# Sea Service Insignia (SSI) [Merged]



## Pat in Halifax

Seeing as 'we' were reminded several times that this topic seemed to have hijacked another one, I thought I would start it's own. For those on the DIN, latest 'changes' to SSI requirements:
http://marcom-comar.mil.ca/ssi-ism/default-eng.asp


----------



## FDO

How about those of us not on the DIN?


----------



## Pat in Halifax

I got my pee pee  wrist slapped for posting it previously but then again, I have big 'wrists' so here goes again:
Levels.
1.         The SSI will consist of the following four levels:
                        (1)        Level I (gun metal) - 365 - 729 sea-days (1-2 years);
                        (2)        Level II (bronze) - 730 - 1094 sea-days (2-3 years);
                        (3)        Level III (silver) -1095 - 1459 sea-days (3-4 years); and
                        (4)        Level IV (gold) - 1460 or greater sea-days (4+ years).

2.         The initial sea-day requirement of 1 year (365 days) has remained unchanged. However, qualifying days required to achieve Level II, III and IV have all been reduced by one year.


----------



## dapaterson

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> ...qualifying days required to achieve Level II, III and IV have all been reduced by one year.



In other words, some senior folks looked over their records, felt they deserved better, and lobbied for change.


Shades of the Army's ill-fated "Warrior" badges - the Gold standard was what General So-and-so achieved...


----------



## gcclarke

dapaterson said:
			
		

> In other words, some senior folks looked over their records, felt they deserved better, and lobbied for change.
> 
> 
> Shades of the Army's ill-fated "Warrior" badges - the Gold standard was what General So-and-so achieved...



Or some folks looked at the overall numbers and felt that the distribution was a bit off, and that a slightly larger percentage of CF personnel should be awarded the higher and highest levels. 

I see no reason to jump straight to accusations of misconduct.


----------



## dapaterson

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Or some folks looked at the overall numbers and felt that the distribution was a bit off, and that a slightly larger percentage of CF personnel should be awarded the higher and highest levels.
> 
> I see no reason to jump straight to accusations of misconduct.



No acusations of misconduct - every organization has formal and informal means to lobby for change.


But this does smack (somewhat) of the Lake Wobegon syndrome - where everyone is above average.


----------



## Pusser

I'll be curious to see what happens when the grievances start to roll in when folks feel they're not getting the same credit they've calculated for themselves.  I haven't seen any discussion of how they're going to account for all the legitimate days at sea for which there is no record.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Pusser said:
			
		

> I'll be curious to see what happens when the grievances start to roll in when folks feel they're not getting the same credit they've calculated for themselves.  I haven't seen any discussion of how they're going to account for all the legitimate days at sea for which there is no record.



They can have all my sea days, no strings.  That way I'll never qualify for this Boy Scout badge.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Or some folks looked at the overall numbers and felt that the distribution was a bit off, and that a slightly larger percentage of CF personnel should be awarded the higher and highest levels.
> 
> I see no reason to jump straight to accusations of misconduct.



From the previous tread on the same topic, I clearly remember it was, like you said, a percentage question... something like only 20 sailors qualified for the last "rank" of the SSI


----------



## Jaydub

Does anyone know when this will take effect?  Is this operational sea time, or just time posted to a ship?


----------



## Klinkaroo

As far as I know it is actual days at sea, unlike sea pay that is calculated on time posted. If it were time posted everyone in the navy would pretty much be gold by now. Most peoples first ship posting is longer then 4 year...

Klink


----------



## Jaydub

Klinkaroo said:
			
		

> As far as I know it is actual days at sea, unlike sea pay that is calculated on time posted. If it were time posted everyone in the navy would pretty much be gold by now. Most peoples first ship posting is longer then 4 year...



Yeah, that sounds about right.  But it's going to be hard for them to calculate every little sail that you do. SOVPAT, Sea Trials, Salty Dips, etc.  Based on that, it would probably just include major exercises and deployments; stuff that gets written into your UER.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

Jaydub said:
			
		

> Yeah, that sounds about right.  But it's going to be hard for them to calculate every little sail that you do. SOVPAT, Sea Trials, Salty Dips, etc.  Based on that, it would probably just include major exercises and deployments; stuff that gets written into your UER.



We already pretty much exhausted the discussion on the calculation problem here...
http://Forums.Navy.ca/forums/threads/92470.345.html


----------



## navypuke

Has anyone heard any news on this lately, its seems to have died down. And now the DIN link no longer works! I wonder if thats a sign that they learned it would ebe to to difficult to do and just quietly scrapped it.


----------



## jollyjacktar

I certainly hope so.  But you're right it seems to have fallen off the grid.


----------



## Stoker

I happened to be talking to someone who is working on the project, apparently audits are going slowly. I was told there is a MARGEN coming out on it soon.


----------



## NavyShooter

I believe it.....it'll be a nightmare to track it from years ago....

NS


----------



## navypuke

Things are going more slowly than anticipated eh. Well they said they are going to start giving them out in Jan 2011. And with Xmas leave around the corner that barely gives them 2 months to finalize. Yeah I don't see this being done on time, if at all. Any one work at NDHQ cause I thought they've already audited like 3000 people.


----------



## NavyShooter

Honestly, let's get them out to the easiest ones (the young/new guys) right away.

Us old coots don't need an extra badge to lose to show our experience/skill.  

The young'uns need some recognition before us old guys do, and it'll be easier to calculate the days for a kid with 1 posting to a ship, than a guy like me with 6 different sea-going postings on 5 ships over the span of 18 years....

Recognize the efforts of the new guys, give them something to put up on their uniform....we don't give the SSM(NATO) anymore, so having something for 'em would be good.

NS


----------



## Navalsnpr

/\ Agreed... More Junior & More often!


----------



## kratz

ref: CANFORGEN 001-11

It looks like the roll out of the SSI will now be delayed until April this year, at the earliest. The mesage indicates they intend on having the SSI out before Battle of Atlantic ceremonies this year.


----------



## Navalsnpr

Wondering if we will see another CANFORGEN in April!!


----------



## Sub Standard

Even with the delays it is makes you wonder why the pretty shiny things seem to make it out fairly quickly yet the operational clothing promised by the NICE program still hasn't come out yet.  Seems like some mixed priorities.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Sub-normal said:
			
		

> Even with the delays it is makes you wonder why the pretty shiny things seem to make it out fairly quickly yet the operational clothing promised by the NICE program still hasn't come out yet.  Seems like some mixed priorities.



Well look at it this way...do you want the clothes that are designed to keep you warm and dry to actually do their jobs or would you rather settle for the first piece of gear they find at Value Village?


----------



## Pat in Halifax

I was just talking to a clerk and was told that the CANFORGEN may have been released in a little haste (I am not saying this is the gospel truth people). Until numbers from people's MPRRs are correlated with specific ship's schedules by the "Team" (wherever they are) and then entered into Monitor Mess...I mean Mass, then members cannot really check (IAW the end of para 3 of the CANFORGEN). 
He suggested that this may not be the case until at least mid February.
Again, this is what is being relayed to me by someone who seems to be quite a competent clerk. (even if he does wear green!)
For some reason, I have been getting MANY emails from afar (I just got posted to Ottawa) from people asking me about this.
If I hear anything a little more solid, I will pass it on.


----------



## NavyShooter

Saw a spreadsheet yesterday.

I apparently have 1083 Sea Days.

*shrug*  Might be right.  

NS


----------



## Halifax Tar

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Saw a spreadsheet yesterday.
> 
> I apparently have 1083 Sea Days.
> 
> *shrug*  Might be right.
> 
> NS



Hmmm is this spread sheet open for all to see ?


----------



## Stoker

Seen my time today as well, seems like I have 1620. I know I have more, but since I meet the criteria for the gold I guess it doesn't matter.


----------



## agc

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Hmmm is this spread sheet open for all to see ?



It's not available in the production version of Monitor/MASS yet.  If you know someone who has Beta you should be able to see your days.


----------



## agc

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Hmmm is this spread sheet open for all to see ?


It's not available in the production version of Monitor/MASS yet.  If you know someone who has Beta you should be able to see your days.


----------



## NavyShooter

Not sure the source, but it came from my COC, and showed the sea days of the entire ship's company.  

I think the highest number was in the 1900's....that's almost 200 sailing days per year for 20 years....

Care to guess his trade??

Hint #1...NOT MARS


----------



## Occam

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> I think the highest number was in the 1900's....that's almost 200 sailing days per year for 20 years....



rly:

New math?


----------



## NavyShooter

Oopsie.

Brain took a momentary vacation on me....insert FAIL icon here.

(face-palm....?)

I've been busy thinking about why they'd send a bunch of CSE guys out for the new Attack team Leader course (50% of the Journeymen LS's in the entire department GONE for 2 days during a SWP....)  and the CSE guys will, in all likelyhood, never be an Attack Team leader....

Pre-occupied.  

I'll sign up for remedial math tomorrow.

 ;D

NS


----------



## Stoker

I see the new production version of monitor mass is out now, lots of gaps to be fixed.  Apparently where we work we will be in charge of updating the sea days for our people a pretty big task to be sure.  Interestingly I was also given a database today of every CF ship since 1955 and the sea days for each, looks pretty good and an excellent  tool to figure out actual days at sea.


----------



## Navalsnpr

I checked Monitor Mass today and the numbers were in there. Our section ranged from 760-1700 days.


----------



## navymich

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I see the new production version of monitor mass is out now, lots of gaps to be fixed.  Apparently where we work we will be in charge of updating the sea days for our people a pretty big task to be sure.  Interestingly I was also given a database today of every CF ship since 1955 and the sea days for each, looks pretty good and an excellent  tool to figure out actual days at sea.



I will have to check MM when I am back to work tomorrow.  After my CT, my sea time did not cross over to my new MPRR.  My BOR is in the process of requesting my file through the Privacy Act to track everything down.

As for the ship database, does it include the MCDVs too?  Would you mind sharing 2002-2006 for SAS and WHI, if it does?  Thanks.


----------



## NavyShooter

Chief Stoker, 

I can imagine that would be a tough data-base to have developed.

Question.  Does it count days in foreign port?

NS


----------



## Stoker

The database shows days at sea for each ship and has a search feature. I can't attest how accurate it is, I would imagine there are instances where it is not due the data available and difficulty obtaining it.


----------



## Navalsnpr

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Question.  Does it count days in foreign port?



Days at anchor or foreign port do not count. Also days less than 8 hours underway do not count as well.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> The database shows days at sea for each ship and has a search feature. I can't attest how accurate it is, I would imagine there are instances where it is not due the data available and difficulty obtaining it.



Actually, it ought to be near perfect and should have been easy to produce. The math wiz at operational research have had every ship in commission file a monthly Ship Activity Report every month for the last 60 years. This report, compiled by the Nav. O's from the ship's logs and OOW notebooks, have to be a continuous description of the employment of the ship accounting for every hour  of its service. No gaps allowed. So for each ship in commission, you know precisely which hours you were at sea, at anchor or alongside for the whole duration of her service.

It doesn't tell you who was onboard in any given hour, however.


----------



## Halifax Tar

If someone has access to Mon Mass and is willing to look up stuff for me please PM me as at my current unit we have neither Mon Mass or do I have access to somone who does. 

Or email me on the Din thanks Andrew.Kenny@forces.gc.ca


----------



## Sailorwest

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Actually, it ought to be near perfect and should have been easy to produce. The math wiz at operational research have had every ship in commission file a monthly Ship Activity Report every month for the last 60 years. This report, compiled by the Nav. O's from the ship's logs and OOW notebooks, have to be a continuous description of the employment of the ship accounting for every hour  of its service. No gaps allowed. So for each ship in commission, you know precisely which hours you were at sea, at anchor or alongside for the whole duration of her service.
> 
> It doesn't tell you who was onboard in any given hour, however.


In some weird way, I feel somewhat proud of the fact that I managed to get MWS command qualified and I'm not anywhere close enough to get one of these badges. In fact I will never be getting one. I assume that a good majority of my sea time is in the 'doesn't count' category.


----------



## Occam

Navalsnipr said:
			
		

> Days at anchor or foreign port do not count. Also days less than 8 hours underway do not count as well.



Days at anchor do count.  The note to the policy guidance for the SSI states:

_"Unlike the criteria applied for civilian certification, time spent at anchor will count towards the SSI.  OPERATION HESTIA highlights the efforts of our sea-going personnel even while at anchor.  However, as this will require an amendment in the way ships report sea-days, D Mar Pers will only commence crediting time at anchor once the sea-day reports are amended to include time at anchor (anticipated 1 Jan 11)"_



			
				Sailorwest said:
			
		

> In some weird way, I feel somewhat proud of the fact that I managed to get MWS command qualified and I'm not anywhere close enough to get one of these badges. In fact I will never be getting one. I assume that a good majority of my sea time is in the 'doesn't count' category.



How is that possible?


----------



## Sailorwest

Occam said:
			
		

> Days at anchor do count.  The note to the policy guidance for the SSI states:
> 
> _"Unlike the criteria applied for civilian certification, time spent at anchor will count towards the SSI.  OPERATION HESTIA highlights the efforts of our sea-going personnel even while at anchor.  However, as this will require an amendment in the way ships report sea-days, D Mar Pers will only commence crediting time at anchor once the sea-day reports are amended to include time at anchor (anticipated 1 Jan 11)"_
> 
> How is that possible?


How is what possible? 
Not having enough sea time to even be close? A lot of the MWS west coast sailing is day sails, in and out of ports, doing lots of shiphandling for alongside and departures but doesn't count. Great experience but no accumulation for SSI.


----------



## Occam

Sailorwest said:
			
		

> How is what possible?
> Not having enough sea time to even be close? A lot of the MWS west coast sailing is day sails, in and out of ports, doing lots of shiphandling for alongside and departures but doesn't count. Great experience but no accumulation for SSI.



I guess I just overestimated the amount of 8-hour periods at sea it would take to gain a MWS command ticket.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

I finally got into MM today and then forgot my %$#@* password! I do know that as a new Cert 3 in the early 90s, I was passed around to an AWFUL LOT OF SHIPS and none of them show on my MPRR as A'dP-ings...Oh well...It isn't all about glory!!!


----------



## NavalMoose

I saw my Sea day count in MM today....1209, will bring in my RN docs to put me over the top for gold, whenever they come out is anybody's guess.


----------



## navymich

Anything connected to sea time has not shown on my MPRR since my CT.  However, I am curious as to whether the update on MM will do anything for me.  I did a quick peek today but I don't find the update quite as user friendly as when it first came out (aka I don't like change!  lol).  Could someone please tell me where they went to find anything regarding seadays or sea time.  Thanks!


----------



## Stoker

The SSI webpage is now updated with a link to the database for sea day counts http://mshq.mil.ca/dmarp-dperm/dmarp2-dperm2/ssi-ism/default-eng.asp. The online vertification forms are located at http://halifax.mil.ca/N1/N1/monitor_mass.htm. All are on the DIN only.


----------



## NavyShooter

Did some quick math, and it looks like mine is pretty close to correct.

Life is good.


----------



## navymich

Thank you Chief Stoker for all of your help.

Still missing paperwork for some of my attach postings, but they won't be enough to bump me up a level so it's not a big concern.  With the final tally there will eventually be a Bronze SSI on my blues!


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> The SSI webpage is now updated with a link to the database for sea day counts http://mshq.mil.ca/dmarp-dperm/dmarp2-dperm2/ssi-ism/default-eng.asp. The online vertification forms are located at http://halifax.mil.ca/N1/N1/monitor_mass.htm. All are on the DIN only.



Good stuff Chief! Much appreciated! All tallied up and I think its pretty accurate as well.


----------



## Pusser

Here's something interesting.  I've looked up my record in Monitor Mass and I have enough sea days to qualify.  However, I figure I've received credit for at least 80 days I didn't earn (I was landed), while at the same time, I have not received credit for at least another 130 days, which I can prove.  If the days I wasn't at sea are deducted from the total, my level doesn't change, nor does it change if they are replaced by the days I actually did go to sea.  So, I really don't have to do anything as I will receive the badge to which I'm actually entitled regardless.

However, not reporting the overage, while claiming the shortage, will put me over the top for the next level.  Other than my own personal integrity, what's to stop me from doing this?  Are we expecting individuals to step forward and report that they were not on board for the times in question, even if it means they get knocked down a level or even denied the badge altogether?

One of the prime reasons for not using pay records (i.e. payment of Sea Duty Allowance)to calculate entitlement for the SSI was supposedly that SDA did not actually prove you were at sea for the time in question.  However, I have proof that the chosen method has the same flaw.  We have an ethical dilemma. :-\


----------



## NavalMoose

I handed in my RN Docs and got credit for 85% of 1232=1047, that with my Canadian sea days of 1209 puts me over the top for gold or even platinum if such a thing existed. 6 years in a tin can.


----------



## Navalsnpr

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?cat=00&id=3727

Vice-Admiral Dean Mcfadden To Preside Over Inaugural Presentation Of Insignia Recognizing Time Served At Sea

CMS MA11.001 - March 1, 2011

OTTAWA – The Commander of Maritime Command, Vice-Admiral Dean McFadden, will present eight Canadian Forces (CF) members with the Sea Service Insignia (SSI) at a ceremony marking the launch of the distribution of the new badges.

Available to all serving CF members regardless of environment, the SSI is a visible and formal recognition for those who have spent significant amounts of time at sea.  Four levels of the insignia have been produced, the first level being awarded to members with 365 sea days.  Those eligible for the fourth insignia will have upwards of 1460 days at sea.

Details are as follows:

When:              Thursday, March 3rd at 10 a.m.

Where:            Conference Room D, 2 North Tower
                        National Defence Headquarters
                        101 Colonel By Dr
                        Ottawa, ON


----------



## Occam

I didn't get my invite.  

I guess handing over a silver doodad to an Air Force type wouldn't make for a good photo op, eh?   ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar

I signed my sheet yesterday.  What a crock.  I did take the time to go through the days at sea for each ship I was assigned to.  I came up with a number at least 200 days less than the  official tally.  My first ship as a real sailor for example was a very short stint, did not sail, but they have credited me with 15 days at sea.  I honestly have some lack of believability with this whole process.  Maybe I'm really getting senile, but their version of days at sea do not correspond with what I could come up with.  I am over scored big time and am looking at a boy scout  badge of my own that I will have to don after all down the road.  Seems almost like a forced "lets make everyone feel good with some bling" smoke and mirrors parlor trick.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I signed my sheet yesterday.  What a crock.  I did take the time to go through the days at sea for each ship I was assigned to.  I came up with a number at least 200 days less than the  official tally.  My first ship as a real sailor for example was a very short stint, did not sail, but they have credited me with 15 days at sea.  I honestly have some lack of believability with this whole process.  Maybe I'm really getting senile, but their version of days at sea do not correspond with what I could come up with.  I am over scored big time and am looking at a boy scout  badge of my own that I will have to don after all down the road.  Seems almost like a forced "lets make everyone feel good with some bling" smoke and mirrors parlor trick.


