# CO of Hal relieved



## Halifax Tar (9 Jun 2022)

Yikes...





__





						Statement – Commander Canadian Joint Operations Command regarding HMCS Halifax – Waterfront Media Halifax
					






					waterfrontmediahfx.the902hxir.ca


----------



## Halifax Tar (9 Jun 2022)

I have no idea who corrected my spelling but thank you  mucho appreciado.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jun 2022)

So, the CAF will issue a press release announcing an appointment to command, but not release the name of the same individual if relieved of command.


----------



## Underway (9 Jun 2022)

Well, we will have to wait out for the rumor mill on that one. Any number of things but by the nature of the statement.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jun 2022)

dapaterson said:


> So, the CAF will issue a press release announcing an appointment to command, but not release the name of the same individual if relieved of command.



St. Croix, apparently, according to sleuths in Peterborough









						HMCS Halifax commanding officer under investigation, removed from post: military
					

OTTAWA - The Department of National Defence says Cmdr. Dale St. Croix has been temporarily removed from his position as commanding officer of HMCS Hal...




					www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jun 2022)

The official news release does not include the name.






						Statement – Commander Canadian Joint Operations Command - Canada.ca
					

“Following several incidents onboard HMCS Halifax during Operation REASSURANCE, Vice-Admiral Bob Auchterlonie, Commander Canadian Joint Operations Command, has temporarily relieved the Commanding Officer of HMCS Halifax of his duties so that an investigation into the details of the incidents may...




					www.canada.ca


----------



## kev994 (9 Jun 2022)

It doesn’t take a genius to pull up the Canforgen and figure out who was last appointed as CO.


----------



## kratz (9 Jun 2022)

Search the deployment announcement or change of command ceremony will usually provide the answer of who a unit CO is.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jun 2022)

Why can't the CAF include it in the press release?


----------



## kev994 (9 Jun 2022)

dapaterson said:


> Why can't the CAF include it in the press release?


I assume they’re trying to avoid public shaming of someone who hasn’t been proven to have done anything (committed a service infraction?). But it’s impossible to hide it when it’s a publicly known position.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jun 2022)

dapaterson said:


> Why can't the CAF include it in the press release?



I'll go!

Because the CAF believes that the less information they provide the more the CAF will be protected from shame?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jun 2022)

kev994 said:


> I assume they’re trying to avoid public shaming of someone who hasn’t been proven to have done anything (committed a service infraction?). But it’s impossible to hide it when it’s a publicly known position.


I believe that once you reach a level where you are appointed to a position through a formal selection process (COs, SWOs, RSMs, Cols/Capts, GOFOs), the public is entitled to know whether there are potential reasons to believe trust in your ability to hold that position is in doubt. With great powers comes great responsibilities (and accountability).


----------



## KevinB (9 Jun 2022)

So not sexual related — next up Liquor…


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Jun 2022)

It took about 10 minutes for the CP to figure out who it was. Pretty stupid when the RCN posts it on facebook and tweets the change of command.

HMCS Halifax commanding officer under investigation, removed from post: military


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Jun 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> I'll go!
> 
> Because the CAF believes that the less information they provide the more the CAF will be protected from shame?











SupersonicMax said:


> I believe that once you reach a level where you are appointed to a position through a formal selection process (COs, SWOs, RSMs, Cols/Capts, GOFOs), the public is entitled to know whether there are potential reasons to believe trust in your ability to hold that position is in doubt. With great powers comes great responsibilities (and accountability).



Agreed.


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> So not sexual related — next up Liquor…



Either that or a seemingly catastrophic leadership failure somewhere.


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> So not sexual related — next up Liquor…


That's my take on it. In the early 2000s IIRC I think the CO of 1 VP was relieved of command because he had a few drinks with the Brits in Bosnia despite the order "no alcohol" or similar orders.


----------



## Weinie (10 Jun 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> That's my take on it. In the early 2000s IIRC I think the CO of 1 VP was relieved of command because he had a few drinks with the Brits in Bosnia despite the order "no alcohol" or similar orders.


