| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#72
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On 8/25/2017 12:03 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 08:00:52 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:25:12 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The evaporators could never keep up with the demand for fresh water so we were always on water hour rationing while underway. Taking a real shower became a once in a great while deal. === I'm surprised they didn't have reverse osmosis systems, wonder if that has changed? I doubt anyone had even heard of RO in the 60s. The ships we were on were from WWII and I am sure they did not have RO then. The DE's I was on were built in the mid 50's. They had conventional evaporators. I don't know what the PG had. It was newer, build in the late 60's and only had a compliment of 24. |
|
#73
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On 8/25/2017 12:01 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:25:12 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 8/24/2017 11:12 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 22:07:07 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 19:50:57 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: What do they use to make bug juice? === Bug Juice is any powdered drink like Kool-Aid. The CG fed us better ;-) Navy shore commands and the larger ships usually had good food. The smaller ships like the destroyer escorts I was on didn't have the storage capacity for a lot of fresh food for longer cruises. We ate well for the first few days but then it got pretty bad. Most of us stocked up our lockers with canned food and other treats that didn't need refrigeration. The evaporators could never keep up with the demand for fresh water so we were always on water hour rationing while underway. Taking a real shower became a once in a great while deal. We were on a smaller ship than you and we were at sea for 5 weeks at a time. I am not sure why they couldn't keep you in food. They had huge "reefers" and lots of dry stores. They generally had fresh eggs for the whole cruise but they mixed in some powder I am sure. We also seemed to have enough fresh water. Maybe you just had more guys on board. We had around 75 on a 311' ship. These things were originally sea plane tenders so they were all "tank". We carried enough fuel to sail around the world a couple times and I assume they had big fresh water tanks. We did have a strict "sea shower" rule but you could take a salt water shower as long as you wanted. The trick was you took a long "Hollywood" shower in sea water then did a quick rinse in fresh. Different ships for different purposes. Based on your description and vintage it sounds like you were on a Barnegat class cutter. Only 4 feet shorter than the DE's I was on but, according to Wiki, your cutter had a crew compliment of 215. What was the name or hull number? |
|
#74
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 12:50:50 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 8/25/2017 12:01 PM, wrote: On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 07:25:12 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 8/24/2017 11:12 PM, wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 22:07:07 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 19:50:57 -0500, Boating All Out wrote: What do they use to make bug juice? === Bug Juice is any powdered drink like Kool-Aid. The CG fed us better ;-) Navy shore commands and the larger ships usually had good food. The smaller ships like the destroyer escorts I was on didn't have the storage capacity for a lot of fresh food for longer cruises. We ate well for the first few days but then it got pretty bad. Most of us stocked up our lockers with canned food and other treats that didn't need refrigeration. The evaporators could never keep up with the demand for fresh water so we were always on water hour rationing while underway. Taking a real shower became a once in a great while deal. We were on a smaller ship than you and we were at sea for 5 weeks at a time. I am not sure why they couldn't keep you in food. They had huge "reefers" and lots of dry stores. They generally had fresh eggs for the whole cruise but they mixed in some powder I am sure. We also seemed to have enough fresh water. Maybe you just had more guys on board. We had around 75 on a 311' ship. These things were originally sea plane tenders so they were all "tank". We carried enough fuel to sail around the world a couple times and I assume they had big fresh water tanks. We did have a strict "sea shower" rule but you could take a salt water shower as long as you wanted. The trick was you took a long "Hollywood" shower in sea water then did a quick rinse in fresh. Different ships for different purposes. Based on your description and vintage it sounds like you were on a Barnegat class cutter. Only 4 feet shorter than the DE's I was on but, according to Wiki, your cutter had a crew compliment of 215. What was the name or hull number? When I was there the enlisted crew was around 75 (that may not have included the SONAR guys since they were on another planet). I am not sure where they would put 215. Maybe that was the navy crew when they were tending seaplanes or something. I am sure they also had more ordinance people on board since the CG removed quite a bit of the firepower. We just had a 5", a rack of hedge hogs and 6 torpedo tubes along with a half dozen M2s and other small arms. We had the tubs on the 03 deck where 40mm guns used to be and there was a mount on the fantail where the weather shack ended up being. We only had a GM chief, a GM3 or 2 and a couple FTs. We were all gunners mates. ;-) I was on the Absecon W374 and Chincoteague W375 (Berkeley Base in Chesapeake near Norfolk). I was also on the Mendota W68 a 255' out of Wilmington NC. I did a reserve cruise to Nassau on the Tananger the last 2 weeks I was in, actually extending about a week but I don't remember much about it. My give a **** button was broken by then. |
|
#75
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser SozeÂ* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:Â* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.Â*Â* I don't know the breakdown butÂ* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.Â* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.Â* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.Â* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.Â* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.Â* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. |
|
#76
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:01:14 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser Soze* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.** I don't know the breakdown but* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. Is your spelling supposed to make you seem more intelligent? How laughable do you think your self-congratulatory claims are? Quite. |
|
#77