I will figure out who you are eventually! I don't know why your ass is in such a tizzy over this(The SSI thing). Nothing is perfect but it gives some of our young guys/gals bragging rights and though it is of no use for guys like you and me, we can pick out the true sea-farers in a crowd I am sure. Let it go!


----------



## Navalsnpr

Occam said:
			
		

> I didn't get my invite.
> 
> I guess handing over a silver doodad to an Air Force type wouldn't make for a good photo op, eh?   ;D



I would gather it will be 4 NCM's and 4 Officers, one at each level.


----------



## dapaterson

Let us hope that for appearances sake that all four officers have already received the Curl, lest we have a hodgepodge of uniforms at a press conference.


----------



## Stoker

They gave out the SSI yesterday to 10 pers randomly selected in the dockyard.  I had a close look at the badge, the cloth and metal badges are done very nicely. As well there is another on line calculator you can access. Go to the monitor mass page on the Marlant webpage and click on the anchor symbol, it goes straight to the new database. It hasn't been officially rolled out yet, and they have it sort of hidden.


----------



## Infanteer

Looks good to me - I'm just waiting for my "Slept in a ditch/hole Service Insignia".

I've got a couple weeks on a U.S. Navy Gator?  Can I get that time accredited?


----------



## Stoker

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Looks good to me - I'm just waiting for my "Slept in a ditch/hole Service Insignia".
> 
> I've got a couple weeks on a U.S. Navy Gator?  Can I get that time accredited?



No doubt you guys are doing just that :


----------



## Rheostatic

Occam said:
			
		

> I didn't get my invite.
> 
> I guess handing over a silver doodad to an Air Force type wouldn't make for a good photo op, eh?   ;D


Sorry, it's just you 
http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/navy_images/cms_images/news_photos/IS2011-8000-01.jpg


----------



## Occam

Rheostatic said:
			
		

> Sorry, it's just you
> http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/navy_images/cms_images/news_photos/IS2011-8000-01.jpg



What?  I even showered last week.


----------



## PuckChaser

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> No doubt you guys are doing just that :



Not sure if that's sarcastic or not, but the Combat Action Insignia got killed. I'm not a big fan of giving bling to people who are just doing their jobs though.


----------



## NavyShooter

*shrug*

I didn't ask for it, but if they're giving it, and I'm supposed to have it on my uniform, I'll wear it.

The thing that pleased me more than anything in recent times WRT Naval uniforms was (finally) the addition of a Canadian Flag to the shoulder of our NCD Jacket.

NS


----------



## PuckChaser

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> The thing that pleased me more than anything in recent times WRT Naval uniforms was (finally) the addition of a Canadian Flag to the shoulder of our NCD Jacket.



I don't see many people in NCDs.... but it baffles me that you guys didn't have a Canadian flag on there!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> it baffles me that you guys didn't have a Canadian flag on there!



That's because we all wear two nice shoulder boards that say CANADA. In the Navy, we expect everybody can read  .


----------



## PuckChaser

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> That's because we all wear two nice shoulder boards that say CANADA. In the Navy, we expect everybody can read  .



I forgot that everyone in the world can read English and doesn't identify countries by the flag they have on their person.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Well, the people we let onboard our ships all do  . And when we go in harbours where they don't all, we usually go with a great big grey thing that has a nice red and white flag at the stern and a little red mapple leaf on the funnel - just in case they can't figure it out.

All this said, I kind of like the look of the NCD with the little flag too, and the little flag we sometimes put on the back of our baseball caps.


----------



## NavyShooter

I dug out my Tilley hat that has one on it even.  

Maybe I'll even get to wear it!

NS


----------



## CountDC

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> They gave out the SSI yesterday to 10 pers randomly selected in the dockyard.  I had a close look at the badge, the cloth and metal badges are done very nicely. As well there is another on line calculator you can access. Go to the monitor mass page on the Marlant webpage and click on the anchor symbol, it goes straight to the new database. *It hasn't been officially rolled out yet, and they have it sort of hidden.*



and according to the powers in charge of this project the calculator still is not official.  By the way I checked it, fixed one thing by moving a line of code and then realized there was a bigger problem.  It drops your start and end month giving you zero credit for them.  For example enter 7713 18 Feb 2000 to 16 Jun 2002 and it will not show you the credit for Feb and Jun.  In this case Jun is not a problem as ATHABI was in refit but for Feb there is time missing.


----------



## Occam

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Go to the monitor mass page on the Marlant webpage and click on the anchor symbol, it goes straight to the new database. It hasn't been officially rolled out yet, and they have it sort of hidden.



It must be hidden well;  I can't even find the Monitor/MASS page on the Marlant DWAN site...


----------



## Pat in Halifax

I am not sure what Chief Stoker means either. I don't see any kind of 'link' there. That said, if your unit is not utilizing MM yet, you will need to see your clerks. I just left CFNES where we used it and we all had accounts. I get to Ottawa (ironically) and we still are not using it though I believe CFSU is. I just sat with the clerk and unless you are familiar with some of the MM tools, it is hopeless to try to talk someone through it.


----------



## Stoker

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> I am not sure what Chief Stoker means either. I don't see any kind of 'link' there. That said, if your unit is not utilizing MM yet, you will need to see your clerks. I just left CFNES where we used it and we all had accounts. I get to Ottawa (ironically) and we still are not using it though I believe CFSU is. I just sat with the clerk and unless you are familiar with some of the MM tools, it is hopeless to try to talk someone through it.



If anybody wants to PM with their email, I can send them the database the online one was based on, its a lot easier to use.  As for it not being official, its  is what the ships and shore units are being told to use. When i'm at work tomorrow i'll post the link and you can access it yourself.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> If anybody wants to PM with their email, I can send them the database the online one was based on, its a lot easier to use.  As for it not being official, its  is what the ships and shore units are being told to use. When i'm at work tomorrow i'll post the link and you can access it yourself.


I don't think the question was about the ship's sea days database but more about the Monitor Mass access. All I know is that the tab within MM is an anchor!
Funny enough, I used the database and got 1728 but Monitor Mass says 1851. When I get the chance, I will check the one big discrepancy which was my time on TOR ('98 - '02)


----------



## Stoker

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> I don't think the question was about the ship's sea days database but more about the Monitor Mass access. All I know is that the tab within MM is an anchor!
> Funny enough, I used the database and got 1728 but Monitor Mass says 1851. When I get the chance, I will check the one big discrepancy which was my time on TOR ('98 - '02)



From what I have seen MM is definitely not correct in a lot of cases, in my case there was 5 years of seatime missing. Once you verify MM from the database, MPRR, ATP's and whatever documents you have to prove your time its a pretty simple process to update MM. Its also set up that whoever edits your page in MM, it records who made the change.


----------



## daftandbarmy

It might be easier just to count up the total # of tots of rum issued during a cruise, divide by the number of people on board, then enter it in the ship's log  ;D


----------



## Stoker

Occam said:
			
		

> It must be hidden well;  I can't even find the Monitor/MASS page on the Marlant DWAN site...



Go to this link at the N1 site in MARLANT http://halifax.mil.ca/N1/N1/monitor_mass.htm. Go to the heading "monitor mass updates" and click on the anchor symbol across from it to access the database.


----------



## Stoker

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It might be easier just to count up the total # of tots of rum issued during a cruise, divide by the number of people on board, then enter it in the ship's log  ;D



From some of the initial counts on MM I have seen, that's probably what happened. :


----------



## Halifax Tar

My CoC here at FMF CS emailed out and excell data base they used to calculate the sea days and I would estimate its pretty accurate.

It take you referencing back and forth from your MPRR to the data base allot but it works


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> My CoC here at FMF CS emailed out and excell data base they used to calculate the sea days and I would estimate its pretty accurate.
> 
> It take you referencing back and forth from your MPRR to the data base allot but it works



I have 4 databases including the online based one for seadays. All are pretty good but there are holes. Most of the data came from Ottawa and based on ships logs etc. The only problem is that if the logs etc are not accurate its going to affect the data.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

For DWAN users, this seems to be the one from the proverbial 'horses mouth"...(or horses ass!):
http://mshq-qgemfm.mil.ca/repository/dmarp-dperm/dmarp2-dperm2/dmarp2-2-dperm2-2/Database.xls


----------



## Jaydub

They gave me mine yesterday.  Bronze.
I didn't expect them to just unceremoniously hand it to me like they did, though.
I figured they would hand them out at a hands fall in or something like that.


----------



## Occam

While on the subject - there seems to be plenty of info on the MARLANT SSI page.  Plenty of info, except for one minor point - how are these things to be handed out?  I know you can go into Monitor/MASS and find out what level you qualify for, but whose responsibility is it to:  a) officially look up how many sea days you have and b) ensure you get the appropriate insignia?


----------



## S.Stewart

Jaydub said:
			
		

> They gave me mine yesterday.  Bronze.
> I didn't expect them to just unceremoniously hand it to me like they did, though.
> I figured they would hand them out at a hands fall in or something like that.



I know guys who have gotten their medals in their mailbox, so that doesn't surprise me.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Occam said:
			
		

> Plenty of info, except for one minor point - how are these things to be handed out?



At FMF we were told to go to the MAO and sign for them.  No fuss, no ceremony.


----------



## Halifax Tar

No to be condescending or rude but were people expecting a parade for this ? 

I loved the way we did it at FMF no fuss no muss, walk up to the OR (MAO) sign for it and walk away, too easy. I wish all my medals and promotions were done this way!


----------



## Occam

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> No to be condescending or rude but were people expecting a parade for this ?



I can't speak for others, but I wasn't expecting a parade for it.  I was, however, expecting to hear from some level of authority as to whether my boss would be dropping these things on my desk one day, or if I had to make the 1/2 day trek to clothing stores in Gatineau to pick them up of my own accord.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

"I was told" (that could be a loaded statement!!) that for my unit (DMTE/DMarPers) a bulk issue will be done too (similar to FMFCS?). The clerks have been going over everyone's printout with them.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Zactly like FMF.  Big ass bag of bling and a thick nominal roll to sign.


----------



## TwoTonShackle

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> No to be condescending or rude but were people expecting a parade for this ?



All MARLANT units have been directed that these shall be awarded in an appropriate manner such as hands fall in, and not simply handed out.


----------



## Halifax Tar

TwoTonShackle said:
			
		

> All MARLANT units have been directed that these shall be awarded in an appropriate manner such as hands fall in, and not simply handed out.



Could you imagine having to be the guy/gal who organizes the SSI pins to coincide with the people as they are called up in front of the old man hahaha 

I'm sure that it is a MARLANT directive and I'm sure its one that is being followed pragmatically


----------



## hugh19

I just got mine last week. One of my PO's handed it to me. Now I have to fill out paperwork so I can get my reserve seatime included.


----------



## Radar114

TwoTonShackle said:
			
		

> All MARLANT units have been directed that these shall be awarded in an appropriate manner such as hands fall in, and not simply handed out.



"And one, two cloth badges and one, two pins, sign here ...congratulations"   Done.

Whats the measurement to sew this onto the No 1's again?  1/2 " above the name tag?


----------



## jollyjacktar

Take it to the tailor's shop.  They will sew it on for you for free, and they know the correct measurement.


----------



## NavyShooter

I think we're getting ours the morning we leave our next port.

NS


----------



## Occam

Our OR doesn't know a thing about them - and they're across the hall from CMS in NDHQ.  Oh well, it'll get sorted eventually.


----------



## Pusser

CFSU(O) Clothing Stores doesn't even have any in stock.


----------



## Occam

Pusser said:
			
		

> CFSU(O) Clothing Stores doesn't even have any in stock.



I'm shocked.   

It's common knowledge that there are no Navy or Air Force personnel in Ottawa, therefore no need to stock any of their kit at Clothing Stores.

How did you find out that they didn't have any?  They don't answer their phones or e-mail....you must've made the cross-border trek, only to be disappointed at wasting a half day to find out.   ;D


----------



## Pusser

Occam said:
			
		

> I'm shocked.
> 
> It's common knowledge that there are no Navy or Air Force personnel in Ottawa, therefore no need to stock any of their kit at Clothing Stores.
> 
> How did you find out that they didn't have any?  They don't answer their phones or e-mail....you must've made the cross-border trek, only to be disappointed at wasting a half day to find out.   ;D



I did indeed trek across the border (no passport required ;D), but was over there for other reasons as well, so it was not a complete waste of time.  Thanks for caring.


----------



## dapaterson

Occam said:
			
		

> I'm shocked.
> 
> It's common knowledge that there are no Navy or Air Force personnel in Ottawa, therefore no need to stock any of their kit at Clothing Stores.
> 
> How did you find out that they didn't have any?  They don't answer their phones or e-mail....you must've made the cross-border trek, only to be disappointed at wasting a half day to find out.   ;D



Let's be fair to clothing stores at NDHQ - they run out of most Army issue items as well.


----------



## Radar114

Yep, 1/2 inch above the name tag and centered.


----------



## Occam

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Let's be fair to clothing stores at NDHQ - they run out of most Army issue items as well.



LOL!

They moved from the bowels of Pearkes to the NPB building to vastly increase their supply of empty shelf space.   >


----------



## Halifax Tar

Easy on the storesmen folks.  ;D

One on the other side of that counter and you may just gain some understand lol


----------



## Occam

Which storesman?  There are only two there.     

Eight wickets, but only two storesmen.  For the entire NCR.  Career Manager, are you listening?   ;D

Okay, I'll stop derailing the SSI thread now.


----------



## dapaterson

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Easy on the storesmen folks.  ;D
> 
> One on the other side of that counter and you may just gain some understand lol



Who's picking on the Sup Techs?  I'm picking on the item managers who don't order sufficient stock for the CF, resulting in bases not having adequate stock to support their dependencies.

But as long as we buy "shiny & new" and don't divest the old, we'll have inadequate National Procurement funding and continue to be short of socks & spares.


----------



## Pusser

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Who's picking on the Sup Techs?  I'm picking on the item managers who don't order sufficient stock for the CF, resulting in bases not having adequate stock to support their dependencies.
> 
> But as long as we buy "shiny & new" and don't divest the old, we'll have inadequate National Procurement funding and continue to be short of socks & spares.



To be fair, it's not even the item managers responsible for this.  They send the requirements to PWGSC and THEN the fun begins (or not - maybe that's why it takes so long).


----------



## navymich

This is currently going through my CoC but I wanted to ask here too and see if anyone is in the same situation, or has any other info.

My monitor mass has finally been updated with all of the paperwork that I sent in regarding the SSI.  I show 365+ days.  However, my BOR does not know where to go from this now.  As well, stores here has no insignia and has not heard about it.

Is anyone aware how they are being given to bases such as mine where there is only a handful of people to receive them?


----------



## Occam

airmich said:
			
		

> This is currently going through my CoC but I wanted to ask here too and see if anyone is in the same situation, or has any other info.
> 
> My monitor mass has finally been updated with all of the paperwork that I sent in regarding the SSI.  I show 365+ days.  However, my BOR does not know where to go from this now.  As well, stores here has no insignia and has not heard about it.
> 
> Is anyone aware how they are being given to bases such as mine where there is only a handful of people to receive them?



PM incoming.


----------



## NavyShooter

I got mine the morning we sailed from our last port.  Ship's company fallen in on the flight deck, SSI recipients on the Stbd Side, others on the Port.  

Not many gold, a few of us silver, a bunch of bronze, and lots of gun-metal.

Good times.  

NS


----------



## Weatherwitch

As a Airman once posted to  HMCS Saguanay, I find it a little frustrating trying to figure out how to Calculate sea time when My MPRR/490a  dose not have all the ships I sailed on and my UER was un kept when I was away on the great lakes cruise.  The older ships time at sea don't seem to add up.   I was the Navyeoman and the Chart I had shows the dates in each port but Official records don't correspond to the trips.  I am looking at gunmetal with 410 days on record. I think that's how it works out!  Any way I myself think The SSI is a good thing I will go back to sea again within the next few years before I retire and like anything else Time in and experience should be acknowledged if not recognized.  Remember the old saying TI.


----------



## jollyjacktar

For all those crowing (or not) about their SSI, we're rank amateurs when set aside this hairy bag.   

*Her Majesty's saltiest sea dog: Royal Navy sailor completes 33 years of service with an incredible THIRTEEN years at sea
*
By Anthony Bond

He joined the Royal Navy as a fresh-faced 16-year-old because he wanted to travel the world.  And after completing 33 years service and visiting more than 30 countries, Leading Logistician John Wicking is proud to have made history by notching up an incredible 5,100 days at sea, believed to be an Armed Forces record.

Full story and photos at link.

article link


----------



## Halifax Tar

Wow! That Is impressive. Leading Logistician too eh... His trade badge looked like supply to me. Don't they wear a star type badge in th RN ?


----------



## NavalMoose

Wow, 33 years in and already a killick ;D


----------



## Pusser

NavalMoose said:
			
		

> Wow, 33 years in and already a killick ;D



Things are a little different in the RN.  They have fewer ranks than we do.  Promotion to leading seaman is not automatic.  His next rank would be petty officer (of which there is only one grade), immediately followed by Chief Petty Officer.  In short, there is little comparison between an RN leading seaman and an RCN one, other than the title.


----------



## NavalMoose

> Things are a little different in the RN.  They have fewer ranks than we do.  Promotion to leading seaman is not automatic.  His next rank would be petty officer (of which there is only one grade), immediately followed by Chief Petty Officer.  In short, there is little comparison between an RN leading seaman and an RCN one, other than the title



Yes I know, I was a killick in the RN and a MS in the RCN.  I meant that he hasn't shown much ambition to go any higher and make a better pay rate. Thanks for the lesson on navy rates/ranks though ;D


----------



## CountDC

Impressive indeed.  Checking my records the longest period I could find for the people I calculated the SSI time for was 4 years.

Nothing wrong with the rank either in my books.  If he was happy at that level, which I assume he was as he did continue to serve, then good for him.

I've known drivers in the CF that didn't want to be promoted as that was all they wanted to do was drive.  Promotions put you in the office. I also knew an infantry Cpl that was happy there; joined at 17 and retired at 55.  Sometimes people stay not because they can't advance but because they don't want to.  They like being the hands on man vice the paper pushing manager.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> For all those crowing (or not) about their SSI, we're rank amateurs when set aside this hairy bag.



I'll guess that is a compliment in navy lingo?   

33 yrs is alot of svc, and 13 years is alot of time on the big grey circle IMO.


----------



## Pusser

Hairy bag - not so much a compliment, but certainly a term of endearment.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Pusser said:
			
		

> Hairy bag - not so much a compliment, but certainly a term of endearment.



Speak for yourself! I take the term Hairy Bag with pride


----------



## jollyjacktar

Pusser said:
			
		

> Hairy bag - not so much a compliment, but certainly a term of endearment.


After 33 years and 13 of them at sea, the good Killick is no doubt very salty and a hairy bag.  I use it in this case as a compliment and I guess a term of endearment as well.  I call myself a Hairy bag and like HfxTar say it with pride as well.  