I believe he drank slivovitz with a local official and ended up getting pissed, IIRC.


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Jun 2022)

Weinie said:


> I believe he drank slivovitz with a local official and ended up getting pissed, IIRC.


Probably correct. I won't mention his name but in 2 VP as a Lt he was a real (insert expletive here ) as a Duty Officer. Defaulters hated him.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> So not sexual related — next up Liquor…


No idea about this case but the CAF likes to play "technically speaking" sometimes.

Example- an OC harasses a female soldier who accused his buddy of sexual misconduct. The OC is relieved but technically it isn't for sexual misconduct, just harassment.


----------



## KevinB (10 Jun 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> That's my take on it. In the early 2000s IIRC I think the CO of 1 VP was relieved of command because he had a few drinks with the Brits in Bosnia despite the order "no alcohol" or similar orders.


Was with the Russians - in Kosovo. 
    It sort of stopped a shooting battle over the airport / but IIRC he and the RSM where stumbling drunk afterwards.


----------



## GK .Dundas (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> Was with the Russians - in Kosovo.
> It sort of stopped a shooting battle over the airport / but IIRC he and the RSM where stumbling drunk afterwards.


Welcome to Canada. Any other army they would overlooked the indiscretion and lauded the result.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> Was with the Russians - in Kosovo.
> It sort of stopped a shooting battle over the airport / but IIRC he and the RSM where stumbling drunk afterwards.



Averted a shooting battle?  

". . .  instead of the serious meeting they had expected, the Russians had prepared what they call a dog-and-pony show, . . . followed by a vodka-fuelled meal."



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/two-canadian-officers-return-from-kosovo-in-disgrace-1.173841
		



> Two Canadian officers return from Kosovo in disgrace​CBC News · Posted: Oct 03, 1999 3:08 PM ET | Last Updated: October 3, 1999
> 
> Two of Edmonton's top military officers, who were part of Canada's peacekeeping mission in Kosovo, are back in Canada after being sent home in disgrace.
> 
> ...











						Two officers scolded for toasting with the Russians
					

Canadians say they had to exceed two-drink limit




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				





> Two officers scolded for toasting with the Russians​CBC News · Posted: Jan 19, 2000 10:51 AM ET | Last Updated: January 19, 2000
> 
> In a case that pits rules against reality, a senior Canadian soldier was found guilty yesterday of drunkenness for an indiscretion at a luncheon in Kosovo where his Russian hosts pressed him to drink their free-flowing vodka.
> 
> ...





			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadian-soldier-fined-for-drinking-on-the-job-1.243910
		



> Canadian soldier fined for drinking on the job​CBC News · Posted: Jan 19, 2000 10:51 AM ET | Last Updated: January 19, 2000
> 
> A military court has reprimanded a 19-year veteran of the Canadian Forces and fined him $1,500 after a drinking incident last summer.
> 
> ...


----------



## KevinB (10 Jun 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Averted a shooting battle?
> 
> ". . .  instead of the serious meeting they had expected, the Russians had prepared what they call a dog-and-pony show, . . . followed by a vodka-fuelled meal."
> 
> ...


The Russians had seized the airport and shots had been fired at NATO troops who had approached / after the ‘meeting’ the Russians allowed NATO forces to the airport. 
    The articles don’t really do justice to the situation on the ground.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> The articles don’t really do justice to the situation on the ground.



Wait…CBC “reporting” that wasn’t quite on the mark?


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> The Russians had seized the airport and shots had been fired at NATO troops who had approached / after the ‘meeting’ the Russians allowed NATO forces to the airport.
> The articles don’t really do justice to the situation on the ground.


I know Canada has a history of underplaying/understating the confrontational bits of overseas missions, especially around those days and earlier, so there may be more to it than "lazy fuckers in the media" (although that ain't zero, either).

CBC?  They were lazy back then re:  military, and with the exception of one reporter, still tend to be.

