Navy OOD (Officer of the Deck) qualifications and experience


#92

Isn’t it kind of pathetic that the ARMY appears to train it’s ship drivers better than the Navy?


#93

Not surprising. They have more vessels than the Navy (and more aircraft than the Air Force).


#94

Maybe it’s because the Army isn’t locked into stupidity by some bizarre sense of “heritage” and the very inflated self image of superiority and the arrogance that breeds. The Army figures the MM figured out how to operate water craft with minimum horseshit and followed that example rather than strutting around hindered by a 16th century culture. They are men and women doing a job with little fanfare or ceremony.

I once did a gig as sea trials chief on an Army LSV and found the crew to be unburdened by military ceremony and just as (if not more) professional than any MM crew.

Maybe the Navy needs to hire the Army to run the ships and let the “senior service” types play HMS Pinafore and shoot the cannons.


#97

And the reason they have them is the same as commercial vessels, to get stuff from one place to another.


#99

This is exactly what I was told when I was informed about the Army and its watercraft operations: “Our vessels exist to move our stuff, nothing more.” A very utilitarian way of thinking that is quite contrary to the Navy. For one, I am flabbergasted by the (limited) availability of naval vessels. They are in port getting repairs or maintenance for what seems 90% of the time.

I wonder what the Air Force would operate like if it still was the Army Air Corps.


#100

You should see how maintenance is done. Simple jobs such as even changing a light bulb can be convoluted.

For the most part maintenance is done on basic tasks that is laughable in comparison to the type of work ships force can accomplish in the merchant fleet, with far less crew!.

Typical merchant PMS and corrective maintenance by ships force would be contracted yard work for a naval vessel, even though they have the bodies. Folks, i’m not making this stuff up.


#101

Navy uses contractors for damn near everything. They probably have contractors on board to fix broken stuff.


#102

This is common…


#103

If you knew the amount of money they pay for the things they do you wouldn’t think that was bad.


#104

If you read my subsequent posts in here, and other threads, I never said it was “bad”, or improper, overcompensation for what they do, or even a poor solution to the problem. I simply said that it was not likely to make it to the USNs solutions list. IMHO.


#105

Because you are so thin skinned that it’s easy as hell to fire you up. And because you have turned the greatest potential in the world to shit.


#106

Yeah…8 yrs of wasted opportunity and wishy washiness…


#107

It’s essentially a jobs program at this point, lots of stuff is outsourced so that politicians can say they created jobs.

The downside is of course that since they do all the work, they don’t train the sailors to do a large chunk of it, so when the civilians aren’t available it can go tits up real fast.


#108

The military is counted as “jobs” so downsizing the military and hiring civilians to do those same jobs is “creating” jobs. Fucking bullshit.


#109

I didn’t say it made sense, just what I’ve seen. They’ll hire more civilians for every sailor they lose though, the number of civilians I see on a daily basis is only going up. For a system that I might have 2 techs onboard(and have only ever seen a max of 4, going back to 2005), they’ll send five or six civilians over to help us troubleshoot it, even if we already have a pretty good idea of what’s wrong but just can’t meet the time requirement for off-ship assistance requests.

Hell, we’ve had eight different civilians from four-five different organizations over troubleshooting what should be a fairly routine power issue, but since there’s contract work at play all the different entities are fighting each other.


#110

Yeah. It’s usually at least 2-3 civilians for every military person they replace.


#111

We should mention though that CivMars are the exception to that.


#112

CivMars are more than the opposite. One CivMar replaces 5-10 Navy personnel.


#113

True, though we do use civilian crews on all of our logistics ships(they generally don’t hit anything either, just get hit when a Navy ship messes up alongside).

Actually sorta fun story, when I was stationed in Japan one of the sailor’s fathers was the master of the USNS Rappahannock, and while we were alongside he requested his daughter be the one on the headset comms over the Phone and Distance line, so he got to chat with her while were taking on fuel at sea.

Kinda cool I thought.


#114

Most surface officers I served with were either incompetent or borderline(unless it related to some administrative task, they certainly are not “leaders” although they are taught to believe that). A few of them were actually amazingly ignorant of what was going on. Very little technical knowledge, most of it is vested in the senior enlisted and warrants. It’s more or less just a club of people who are deluded by the organization through all of the kool-aid drinking and ceremonial stuff, and just punching their sea time ticket. I rarely admit to being in the navy nowadays it’s sad lol