Now, being "Pusser".  That is not as endearing a term to me, too much starch, spit and polish with a healthy sprinkling of chickenshit nitpicking mixed in.  Memories of Esquimault at it's worst to me.  That being said, however, it's not being said as a slight towards you personally, Pusser.


----------



## Pusser

I never said that "hairy bag" could not be used as a compliment (it often is), I only meant that it is not necessarily always used as a compliment.  It can be used in a derogatory manner as well.  Consider the following statements:

1)  Old Fred was the salt of the earth, a right old hairy bag and I'm proud to have known him.

2)  No daughter of mine will ever marry some hairy bag!

Keep in mind that both of these statements can be (and in fact, probably have been) used to describe the same sailor.

As for the term"pusser," you definitely misunderstand the intent of my handle.  You have chosen the more modern meaning, whereas I have intended it in the original way.  In my case, it's a noun, not an adjective.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

And for those who may be ignorant of the old meaning: It means "of the service" or "service issued" and is a bastardized version of "purser", who was the old sailing days supply officer of a ship (he held the "purse - hence the Purser and therefore, whatever he "bought" was "officially" approved).


----------



## Infanteer

Dimsum said:
			
		

> (like having a pin on the DEUs to recognize being fit for deployment, instead of it just being "understood"),


----------



## dimsum

Infanteer said:
			
		

>



Exactly my reaction when I found out what it was for.  Below is the link to what the Operational Readiness Badge is all about (first letter and response).  

http://www.defence.gov.au/news/raafnews/editions/4506/letters.htm

And to see what it looks like:

http://www.heritagemedals.com.au/badges-2/air-force/raaf-readiness-badge.html

 :facepalm:


----------



## Edward Campbell

Infanteer said:
			
		

>




Well, we have Sea Service badges and whatever those terminally silly things the Army had, for a blessedly brief while, shortly after I retired.


----------



## dapaterson

Dimsum said:
			
		

> While the ADF does some seemingly ridiculous things (like having a pin on the DEUs to recognize being fit for deployment, instead of it just being "understood"), not awarding QDJMs is a good idea.



Hopefully no one reads this and decides to ressurect the old Star Trek communicator Warrior badges issued to the Army in the early 90s...


----------



## Edward Campbell

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Well, we have Sea Service badges and whatever those terminally silly things the Army had, for a blessedly brief while, shortly after I retired.





			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> Hopefully no one reads this and decides to ressurect the old Star Trek communicator Warrior badges issued to the Army in the early 90s...










*That's* the "terminally silly" thing I was thinking about.


----------



## Bzzliteyr

I had a gold one.. don't know why they didn't keep them around?  

Oh yeah, loads of members in NDHQ couldn't get higher than a bronze...


----------



## jollyjacktar

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Well, we have Sea Service badges and whatever those terminally silly things the Army had, for a blessedly brief while, shortly after I retired.


And is exactly why I despise the SSI so much.  I see the dikmeasuring going on fairly frequently on who has what colour SSI or not.  Pisses me off to no end as I frankly don't give a damn what colour badge you own as it doesn't automatically make you a better Sailor than the next guy/gal.


----------



## daftandbarmy

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And is exactly why I despise the SSI so much.  I see the dikmeasuring going on fairly frequently on who has what colour SSI or not.  Pisses me off to no end as I frankly don't give a damn what colour badge you own as it doesn't automatically make you a better Sailor than the next guy/gal.



I guess the Navy just wants to leverage some good ol' peer pressure to get people on ship for longer/ more often. ;D

"You call these baubles, well, it is with baubles that men are led....Do you think that you would be able to make men fight by reasoning. Never. That is only good for the scholar in his study. The soldier needs glory, distinctions, and rewards." 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Honour


----------



## jollyjacktar

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I guess the Navy just wants to leverage some good ol' peer pressure to get people on ship for longer/ more often. ;D


They say it's intent was to recognize the amount of time that has been spent away actually at sea.  And it also was a way for the younger Sailors to get some bling as well, they say.  How long you get to stay on ship depends upon many things.  What rank you are, what type of platform you're on and how long you've already been in a sea going billet.  With the FELEX on-going as it is for example, the slots available are greatly outweighed by the people who need them, never-mind want them.  

It was always my opinion, which from what I've observed has held true in many cases, that it would create divisive behaviour between those that have this and those that have not.  Before this SSI, you could not tell from the uniform just who had which amount of time at sea.  But, you knew nevertheless who'd been with you on this trip or that and it was not a real issue we were all in it together.  

Now, it's an negative issue to some degree and that's why I despise it so.  I can imagine if the Army had continued down the path of the CAB issue it may have turned into a similar situation amongst them.


----------



## mariomike

Regarding "Sea Service Insignia":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/95432.0/nowap.html


----------



## daftandbarmy

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> They say it's intent was to recognize the amount of time that has been spent away actually at sea.  And it also was a way for the younger Sailors to get some bling as well, they say.  How long you get to stay on ship depends upon many things.  What rank you are, what type of platform you're on and how long you've already been in a sea going billet.  With the FELEX on-going as it is for example, the slots available are greatly outweighed by the people who need them, never-mind want them.
> 
> It was always my opinion, which from what I've observed has held true in many cases, that it would create divisive behaviour between those that have this and those that have not.  Before this SSI, you could not tell from the uniform just who had which amount of time at sea.  But, you knew nevertheless who'd been with you on this trip or that and it was not a real issue we were all in it together.
> 
> Now, it's an negative issue to some degree and that's why I despise it so.  I can imagine if the Army had continued down the path of the CAB issue it may have turned into a similar situation amongst them.



I think the Army invented the idea of badges that pit one part of the Army against another. Viz:


----------



## TN2IC

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> *That's* the "terminally silly" thing I was thinking about.



I still have mine is my dresser.


----------



## fraserdw

Bzzliteyr said:
			
		

> I had a gold one.. don't know why they didn't keep them around?
> 
> Oh yeah, loads of members in NDHQ couldn't get higher than a bronze...



Exactly, I liked the warrior badge, it showed who was who in the fitness zoo.  In an HQ, it gave old Combat Arms guys like myself the extra push to make sure we had gold.  I see nothing wrong with qualification badges that require alot of effort and, hence, a source of pride.  I was always proud of my gold badge and it will be in my shadow box with my medals and my sword when I am done.


----------



## misratah500

I see nothing wrong with them either. The SSI was brought out to recognize going away from home but not on deployment. The navy doesn't earn nearly as many medals as the army does and especially on the west coast where you can go sail off the coast of the Korean Peninsula (warzone technically) and not earn anything. But you can be on the east coast and do a four month booze cruise through Europe and earn a medal. So I think the navy wanted some more bling. 

You can literally be gone from home for over 200+ days for years and have nothing to show for it. It's just simple recognition. People in general like to be recognized for sacrificing and doing a good job. Even if it's just a dinky shiny bauble. But it's not the piece of medal on the shirt that matters, it's the idea of sacrifice behind it that gives it meaning. 

So at least if you see a guy in the navy with just a CD but a silver or gold SSI, you know that he's put his time in and been away from his family, cause we all know there is no stigma against people who have just CD's after 20 years, right! /sarcasm.

I find a lot of the people that say they don't care about the SSI at least on the west coast are the ones who haven't had enough time to earn one. Funny that.


----------



## NavalMoose

"The navy doesn't earn nearly as many medals as the army does"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the contrary, my SWASM, SSM, Former Yugo, and Peacekeeping Medal were all earned in my time on the Grey Funnel Line.....as well as my Gold SSI ;D


----------



## Stoker

misratah500 said:
			
		

> I see nothing wrong with them either. The SSI was brought out to recognize going away from home but not on deployment. The navy doesn't earn nearly as many medals as the army does and especially on the west coast where you can go sail off the coast of the Korean Peninsula (warzone technically) and not earn anything. But you can be on the east coast and do a four month booze cruise through Europe and earn a medal. So I think the navy wanted some more bling.
> 
> You can literally be gone from home for over 200+ days for years and have nothing to show for it. It's just simple recognition. People in general like to be recognized for sacrificing and doing a good job. Even if it's just a dinky shiny bauble. But it's not the piece of medal on the shirt that matters, it's the idea of sacrifice behind it that gives it meaning.
> 
> So at least if you see a guy in the navy with just a CD but a silver or gold SSI, you know that he's put his time in and been away from his family, cause we all know there is no stigma against people who have just CD's after 20 years, right! /sarcasm.
> 
> I find a lot of the people that say they don't care about the SSI at least on the west coast are the ones who haven't had enough time to earn one. Funny that.



Agree with you there, I have 22 Years in the Navy and have sea time far in excess of the time required for the Gold SSI and all I have is a CD. I'v been lots of places and went to Europe three times however nothing to merit a medal. I wear my SSI proudly like a lot of other guys.


----------



## Infanteer

I think the SSI is a good way to recognize some of the unique service demands of the RCN.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Personnaly, I say: So what.

We shouldn't earn as many medals as the Army anyway.

Going to sea in ships is what we are suposed to do. Peacetime or wartime. Period.

In the army, time spent in camp training, waiting is definetly NOT the same as any campaign - whatever little involvement you may have in it.
Its perfectly fine to recognise that.

I don't need to wear anything special on my uniform to merely depict how many days I spent at sea. 

Time in service is already recognized by the CD. 

I know the Americans have badges and bling for everything, including crossing the street without their Petty Officer's help. I don't care and have never felt any inferiority complex from having little to nothing on my uniform when dealing with Americans. In fact, I took great pride in the mere knowledge that even thougfh they wore dozens of badges, ribbons and medals, I still knew my job better than they did.

If we need to recognize time in for seaman, I would have prefered to bring back the old stripes - regardless of confusion it caused with the Army and Airforces.


----------



## misratah500

What are these stripes you speak of?


----------



## Edward Campbell

misratah500 said:
			
		

> What are these stripes you speak of?




Many years ago the Navy wore chevrons, on one arm, below the rank badges (anchors in various formats), to indicate years of service. So did the army - _upside down_ chevrons (a la a drum major) on one sleeve, just below our marksmanship badges, to indicate years of service before a CD was awarded.






RN (WRNS) PO1 (WO) with 13+ years of service


I found a picture of Canadian Army battle dress - it is an Army Cadet, but his _service stripes_ are in the same place that they would be worn by a real soldier, SSgt or below ~ below the marksmanship badge. WOs (WO1 and WO2) did not wear service stripes (or marksmanship badges) because then, as now, their lower sleeves were taken up with rank badges. Then as now, marksmanship badges were worn on the left sleeve and trade badges on the right.







Edit: to add army photo


----------



## PuckChaser

We'll get to work on a Land Service Insignia, for the troops that spend 200-250 days a year in the field, or Air Service Insignia for the aircrews working around the clock to support operations 365 days a year. You joined the Navy, you shouldn't expect a damn medal or shiny piece of fabric for doing your job. A waste of money you could have put towards some new ships.  :2c:


----------



## winnipegoo7

A lot of sailors don't go to sea as often as they should. Ie they are 'sick', have a bad case of 'NATO knee' or some other lame excuse. So I think the sea service insignia is a good way to find out who hasn't been do there fair share of sailing. I know some sailors in a hard sea trade that only have 50 or 60 sea days in 3 years, while other's posted to the same unit with the same time in have 1 year + of sea time.


----------



## TwoTonShackle

I don't think the intent of the SSI was to give other CF member's another way to measure the value or use of a sailor.  It is a simple gesture in order to recognize and promote the achievement of some.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I just hope the ones with negative outlooks are not fostering that same outlook in their peers and subordinates.


----------



## fraserdw

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> A lot of sailors don't go to sea as often as they should. Ie they are 'sick', have a bad case of 'NATO knee' or some other lame excuse. So I think the sea service insignia is a good way to find out who hasn't been do there fair share of sailing. I know some sailors in a hard sea trade that only have 50 or 60 sea days in 3 years, while other's posted to the same unit with the same time in have 1 year + of sea time.



An issue in the Army too.  I know Gunners, troopers, Royals and Patricia's who have 25 years of service and only a CD1, how they did it I do not know.  This is an interesting discussion, I can recall sitting around common room cleaning C1s for the umpteen time and discussing why it was so hard to get a medal in the army unless you were a General or an RSM.  Once so promoted, you got what we called the "fruit salad" package to attach to your CD to bring you up to 1 whole row of medals.  You still looked lame compared to the US military but you looked like a bloody hero when you paraded with a Canadian battalion.

Now the conversation is full circle.  Interestingly, we (the Army) were never one for giving out medals because of all the trade and years of service badges we wore on the battledress.  Once we went to the Trudeau suits and Hellyer battledress (workdress) we lost those badges.  The CD is a great thing but we used to have the ED on our service dress and the years of service stripes on our battledress.  Perhaps we need a 3 year stripe for each 3 years of good service until the CD is awarded then the stripes are removed.  I see nothing wrong with recognizing soldiers who re-sign for another engagement.  

While not a sailor, myself, I got 9 cousins serving in the RCN and they have often said the same thing.  An SSI would improve the availability of sailors for service as it would be hard to be in a hard RCN trade with a poor showing on your SSI.  Regardless of how you view the intent, it may help share the burden of sea service.  :2c: plus  :2c:


----------



## winnipegoo7

fraserdw said:
			
		

> ...*9 cousins* serving in the RCN ...



That's certainly notable!

I just want to add that many of these sailors who don't sail still receive sea pay, as they are posted to sea going units even though they are unfit sea.


----------



## Stoker

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> That's certainly notable!
> 
> I just want to add that many of these sailors who don't sail still receive sea pay, as they are posted to sea going units even though they are unfit sea.



Up to a certain point, if they're on T6 sea pay stops. If someone has a legit short term injury, I don't begrudge them their sea pay.


----------



## fraserdw

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> That's certainly notable!
> 
> I just want to add that many of these sailors who don't sail still receive sea pay, as they are posted to sea going units even though they are unfit sea.



Not to get off topic but 4 of them are from one family and their father was a navy for 30 years!  Back to topic.


----------



## McG

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I guess the Navy just wants to leverage some good ol' peer pressure to get people on ship for longer/ more often.


If the CF really wanted to leverage something to get sailors to sea (or soldiers in the field) then it would stop with allowances based on posting messages and award allowances based on specific experienced hardships.

Right now there are guys collecting hundreds of additional dollars per paycheck for the glory of having their name put against a particular establishment position but not actually doing anything more than another guy doing the exact same in another position.  Some of these financially rewarded individuals are not even asked in the course of their duties to endure the hardship for which they are rewarded (Adjts & CCs come to mind in particular).  Others manage to always get a 14 day injury or illness just at the right time to never actually endure the conditions for which they are rewarded … and who could expect any different when we have an incentive system that gives the milk away for free.

I am not objecting to the SSI; I really don't care, but let's not pretend it is proof the CF is attempting to influence a particular behavior.  If we were interested in that then our financial compensation and rewards would reflect this; if we cared there would not be the existing sea pay & LDA.  There would be super FOA and enhanced casual sea pay where those exposed to the hardship would make as-much or more while free-rides would end.


----------



## The_Falcon

MCG said:
			
		

> There would be super FOA and enhanced casual sea pay where those exposed to the hardship would make as-much or more while free-rides would end.



HEY HEY HEY enough of that common sense using your head stuff.


----------



## Tank Troll

MCG said:
			
		

> If the CF really wanted to leverage something to get sailors to sea (or soldiers in the field) then it would stop with allowances based on posting messages and award allowances based on specific experienced hardships.
> If we cared there would not be the existing sea pay & LDA.  There would be super FOA and enhanced casual sea pay where those exposed to the hardship would make as-much or more while free-rides would end.



I heard that actual thought some where at some brief this summer (can't remember where) but they were also talking about Air Crew pay also and actually having to log the time instead of just being posted to the postion.


----------



## daftandbarmy

MCG said:
			
		

> If the CF really wanted to leverage something to get sailors to sea (or soldiers in the field) then it would stop with allowances based on posting messages and award allowances based on specific experienced hardships.
> 
> Right now there are guys collecting hundreds of additional dollars per paycheck for the glory of having their name put against a particular establishment position but not actually doing anything more than another guy doing the exact same in another position.  Some of these financially rewarded individuals are not even asked in the course of their duties to endure the hardship for which they are rewarded (Adjts & CCs come to mind in particular).  Others manage to always get a 14 day injury or illness just at the right time to never actually endure the conditions for which they are rewarded … and who could expect any different when we have an incentive system that gives the milk away for free.
> 
> I am not objecting to the SSI; I really don't care, but let's not pretend it is proof the CF is attempting to influence a particular behavior.  If we were interested in that then our financial compensation and rewards would reflect this; if we cared there would not be the existing sea pay & LDA.  There would be super FOA and enhanced casual sea pay where those exposed to the hardship would make as-much or more while free-rides would end.




Understood. But badges are cheaper and more effective   ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> A lot of sailors don't go to sea as often as they should. Ie they are 'sick', have a bad case of 'NATO knee' or some other lame excuse. So I think the sea service insignia is a good way to find out who hasn't been do there fair share of sailing. I know some sailors in a hard sea trade that only have 50 or 60 sea days in 3 years, while other's posted to the same unit with the same time in have 1 year + of sea time.


And some don't necessarily get a huge amount of "qualifying" sea days due to the nature of the sail.  Such as the Great Lakes trip the VDQ just completed to show the flag.  They were away from home for an extended period of time, however, their transits were of a short duration which didn't qualify.  And your time on a particular platform might be during a low readiness period, FELEX cycle or whatever.  It doesn't necessarily mean that the member was skiving or had a bad case of NATO knee.

And so you're away from home.  That goes for many members of the Air Force or Army Field units.  When I was in 1 CMBG in my old trade we were away somewhere practically every month, maybe for the day or two or maybe for the whole month.  Goes with the job.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Why not link the requirements for the SSI directly and sea duty allowance scales together.  One earns the other. 

Meaning, if your a gun metal level SSI (like me) then your sea duty allowance is the bottom rung. 

This way you cant get the badge or the pay without actually spending days underway. 

Seems like a good comprise to me...


----------



## Danjanou

Just wait until you retire. You'll get all the pins and badges you want on your "uniform."


----------



## Halifax Tar

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Just wait until you retire. You'll get all the pins and badges you want on your "uniform."



I think we should all look like your first picture!  Gather as much "bling" as you can.  Our dress uniform standards should defiantly run off the wallmart door greeter dress standards!


----------



## The Bread Guy

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Understood. But badges are cheaper and alleged to be more effective   ;D


FTFY


----------



## daftandbarmy

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Just wait until you retire. You'll get all the pins and badges you want on your "uniform."



Whoa... there's hardly any room for dandruff on there!


----------



## Danjanou

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Whoa... there's hardly any room for dandruff on there!



Hey I've seen a recent pic of you ole buddy. Dandruff is something neither of us have to worry about ever again. :'(


----------



## daftandbarmy

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Hey I've seen a recent pic of you ole buddy. Dandruff is something neither of us have to worry about ever again. :'(



Thank gawd. The money I've saved in hair products....