What did the military tell the media?  Was that even mentioned in the court proceedings?  I like to think it would (I would have if I were defence counsel/friend of the accused), because it appears the Globe @ least had some details (likely based on a transcript, since it's placelined Edmonton but the court martial happened in Hull).  I'm pretty sure if anything in the documentation said something like "after the drinks, the Russians let the NATO troops thru," the story may have gone from a party scolding to a "guy getting the job done gets boned" - maybe, anyway ...


----------



## Eaglelord17 (10 Jun 2022)

You mean the same military (and Government) which hid Medak Pocket, would possibly lie about other events in the same era?


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Jun 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You mean the same military (and Government) which hid Medak Pocket, would possibly lie about other events in the same era?


A lie of omission?  Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe ....


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (11 Jun 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Averted a shooting battle?
> 
> ". . .  instead of the serious meeting they had expected, the Russians had prepared what they call a dog-and-pony show, . . . followed by a vodka-fuelled meal."
> 
> ...


I don't even see a problem with this.  Looks like they used unconventional methods to achieve mission success 😎

Gunboat Diplomacy?...... nah lets try Vodka Diplomacy!


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jun 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I don't even see a problem with this.  Looks like they used unconventional methods to achieve mission success 😎
> 
> Gunboat Diplomacy?...... nah lets try Vodka Diplomacy!


I think so too. In Bosnia we did some operations where we would cordon off villages and search them for weapons. We found that having one soldier sharing a couple drinks with the locals was very effective at deescalating the charged atmosphere.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (11 Jun 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I think so too. In Bosnia we did some operations where we would cordon off villages and search them for weapons. We found that having one soldier sharing a couple drinks with the locals was very effective at deescalating the charged atmosphere.


This is what happens when you have Commanders thousands of miles away micromanaging situations they have no context of.

Sounds like a recipe for extreme levels of Military success 😆


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Jun 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I think so too. In Bosnia we did some operations where we would cordon off villages and search them for weapons. We found that having one soldier sharing a couple drinks with the locals was very effective at deescalating the charged atmosphere.


There is a gravel pit just up the road from the camp in Kljuc. As a dump truck driver I was in and out of there all the time. Once my truck was loaded, I was not allowed to leave until I had taken a wee sip of the contents of the little purple genie bottle that was magically never empty.


----------



## KevinB (11 Jun 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> This is what happens when you have Commanders thousands of miles away micromanaging situations they have no context of.
> 
> Sounds like a recipe for extreme levels of Military success 😆


The problem is when you have people that don’t understand the world isn’t Black and White, a local  Commander need the freedoms to go into the Gray zone as needed to achieve the mission.  
   Heck made it be documented, and explained as needed, but allow for deviation from the rules as long as the actions are not malicious or evil.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> The problem is when you have people that don’t understand the world isn’t Black and White, a local  Commander need the freedoms to go into the Gray zone as needed to achieve the mission.
> Heck made it be documented, and explained as needed, but allow for deviation from the rules as long as the actions are not malicious or evil.


The Vietnam Syndrome I call it. The Pentagon telling the Green Beret or the commanders " thou shalt not hurt anyone too much"


----------



## Underway (11 Jun 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> The Vietnam Syndrome I call it. The Pentagon telling the Green Beret or the commanders " thou shalt not hurt anyone too much"


So what you're saying is shoot them directly between the eyes so they don't feel anything??


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Jun 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I don't even see a problem with this.  Looks like they used unconventional methods to achieve mission success 😎
> 
> Gunboat Diplomacy?...... nah lets try Vodka Diplomacy!





Jarnhamar said:


> I think so too. In Bosnia we did some operations where we would cordon off villages and search them for weapons. We found that having one soldier sharing a couple drinks with the locals was very effective at deescalating the charged atmosphere.


Agreed it was the right thing to do, but that's different than someone putting it on the public record, _officially_, that it was the right thing to do.

