Tune into swap ship...
- Thread starter pondwater
- Start date
I'm involved in the whole ship's company swap, our main drip is that in a five month deployment we will only get one decent run ashore. Oh, and the comms fits we both have are different.
The biggest problem is having to try and get all your stuff packed and onto an aeroplane, it's amazing how much stuff you aquire over the years.
The biggest problem is having to try and get all your stuff packed and onto an aeroplane, it's amazing how much stuff you aquire over the years.
We're not being drafted, we are just swapping platforms. So we take our ship's name to our new ship, and vice versa. This is so that ships can stay deployed longer. Another reason stated was that Jack doesn't like long deployments. However, when they stop LSSB in October/November ask Jack if he wants to deploy or remain alongside in Pompey. With my LSA at £600 ish a month I think I would like to go away, buts that my personnal preference.
its called a roulemont, guys and most of the other services do it already....yes it's true, it's gonna be a cluster trying to keep 170 odd matelots together and getting on the same planes home and 170 coming the other way all of them either half pissed or still drunk from the night before getting to the dockside without falling out or falling in. The other point is ship's security whilst all this is going on.....step forward GSSR SPO teams, don't worry guys we'll be there as well ushering the new crew on board..........possibly with a cattle prod 8O
Jesse - roulement may be done by the other services, but not at the expense of force structure which is what this is about. The idea behind it is not to meet harmony guidelines or reduce gapped billets it is to get away with even fewer DD/FF. Ship numbers in a major procurement are heavily influenced by permanant tasks (eg Armilla, WIGS etc). One task is pretty much counted as three ships (one on task, one in transit / work up / one in upkeep). The idea behind swap is to remove the one in transit which will lead to fewer ships and save procurement budget. Fine and dandy you might say, trouble is some bright spark will then pipe up that personnel costs are the biggest single factor in the operating budget, so they'll cut the perceived "over-manning". Then 2SL will point out that he can't man the number of ships that Fleet wants, so Fleet will have to do the same with fewer ships or cut the task. Sound familiar?
Then we start all over again getting smaller and smaller. This is a recipe for extinction.
Then we start all over again getting smaller and smaller. This is a recipe for extinction.
I have been following this thread with some interest.
Surely this is not a great step from the days of Foreign Service Commisions, in those days ('60's), in Boats (have little knowledge of General Service), the Boat steamed out to, for example, Singapore, after 18 months there was a part crew change over when those members of the crew who wer either single or married unaccompanied, either flew or took another boat home, 12 months later the other original members of the crew went home by the same routes, being replaced by new people flown out from the UK, or crew from other Boats going home. I know that the Boats stayed on station longer with local refits and maintainance, I'm sure that someone else can give an idea of how long that would have been.
I can see that the change over of the whole crew will cause problems and expense, especially due to the relatively short periods of deployment in each case.
Did I read somewhere that they were also looking at part changeovers something along the lines of my second paragraph?
Surely this is not a great step from the days of Foreign Service Commisions, in those days ('60's), in Boats (have little knowledge of General Service), the Boat steamed out to, for example, Singapore, after 18 months there was a part crew change over when those members of the crew who wer either single or married unaccompanied, either flew or took another boat home, 12 months later the other original members of the crew went home by the same routes, being replaced by new people flown out from the UK, or crew from other Boats going home. I know that the Boats stayed on station longer with local refits and maintainance, I'm sure that someone else can give an idea of how long that would have been.
I can see that the change over of the whole crew will cause problems and expense, especially due to the relatively short periods of deployment in each case.
Did I read somewhere that they were also looking at part changeovers something along the lines of my second paragraph?
Hi,
I am sure this has been done before, 1960's maybe? Before my time anyway, but, the Tartar or Lynx are names that spring to mind.
I don't understand how all the Ships Name changing palava would work, that, in those days you just moved from one ship to another.
I would have thought that it would be better to keep the ship on station and swap a percentage of the crew at regular intervals, rather like we did on the Dili (NP2010) in the Falklands, drafted for 6 months.
However, I don't think the "fighting efficiency" of said war canoe would be enhanced by continuously drafting new personnell and expecting them to hit the ground running, takes a while to mould a crew.
Therefore the crews would have to be based on a working, floating, training ship of same class which was sat in dock enabling leave, RA's training, which seems to me to be a waste of a ship
Just a thought
Terry
I am sure this has been done before, 1960's maybe? Before my time anyway, but, the Tartar or Lynx are names that spring to mind.
I don't understand how all the Ships Name changing palava would work, that, in those days you just moved from one ship to another.
I would have thought that it would be better to keep the ship on station and swap a percentage of the crew at regular intervals, rather like we did on the Dili (NP2010) in the Falklands, drafted for 6 months.
However, I don't think the "fighting efficiency" of said war canoe would be enhanced by continuously drafting new personnell and expecting them to hit the ground running, takes a while to mould a crew.
Therefore the crews would have to be based on a working, floating, training ship of same class which was sat in dock enabling leave, RA's training, which seems to me to be a waste of a ship
Just a thought
Terry
This i think has been covered on another Forum,cant find it,Foreign Service commissions in the far east Bulwark for example,changed whole crews over,tho not in one big lump,Britannias, from my exchange broke down in Bombay,we flew to Bombay courtesy of Air India on Super Constellations but the way i read this is that you are swapping crews with another ship,unless ive read it wrong,which just does`nt make sense.
I can understand it when the ships company transfer from one ship going into refit onto the same class of ship coming out of refit yet the ships keep their own identity. But taking the ships name as well would be very confusing - surely the pennant numbers would have to change also. What if the class of ships are different (batch 1/2/3 etc)- chaos would ensue imho. Janes fighting ships would need constant changes? :?
and what if your pit prior to transfer was a good one (ie in a quiet part of a gulch and not in the mess square) and some cnut beat you to it on the new ship...argh :roll:
and what if your pit prior to transfer was a good one (ie in a quiet part of a gulch and not in the mess square) and some cnut beat you to it on the new ship...argh :roll:
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | Neptune, Baal, anchors, vikings, Scotland | History | 10 | |
|
RumRation Members Theme tunes. | Films, Music, TV & All Things Artsy | 54 | |
|
News story: Tune in to TA LIVE | MoD News | 0 |
Similar threads
-
-
RumRation Members Theme tunes.
- Started by BillyNoMates
- Replies: 54
-
Latest Threads
-
-
-
Press release: New tool helps savers get a 50% government boost to their savings
- Started by MoD_RSS
- Replies: 0
-
-
