Streaky said:My last ship was the Norfolk, straight out of build, and to say it was culture shock comparing it to my previous ship, the Glasgow, would be an understatement.
As a Killick Greenie, I went from 1 in 15 duties on the Glasgow, to 1 in 5 on the Norfolk - midday to midday handover to boot!
Did that suck, or what?
Constant scrubbing out on the Norfolk, as there were hardly any JRs. In fact the sole reason there were JRs was to scrub out.
On the whole, I preferred the Glasgow.
Streaky said:My last ship was the Norfolk, straight out of build, and to say it was culture shock comparing it to my previous ship, the Glasgow, would be an understatement.
As a Killick Greenie, I went from 1 in 15 duties on the Glasgow, to 1 in 5 on the Norfolk - midday to midday handover to boot!
Did that suck, or what?
Constant scrubbing out on the Norfolk, as there were hardly any JRs. In fact the sole reason there were JRs was to scrub out.
On the whole, I preferred the Glasgow.
F169 said:Why was ExETER considered 'unsafe' though? Sometimes even safety is not black and white
F169 said:Flag Wagger - disagree, mostly it is black and white. Its totally common dog that you stop at red lights, or in a ship remain within the navigable channel entering harbour. etc etc. Risk management of safety is a pretty formalised system now which covers the grey areas doesn't it?
FlagWagger said:F169 said:Why was ExETER considered 'unsafe' though? Sometimes even safety is not black and white
<SNIP>
If someone somewhere has taken a decision to withdraw a major surface platform from service then my guess is that its likely to be either a smokescreen to disguise the fact that we can't afford to operate her, or there are serious underlying design factors affecting the safety of the ship and her crew.