For all the reasons others have posted, as well as some we may not even know about


----------



## dapaterson (30 Jun 2022)

Cue Freddie Mercury singing "Another one bites the dust" as CO Regina has now been relieved as well.






						Statement by the Commander of Canadian Fleet Pacific - Canada.ca
					

“Today, Commodore (Cmdre) David Mazur, Commander Canadian Fleet Pacific, has relieved Lieutenant-Commander (LCdr) David Dallin, the Commanding Officer of Her Majesty’s Canadian Ship (HMCS) Regina of his duties."




					www.canada.ca


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Jun 2022)

KevinB said:


> The problem is when you have people that don’t understand the world isn’t Black and White, a local  Commander need the freedoms to go into the Gray zone as needed to achieve the mission.
> Heck made it be documented, and explained as needed, but allow for deviation from the rules as long as the actions are not malicious or evil.


That would require grownups to be in charge, to be able to determine if the right judgement was to be made.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (30 Jun 2022)

dapaterson said:


> Cue Freddie Mercury singing "Another one bites the dust" as CO Regina has now been relieved as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Regina was shore office so no more Stone Frigate command!


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Jun 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You mean the same military (and Government) which hid Medak Pocket, would possibly lie about other events in the same era?


I'll speak to this. 

One word: Somalia. The politicians (in and out of uniform) thought that Canadians could not accept the fact we had accomplished our mission but had to defend ourselves. Goes against the whole "Canadians are peacekeepers" bullshit narrative that we wore blue berets and everyone loved us.

I did write a paper for OPMEs to determine if peacekeeping was a fatal distraction. It isn't but the CAF has to be careful.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Regina was shore office so no more Stone Frigate command!



I was going to ask “aren’t CPF skippers usually Cdr rank”…


----------



## rmc_wannabe (1 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> I'll speak to this.
> 
> One word: Somalia. The politicians (in and out of uniform) thought that Canadians could not accept the fact we had accomplished our mission but had to defend ourselves. Goes against the whole "Canadians are peacekeepers" bullshit narrative that we wore blue berets and everyone loved us.
> 
> I did write a paper for OPMEs to determine if peacekeeping was a fatal distraction. It isn't but the CAF has to be careful.


Agreed. I think this is why Mali was a quick and forgettable affair for this government.

Peacekeeping in the 21st century is COIN with less tools. People die and thats bad optics.The second a ramp ceremony again, when we were "back to Blue Beret happy joy joy" operations... we lose the "no need for expensive stuff, constabulatory peacekeeping CAF" of yesteryear Trudeau grew up with.

Anything that deviates from that narrative is suspect, including that money sink organization that occupies both coasts.


----------



## Underway (1 Jul 2022)

dapaterson said:


> Cue Freddie Mercury singing "Another one bites the dust" as CO Regina has now been relieved as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So confusion from me here...

A LCdr is normally not the CO of a frigate, even one in the ditch.

LCdr David Dallin was the XO of HMCS Regina and was scheduled to be replaced with a full command team turnover last week.  There was a Change of Command Parade for the new incoming CO I think on Tuesday/Wednesday IIRC.

Something doesn't line up here, unless the old CO was rowed ashore and the XO was temporarily the CO until the new CO arrived... but that's not normally the way things work either.


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> So confusion from me here...
> 
> A LCdr is normally not the CO of a frigate, even one in the ditch.
> 
> ...



Agreed, it is an unusual situation.


----------



## Underway (1 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Agreed, it is an unusual situation.


Maybe the XO was the incoming CO and hadn't been promoted to the position yet?  That's not unheard of but normally you aren't XO straight into CO either.  There is at least a posting in between.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Jul 2022)

Good idea...


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Jul 2022)

On the bright side it's a good recruiting tool.

"lots of promotion oppertunities in the navy"


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> On the bright side it's a good recruiting tool.
> 
> "lots of promotion oppertunities in the navy"



Cheers to a sickly season and a poor behavior 



Underway said:


> Maybe the XO was the incoming CO and hadn't been promoted to the position yet?  That's not unheard of but normally you aren't XO straight into CO either.  There is at least a posting in between.



