of such exalted rank.

As an aside, I understand that the RAMC 1*s and up are far more numerous, of whom only one (1*) is a Territorial, despite the TAMS making up 70% of the AMS...

APN
 
all_purple_now said:
fangita said:
Rank Total X E S
Adm 3 3 0 0
VAdm 6 5 0 1
RAdm 24 14 8 1
Cdre 58 30 23 4 (plus 1 medic)

Edit: Tried and failed to put in a table format. Hint?

You sure about your numbers? AFAIK the medical brass are:

Surg V Adm Lawrence,
Surg R Adm Farquarson-Roberts
Surg R Adm Raffaelli
Cdre Reed

which is rather more than one flag officer... :)

APN

You're absolutely right, I do apologise. I was looking at page 130 onwards (138 on Acrobat) of the Navy List 2006 (which I found here) and as there was one chap (Cdre F Reed) whose branch was given as "MS", so I called him a medic. I failed to notice page 167 (p174 on Acrobat) with your other fellows.

A million sorries, effendi.... :wink:
 
[quote="all_purple_now" I don't, however, feel that the comment regarding the medical 'God-given right' is fair.....

Who said anything about being fair? Methinks you are a doctor, APN. You find an OF5 medic or dentist who won't whinge for Britain when he realises he's not going to make OF6 and I'll give you a lollipop!
 
asst_dep_to_dep_asst said:
all_purple_now said:
I don't, however, feel that the comment regarding the medical 'God-given right' is fair.....

Who said anything about being fair? Methinks you are a doctor, APN. You find an OF5 medic or dentist who won't whinge for Britain when he realises he's not going to make OF6 and I'll give you a lollipop!

I can think of at least one off the top of my head :)

I may or may not be a doctor; I'm not sure how that's relevent (although I'm not sure why a non-doctor would be sad enough to have an Isotec 5 as their profile pic). I still don't believe that MOs feel that they have some divine right to flag rank, any more than anyone else does (obviously, there will be those who set out to be the Surgeon General, as there are those who set out to be 1SL - but these are few in number) - and, as I posted before, would you suggest that S&S or ME weren't deserving of flag-level representation?

If what you are driving at is the question of why no QARNNS officer has achieved the dizzy height of flag rank, I couldn't comment, except to note that Cdre Reed isn't an MO, he's an MS officer (& it is widely rumoured to be a future Surgeon General - and, while I have never met him, I understand all who have feel he is thoroughly deserving). Indeed, I understand that many of the AMS 'flag' officers are from an MS background.

APN
 
[quote="all_purple_now

I may or may not be a doctor; I'm not sure how that's relevent.....as I posted before, would you suggest that S&S or ME weren't deserving of flag-level representation?

If what you are driving at is the question of why no QARNNS officer has achieved the dizzy height of flag rank......except to note that Cdre Reed isn't an MO, he's an MS officer (& it is widely rumoured to be a future Surgeon General - and, while I have never met him, I understand all who have feel he is thoroughly deserving). Indeed, I understand that many of the AMS 'flag' officers are from an MS background.

APN[/quote]

In answer, the relevance of your being a doctor is the reflex leap to support your peers! The ME and S&S bunch are much bigger than the medics, but no, I don't think there is any requirement for them to have flags at the top of their organisations. Flags are only needed at the very top and they should make flag on merit and from any branch of the Service.

There have been Cdre equivalents from QARNNS in the past, but only in tri-Service jobs.

Sadly, Frank Reed retires imminently, but he would have made an excellent leader for the Naval Medical Service. There was no chance that he would ever have made SG, though, at least not in this lifetime, because it is a position for which the first qualification is that he or she be a doctor.

Agreed, some of the AMS Med Support people have made 1*, but I stand by my general point that none of these roles is really required in a time when the 3 Services are on their financial uppers. My bet is that the DMS in its current very expensive guise will quietly die in the next 10 - 20 years! I feel a new thread coming on.
 
all_purple_now said:
You sure about your numbers? AFAIK the medical brass are:

Surg V Adm Lawrence,
Surg R Adm Farquarson-Roberts
Surg R Adm Raffaelli
Cdre Reed

which is rather more than one flag officer... :)

APN

Sadly, Frank Reed's retired. The new Surgeon Commodore at INM is Jeremy Sykes. And the sooner Rafaelli falls under the wheels of a large vehicle the better for all concerned. Someone please promote James Campbell!

And now back to our regular programming....
 
Bloody hell,i knew Mike Farquharson- Roberts as a new 2 and a half ringer!!!Top bloke,he even operated on my arm a few times.
 
andym wrote: Did you actually need the surgery or did he need the practice?

Seriously though - I agree. Met him a couple of times at Fleet before this job. His office was a couple of doors down from me. Nice and easy to talk to.

SF
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top