----------



## MeatheadMick

winnipegoo7 said:
			
		

> That's certainly notable!
> 
> I just want to add that many of these sailors who don't sail still receive sea pay, as they are posted to sea going units even though they are unfit sea.



No different than Army guys posted to field units receiving LDA and never going on exercise....


----------



## Halifax Tar

MPMick said:
			
		

> No different than Army guys posted to field units receiving LDA and never going on exercise....



Exactly.  So, contrary to a post and argument I made some time ago,  I think we should be linking LDA and SDA to actual days in the field or underway at sea.  As well, as I stated earlier this topic the SSI should be a reflection of your level of SDA.  


(I'm allowed to change my mind  ;D)


----------



## McG

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Exactly.  So, contrary to a post and argument I made some time ago,  I think we should be linking LDA and SDA to actual days in the field or underway at sea.


Agreed.  This would ensure the financial incentives actually encourage the behaviour we want.



			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> ... the SSI should be a reflection of your level of SDA.


How about a "nights I had to spend away from home (excluding nights in quarters or Canadian hotels)" badge?  Then all three services would have another way of wearing the MPRR.


----------



## Halifax Tar

MCG said:
			
		

> How about a "nights I had to spend away from home (excluding nights in quarters or Canadian hotels)" badge?  Then all three services would have another way of wearing the MPRR.



I see both sides of this to be honest MCG.  You are right its my job as a sailor to go to sea and my SDA is the incentive for that hardship, were I posted to a sea going billet.  

I also believe there should be some sort of recognition for the time away sea going sailors spend at sea on non-deployment "missions".  And tying this directly to SDA I think is a fair way to implement it.  

Besides I have spent so much time puking in the crews after heads I think I deserve a medal for sticking it out lol  :cdnsalute:

*That last line was joke, I don't actually think I deserve a medal*


----------



## PuckChaser

Jacky Tar said:
			
		

> It's the same sort of mentality that led to introducing the SSI. Seriously, I need a little anchor on my tunic to tell me I've been to sea? I'm pretty sure my memories of runs ashore does that, and doesn't cost the taxpayers a thing.



Don't worry, the Army will probably apply to have a little tent insignia to show how often we go to the field. After all, we need badges to show that we do our jobs, right?


----------



## jollyjacktar

Jacky Tar said:
			
		

> It's the same sort of mentality that led to introducing the SSI. Seriously, I need a little anchor on my tunic to tell me I've been to sea? I'm pretty sure my memories of runs ashore does that, and doesn't cost the taxpayers a thing.


 :goodpost:

I hate that GD anchor almost as much as the 1812 pin... both are a colossal waste of money, time and resources.  So far I've avoided wearing the 1812 pin, wish I could do the same with the other one too.


----------



## dapaterson

Jacky Tar said:
			
		

> It's the same sort of mentality that led to introducing the SSI. Seriously, I need a little anchor on my tunic to tell me I've been to sea? I'm pretty sure my memories of runs ashore does that, and doesn't cost the taxpayers a thing.



Anyone with memories of runs ashore never made runs ashore, at least according to most sailors I know.   >


----------



## dimsum

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Anyone with memories of runs ashore never made runs ashore, at least according to most sailors I know.   >



After reading that, it just dawned on me that I really couldn't find my way around Halifax, St. John's, or San Diego during the day.  

At night though....


----------



## SeaKingTacco

I still have no idea where "Dick's Last Resort" is in San Diego, yet have managed to find my way there, without fail, on every port visit...


----------



## OldSolduer

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I still have no idea where "Dick's Last Resort" is in San Diego, yet have managed to find my way there, without fail, on every port visit...


Most likely because you have few POs or WOs corrupting you..... ;D


----------



## Pat in Halifax

When I was in Esquimalt a couple years ago (only 3 days-didn't have anything to drink at all), I decided to go for a walk one evening into Esquimalt proper. Funny how all those years ago, stinking drunk, leaving the dkyd area I could always find the Tutor House ... but not this one time. It is but an 8 minute walk max from the C+POs Mess but half an hour later I was still slogging around. I did finally find it but it made me chuckle. 
Back on topic though, I find the SSI does actually serve a purpose. When you see someone senior with anything other than silver or gold though not in any way do I question their expertise nor seniority, I do wonder where they have been hiding in those 25-30 years and what 'corporate knowledge' they carry to tell of their life's experiences at sea. A friend calls these people 'white house' sailors as in "I have passed more lighthouses going astern then you have white houses in your life".

Pat


----------



## PuckChaser

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Back on topic though, I find the SSI does actually serve a purpose. When you see someone senior with anything other than silver or gold though not in any way do I question their expertise nor seniority, I do wonder where they have been hiding in those 25-30 years and what 'corporate knowledge' they carry to tell of their life's experiences at sea. A friend calls these people 'white house' sailors as in "I have passed more lighthouses going astern then you have white houses in your life".



That's a horrible reason to have a SSI.... You should be able to tell without a stupid badge whether the person has sea/land/air experience within a few minutes.


----------



## Halifax Tar

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> That's a horrible reason to have a SSI.... You should be able to tell without a stupid badge whether the person has sea/land/air experience within a few minutes.



Not that I agree with this reasoning for the SSI but there are many many sailors with little or no sea time.  Other than actually engaging in conversation <gasp> you will not be able to tell.


----------



## PuckChaser

Just as there is soldiers with no field time and airmen/women with no flight hours. Welcome to unification.


----------



## ModlrMike

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> When you see someone senior with anything other than silver or gold though not in any way do I question their expertise nor seniority, I do wonder where they have been hiding in those 25-30 years and what 'corporate knowledge' they carry to tell of their life's experiences at sea. A friend calls these people 'white house' sailors as in "I have passed more lighthouses going astern then you have white houses in your life".
> 
> Pat



Speaking solely for myself, I spent my time hiding in the field. In that 30 years, I managed 10 tours. Those sailors concerned that I don't have anything on the right side of my tunic should be more than consoled by looking at the left side. Remember that for "purple" sailors the opportunity to be posted to sea is seldom within their own power.


----------



## Halifax Tar

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Speaking solely for myself, I spent my time hiding in the field. In that 30 years, I managed 10 tours. Those sailors concerned that I don't have anything on the right side of my tunic should be more than consoled by looking at the left side. Remember that for "purple" sailors the opportunity to be posted to sea is seldom within their own power.



Pat in Halifax was Referring too experiences at sea not necessarily operational deployments or field time.  I would suspect HMCS Chippewa is your first naval unit ?  I would also suspect/expect you don't walk about blunder busing about all your sea time then.  

Like myself I not walk about CFJSR talking about all my Army time and field this and field that.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Just to clarify a tad-Not my intent to start a pissing contest-I meant hard sea trades as well as Naval Officers. Someone said you would note early on in a conversation whether someone is 'seasoned' and you are indeed correct. I see a MS with a gold SSI and I immediately have a little 'extra' respect before that conversation commences. It works both ways of course. For some of the young guys/gals, when they are bumped up to the next level, it's a pride thing. I have no problem with that.

Pat


----------



## cupper

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Just to clarify a tad-Not my intent to start a pissing contest-I meant hard sea trades as well as Naval Officers. Someone said you would note early on in a conversation whether someone is 'seasoned' and you are indeed correct. I see a MS with a gold SSI and I immediately have a little 'extra' respect before that conversation commences. It works both ways of course. For some of the young guys/gals, when they are bumped up to the next level, it's a pride thing. I have no problem with that.
> 
> Pat



So it's just the Navy's way of preventing a dick sea time measuring contest.


----------



## Occam

Pat in Halifax said:
			
		

> Someone said you would note early on in a conversation whether someone is 'seasoned' and you are indeed correct. I see a MS with a gold SSI and I immediately have a little 'extra' respect before that conversation commences.



What happens when you run into a MCpl in an Air Force uniform wearing a silver SSI?   

(Aside from wondering "Who'd he piss off?", that is...)


----------



## Halifax Tar

cupper said:
			
		

> So it's just the Navy's way of preventing a dick sea time measuring contest.



No it was an iniative the RCN put forward recognize the amount of time sea going CF pers can spend underway. 

If "decorations" are penis measuring contests perhaps nothing should be on our uniforms other thank rank badges.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Occam said:
			
		

> What happens when you run into a MCpl in an Air Force uniform wearing a silver SSI?
> 
> (Aside from wondering "Who'd he piss off?", that is...)



I would say they are maritime air crew and offer a rum drink!


----------



## Occam

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I would say they are maritime air crew and offer a rum drink!



...or ex-Navy types enjoying greener pastures, but not necessarily air crew.   :nod:


----------



## navymich

Occam said:
			
		

> ...or ex-Navy types enjoying greener pastures, but not necessarily air crew.   :nod:



"Bluer" pastures.  But I'll still take the rum drink


----------



## PuckChaser

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> No it was an iniative the RCN put forward recognize the amount of time sea going CF pers can spend underway.



Why do you need a badge for that? I think the RCN uniform should be enough to indicate that they have spent some time at sea.


----------



## rmc_wannabe

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Why do you need a badge for that? I think the RCN uniform should be enough to indicate that they have spent some time at sea.



Why do some people wearing a green uniform desire a CAB or CIB or aome kind of denoter on their GCS-SWA? 

We have somewhat become a military where we no longer look at the group effort, but at the individual experience . I spent my tour in KAF. Did it suck? Yes. Did it suck as much as doing dismounted patrols in Panjwaii? Not a chance. Did my being their contribute to mission success? I'd like to think so....however minute it was.

There is always someone out their trying to pat their ego. Its when they get into a position where they can institutionalize that pat for everyone else and make an effort divisive that it becomes a problem.


----------



## Journeyman

It's simply one more thing -- SSI badges, adding "Royal" to prefixes, 1812 pin, renaming Areas to "Divisions," discussing pip/crown rank badges -- simply massive amounts of staff work being pissed away, with the sole effect (for both supporters and those bitching -- the result is the same) of distracting people from the budget cuts, the abysmal state of equipment acquisition, and the reality that we have more General/Flag Officers (and requisite bag men staff) than a military of our size remotely warrants.


Nero fiddling.....Potemkin Village.....Titanic needing ice for the drinks carts......hell, insert whatever metaphor works for you.


----------



## Edward Campbell

:ditto:      :goodpost:    and all that sort of thing.

Milpoints inbound for truth telling.


----------



## OldSolduer

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> :ditto:      :goodpost:    and all that sort of thing.
> 
> Milpoints inbound for truth telling.



Same here, Mil Points inbound .


----------



## Halifax Tar

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Why do you need a badge for that? I think the RCN uniform should be enough to indicate that they have spent some time at sea.



I don't agree or disagree buds just stating how I understood it came about.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Journeyman said:
			
		

> It's simply one more thing -- SSI badges, adding "Royal" to prefixes, 1812 pin, renaming Areas to "Divisions," discussing pip/crown rank badges -- simply massive amounts of staff work being pissed away, with the sole effect (for both supporters and those bitching -- the result is the same) of distracting people from the budget cuts, the abysmal state of equipment acquisition, and the reality that we have more General/Flag Officers (and requisite bag men staff) than a military of our size remotely warrants.
> 
> 
> Nero fiddling.....Potemkin Village.....Titanic needing ice for the drinks carts......hell, insert whatever metaphor works for you.



Excellent point!  But do you really expect to see cuts to Generals/Flag Officers though ?  I don't.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Same here, Mil Points inbound .



Me too, well said.  Bread and circus for sure, when in trouble do as the Roman's did.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

airmich said:
			
		

> "Bluer" pastures.  But I'll still take the rum drink



Good thing the RCAF doesn't do things to denote time in the air, etc.... ;D


----------



## George Wallace

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Good thing the RCAF doesn't do things to denote time in the air, etc.... ;D



He is just a MSE Op in the air.  He just doesn't have to do a Safe Backing Crse.    >


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Looking at the badge, I don't see that it necessarily refers to "time in the air".

It could be hours spent at the local bar, or time in hotels for overnight flights .

Or maybe, since it says RCAF 10,000 hours, it could be the number of hours Air Command has been renamed RCAF: about a year and a half is about right for 10,000 hours .


----------



## cupper

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Looking at the badge, I don't see that it necessarily refers to "time in the air".
> 
> It could be hours spent at the local bar, or time in hotels for overnight flights .
> 
> Or maybe, since it says RCAF 10,000 hours, it could be the number of hours Air Command has been renamed RCAF: about a year and a half is about right for 10,000 hours .



Still, as they say on the Comedy Channel, "Time Well Wasted"


----------



## daftandbarmy

God will not look you over for medals degrees or diplomas, but for scars.

Elbert Hubbard 

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/medals.html#9OwO2KEGfslz618m.99


----------



## mariomike

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> God will not look you over for medals degrees or diplomas, but for scars.
> Elbert Hubbard



 :goodpost:


----------



## TCM621

How would one find out which Badge they qualify for?


----------



## McG

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> How would one find out which Badge they qualify for?


Start here:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/95432.0.html


----------



## NavyShooter

Heard rumbles today that the Gunmetal SSI badge might be dropped to 180 days....will followup when I hear more than rumours!

NS


----------



## kratz

Too many MARS IV are reminded they don't have enough sea time.  :nod:


----------



## Halifax Tar

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Heard rumbles today that the Gunmetal SSI badge might be dropped to 180 days....will followup when I hear more than rumours!
> 
> NS



Interesting I would like to know the reasoning.  While the SSIs necessity could be, and has been, argued lowering the bar just makes it more worthless IMHO.


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Interesting I would like to know the reasoning.  While the SSIs necessity could be, and has been, argued lowering the bar just makes it more worthless IMHO.



Its not a rumour, its happening soon. Don't know the reasoning, you're guess is as good as mine. When the SSI came out, not enough people qualified for the gold, so they dropped it a year. Nothing surprises me anymore.


----------



## Monsoon

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Its not a rumour, its happening soon. Don't know the reasoning, you're guess is as good as mine. When the SSI came out, not enough people qualified for the gold, so they dropped it a year. Nothing surprises me anymore.


I've heard some talk to the effect that the RCN would like to see more folks from outside the institution wearing it - like flight crew and medics and augmentees who may just deploy for a single six-month mission at sea once in their career. Seems the entry-level threshold for most gongs is six months in theatre, so it doesn't seem completely unreasonable (granted that the whole thing is rather silly, IMHO).


----------



## dimsum

I'm sure this has been covered somewhere but I can't find it - how would one go about getting the admin for it?  I was just shy of the original SSI requirements.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

It was explained recently at a Command brief in Halifax that it is so newer folks can get something on their uniform early in their career although the 'outside the institution' reasoning could be a secondary. And yes, the number was 180 and no, it had nothing specifically to do with MARS Officers.
To get info, go to the NSHQ page in DIN and look under DNP (?) (the former DGNP) and follow to DNav P&T (the former DNavPers). There is a link for SSI although the contact name(s) may be dated. If I make it into work today (Still have 6 feet of snow outside my garage door), I will put the link on here. 

Pat


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Here's the DIN link:
http://nshq-qgemm.mil.ca/dnavp-dperm/dnavp2-dperm2/ssi-ism/default-eng.asp
Though some of the data there may seem dated, the database is good. As well, the contact name seems to be current.


----------



## misratah500

They are just dropping the Gun Metal requirement? Or all SSI's by 180days.


----------



## NavyShooter

Just the Gun-Metal.  Remainder stay the same.


----------



## Stoker

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Just the Gun-Metal.  Remainder stay the same.



I made up my own level after Gold, ship side grey ;D


----------



## Pusser

One of the problems with the SSI is that it can be devisive if not handled carefully.  On the one hand, I see differentiating those people who actually go to sea from those who don't (but who still wear a naval uniform) as a good thing.  In this case we are separating "real" sailors from those who chose a naval uniform simply because it matches their eyes best.  On the other hand, the current situation in the Navy with regard to the number of platforms, posting cycles and career progression, sees a lot of people who actually do go to sea, never achieving enough days to qualify under the 365-day rule.  The best examples of these are Naval Logisitics and Naval Technical Officers.  Keep in mind that these officers DO go to sea and with the amount of responsibility they hold as sea-going Heads of Departments in HMC Ships, it is difficult to argue that they are not "real" sailors.  They deserve recognition as such.

Remember also that 180 sea days is not achieved from a six-month deployment.  It will still take a few years posted to ships in order to achieve this.  I don't see lowering the initial threshold as a bad thing.  This amount should be sufficient to recognize the LogOs and NTOs who truly do deserve it.

PS:  For those who are curious, the lowered threshold makes absolutely no difference to my situation as I have more than enough sea days to qualify.


----------



## ADIDAS

Heres a question.  Did our Orca time (for those who were PCTU or otherwise MARS trainees) contribute to our SSIs at all?


----------



## dimsum

ADIDAS said:
			
		

> Heres a question.  Did our Orca time (for those who were PCTU or otherwise MARS trainees) contribute to our SSIs at all?



Yes - it's in the Sea Day Metrics along with a whole whack of other instances under NOTC VENTURE.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Just had my sea days audited. Over 500 days at sea (and counting....)


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Nice. But where does it fit on the RCAF leather jacket ???


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Please. I wouldn't wear one of those if it was given to me...


----------



## Lumber

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Please. I wouldn't wear one of those if it was given to me...



Does anyone wear it? I've only encountered one person wearing it, and they weren't wearing any rank insignia, so we just kind of walked past each other making slight eye contact daring the other to salut first.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Lumber said:
			
		

> _Does anyone wear it?_ I've only encountered one person wearing it, and they weren't wearing any rank insignia, so we just kind of walked past each other making slight eye contact daring the other to salut first.




I saw a few, here in Ottawa, last fall and this spring: I thought they looked, generally, smart and practical for the days when I, too, wear a leather windbreaker. I guess the patches and _geegaws_ are/can be a problem ~ I actually didn't notice them on the few I saw. I don't see what's wrong with _optional_, personal expense, items like leather jackets, as long as we don't go overboard on the badges, flashes, patches and trinkets.


----------



## Nuggs

Even the SSI price is over the top if you ask me. The SSI by itself is somewhat of a farce anyway.  especially with the devaluation of gun metal, the sea time tracking issues, and all the bodies wearing versions thier not entitled too.

Why in the hell are we trying to dress up operational dress? I don't see the Army putting jump wings on cadpat.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## Stoker

Nuggs said:
			
		

> Even the SSI price is over the top if you ask me. The SSI by itself is somewhat of a farce anyway.  especially with the devaluation of gun metal, the sea time tracking issues, and all the bodies wearing versions thier not entitled too.
> 
> Why in the hell are we trying to dress up operational dress? I don't see the Army putting jump wings on cadpat.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk



I don't think so, apparently all this extra patches and badges and what not was from feedback from the younger guys. I see no problem with making a change now and again, the uniforms been pretty stale for a lot of years. I personally see no problem with the SSI and far as I know there is no problem with the tracking of sea time. I would suggest if you know of someone is wearing a SSI level their not entitled to tell your COC.