Perhaps.  It was a shore office, so I imagine silly buggers with high rank / low rank is easier played.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (1 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> So confusion from me here...
> 
> A LCdr is normally not the CO of a frigate, even one in the ditch.
> 
> ...



Musical chairs ships?

March 11

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502517122659876865
March 12

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502879605731971074


----------



## Remius (1 Jul 2022)

We are slowly catching up with Russia on forced change of commands…


----------



## Navy_Pete (1 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> So confusion from me here...
> 
> A LCdr is normally not the CO of a frigate, even one in the ditch.
> 
> ...


I think the skipper was posted earlier and the XO was acting CO. Edit; see @Blackadder1916 's post above. That kind of shuffle is normal to get the skippers some actual sea time.

Honestly no real reason to have a Cdr for a ship in a 2 year refit; basically down to a platoon sized crew in shore office, with a lot of them on courses etc. On older classes the EO would take over the CO role as they were LCdrs, but having an NWO do it means someone else can deal with the pers admin side of things and leave the engineers and log to just support the DWP. Could easily leave the CO job vacant for a year and no one would really notice.

All you really need is someone with the presiding officer course that can do the divisional support, but if the Navy wants to give someone the golden moustache for a shore office tour then I guess that's up to them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Jul 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> March 12
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502879605731971074


I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?


Have to cut criteria down to 5 days in the ops box, don't want anyone left out!


----------



## dimsum (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?


I'm not seeing a CPO1 in any of the pictures?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (1 Jul 2022)

dimsum said:


> I'm not seeing a CPO1 in any of the pictures?



I had to search about to see what he was referring to.  I assume that he meant a photo in another tweet that followed the one I linked.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502879612065394695


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Jul 2022)

Blackadder1916 said:


> I had to search about to see what he was referring to.  I assume that he meant a photo in another tweet that followed the one I linked.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1502879612065394695



Yes, sorry, thank you. I'm not very tech savvy with social media.


----------



## torg003 (1 Jul 2022)

Just an observation, noticed that the officer in the pic doesn't have the executive curl on his rank insignia.  I thought all naval officers had changed over in 2010 (or so).


----------



## Blackadder1916 (1 Jul 2022)

torg003 said:


> Just an observation, noticed that the officer in the pic doesn't have the executive curl on his rank insignia.  I thought all naval officers had changed over in 2010 (or so).



It's there, you're just not seeing enough of his sleeve cuff.


----------



## torg003 (1 Jul 2022)

Fair enough.


----------



## Underway (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?


West coast was pretty medal opportunity deficient in the last 10 years.  This is one of the reasons they brought the Sea Service Ensignia.  She might have a gold anchor over there...  lots of sea days, not many medals.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?



Operational experience is significantly devalued in the CAF.  Mandatory DLN trg is where it’s currently at…


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Jul 2022)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Operational experience is significantly devalued in the CAF.  Mandatory DLN trg is where it’s currently at…


Operational experience also varies given how few days you need to get a medal now


----------



## dapaterson (1 Jul 2022)

To the credit of the RCN, lots of sailing isn't part of a named deployment, so there's no medals awarded.

Plus even in the most routine of sailings, the ocean actively tries to kill everyone.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Jul 2022)

dapaterson said:


> To the credit of the RCN, lots of sailing isn't part of a named deployment, so there's no medals awarded.
> 
> Plus even in the most routine of sailings, the ocean actively tries to kill everyone.



Thanks that makes a bit more sense. Weird to have missed named deployments but maybe it's just a lot of regular sailing.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Jul 2022)

Eye In The Sky said:


> Operational experience is significantly devalued in the CAF.  Mandatory DLN trg is where it’s currently at…



Professional box ticking... it's a thing


----------



## Furniture (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not a medals hound but doesn't that CPO1 seem to be a little light in the deployment area? Or am I missing something?