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:01:14 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser SozeÂ* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:Â* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.Â*Â* I don't know the breakdown butÂ* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.Â* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.Â* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.Â* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.Â* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.Â* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. I agree that if they are being rammed by big lumbering merchant ships, there does seem to be a hole in the situational awareness on the bridge of these navy ships. I think it is arrogance coupled with an over reliance on electronics. Both of these things seem to have involved a course change by the merchant ships that was missed by the people on the bridge of the navy ship. I think that may be why some are saying this could have been a cyber attack. Even if they did hack the on board computers, doesn't anyone look out the window anymore? Maybe not. This is the video game generation. |
|
#78
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:01:14 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser SozeÂ* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:Â* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.Â*Â* I don't know the breakdown butÂ* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.Â* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.Â* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.Â* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.Â* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.Â* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. I agree that if they are being rammed by big lumbering merchant ships, there does seem to be a hole in the situational awareness on the bridge of these navy ships. I think it is arrogance coupled with an over reliance on electronics. Both of these things seem to have involved a course change by the merchant ships that was missed by the people on the bridge of the navy ship. I think that may be why some are saying this could have been a cyber attack. Even if they did hack the on board computers, doesn't anyone look out the window anymore? Maybe not. This is the video game generation. A year of small boat handling might help. -- Posted with my iPhone 7+. |
|
#79
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 10:59:27 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote: wrote: On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 09:01:14 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser Soze* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.** I don't know the breakdown but* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. I agree that if they are being rammed by big lumbering merchant ships, there does seem to be a hole in the situational awareness on the bridge of these navy ships. I think it is arrogance coupled with an over reliance on electronics. Both of these things seem to have involved a course change by the merchant ships that was missed by the people on the bridge of the navy ship. I think that may be why some are saying this could have been a cyber attack. Even if they did hack the on board computers, doesn't anyone look out the window anymore? Maybe not. This is the video game generation. A year of small boat handling might help. === I agree with that, especially in a crowded harbor like Boston, New York, Baltimore or Norfolk. It should also be a recognized naval career specialty, on the order of being a harbor pilot which requires similar skill and training. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
|
#80
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
A Look At Officer Training In The US Navy and Merchant Marine
On 8/26/2017 9:01 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 8/24/17 5:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/24/2017 4:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/24/17 2:43 PM, True North wrote: On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:00:56 UTC-3, Keyser SozeÂ* wrote: On 8/23/17 6:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 5:36 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 8/23/17 12:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 8/23/2017 11:02 AM, wrote: This article offers some interesting insights into some of the issues behind the recent naval collisions: http://gcaptain.com/separate-equal-look-officer-training-us-navy-merchant-marine/ They make the point that many, if not most, US naval officers regard sea duty as something that must be endured on the way to higher rank, as opposed to a career goal in and of itself. My wife and I once met a recently promoted US Coast Guard admiral who expressed exactly those sentiments in a conversation with us. We were surprised by both the attitude and the candor but that was probably a reflection of our inexperience with such things. I don't know of anyone who was in the Navy, officer or enlisted, who relished sea duty. Then why sign up for it? One might think that if one is signing up for the navy, one relishes the idea of serving on a ship at sea. Reason number one:Â* It was Navy or the Army. Actually, the Navy is much, much more than just ships at sea. There's a vast system for communications, aircraft squadrons, INTEL facilities, administration, logistics and supply facilities that support the mission of the Navy and the fleet.Â*Â* I don't know the breakdown butÂ* I believe that far more Navy personnel are assigned to shore duty stations at any one time than assigned to ships. Typically, the rotation is three years of sea duty and then three years of shore duty.Â* But it's more complicated than that because some overseas shore duty may be counted as sea duty for rotational purposes. I was actually on ships for three years but had two tours overseas that also counted as sea duty.Â* My only duty that did not count as sea duty was time in schools and my last duty station in Annapolis. Yeah, I know the navy is more than just ships at sea, but...why would you join the navy unless you were into ships at sea? Funny you should ask that. I had a niece and a nephew's significant other who both joined the navy.Â* Both were trying to find ways to avoid sea duty after a couple long deployments and especially after kids arrived.Â* One had the navy pay her way through nursing school right here in Halifax. One of life's absurdities...join a force that sends you to sea and then try to get out of it. Love it. I admit, it is amusing to read your comments on a subject that you have absolutely no knowledge of.Â* Tooling around on Long Island Sound or on the Chesapeake Bay on "YO HO" isn't exactly like being at sea on a ship that runs out of fresh water on the second day of a six month cruise and breakfast consists of powdered eggs, coffee or Bug Juice. You've never experienced "Channel Fever" either. Interesting how much praise you boys throw on the naveee for its technical training programs...perhaps the naveee should concentrate on training how to run a ship so it doesn't crash into another ship or run aground. Makes the claims of near-invulnerbility of these ships to enemy attacks laughable. I'll be interested in the results of the investigations. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Navy Officer Encounters Part II (When it pays to play Marine) | General | |||
| Marine officer question | General | |||
| Merchant Marine Mike | ASA | |||
| Hull Material Evaluation for Navy 44 Sail Training Craft | Cruising | |||
| OT - Joining Merchant Navy | Boat Building | |||
![Mr. Luddite[_4_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