----------



## jollyjacktar

My SSI calculations were fucked up right from the start and have remained so.  They have me sailing when I was landed and at times landed when I was sailing.  I know many others whose dates are a mess too.


----------



## Nuggs

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I don't think so, apparently all this extra patches and badges and what not was from feedback from the younger guys. I see no problem with making a change now and again, the uniforms been pretty stale for a lot of years. I personally see no problem with the SSI and far as I know there is no problem with the tracking of sea time. I would suggest if you know of someone is wearing a SSI level their not entitled to tell your COC.


In my experience those personnel are normally a part of the CoC [emoji39]

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## Stoker

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> My SSI calculations were ****ed up right from the start and have remained so.  They have me sailing when I was landed and at times landed when I was sailing.  I know many others whose dates are a mess too.



So they gave some and not enough. From what I could see it was common to not have enough due to the database not being accurate enough. I would say I have several hundred sea days not accurately reflected however it doesn't matter in my case.


----------



## Stoker

Nuggs said:
			
		

> In my experience those personnel are normally a part of the CoC [emoji39]
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk



Honestly its pretty hard to actually make up sea days to give you ones you don't deserve. You need to provide proof for the verification's. I highly doubt someone would risk a charge for doing so, I suppose its possible but I doubt its that wide spread that you contend. It seems you are sure  that people in your chain of Command are wearing SSI's that you know they don't deserve, I would like to know how exactly you know? Do you have lots of sailing experience in your 9 years in?


----------



## Nuggs

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Honestly its pretty hard to actually make up sea days to give you ones you don't deserve. You need to provide proof for the verification's. I highly doubt someone would risk a charge for doing so, I suppose its possible but I doubt its that wide spread that you contend. It seems you are sure  that people in your chain of Command are wearing SSI's that you know they don't deserve, I would like to know how exactly you know? Do you have lots of sailing experience in your 9 years in?



You don't need to make up sea days, people just went down to clothing stores and picked up the SSI of their choice. Sometimes people asked for verification (print out from MM) sometimes they didn't.

No one in my current CoC is wearing an erroneous SSI, hell most of them don't even know what it is. I have however seen a fairly extensive amount of PO1-CPO2 wearing the wrong ones, along with some senior officers. I've also seen a few caught and corrected.

Most of it appears to stem from a lack of effort to get an audit done, so they wear what they believe they’re entitled to. Or more primarily the need to feel as though they, the individual, will be taken seriously. (IE that group of PO2 talking about the experience of the new PO1 posted in, I mean he’s only got 10 years in and a gun metal).

I'm not exactly sure how my years of service (which by the way is 8, not 9, but I appreciate you researching my post history) correlate with knowing members sea day counts. I'm fairly certain an OD scribe can tell what pay scale someone is on. In the same way that anyone that has read permissions in MM can see your sea day count.

However, just like the SSI, erroneously tying TI = Experience = Expertise is an issue. Yes, time spent performing any task will provide experience, but it won't necessarily make someone a SME. There’s all kinds of guys with decades at sea that are bags of hammers.


----------



## Stoker

Nuggs said:
			
		

> You don't need to make up sea days, people just went down to clothing stores and picked up the SSI of their choice. Sometimes people asked for verification (print out from MM) sometimes they didn't.
> 
> No one in my current CoC is wearing an erroneous SSI, hell most of them don't even know what it is. I have however seen a fairly extensive amount of PO1-CPO2 wearing the wrong ones, along with some senior officers. I've also seen a few caught and corrected.
> 
> Most of it appears to stem from a lack of effort to get an audit done, so they wear what they believe they’re entitled to. Or more primarily the need to feel as though they, the individual, will be taken seriously. (IE that group of PO2 talking about the experience of the new PO1 posted in, I mean he’s only got 10 years in and a gun metal).
> 
> I'm not exactly sure how my years of service (which by the way is 8, not 9, but I appreciate you researching my post history) correlate with knowing members sea day counts. I'm fairly certain an OD scribe can tell what pay scale someone is on. In the same way that anyone that has read permissions in MM can see your sea day count.
> 
> However, just like the SSI, erroneously tying TI = Experience = Expertise is an issue. Yes, time spent performing any task will provide experience, but it won't necessarily make someone a SME. There’s all kinds of guys with decades at sea that are bags of hammers.



Well that too bad that you think people are walking around with SSI's that they didn't deserve, I personally don't think its as rampant as you think. Hopefully you are vigilant to bring people to task about this. Its nice to see that you are looking out for the RCN's interests in Ottawa.


----------



## PuckChaser

Nuggs said:
			
		

> Even the SSI price is over the top if you ask me. The SSI by itself is somewhat of a farce anyway.  especially with the devaluation of gun metal, the sea time tracking issues, and all the bodies wearing versions thier not entitled too.



The SSI was a farce the minute it was proposed. You want a uniform device that says you go to sea? You're in the RCN, you're supposed to go to sea. That to me says there's far to many RCN pers not going to sea that you had to show there was at least some people fulfilling their primary function.



			
				Nuggs said:
			
		

> Why in the hell are we trying to dress up operational dress? I don't see the Army putting jump wings on cadpat.



Its coming. Once all our Generals and Colonels get their wings and coloured badges to show what division and Bde they belong to, the troops will get them to "improve morale". But you only get to wear 2 specialty badges, so you're not showing off.  :


----------



## Monsoon

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You want a uniform device that says you go to sea? You're in the RCN, you're supposed to go to sea. That to me says there's far to many RCN pers not going to sea that you had to show there was at least some people fulfilling their primary function.


That same argument, with the substitution of "to sea" with "on deployment" and "RCN" with "army", is 100% as valid in relation to mission deployment medals.


----------



## PuckChaser

Monsoon said:
			
		

> That same argument, with the substitution of "to sea" with "on deployment" and "RCN" with "army", is 100% as valid in relation to mission deployment medals.


No, an appropriate comparison is if I got a device for spending X days in the field. Operational deployments are awarded medals the same across all elements and sufficiently rare as to warrant a medal. Do you not get SSI time for heading to RIMPAC? I don't get bling for going to MAPLE RESOLVE.


----------



## Monsoon

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> No, an appropriate comparison is if I got a device for spending X days in the field. Operational deployments are awarded medals the same across all elements and sufficiently rare as to warrant a medal. Do you not get SSI time for heading to RIMPAC? I don't get bling for going to MAPLE RESOLVE.


It's almost as though there were very real differences in how the various components train and operate, and that passing judgement on one from a basis of experience in another might end up making the person doing the analysis look ignorant...


----------



## Halifax Tar

IMHO the SSI is a ridiculous accoutrement that should be done away with.  Its a badge for doing your/our job.  When do stewards get their good housekeeping badge ?


----------



## Stoker

I find that most who are against the SSI either has never sailed, or has done fairly limited sea time due to platform or trade. Most people with significant sea time actually wear it with pride. I personally would never begrudge someone else about something they are awarded. It may be for just doing our job but its also a visible reminder of what we do and its for actual time underway not sitting alongside posted to a ship.

This is what the RCN says about it.

"The SSI is a visible and formal recognition of the time the navy's sailors, as well as members of the army and air force who sail on HMC Ships, spend at sea, away from their homes and loved ones. It is a way of saying "thank you" to all those who have spent significant amounts of time away from their homes and families in service to the Canadian Navy"

Honestly that fine with me.


----------



## Lumber

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> IMHO the SSI is a ridiculous accoutrement that should be done away with.  Its a badge for doing your/our job.  When do stewards get their good housekeeping badge ?



I disagree. It's not just about doing your job, it's about all the time and sacrifice that goes with doing your job in the Navy. Being away at sea is not like being in the field. The Army goes to the field for exercises; we go to sea for trials (oh god, the trials...), work ups, support to trg courses, support to OGDs, exercises, SARs, operations, and full-blown deployments. All of these, from the minor ones to the major ones, take us away from our families and our daily routines. 

If you're lucky, you get rotated around between high-tempo units, low-temp units, and shore postings; but if you're unlucky, you get posted to high-tempo ship after high-tempo ship and end up spend 200+ days each year at sea for several years on end. Does the Army do that? Does the Air Force do that?

From another perspective, we also take our time at sea much more seriously than the Army does. Let me put it this way: has anyone in the Navy ever seen members of the ship's company landed during a major training exercise so that they could practice and compete in a regional military Hockey tournament? The Army has...


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I find that most who are against the SSI either has never sailed, or has done fairly limited sea time due to platform or trade. Most people with significant sea time actually wear it with pride. I personally would never begrudge someone else about something they are awarded. It may be for just doing our job but its also a visible reminder of what we do and its for actual time underway not sitting alongside posted to a ship.
> 
> This is what the RCN says about it.
> 
> "The SSI is a visible and formal recognition of the time the navy's sailors, as well as members of the army and air force who sail on HMC Ships, spend at sea, away from their homes and loved ones. It is a way of saying "thank you" to all those who have spent significant amounts of time away from their homes and families in service to the Canadian Navy"
> 
> Honestly that fine with me.



I have lots of sea time, probably in the top 3rd in my trade in Halifax.  This still doesn't sway my position.  We get sea pay for these sacrifices if the RCN wanted to give me more of a reward for doing my job then up the dollar value of sea pay.  The SSI was probably well intentioned but is really tuned into just a penis size contest for hard sea trades. 

You can take pride in all you want and I am entitled to think its a self licking iced cream cone devised by the RCN.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Lumber said:
			
		

> I disagree. It's not just about doing your job, it's about all the time and sacrifice that goes with doing your job in the Navy. Being away at sea is not like being in the field. The Army goes to the field for exercises; we go to sea for trials (oh god, the trials...), work ups, support to trg courses, support to OGDs, exercises, SARs, operations, and full-blown deployments. All of these, from the minor ones to the major ones, take us away from our families and our daily routines.
> 
> If you're lucky, you get rotated around between high-tempo units, low-temp units, and shore postings; but if you're unlucky, you get posted to high-tempo ship after high-tempo ship and end up spend 200+ days each year at sea for several years on end. Does the Army do that? Does the Air Force do that?
> 
> From another perspective, we also take our time at sea much more seriously than the Army does. Let me put it this way: has anyone in the Navy ever seen members of the ship's company landed during a major training exercise so that they could practice and compete in a regional military Hockey tournament? The Army has...



Again you are remunerated for your sea time with sea pay.   I'm glad you like SSI, I think its ridiculous.


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I have lots of sea time, probably in the top 3rd in my trade in Halifax.  This still doesn't sway my position.  We get sea pay for these sacrifices if the RCN wanted to give me more of a reward for doing my job then up the dollar value of sea pay.  The SSI was probably well intentioned but is really tuned into just a penis size contest for hard sea trades.
> 
> You can take pride in all you want and I am entitled to think its a self licking iced cream cone devised by the RCN.



I respect your position but don't agree with it. I see no problem with showing how sea time you actually have, in fact it may have the effect of people wanting to sail just to get to that extra level, its an incentive.  I do agree that sea pay should be higher though.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I respect your position but don't agree with it. I see no problem with showing how sea time you actually have, in fact it may have the effect of people wanting to sail just to get to that extra level, its an incentive.  I do agree that sea pay should be higher though.



And I yours Chief!  :cheers:


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

It's a hard one, but my problem is that there can be no real understanding of either the sacrifice made nor the quality of the seaman.

Let me explain:Is the "sacrifice" of a LS who is single, 24 years old, in the service for six years wearing a bronze SSI the same "sacrifice" as that of a MSEO Lcdr married, three children, in the service for 12 years also awarded a bronze SSI?

And, is a LS awarded the silver SSI better than a PO2 only wearing the bronze SSI? What if the LS has been in the service for 20 years and just happen not to be promotable past that level, while the PO2 is a "go-getter" who made it to his level on excellent leadership and trade knowledge in 12 years?

And sea time in and of itself does not amount to anything in terms of recognizing capability of the seaman. I know very smart cookies who could be run through MARS III and IV six times in a row and still wouldn't be able to navigate or handle a ship. On the other hand, I know OSER that can grasp their engineering to a level commensurate with a LS/MS after a single year at sea. They just "get" naval engineering.

BTW, for comparison sake here, with the definition we use for "days at sea", your average merchant seaman would qualify for gun metal in 13 months, bronze in four years and 9 months, silver in 7 years and gold in 9 years and 4 months. Since the merchies average career is 35 years at sea, they would all make triple gold and more. We should just keep that in mind and not let our SSI levels go to our heads too much.  ;D


----------



## Stoker

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> It's a hard one, but my problem is that there can be no real understanding of either the sacrifice made nor the quality of the seaman.
> 
> Let me explain:Is the "sacrifice" of a LS who is single, 24 years old, in the service for six years wearing a bronze SSI the same "sacrifice" as that of a MSEO Lcdr married, three children, in the service for 12 years also awarded a bronze SSI?
> 
> And, is a LS awarded the silver SSI better than a PO2 only wearing the bronze SSI? What if the LS has been in the service for 20 years and just happen not to be promotable past that level, while the PO2 is a "go-getter" who made it to his level on excellent leadership and trade knowledge in 12 years?
> 
> And sea time in and of itself does not amount to anything in terms of recognizing capability of the seaman. I know very smart cookies who could be run through MARS III and IV six times in a row and still wouldn't be able to navigate or handle a ship. On the other hand, I know OSER that can grasp their engineering to a level commensurate with a LS/MS after a single year at sea. They just "get" naval engineering.
> 
> BTW, for comparison sake here, with the definition we use for "days at sea", your average merchant seaman would qualify for gun metal in 13 months, bronze in four years and 9 months, silver in 7 years and gold in 9 years and 4 months. Since the merchies average career is 35 years at sea, they would all make triple gold and more. We should just keep that in mind and not let our SSI levels go to our heads too much.  ;D



I personally wouldn't use it to describe how smart you are or how much of a go getter you are. If you use the SSI as a measure of the sailor or member then you are foolish.The SSI wasn't for that purpose at all. The comparison with the merchants with their accommodations, and superior QOL is not much of a comparison either.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I personally wouldn't use it to describe how smart you are or how much of a go getter you are. If you use the SSI as a measure of the sailor or member then you are foolish.The SSI wasn't for that purpose at all. The comparison with the merchants with their accommodations, and superior QOL is not much of a comparison either.



This is great in theory.  But it doesn't and didn't work that way in application and operation.  We have things that denote ones experience, leadership and accomplishments, its called ranks and medals.  The SSI has just muddied those waters. 

Its not so bad for us Loggies, you guys mostly know we don't spend our careers with the RCN; but some of your hard sea brethren can be very snide and underhanded to those that hold the ranks of MS and above and have what is considered a lesser shade of SSI.


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> This is great in theory.  But it doesn't and didn't work that way in application and operation.  We have things that denote ones experience, leadership and accomplishments, its called ranks and medals.  The SSI has just muddied those waters.
> 
> Its not so bad for us Loggies, you guys mostly know we don't spend our careers with the RCN; but some of your hard sea brethren can be very snide and underhanded to those that hold the ranks of MS and above and have what is considered a lesser shade of SSI.



I guess that could be said of any incentive such as the FORCE test or even medals. I have well excess of 2100 sea days, but only have a CD1 and Operation service, I'm sure people will say they're better than me because they a bigger rack of medals. I think your are correct that to a certain extent it had muddied the waters but I se it has merit and not need to be scrapped.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I guess that could be said of any incentive such as the FORCE test or even medals. I have well excess of 2100 sea days, but only have a CD1 and Operation service, I'm sure people will say they're better than me because they a bigger rack of medals. I think your are correct that to a certain extent it had muddied the waters but I se it has merit and not need to be scrapped.



The Force test is required for you/me/us to maintain employment with the CAF.  Different ball of wax, IMHO. 

I don't want to come off as harsh here Chief, but that 2100 days towards your SSI tells me you have 2100 days doing your sea going job.  Your OSM, CD1 and rank tells me you have lots and lots of experience and you probably know what your talking so I will defer to you as a SME, this is what I put weight into. 

People who judge others simply by "racks" are inexperienced themselves and lack a view of the bigger picture.


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> The Force test is required for you/me/us to maintain employment with the CAF.  Different ball of wax, IMHO.
> 
> I don't want to come off as harsh here Chief, but that 2100 days towards your SSI tells me you have 2100 days doing your sea going job.  Your OSM, CD1 and rank tells me you have lots and lots of experience and you probably know what your talking so I will defer to you as a SME, this is what I put weight into.
> 
> People who judge others simply by "racks" are inexperienced themselves and lack a view of the bigger picture.



I agree that people should never judge but it does happen and seems to happen here on a daily basis on the way we choose to do business in the RCN. Its the way society is and we are a refection of that society. Bottom line I appreciate what the SSI brings us despite the downsides to it.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

Sorry if I did not express myself properly, Chief.

I did not mean to intimate that the SSI is an indicator of competence be it in one's trade or as a leader. On the contrary, it was meant to illustrate that it doesn't indicate such thing, but that, even for what it supposedly meant to illustrate, i.e. the sacrifice of being at sea, it doesn't work. Here's a further example from my past.

You yourself quoted from the RCN's position: The SSI is meant to (my underlining in yellow):

"The SSI is a visible and formal recognition of the time the navy's sailors, as well as members of the army and air force who sail on HMC Ships, spend at sea, away from their homes and loved ones. It is a way of saying "thank you" to all those who have spent significant amounts of time away from their homes and families in service to the Canadian Navy"

Now, unless they have changed their definition, isn't a day at sea defined as any time spent at sea of more than eight hours in a row in any given day?

Many moons ago, when I served in THUNDER, we trained all the new PB crew members coming into the division for two months in winter. We were sailing every morning from about 10 minutes before eight (to avoid colours  ;D) to about 17h00 back alongside D-Jetty in Esquimalt. Under today's system, that would be 45 days toward your SSI. What's the hardship? Where is the time away from "homes and families"?

Now, how about the Naval reservist, 30 years old - married with two young kids, from Winnipeg, who finally managed to rustle up three months of unpaid leave from his employer so he could go on a long course in Halifax for career progression? Under the current system, he gets no time whatsoever toward a SSI level. Yet, he is definitely away from "homes and families". Same goes of the Halifax based Regular Force member sent for three months on a course in Victoria on attach posting.

See the problem: where do you stop, and what does it really represent?

That's all I am saying.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

I always thought the SSI was stupid and devisive.

And some of the RCAF routinely sails, too.  

(Says the guy who has somewhere between 750-1000 sea days, if I cared enough to insist my already overworked clerks drop what they are doing and conduct an audit for me. I have no idea what colour that  entitles me and don't really care.)