She has a silver SSM, indicating between three and four years underway. That's pretty reasonable these days, given that for a a few years between 2011-2016 only a few ships were at sea at any given time.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> She has a silver SSM, indicating between three and four years underway. That's pretty reasonable these days, given that for a a few years between 2011-2016 only a few ships were at sea at any given time.


Does that mean 3 to 4 years worth of sailing time?


----------



## Furniture (1 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Does that mean 3 to 4 years worth of sailing time?


3-4 years being on a ship that is not connected to the shore. Sea days are counted based on days the ship is "underway", not just days posted to a ship. For example, in five years posted to the left coast, and having done four deployments in that time, I only have 794 Sea Days, or just over two years. For someone to get to between 1095 and 1461 days at sea means they have done some time on ships actually being a sailor.


----------



## TacticalTea (2 Jul 2022)

According to a credible source, the LCdr reported himself almost immediately after the incident.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (2 Jul 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Operational experience also varies given how few days you need to get a medal now



In some cases, yup.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Jul 2022)

That’s a SWASM beside her CD.  I’ll bias to giving credit for a SWASM before I give thumbs up for a row of Queen’s Jubilees beside a CD…


----------



## dimsum (2 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> 3-4 years being on a ship that is not connected to the shore. Sea days are counted based on days the ship is "underway", not just days posted to a ship. For example, in five years posted to the left coast, and having done four deployments in that time, I only have 794 Sea Days, or just over two years. For someone to get to between 1095 and 1461 days at sea means they have done some time on ships actually being a sailor.


It's still counted as "24 hour days at sea", right?  So if a ship sails for a week, Monday and Friday (assuming those are the dates of departure and arrival) don't count?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jul 2022)

dimsum said:


> It's still counted as "24 hour days at sea", right?  So if a ship sails for a week, Monday and Friday (assuming those are the dates of departure and arrival) don't count?


Foreign port days might count, too. It has been many years since I cared what colour my SSI badge is…


----------



## Underway (2 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Does that mean 3 to 4 years worth of sailing time?


Yes, as @Furniture pointed out that means a large amount of time posted to a ship.  It makes sense, for most hard sea trades you'll have your initial trade OJT and subsequent S1 time onboard.  Then you'll have to come back as an MS.  Then again as a PO2, a PO1, and CPO2.  Assuming a posting time of 2 years or so that's 10+ years of time on ship, usually 12+ years.  Over that time you'll rotate through ships that are coming and going from high readiness with varying amounts of time at sea.  Some postings might be thin for sea time and others you're never home.



dimsum said:


> It's still counted as "24 hour days at sea", right? So if a ship sails for a week, Monday and Friday (assuming those are the dates of departure and arrival) don't count?


I can never keep this right.  If you leave on Monday morning and don't get back until Friday evening both Monday and Friday count IIRC.  They are more than 8 hours attached to a longer continuous time at sea in between.

If you left Monday morning and came back end of the same day it wouldn't count. 8+ hours are not connected to a longer sail in between.  Or something like that.  I'll look at the reference Monday and let you know properly what it is.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Jul 2022)

dapaterson said:


> To the credit of the RCN, lots of sailing isn't part of a named deployment, so there's no medals awarded.
> 
> Plus even in the most routine of sailings, the ocean actively tries to kill everyone.


I think I have something like 450 odd days of sea time that aren't part of a named deployment. Honestly that was more work/riskier than the other 200 days for the Op Reassurance and NATO time; the ships sail in a better repair state for deployments with more people, where you will limp out with a minimal crew for the rest. 

The times I've been genuinely worried were always 'routine standard readiness' type sailing from A to B, (like when we spent several days on a single generator caught in a major storm during an Atlantic crossing trying to get another one going). Conversely for the NATO we left with everything meeting/exceeding SOLAS and enough people and time in the schedule to do maintenance (actually hit 100% for a while, which made us a unicorn).