----------



## Stoker

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Sorry if I did not express myself properly, Chief.
> 
> I did not mean to intimate that the SSI is an indicator of competence be it in one's trade or as a leader. On the contrary, it was meant to illustrate that it doesn't indicate such thing, but that, even for what it supposedly meant to illustrate, i.e. the sacrifice of being at sea, it doesn't work. Here's a further example from my past.
> 
> You yourself quoted from the RCN's position: The SSI is meant to (my underlining in yellow):
> 
> "The SSI is a visible and formal recognition of the time the navy's sailors, as well as members of the army and air force who sail on HMC Ships, spend at sea, away from their homes and loved ones. It is a way of saying "thank you" to all those who have spent significant amounts of time away from their homes and families in service to the Canadian Navy"
> 
> Now, unless they have changed their definition, isn't a day at sea defined as any time spent at sea of more than eight hours in a row in any given day?
> 
> Many moons ago, when I served in THUNDER, we trained all the new PB crew members coming into the division for two months in winter. We were sailing every morning from about 10 minutes before eight (to avoid colours  ;D) to about 17h00 back alongside D-Jetty in Esquimalt. Under today's system, that would be 45 days toward your SSI. What's the hardship? Where is the time away from "homes and families"?
> 
> Now, how about the Naval reservist, 30 years old - married with two young kids, from Winnipeg, who finally managed to rustle up three months of unpaid leave from his employer so he could go on a long course in Halifax for career progression? Under the current system, he gets no time whatsoever toward a SSI level. Yet, he is definitely away from "homes and families". Same goes of the Halifax based Regular Force member sent for three months on a course in Victoria on attach posting.
> 
> See the problem: where do you stop, and what does it really represent?
> 
> That's all I am saying.



End of the day we are mandated to wear it and I like the fact the more junior sailors get something to wear and be proud of. Some like it and some don't, and yes it is for the people who sail not the people who come out on training or courses.  You can talk about all kinds of situations where it doesn't represent the intent the RCN had when it was created such as courses and what not. Obviously you can't please everyone.


----------



## jollyjacktar

You could start by making it optional dress for those of us who'd rather not instead of mandatory.  Those who wish to wear it, please continue to do so with my respect.  But I'd be happier opting out, given the choice.


----------



## NavalMoose

I don't understand the strong (negative) feelings towards the SSI expressed by some here. It's not like we are going the Yank route where a gold SSI would probably equate to an arm full of chevrons and several gongs.


----------



## FSTO

I'm rather agnostic about the whole thing. I remember my first time in the Halifax Wardroom and seeing the portraits of Senior Officers and you could tell when the WWII/Korean War generation retired. From a chest full of medals to a CD with clasp all by itself. Those guys really went through the decades of darkness.


----------



## jollyjacktar

NavalMoose said:
			
		

> I don't understand the strong (negative) feelings towards the SSI expressed by some here. It's not like we are going the Yank route where a gold SSI would probably equate to an arm full of chevrons and several gongs.



Obviously you've missed out on witnessing the dick measuring contests and attitudes some members exhibited with the SSI.  It was disappointing to watch and only increased my desire to distance myself from it.  I personally don't like all the flare that is creeping up on our uniforms.  The 1812 pin was enough for me and the straw that broke this camel's back.  I just want my name, rank, medals/ribbons and trade badge (pre amalgamation) on my uniform, thank you very much.  It shouldn't be hard to grasp the concept.


----------



## NavalMoose

Yes, I had been out of the Navy 8 years when they started handing out the SSI, so I probably did miss certain "measurement" contests etc


----------



## Navy_Pete

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Obviously you've missed out on witnessing the dick measuring contests and attitudes some members exhibited with the SSI.  It was disappointing to watch and only increased my desire to distance myself from it.  I personally don't like all the flare that is creeping up on our uniforms.  The 1812 pin was enough for me and the straw that broke this camel's back.  I just want my name, rank, medals/ribbons and trade badge (pre amalgamation) on my uniform, thank you very much.  It shouldn't be hard to grasp the concept.



One of the funniest ones I overheard was at an NTO mess dinner.  There was a new Lt(N) with a gun metal SSI (when it was still 365 days) bugging some post HOD MSEOs that didn't have one.  Someone overheard this and pointed out that the reason he had so many sea days was because he took 19 months to finish his ph 6 OJT (scheduled for 12 or less) and almost two years for his HOD qual (again, another 12 month OJT).  He shut up pretty quickly at that point, particularly and the discussion changed to how early other had got it done. He slunk off somewhere at that point...  ;D

For some of the officer trades, anything higher than a gun metal in the current generation is almost a red flag if someone wasn't either an NCM previously or went to sea training, so it's weird that way.  You can spend both one year OJT postings and your HOD tour on high tempo ships and still come no where near to the bronze.  I personally don't really care one way or the other about the SSI, but thought that was a pretty funny exchange.

I guess the one nice thing is that it gives the odd sailor that is always the deployment bridesmaid but does a lot of sailing something to show for it.  There was one guy that comes to mind that had well over 1500 days but because he had basically always been posted to the same ship for 12 years, and happened to be on a career course both times it deployed in it's cycle; he only had the silver SSI and a CD.  Probably an outlier but at least made for an interesting story, as he had done half a dozen WUPs, every exercise on the east coast a few times, and three full sets of TRPs so had a lot of really useful experience.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Lumber said:
			
		

> I disagree. It's not just about doing your job, it's about all the time and sacrifice that goes with doing your job in the Navy. Being away at sea is not like being in the field. The Army goes to the field for exercises; we go to sea for trials (oh god, the trials...), work ups, support to trg courses, support to OGDs, exercises, SARs, operations, and full-blown deployments. All of these, from the minor ones to the major ones, take us away from our families and our daily routines.
> 
> If you're lucky, you get rotated around between high-tempo units, low-temp units, and shore postings; but if you're unlucky, you get posted to high-tempo ship after high-tempo ship and end up spend 200+ days each year at sea for several years on end. Does the Army do that? Does the Air Force do that?
> 
> From another perspective, we also take our time at sea much more seriously than the Army does. Let me put it this way: has anyone in the Navy ever seen members of the ship's company landed during a major training exercise so that they could practice and compete in a regional military Hockey tournament? The Army has...



I think I am justified in saying the mission end of the Air Force goes pretty hard at it and I'm typing this from a different country.  Again.  I was home less than 1 week from being away from home and Canada.  The mission end of the Air Force is busy.  And the navy.  Army?  There is a place called Latvia that I recall going 24/7.

As an ex green DEU guy, I know guys who spent equal time as me and the 200 day sae time sailors you are talking about in Petersville.   Away from home is away from home.  

I think your brush was a little wide and particularly harsh on the army.  I will take 2 week on a ship over a night in a night OP on winter ex at -30.  The whole don't knock it to you try it think.  ;D

The list of things the navy does at sea, if you don't think the army also does similar things for similar reasons in the field you have never been in a training area very much or took a boo at DRSOs and monitored a range control net.  Trg areas can be very busy places.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> I guess that could be said of any incentive such as the FORCE test or even medals. I have well excess of 2100 sea days, but only have a CD1 and Operation service, I'm sure people will say they're better than me because they a bigger rack of medals. I think your are correct that to a certain extent it had muddied the waters but I se it has merit and not need to be scrapped.



My father retired a WO with 28 years in and a CD1.  Later he received his SSM NATO for his time in Germany when he was an airframe tech on the Clunks back in the 50s.

I am sure some people might see him on Remembrance Day and think he didn't do much.  If they asked they'd find out he had over 13000 hours in his logbook from his years on the Argus doing VP stuff during the Cold War and risked, sacrificed and served just as much as anyone else who lived and breathed on the pointy end.

He taught me there is no such thing as just CD1.  The people he worked with knew he was one of the best, respected and trusted Engineers in the fleet and that's what he really cared about; his name and credibility amongst peers.


----------



## Stoker

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> My father retired a WO with 28 years in and a CD1.  Later he received his SSM NATO for his time in Germany when he was an airframe tech on the Clunks back in the 50s.
> 
> I am sure some people might see him on Remembrance Day and think he didn't do much.  If they asked they'd find out he had over 13000 hours in his logbook from his years on the Argus doing VP stuff during the Cold War and risked, sacrificed and served just as much as anyone else who lived and breathed on the pointy end.
> 
> He taught me there is no such thing as just CD1.  The people he worked with knew he was one of the best, respected and trusted Engineers in the fleet and that's what he really cared about; his name and credibility amongst peers.



I agree I just mentioned my experience as an example. Good story though.


----------



## Lumber

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I think your brush was a little wide and particularly harsh on the army.  I will take 2 week on a ship over a night in a night OP on winter ex at -30.  The whole don't knock it to you try it think.  ;D



And I would take 2 weeks in the field in the winter over being sea-sicking but still having to work 18 hrs a day... potato/patatoe.

Everything else you said; yes, I concede I was being overly generalistic and hyperbolic... still grinds my gears that soldiers get weeks or a whole month of work to compete in sports tournaments...


----------



## Halifax Tar

Lumber said:
			
		

> And I would take 2 weeks in the field in the winter over being sea-sicking but still having to work 18 hrs a day... potato/patatoe.
> 
> Everything else you said; yes, I concede I was being overly generalistic and hyperbolic... still grinds my gears that soldiers get weeks or a whole month of work to compete in sports tournaments...



You do realize that military sports are considered being on duty right ?  That's not truly time off. 

If you get sea sick perhaps the RCN isn't for you ?


----------



## Lumber

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> You do realize that military sports are considered being on duty right ?  That's not truly time off.
> 
> If you get sea sick perhaps the RCN isn't for you ?



Just because it's approved by the Brigade Cdr doesn't make feel any less fair that the rest of the company has to grind it out in the field for the ex, while you and the rest of the hockey team get to play hockey and drink beer.

Last time I started feeling queasy to the point I thought I might throw up, we'd already lost half the Ops Room to sea sickness, so I think I'm doing pretty good where I am. That being said, I have been in seas so rough that I was dry-heaving for the entire watch. 

I have never been more miserable in my life (and that's not hyperbole) than when trying to maintain composure, drive, navigate, do math, and make reports, all the while getting hit with wave after wave of nausea. 

Funny thing is, the next day when the seas were calm, I couldn't help but say to myself "Geeze, what was I complaining about yesterday"?


----------



## jollyjacktar

There is nothing more miserable than being sea sick.  I experienced once and suffered for a day and a half.  Not fun.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver

There was no need to explain, Lumber. I've always said that any seaman that claims that he/she has _*never*_ been sea sick is a seaman that has never sailed ... and you don't even need to look at the colour of their SSI to figure it out  ;D.

Besides, what's wrong with getting sick? it's not like we get sick because we want to.

Myself, I am pretty weak-stomached, so I spent most of my time at sea on Gravols. Didn't stop me from enjoying my sea time and naval career.


----------



## FSTO

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> There was no need to explain, Lumber. I've always said that any seaman that claims that he/she has _*never*_ been sea sick is a seaman that has never sailed ... and you don't even need to look at the colour of their SSI to figure it out  ;D.
> 
> Besides, what's wrong with getting sick? it's not like we get sick because we want to.
> 
> Myself, I am pretty weak-stomached, so I spent most of my time at sea on Gravols. Didn't stop me from enjoying my sea time and naval career.



Gee, I feel bad now. Never been sea sick. Had a queasy stomach for a bit when I first sailed in Preserver. But once I got used to the different roll I was fine.


----------



## EpicBeardedMan

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> There was no need to explain, Lumber. I've always said that any seaman that claims that he/she has _*never*_ been sea sick is a seaman that has never sailed ... and you don't even need to look at the colour of their SSI to figure it out  ;D.
> 
> Besides, what's wrong with getting sick? it's not like we get sick because we want to.
> 
> Myself, I am pretty weak-stomached, so I spent most of my time at sea on Gravols. Didn't stop me from enjoying my sea time and naval career.



On the 2 sails I was on, I lived on Bonine.  It threw me off because I've been on over 20 cruises and have never gotten seasick, not realizing at the time that the way a cruise ship moves through water with stabilizers is vastly different than how a destroyer moves through water. On my first sail when I was on watch, I threw up on the OoW. She was nice though and brought me gatorade powder and some crackers.


----------



## NavalMoose

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> There was no need to explain, Lumber. I've always said that any seaman that claims that he/she has _*never*_ been sea sick is a seaman that has never sailed ... and you don't even need to look at the colour of their SSI to figure it out  ;D.
> 
> Besides, what's wrong with getting sick? it's not like we get sick because we want to.
> 
> Myself, I am pretty weak-stomached, so I spent most of my time at sea on Gravols. Didn't stop me from enjoying my sea time and naval career.


  
I was lucky enough to never be sea sick, tired and worn out if it was too rough to sleep, but never sick. I have sailed on everything from carriers to MCDVs (not boats though) and the first day was usually the worst(spaghetti for dinner)....hangovers might have played a role...lol


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Lumber said:
			
		

> And I would take 2 weeks in the field in the winter over being sea-sicking but still having to work 18 hrs a day... potato/patatoe.
> 
> Everything else you said; yes, I concede I was being overly generalistic and hyperbolic... still grinds my gears that soldiers get weeks or a whole month of work to compete in sports tournaments...



There was a retired CP02 (initials HP) who worked at Shannon Park arena 8-9 years ago who was a sailor that got posted to Germany with the tankers to play hockey... :nod:


----------



## Pusser

Lumber said:
			
		

> From another perspective, we also take our time at sea much more seriously than the Army does. Let me put it this way: has anyone in the Navy ever seen members of the ship's company landed during a major training exercise so that they could practice and compete in a regional military Hockey tournament? The Army has...



Don't go too far down that rabbit hole, because yes, the Navy has done that.  They've also been known to fly whole ships' sports teams back from trips in order to compete.  I think it's fair to say that this doesn't happen any more, but it used to...


----------



## Pusser

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> No, an appropriate comparison is if I got a device for spending X days in the field. Operational deployments are awarded medals the same across all elements and sufficiently rare as to warrant a medal. Do you not get SSI time for heading to RIMPAC? I don't get bling for going to MAPLE RESOLVE.



There's a key difference between MAPLE RESOLVE and RIMPAC.  Yes, they are both exercises, but MAPLE RESOLVE takes place in a much more controlled environment.  If things get too dangerous, things can be shut down pretty quickly.  We can't control the sea.  When a storm comes up, we have to ride it out.  There's no seeking shelter.  You can't park the vehicles and wait.  

Everybody is emphasizing the time away from home aspect, but missing the actual hardship, life at sea, which has an inherent danger that doesn't change whether you're sailing into a combat zone or between ports on the cocktail circuit.  The sea is a merciless, unrepentant and indiscriminate mistress.  There is a reason that "the dangers of the sea" comes before "the violence of the enemy" in the Naval Prayer.


----------



## Pusser

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> You could start by making it optional dress for those of us who'd rather not instead of mandatory.  Those who wish to wear it, please continue to do so with my respect.  But I'd be happier opting out, given the choice.



I'm not aware of any regulation that says you have to wear any medal, hazardous skill/flying badge or other award/badge you don't want to.  There are standards as to how to wear them, but no requirement to actually wear them.  The only badges that are required to be worn are rank and trade badges.

On another note, are folks aware that the original proposal for the SSI was for it to have been a medal?


----------



## Halifax Tar

Pusser said:
			
		

> There's a key difference between MAPLE RESOLVE and RIMPAC.  Yes, they are both exercises, but MAPLE RESOLVE takes place in a much more controlled environment.  If things get too dangerous, things can be shut down pretty quickly.  We can't control the sea.  When a storm comes up, we have to ride it out.  There's no seeking shelter.  You can't park the vehicles and wait.
> 
> Everybody is emphasizing the time away from home aspect, but missing the actual hardship, life at sea, which has an inherent danger that doesn't change whether you're sailing into a combat zone or between ports on the cocktail circuit.  The sea is a merciless, unrepentant and indiscriminate mistress.  There is a reason that "the dangers of the sea" comes before "the violence of the enemy" in the Naval Prayer.



I have been a few ships now that have altered their operations and tasks for weather.  For example its rough out so we run to Norfolk Va. to seek shelter.  Weather plays a big role in RCN trg and can derail the best laid intentions.  

I have also done Winter Warfare in the field and we most certainly didn't RTU lines because the weather became a trg hindrance.  

The field and sea have their equal number of challenges and demands.  That's why you get SDA and LDA.  IMHO the RCN implementing the SSI was/is just a feel good device devised bye people who felt when they put on their DEUs it wasn't a true reflection of their contributions.  This is fully self inflicted.


----------



## Stoker

Pusser said:
			
		

> On another note, are folks aware that the original proposal for the SSI was for it to have been a medal?




I know that would of spun up quite a few people on this site.


----------



## Halifax Tar

The fact that LDA and SDA became and remained linked tells me the hardships and discomfort attributed to one in no way out weighs the other. 

Chief, I feel for ya and in no way was my previous post meant to be personal.  This is all just my opinion, which is like an a__hole, everyone has one.


----------



## NavalMoose

That's one slightly bitter storesman, but that's just my opinion


----------



## jollyjacktar

Pusser said:
			
		

> I'm not aware of any regulation that says you have to wear any medal, hazardous skill/flying badge or other award/badge you don't want to.  There are standards as to how to wear them, but no requirement to actually wear them.  The only badges that are required to be worn are rank and trade badges.
> 
> On another note, are folks aware that the original proposal for the SSI was for it to have been a medal?



I will have to look into this further.  If it is the case, I shall be ditching it.  Thank you.


----------



## Stoker

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> The fact that LDA and SDA became and remained linked tells me the hardships and discomfort attributed to one in no way out weighs the other.
> 
> Chief, I feel for ya and in no way was my previous post meant to be personal.  This is all just my opinion, which is like an a__hole, everyone has one.



No worries I respect your opinion as I do with any RCN sailor I just don't get the bitter nature of the other non RCN personnel who feel they must chime in on any changes to our dress or the way we do business. I mean sure its cool to have an opinion on this as a CF member but some seem to go out of their way when it really has nothing to do with them whatsoever.


----------



## Halifax Tar

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> No worries I respect your opinion as I do with any RCN sailor I just don't get the bitter nature of the other non RCN personnel who feel they must chime in on any changes to our dress or the way we do business. I mean sure its cool to have an opinion on this as a CF member but some seem to go out of their way when it really has nothing to do with them whatsoever.



That is a problem on this forum, members straying our of their lane.  I am sure I could found guilty of this as well.


----------



## jollyjacktar

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I will have to look into this further.  If it is the case, I shall be ditching it.  Thank you.



I have inquired and have an answer, Pusser.  Curses foiled again.

1. DISTINGUISHING INSIGNIA: a. Sea Service Insignia: The Sea Service Insignia is awarded to CAF personnel for recognition of time at sea. The insignia is metal for service dress shirts, high collar whites, mess dress and naval service dress and embroidered on melton cloth for army and airforce service dress jackets. There are four levels of insignia, gun metal, bronze, silver, and gold. The level of insignia that is presented is dependant on the amount of time spent at sea, as determined by RCN. The insignia is illustrated in fig 3-6-3, and eligible personnel shall wear the insignia as detailed at Annex F.


----------



## Halifax Tar

NavalMoose said:
			
		

> That's one slightly bitter storesman, but that's just my opinion



Bitter ?  No I wouldn't say so.  Opinionated ?  Guilty as charged


----------



## Pusser

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I have been a few ships now that have altered their operations and tasks for weather.  For example its rough out so we run to Norfolk Va. to seek shelter.  Weather plays a big role in RCN trg and can derail the best laid intentions.
> 
> I have also done Winter Warfare in the field and we most certainly didn't RTU lines because the weather became a trg hindrance.
> 
> The field and sea have their equal number of challenges and demands.  That's why you get SDA and LDA.  IMHO the RCN implementing the SSI was/is just a feel good device devised bye people who felt when they put on their DEUs it wasn't a true reflection of their contributions.  This is fully self inflicted.



Sometimes we do alter course for weather - either to avoid it or aim for it!   I've also seen units pulled out of the field because the weather turned cold.  IIRC Borden Range control will pull in all units if the temperature drops below -40C.  The difference though is that no matter what the weather is in a training area in Canada, warm and dry is never more than a truck ride away if required.  If worse comes to worst, the option to build a fire is always there.  In cases where this is not possible, it is likely the result of poor planning or somebody screwing up.  However, at sea, even if all has been planned correctly (based on hundreds of years of experience) all equipment is functioning properly and no one makes a mistake, the sea can still turn on you and there is no respite for a ship that's dead in the water in rough seas.  Ships can't run away from fires (11 men died in KOOTENAY during a trial) and compartments filling with water is always a bad thing.

I'm not trying to turn this into an Army vs Navy bun fight over who's life is harder (we all make our choices at the recruiting centre - I would still choose my bunk in a hurricane over a foxhole in February), but there are differences and that is what the SSI is designed to recognize.

For the record, I'm not the biggest fan of the SSI, but I do see its utility.  I would have preferred something a little more subtle (e.g. executive curls for sea-going officers only, maybe different coloured trade badges for NCMs with requisite sea experience, naval ops cap badges for personnel with requisite sea-time, etc.)


----------



## Pusser

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I have inquired and have an answer, Pusser.  Curses foiled again.
> 
> 1. DISTINGUISHING INSIGNIA: a. Sea Service Insignia: The Sea Service Insignia is awarded to CAF personnel for recognition of time at sea. The insignia is metal for service dress shirts, high collar whites, mess dress and naval service dress and embroidered on melton cloth for army and airforce service dress jackets. There are four levels of insignia, gun metal, bronze, silver, and gold. The level of insignia that is presented is dependant on the amount of time spent at sea, as determined by RCN. The insignia is illustrated in fig 3-6-3, and eligible personnel shall wear the insignia as detailed at Annex F.



Your quote does not answer the question.  Putting on my grammar Nazi hat:  the quote above does NOT say the SSI shall be worn by eligible personnel.  It says that "eligible personnel shall wear the insignia as detailed at Annex F" (i.e. the manner in which it shall be worn).  This is an instruction on how to wear it, not that it must be worn.  That may not be what the author intended, but that is what it says.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Wow, Pusser.  I brought your comment out and what a shit storm that has brought down.  World War 6 at least.  I agree with your Nazism, apparently I seem to be alone in the office.


----------



## NavalMoose

Pusser, your grammar Nazi hat is on too tight.  Are you an eligible personnel?....if so, wear as shown in the annex...simple really.


----------



## Pusser

NavalMoose said:
			
		

> Pusser, your grammar Nazi hat is on too tight.  Are you an eligible personnel?....if so, wear as shown in the annex...simple really.



Whether or not I am eligible or whether I wish to wear the SSI is irrelevant to this tangent of the discussion.  My point is that you cannot be forced to acknowledge (i.e. wear) an award that you don't want to.  If some folks choose not to wear the SSI, the choice should be (and in fact is) theirs.  It would make for an interesting court martial should someone be charged for refusing to wear one.

If you can refuse an Honour from the Crown (and people do it all the time), surely you can refuse a badge from the Admiral?


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Pusser said:
			
		

> There's a key difference between MAPLE RESOLVE and RIMPAC.  Yes, they are both exercises, but MAPLE RESOLVE takes place in a much more controlled environment.  If things get too dangerous, things can be shut down pretty quickly.  We can't control the sea.  When a storm comes up, we have to ride it out.  There's no seeking shelter.  You can't park the vehicles and wait.
> 
> Everybody is emphasizing the time away from home aspect, but missing the actual hardship, life at sea, which has an inherent danger that doesn't change whether you're sailing into a combat zone or between ports on the cocktail circuit.  The sea is a merciless, unrepentant and indiscriminate mistress.  There is a reason that "the dangers of the sea" comes before "the violence of the enemy" in the Naval Prayer.



I've never sailed so I can't comment on the hardship of it...but I've flown over folks riding out Sea State 5+ and there's no doubt in my mind how much it sucks when you see Group 3s with their whole stern coming up with props hanging in the air.  

Sailing would be like flying...danger exists, just more on ops with the added bonus of the other guy shooting at you.  Maybe the Air Force should come up with a new one too.  X amount of missions or X amount of flying hours and you get the DEU bling.  We can call it the FHI (Flying Hours Insignia) and wear it below our Wings on the pocket flap. Or we could call it the PDI (Per Diem Insignia)...X amount of nights in a hotel and you get it.   ;D

Good Idea Fairie...lets get this one on the role to go with our new swanky Command Badge.   >


----------



## dimsum

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> X amount of missions or X amount of flying hours and you get the DEU bling.



That's what the USAF does with their Senior and Master/Command *insert trade* wings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Air_Force_aeronautical_rating#USAF_rating_requirements


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Let's do it too.  Gotta catch up to their gorgets n stuff the army went and got!   8)


----------



## dapaterson

Nah. The Flying Unit Command Knowledge Uniform Patch... that gets removed only after meeting certain standards for ability.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Perfect!!   :rofl:


----------



## PuckChaser

Pusser said:
			
		

> There's a key difference between MAPLE RESOLVE and RIMPAC.  Yes, they are both exercises, but MAPLE RESOLVE takes place in a much more controlled environment.  If things get too dangerous, things can be shut down pretty quickly.  We can't control the sea.  When a storm comes up, we have to ride it out.  There's no seeking shelter.  You can't park the vehicles and wait.



Ack, your job is significantly harder than mine. Unfortunately there's a few examples that hit this forum very close to home that MAPLE RESOLVE and inherently army training is not without risk. 



			
				Pusser said:
			
		

> Everybody is emphasizing the time away from home aspect, but missing the actual hardship, life at sea, which has an inherent danger that doesn't change whether you're sailing into a combat zone or between ports on the cocktail circuit.  The sea is a merciless, unrepentant and indiscriminate mistress.  There is a reason that "the dangers of the sea" comes before "the violence of the enemy" in the Naval Prayer.



Hardship, time away from home and life at sea is why you get Sea Duty Allowance. Its why aircrew get Air Duty Allowance and why I get Land Duty Allowance. Only one of those 3 elements decided they needed money AND some bling so they can brag to their friends on the cocktail circuit.


----------



## daftandbarmy

I've got hundred of jumps with various Airborne units and never saw anyone get killed.

However, every time there was a big armoured corps exercise, like the old Reforgers, at least two or three got crushed to death.

I'm recommending we have an 'I survived the last armoured corps ex' badge of some kind. 

But please, could it be in the shape of a zipper?


----------



## Rifleman62

Especially dangerous at night when the tanks, simulating an attack on your position, using white light mounted by the main gun (this was Brit tanks in Germany 1968). Blackout Sherman's driven by Militia drivers in your patrol's path not quite as bad.


----------



## Pusser

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Ack, your job is significantly harder than mine. Unfortunately there's a few examples that hit this forum very close to home that MAPLE RESOLVE and inherently army training is not without risk.
> 
> Hardship, time away from home and life at sea is why you get Sea Duty Allowance. Its why aircrew get Air Duty Allowance and why I get Land Duty Allowance. Only one of those 3 elements decided they needed money AND some bling so they can brag to their friends on the cocktail circuit.



I never said army or air training exercises were without risk and I acknowledge that people are injured and killed on them.  However, army and air commanders have much more control over what people do in those situations.  They can decide that the terrain is too dangerous and move the troops elsewhere.  Or, if the weather turns foul a commander can simply ground the aircraft.  A ship in the middle of the ocean, 10 days from anywhere, does not have that luxury. they simply have to ride it out.  When the ship is rolling 85 degrees, you really hope everything they taught you in hydrostatic stability class was right.  I have no idea whether anybody thought about this when they came up with the SSI, but it certainly does add to the argument.  By the way, the danger of the sea is not one of the factors for which SDA is paid (hardship and being away from home are though).


----------



## Halifax Tar

Pusser said:
			
		

> I never said army or air training exercises were without risk and I acknowledge that people are injured and killed on them.  However, army and air commanders have much more control over what people do in those situations.  They can decide that the terrain is too dangerous and move the troops elsewhere.  Or, if the weather turns foul a commander can simply ground the aircraft.  A ship in the middle of the ocean, 10 days from anywhere, does not have that luxury. they simply have to ride it out.  When the ship is rolling 85 degrees, you really hope everything they taught you in hydrostatic stability class was right.  I have no idea whether anybody thought about this when they came up with the SSI, but it certainly does add to the argument.  By the way, the danger of the sea is not one of the factors for which SDA is paid (hardship and being away from home are though).



Google search of Canadian Soldiers lost in training accidents:

https://www.google.ca/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA758CA758&q=Canadian+Soldiers+lost+in+training+accidents&oq=Canadian+Soldiers+lost+in+training+accidents&gs_l=psy-ab.12..35i39k1j0i22i30k1.13278.13278.0.14173.1.1.0.0.0.0.110.110.0j1.1.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.109.pdCVkyuY5f8

Canadian Sailors lost at sea:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=canadian+sailors+lost+at+sea&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA758CA758&oq=canadian&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j35i39j69i59j69i60j0.1827j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

You find two very different search results.  

I hear you Pusser.  The sea has its dangers and complexities.  So does Army and Air Force trg.  And having done both I defiantly felt/feel more at risk in Army trg.  Live ammo and poor driving conditions are dangerous things. 

My position is steadfast WRT to the SSI.


----------



## FSTO

Knock on wood but we have been fairly fortunate in the lack of deadly accidents involving the RCN. But as shown by the accidents involving Fitz and McCain, accidents can hit you at the most inopportune time.

But if we got involved in a shooting war, with today's torpedoes especially, a hit would be catastrophic. Most of the ship's company would be dead almost immediately. But that is the nature of naval warfare today with large casualty lists within minutes or seconds of a strike.


----------



## Halifax Tar

FSTO said:
			
		

> Knock on wood but we have been fairly fortunate in the lack of deadly accidents involving the RCN. But as shown by the accidents involving Fitz and McCain, accidents can hit you at the most inopportune time.
> 
> But if we got involved in a shooting war, with today's torpedoes especially, a hit would be catastrophic. Most of the ship's company would be dead almost immediately. But that is the nature of naval warfare today with large casualty lists within minutes or seconds of a strike.



Agreed we, the RCN,  have been very lucky and have learned allot from incidents in the past.  Think Kootenay gear box explosion.  And yes accidents can happen, I never claimed that they didn't. 

As for a shooting war you will notice from this website: https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/second-world-war/second-world-war-dead-1939-1947/Pages/files-second-war-dead.aspx
the majority of losses in WW2 were members of the CA.  24,525 served in the Army, 17,397 in the Air Force and 2,168 in the Navy.  Admittedly I don't know if that figure includes the merchant marine. 

Look, I don't want this to get into a "who's service has it harder" argument as I think all of the services have their hardships and risks and all had vital roles to play in WW2.  My position is that using the hardship and risks of sea duty to quantify the need for an extra accouterments is fallacious and divisive.  We get medals, ranks and extra allowances for our normal duty and duties that are especially difficult or above what is normally expected of us in our duties.  Giving a badge for our most basic, expected and already remunerated duties cheapens and erodes many facets that we already have and should be proud of in the CAF.  

Perhaps a compromise would be to take away days while on deployment (NATOs, Op Reassurance, Op Apllo ect ect) for your SSI totals as those days are already rewarded for in the way of days towards medals.


----------



## FSTO

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Agreed we, the RCN,  have been very lucky and have learned allot from incidents in the past.  Think Kootenay gear box explosion.  And yes accidents can happen, I never claimed that they didn't.
> 
> As for a shooting war you will notice from this website: https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/second-world-war/second-world-war-dead-1939-1947/Pages/files-second-war-dead.aspx
> the majority of losses in WW2 were members of the CA.  24,525 served in the Army, 17,397 in the Air Force and 2,168 in the Navy.  Admittedly I don't know if that figure includes the merchant marine.
> 
> Look, I don't want this to get into a "who's service has it harder" argument as I think all of the services have their hardships and risks and all had vital roles to play in WW2.  My position is that using the hardship and risks of sea duty to quantify the need for an extra accouterments is fallacious and divisive.  We get medals, ranks and extra allowances for our normal duty and that is especially difficult or above what is normally expected of us in our duties.  Giving a badge for our most basic, expected and already remunerated duties cheapens and erodes many facets that we already have and should be proud of in the CAF.
> 
> Perhaps a compromise would be to take away days while on deployment (NATOs, Op Reassurance, Op Apllo ect ect) for your SSI totals as those days are already rewarded for in the way of days towards medals.



Okay before this gets into a pissing match. 
When HMS HOOD blew up 1415 men died in an instant, that is a lot within seconds.

Never ever claimed that Army or Air Force deaths are miniscule because they will have high casualty rates over a longer period of time due to the action they are involved in (which maybe over days, hours or minutes) .
The Navy will have fewer deaths overall but they will come in bigger bunches. Get what I mean?


----------



## Halifax Tar

FSTO said:
			
		

> Okay before this gets into a pissing match.
> When HMS HOOD blew up 1415 men died in an instant, that is a lot within seconds.
> 
> Never ever claimed that Army or Air Force deaths are miniscule because they will have high casualty rates over a longer period of time due to the action they are involved in (which maybe over days, hours or minutes) .
> The Navy will have fewer deaths overall but they will come in bigger bunches. Get what I mean?



Sure I see what you are saying.  Can you explain how this should contribute to the SSI earning criteria ?


----------



## FSTO

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Sure I see what you are saying.  Can you explain how this should contribute to the SSI earning criteria ?



It doesn't. And I don't care about the SSI. I was commenting on a comment by Pusser about accidents in the field in the air and at sea.

Maybe a separate thread is in order.


----------



## Halifax Tar

FSTO said:
			
		

> It doesn't. And I don't care about the SSI. I was commenting on a comment by Pusser about accidents in the field in the air and at sea.
> 
> Maybe a separate thread is in order.



Oh god, a separate thread on which service has it tougher ? Could you imagine how sideways that would go ?  lol


----------



## dapaterson

We used to dream of living in a corridor.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I have no iron in the SSI fire.  If I ever qualify for one it means I got kicked out of my current community and got sentenced to fling wing stuff.   :'(

Just for thought;  the army had marksmanship badges (soon to be Markspersonship badges  ;D), safe driving pins on their DEU for some folks.  Both of those have different levels.  

Air Force has all sorts of badges, not on DEU but the flying jammies.  I wear a VPI badge on my right pocket below my name badge.  some pilots wear ICP badges.  Some people with significant amounts of hours wear "hours patches". 

Those display proficiency and / or experience on DEU or operational dress.  

Isn't the SSI sorta the same as the above examples?


----------



## jollyjacktar

That argument could be made, yes.


----------



## PuckChaser

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I have no iron in the SSI fire.  If I ever qualify for one it means I got kicked out of my current community and got sentenced to fling wing stuff.   :'(
> 
> Just for thought;  the army had marksmanship badges (soon to be Markspersonship badges  ;D), safe driving pins on their DEU for some folks.  Both of those have different levels.
> 
> Air Force has all sorts of badges, not on DEU but the flying jammies.  I wear a VPI badge on my right pocket below my name badge.  some pilots wear ICP badges.  Some people with significant amounts of hours wear "hours patches".
> 
> Those display proficiency and / or experience on DEU or operational dress.
> 
> Isn't the SSI sorta the same as the above examples?



The SSI is an attendance badge for a core skill (being a sailor and sailing). Marksman and Safe Driving (although silly) show proficiency above the standard level expected of the trade/profession/soldier. I count the stuff on flying jammies as more like morale patches than anything. None of it is authorized in dress uniform. Keep in mind that the Army looked at something dumb like this, a Combat Action Badge with different levels based on how big of a TIC you were involved in. It was scrapped because it was a giant penis waving adventure and had people trying to get themselves on CLP convoys so they could get into a TIC and get at least a Silver badge.



			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Perhaps a compromise would be to take away days while on deployment (NATOs, Op Reassurance, Op Apllo ect ect) for your SSI totals as those days are already rewarded for in the way of days towards medals.



That is an interesting idea and would likely change how people viewed the SSI and whether they would even want to wear it at all.


----------



## Navy_Pete

FSTO said:
			
		

> Knock on wood but we have been fairly fortunate in the lack of deadly accidents involving the RCN. But as shown by the accidents involving Fitz and McCain, accidents can hit you at the most inopportune time.



Off the top of my head I can think of a half dozen machinery space fires that were quickly put out but could have gone sideways quickly over the last year or two that could have gone sideways.  I also know of numerous close calls (high pressure fuel leaks) that also could have turned into big fires easily enough, so I think the RCN is just beating the odds at this point for no one getting killed


----------



## Halifax Tar

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I have no iron in the SSI fire.  If I ever qualify for one it means I got kicked out of my current community and got sentenced to fling wing stuff.   :'(
> 
> Just for thought;  the army had marksmanship badges (soon to be Markspersonship badges  ;D), safe driving pins on their DEU for some folks.  Both of those have different levels.
> 
> Air Force has all sorts of badges, not on DEU but the flying jammies.  I wear a VPI badge on my right pocket below my name badge.  some pilots wear ICP badges.  Some people with significant amounts of hours wear "hours patches".
> 
> Those display proficiency and / or experience on DEU or operational dress.
> 
> Isn't the SSI sorta the same as the above examples?



Interesting counter points EITS.  I see some similarities except that safe driving pins are only for truckers, Marksmanship badges are coming into the RCN again, and the different Velcro things you zoomies like are already infesting the RCN. Also marksmanship is a qualification.  You have to score a certain level to gain badges. 

The SSI does not denote proficiency, it simply denotes time spent doing X.


----------



## Stoker

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Off the top of my head I can think of a half dozen machinery space fires that were quickly put out but could have gone sideways quickly over the last year or two that could have gone sideways.  I also know of numerous close calls (high pressure fuel leaks) that also could have turned into big fires easily enough, so I think the RCN is just beating the odds at this point for no one getting killed



Been through two fires at sea, a boatload of near misses (fuel spraying on engine manifold), Swissair and almost getting washed over the side in a storm. So yes its an attendance badge I guess :


----------



## mariomike

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> As for a shooting war you will notice from this website: https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/second-world-war/second-world-war-dead-1939-1947/Pages/files-second-war-dead.aspx
> the majority of losses in WW2 were members of the CA.  24,525 served in the Army, 17,397 in the Air Force and 2,168 in the Navy.



Regarding Bomber Command,

"Only the Nazi U-Boat force suffered a higher casualty rate."
http://www.bombercommandmuseum.ca/commandlosses.html


----------



## dimsum

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> The SSI is an attendance badge for a core skill (being a sailor and sailing). Marksman and Safe Driving (although silly) show proficiency above the standard level expected of the trade/profession/soldier. I count the stuff on flying jammies as more like morale patches than anything.



The only "morale patch" would be the one on the left shoulder, which is usually for a unit badge (as opposed to the crest on the right shoulder).   I think the closest to the SSI would be the "X thousand-hour" patch but that's not mandatory.  

In true Aussie tongue-in-cheek fashion, they have a "X thousand orbit" patch for their AP-3C Orions when they did similar stuff to what the Auroras are doing on OP IMPACT.    :nod:


----------



## Eye In The Sky

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> The SSI is an attendance badge for a core skill (being a sailor and sailing). Marksman and Safe Driving (although silly) show proficiency above the standard level expected of the trade/profession/soldier.



I've said I've never sailed.  I HAVE been *over* high sea states and watching frigates, destroyers, etc heaving in Sea State 6 plus.  Think of being in the back of an AFV going cross country hatches down for days.  Following tanks.  

I am on the fence on the SSI, but I know when I see someone in my trade with the SSI on, or any hard air trade for that matter, I know just from a glance they've got experience I don't (air ops from a flight deck the same size as my patio) and I give them the respect due just for that.  I've watched the fling wingers and Mother in sea states that make me think "oh man I am glad I got LRP"  ;D.



> I count the stuff on flying jammies as more like morale patches than anything. None of it is authorized in dress uniform.



Actually,Army types, I can take a look at someone in DEU and have a fair idea of what their trade, qualification/experience, and unit is.  Cap badge, shoulder dogs, trade badge, rank, Bde patch, ribbons, medals, commendations, etc.  Pretty easy read, right?  

We're somewhat the opposite.  I see someone in a flight suit..and seeing as we all wear the Big Bird cap badge I can get a read on them from right side badge (name), left side badge (aircrew/flight crew/specialty qual...pilot, FE, Flt Srgn).  Right shoulder should be their heraldic crest (their Sqn, or unit).  Left shoulder could be their subunit or type...this could be a *type* patch (Aurora, Hornet), it could be a crew/Det (subunit patch).  We've also been getting unit identifiers to go on our slip-ons, just like RCD, or RCCS etc have (not everyone posted to a Sqn is in flying jammies) and Sqn patches are now auth for CADPAT (which I support...the folks posted to my Sqn who wear CADPAT are just as equal Sqn members as I am).   

I can look at someone I don't necessarily know in a flight suit and say *that guy is Bob, he is an FE WO at 413 flying on the Cormorants*.  Morale patches, to me, would be more like the ones that are authorized for certain periods of time doing a big exercise like MANTA, Joint Warrior, RIMPAC, etc.  

*Hours* patches.  They are semi bragging rights, semi experience level IMO.  Working for a TacNav who has a 5000 patch, well thats a shitload of experience.  SSI I would compare to the experience level, myself, reflected in someone with an Hours patch, only ya we don't wear that on DEU.  

Does a gold SSI mean someone is the best in their trade?  Nope, and I've seen shitpumps walking around with medals who were shitpumps on ROTOs.



> Keep in mind that the Army looked at something dumb like this, a Combat Action Badge with different levels based on how big of a TIC you were involved in. It was scrapped because it was a giant penis waving adventure and had people trying to get themselves on CLP convoys so they could get into a TIC and get at least a Silver badge.



Maybe the SSI will eventually go the way of the Warrior Badge.   8)


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Maybe the SSI will eventually go the way of the Warrior Badge.   8)



IMHO, speaking as an Infantry guy, the SSI is to the Warrior Badge as 'sublime' is to 'ridiculous'.  :nod:


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Interesting counter points EITS.  I see some similarities except that safe driving pins are only for truckers, Marksmanship badges are coming into the RCN again, and the different Velcro things you zoomies like are already infesting the RCN. Also marksmanship is a qualification.  You have to score a certain level to gain badges.
> 
> The SSI does not denote proficiency, it simply denotes time spent doing X.



Exactly, only MSE Ops get the *I can drive!* badge, but I never heard a blackhatter complain about that (crewman are, on average, pretty damn good drivers...anyone remember the old CADMS qual?).  

I used to wear the Marksmanship one, years ago...they visually represent something to people...same as the SSI does.  Only the SSI is, like my Wings, not an annual thing.

If trucker might not ever get in an accident, drive forever because he/she isn't 'leadership material'  ;D and still get the Safe Driving Award.  But could also, possibly, not be a very strong member of their trade.  Just a safe driver.  Does that equal proficient?   ???


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Dimsum said:
			
		

> The only "morale patch" would be the one on the left shoulder, which is usually for a unit badge (as opposed to the crest on the right shoulder).   I think the closest to the SSI would be the "X thousand-hour" patch but that's not mandatory.
> 
> In true Aussie tongue-in-cheek fashion, they have a "X thousand orbit" patch for their AP-3C Orions when they did similar stuff to what the Auroras are doing on OP IMPACT.    :nod:



There are some crew patches that have been "procured" or so I've heard.  I personally say this is unconfirmed RUMINT because NO ONE would wear a patch that wasn't blessed by the Boss.  _No one!_  

* Especially, a patch would NOT be worn by a crew with a RAAF skipper.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> IMHO, speaking as an Infantry guy, the SSI is to the Warrior Badge as 'sublime' is to 'ridiculous'.  :nod:



The Warrior Badge was a highly regarded, respected _and_ coveted...pin!


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> The Warrior Badge was a highly regarded, respected _and_ coveted...pin!



Yes, by a certain General especially


----------



## Happy Guy

All this talk about the SSI, morale patches and the Warrior Badges is giving me an idea.  We need a patch or a badge or a ribbon on our uniform to say how well we did on our Force Test.  I'm leaning towards a patch to wear on the CADPAT / flying suit / NCD and a ribbon on the DEU (like the Americans have for certain things) so people who don't have many can feel good about themselves.  I was thinking of a badge for the DEU but I'm guessing that most people would like a ribbon instead.  Of course, if you get so many Golds on the Force Test you would get a different morale patch and more ribbons (sarcasm)!!!! >


----------



## PuckChaser

Was there not supposed to be one for those who got Platnium?


----------



## dimsum

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> All this talk about the SSI, morale patches and the Warrior Badges is giving me an idea.  We need a patch or a badge or a ribbon on our uniform to say how well we did on our Force Test.



To risk the Good Idea Fairy (TM), the Aussies actually do have a badge (eagle for RAAF, rifle for ARA, anchor and waves for RAN) that signifies that you are fit for deployed service, or something to that effect.  Basically, a badge to say that you can do your job.

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-badges/aussie-current.htm


----------



## kratz

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> We need a patch or a badge or a ribbon on our uniform to say how well we did on our Force Test. (sarcasm)!!!! >



Happy Guy,

There are levels of hell (NDHQ) reserved for you, simply for giving birth to such a suggestion. The bloody Good Idea fairies will now run with the suggestion and impose new untold torture on us all.  [/spoof, parody]


----------



## dapaterson

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> We need a patch or a badge or a ribbon on our uniform to say how well we did on our Force Test.



No problem.


----------



## Navy_Pete

dapaterson said:
			
		

> No problem.



Those are a really poor rip off on the 'Participaction' logo.

Good grief. :facepalm:


----------



## McG

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> Those are a really poor rip off on the 'Participaction' logo.
> 
> Good grief. :facepalm:


Those were a version of the Canada Fitness Award Program badges that existed between 1970 and 1990.  I think the Army Cadets still wear a variation of this that could easily be co-opted for use on DEU.


----------



## McG

Some more pictures of both award program badges:

https://www.google.ca/search?q=Canada+Fitness+Award+Program&client=safari&hl=en-ca&prmd=inmv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3tLPjwJ7WAhUY8WMKHYwHBVIQ_AUIESgB&biw=320&bih=460

https://www.google.ca/search?client=safari&hl=en-ca&biw=320&bih=460&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=4Dm3WbHvGo-qjwOcp7DwDQ&q=army+cadet+Fitness+badge&oq=army+cadet+Fitness+badge&gs_l=mobile-gws-img.3...13376.16760.0.17852.12.12.0.0.0.0.224.1721.1j10j1.12.0....0...1.1.64.mobile-gws-img..0.8.1107...41j30i10k1j0i24k1.LvhtgaGEWXw


----------



## dapaterson

Ah, the flexed arm hang...


----------



## daftandbarmy

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Ah, the flexed arm hang...



Still harder than the FORCE test (chin-ups = death, right?) so that wouldn't do


----------



## brihard

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> There are some crew patches that have been "procured" or so I've heard.  I personally say this is unconfirmed RUMINT because NO ONE would wear a patch that wasn't blessed by the Boss.  _No one!_
> 
> * Especially, a patch would NOT be worn by a crew with a RAAF skipper.



I just about died when I read the one on the right. That's hilarious.

A few years back I had a patch made up reading "f*** it, we'll do it live" in response to a couple of less than ideally run exercises. I still have it kicking around somewhere.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Brihard said:
			
		

> I just about died when I read the one on the right. That's hilarious.
> 
> A few years back I had a patch made up reading "f*** it, we'll do it live" in response to a couple of less than ideally run exercises. I still have it kicking around somewhere.



Ya the goat one was a gooder.  Better for morale than the ATF-I patch we were supposed to wear but couldn't get (all the HQ wankers had them on their CADPAT though).

Did you get to wear it on ex?  That's rich.


----------



## Pusser

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I hear you Pusser.  The sea has its dangers and complexities.  So does Army and Air Force trg.  And having done both I defiantly felt/feel more at risk in Army trg.  Live ammo and poor driving conditions are dangerous things.



Yes, Army and Air Force training have their dangers and complexities (never said they didn't), but the key difference is that Army and Air Force commanders have much more ability to reduce the danger under most circumstances.  A commander can suspend the use of live ammo, prevent people from dangerous driving conditions or ground aircraft if necessary (doesn't mean he will, but he can).  The dangers of the sea can be unpredictable.  Weather forecasting is not 100% and even if you know it's coming, you can't always avoid or outrun the storm.  Even the coxswain can't stop a hurricane.

Then, there's the Kracken rising from the depths...


----------



## daftandbarmy

Pusser said:
			
		

> The dangers of the sea can be unpredictable.  Weather forecasting is not 100% and even if you know it's coming, you can't always avoid or outrun the storm.  Even the coxswain can't stop a hurricane.
> 
> Then, there's the Kracken rising from the depths...



As a sea kayaker on the left coast, nervously venturing off shore on regular occasions, I totally get that...

Especially the Kracken thing (or a humpback whale)


----------



## PuckChaser

Pusser said:
			
		

> Yes, Army and Air Force training have their dangers and complexities (never said they didn't), but the key difference is that Army and Air Force commanders have much more ability to reduce the danger under most circumstances.  A commander can suspend the use of live ammo, prevent people from dangerous driving conditions or ground aircraft if necessary (doesn't mean he will, but he can).  The dangers of the sea can be unpredictable.  Weather forecasting is not 100% and even if you know it's coming, you can't always avoid or outrun the storm.  Even the coxswain can't stop a hurricane.
> 
> Then, there's the Kracken rising from the depths...



You're using a red herring argument. If sailing was as dangerous as you say, the CAF would be giving you Risk Allowance on top on SDA. Clearance Divers and Submariners get extra pay because of the risks involved. In fact, sailors are the only ones other than CANSOF (after a quick look through CBI205), that retains their environmental allowance while deployed in an area that gets Hardship and Risk.


----------



## Sub_Guy

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> In fact, sailors are the only ones other than CANSOF (after a quick look through CBI205), that retains their environmental allowance while deployed in an area that gets Hardship and Risk.



Aircrew also get to keep their allowance (which is lower than land/sea duty allowance).

I have had more "oh shit" moments with the RCAF, than I ever did with the Navy (surface and subsurface).


----------



## Eye In The Sky

DH beat me to it...

Actually, I keep my AIRCRA too if I am in a designated flying position.  Why would I loose that for flying in a less secure airspace like Syria?  Using IMPACT as an example, I got the same RA as those who are Under The Dome.  Flying over 100hrs/month my AIRCRA would equal about 3 bucks an hour.  In Iraq and Syria. Over ISIS.  $3/hr. It ain't all that great for the difference in actual RISK when compared to the risk any Domer faced.  We earn every tax-free penny of it over there.


----------



## Halifax Tar

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You're using a red herring argument. If sailing was as dangerous as you say, the CAF would be giving you Risk Allowance on top on SDA. Clearance Divers and Submariners get extra pay because of the risks involved. In fact, sailors are the only ones other than CANSOF (after a quick look through CBI205), that retains their environmental allowance while deployed in an area that gets Hardship and Risk.



I can assure you we do not receive SDA while deployed in areas that get hardship, risk and FSP.  We do accumulate points, like the Army, but we not receive the prescribed monetary sums.


----------



## jollyjacktar

Agreed.





			
				Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I can assure you we do not receive SDA while deployed in areas that get hardship, risk and FSP.  We do accumulate points, like the Army, but we not receive the prescribed monetary sums.


----------



## Navy_Pete

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I can assure you we do not receive SDA while deployed in areas that get hardship, risk and FSP.  We do accumulate points, like the Army, but we not receive the prescribed monetary sums.


Can confirm.  SDA ceased while on deployment as soon as FSP started.

As an aside, all of my near miss and other bad experiences came during trials and other lower readiness times.  The pre deployment work period is the only time you ever get enough priority to get all your stuff fixed and repairs/maintenance done.  Otherwise you're at the bare minimum with hand me downs and duct tape and finding stuff like check valves installed backwards, motors wired across phases, etc on first start up post refits.  TRPs are exciting times! Unless we're at war, we're more at risk from our own stuff failing catastrophically.  I was more relaxed bobbing off Syria than when we were sailing off Halifax during trials because I trusted our equipment was all working after five months of deployment and constant maintenance.

I'm completely indifferent to the SSI though; it can be useful to figure out what kind of person you are dealing with though. People that use it as a dick measuring contest generally aren't worth listening to, so I use mine as an arsehole detector.  ;D


----------



## dapaterson

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> I have had more "oh shit" moments with the RCAF, than I ever did with the Navy (surface and subsurface).



Well, of course.  More pilots around.


----------



## q_1966

Hey got out in 2011, never recieved a SSI and I don't even know if I'm eligible for one but who can I talk to about finding out how many days at sea I have, so I can send something to Transport Canada as proof for my Seafarers Discharge Book (being a civilian deckhand / Coastguard etc.) need proof of min 60 days at sea.


----------



## chrisf

All you need is a letter from a current or potential employer stating you need a discharge book and they'll give you one and a CDN number.

I had 0 sea days when I got one.

Even just proof you're registered for a tc approved course would probably suffice as you need a CDN for the certificate.


----------



## q_1966

Already have the following necessary ticks in the box to go to sea as a deckhand on a civilian vessel or Coastguard ship
- CDN (Candidate Document Number) (essentially a civi version of your military service number)
- Valid Transport Canada Marine Medical
- Seafarers Discharge Book
- Valid Passport
- Criminal Record Check
- Marine Basic First Aid
- STCW 6.1 Basic Safety
- STCW 6.2 Proficiency in Survival Craft Other Than Fast Rescue Boat
(STCW is the new training standard of the old MED courses for work internationally)
- Vessel Personel With Security Responsibilities
- Fall Protection / Fall Arrest
- Confined Space Awareness (minimum) better to have Confined Space Entry / Monitor
- Enform H2S Alive (a good to have depending on where you go)
Went to NSCC for Bridge Watch Rating Program which gave me most of the courses above except H2S Alive. Transport Canada requires 60 days of sea time if you go to school for Bridge Watch Rating or 6 months of documented sea time and challenge the Bridge Watch Rating 100 question multiple choice test. A few details I left out but my question is below.

Who could I talk to at DND about finding out if they did or could do a SSI calculation on me for the 4 years out of 5 I was in, posted to ship.


----------



## chrisf

Get Nautical said:
			
		

> Already have the following necessary ticks in the box to go to sea as a deckhand on a civilian vessel or Coastguard ship
> - CDN (Candidate Document Number) (essentially a civi version of your military service number)
> - Valid Transport Canada Marine Medical
> - Seafarers Discharge Book
> - Valid Passport
> - Criminal Record Check
> - Marine Basic First Aid
> - STCW 6.1 Basic Safety
> - STCW 6.2 Proficiency in Survival Craft Other Than Fast Rescue Boat
> (STCW is the new training standard of the old MED courses for work internationally)
> - Vessel Personel With Security Responsibilities
> - Fall Protection / Fall Arrest
> - Confined Space Awareness (minimum) better to have Confined Space Entry / Monitor
> - Enform H2S Alive (a good to have depending on where you go)
> Went to NSCC for Bridge Watch Rating Program which gave me most of the courses above except H2S Alive. Transport Canada requires 60 days of sea time if you go to school for Bridge Watch Rating or 6 months of documented sea time and challenge the Bridge Watch Rating 100 question multiple choice test. A few details I left out but my question is below.
> 
> Who could I talk to at DND about finding out if they did or could do a SSI calculation on me for the 4 years out of 5 I was in, posted to ship.



Sorry, misunderstood what you meant by "for my discharge book".

Side note, if you haven't paid for a H2S alive course, the only place it's required is the oil industry, supply boats and may be tankers are the only place you'd need it.

If you're planning on applying for a job at the coast guard, it's a waste of $200 and a day of your time.

Anyway,  back to the SSI talk.


----------



## PuckChaser

I believe Sea Days are tracked on your MPRR, do you still have a copy? If not, you can ATIP one as your records are still held by DND: https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/transparency/atippr/Pages/Access-information-military-files.aspx#tab2c


----------



## q_1966

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I believe Sea Days are tracked on your MPRR, do you still have a copy? If not, you can ATIP one as your records are still held by DND: https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/transparency/atippr/Pages/Access-information-military-files.aspx#tab2c


 I received a copy of my mprr when I got out, no sea days were on it as I recall, could it of been added later before it went to records?


----------



## Navy_Pete

They are tracked in Monitor Mass but don't show up on your MPRR; not sure what database it's on (something in HRMS?)

Aside from the overall count, if you had minimum sea day requirements during various OJPRs you might be able to use those as well for a minimum, (if you kept the OJPRs with the signatures).


----------



## chrisf

Have you talked to your nearest transport Canada office and asked what they'd accept as documentation?

If you have an MPRR that shows you were posted to ship for several years, that may be sufficient (No guarantees, but it couldn't hurt to ask)

Individual assessors have a *surprising* amount of freedom and autonomy when assessing things like this.


----------



## q_1966

Has to specify days at sea and not in port, will probably need a letter or some such. I have a work term lined up to get the required days but in any case I'm hoping the answer will help someone else transitioning to civilian life.


----------