Similarly you are trying to get ready to go with a portion of the crew so it's nuts to prepare for as well. People who have a high portion of their sea time on HR ships actually have it easy in comparison (for most trades). Wander down to a ship trying to reactivate after a DWP with a skeleton crew and see what I mean; hard to get IPMS up and running with no IPMS tech, and can be a fight just to keep the hotel services running.

RIMPAC is a pretty typical example of a long sail with no medals attached where the ships aren't at full high readiness, and there are a few equivalents on the East coast where you will be gone for 2-3 months doing exercises with the USN or the UK. Know a few people who had the gold medal but a similar lack of medals; some people are just always bridesmaids that spend a lot of time sailing without a deployment.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Jul 2022)

I'm humbled by the info thanks all. Glad to see my assumptions were wrong.


Missing a soldier or two out of a rifle section can really impact performance, it seems criminal to keep hearing how under-strength the navy is and how you still sail. Having leaders constantly in the news for inappropriate behavior probably doesn't help morale very much either.

For me personally I can handle dangerous environments, shitty living conditions and regular army bullshit (wash the vehicles so a general can see dust free vehicles in the middle of the desert). Leaders with double standards for themselves (behavior, performance) cause the most stress.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (2 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Thanks that makes a bit more sense. Weird to have missed named deployments but maybe it's just a lot of regular sailing.


The West Coast hasn't historically done much in the way of deployments.  They would do what used to be called WESTPLOY which is literally just sailing around the Pacific visiting other friendly Countries.

Having done a PROJECTION I can say I would never want to do it again.  Boring as all heck, didn't really feel like we actually accomplished anything.  

Now going to the Middle East, that was way better.  I felt like we should have just skipped most of PROJECTION and spent an extra 2 months in the Gulf/Indian Ocean actually doing operations.


Navy_Pete said:


> I think I have something like 450 odd days of sea time that aren't part of a named deployment. Honestly that was more work/riskier than the other 200 days for the Op Reassurance and NATO time; the ships sail in a better repair state for deployments with more people, where you will limp out with a minimal crew for the rest.
> 
> The times I've been genuinely worried were always 'routine standard readiness' type sailing from A to B, (like when we spent several days on a single generator caught in a major storm during an Atlantic crossing trying to get another one going). Conversely for the NATO we left with everything meeting/exceeding SOLAS and enough people and time in the schedule to do maintenance (actually hit 100% for a while, which made us a unicorn).
> 
> ...


I can't imagine doing nothing but RIMPACs and Force Generation sails my entire career.  What a boring existence.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Jul 2022)

For context, I was talking to someone pretty recently trying to reactivate a ship with about 20 people out of the 50 they are supposed to have in the department. On a normal day, you'll be down a few at the get go from duty watches, plus courses, leave etc.

Crews are doing the best they can, but they are criminally under crewed with no real adjustments to the schedule, and then the BGHs are surprised when a lot of items still aren't fixed when they are doing the safety conferences to see if they go to sea.

The common sense approach is to prove the ship is safe before sailing (ie meets basic commercial standards). The RCN approach is to risk assess things, which is not really feasible to do properly when you have 1000+ defects unless you look at the overall impact. For example, you can have a pool of diesel in a cold area with no sources of heat be low risk, you can have some kind of ignition source (hot pipe?) in an empty area also be low risk, but if those two low risk items are in the same spot you have a problem.

That process is pretty handraulic and can't be automated to catch the compounding impacts. On the commercial side they avoid that by having things as red lines that just get fixed or the ship doesn't sail. We just talk it until it's yellow and hope nothing happens.

Getting completely off topic though, so apologize for derailing things.

Really frustrated by situations like this where they don't give details. I know they said it wasn't sexual misconduct, but people will still assume the worst. There will be a lot of assumptions, recriminations etc and then even if they announce the results of the investigation will be accusations of a cover up later on.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I can't imagine doing nothing but RIMPACs and Force Generation sails my entire career.  What a boring existence.



My non-operational sailing was probably more 'exciting' compared to the operational tour, but probably varies by department/trade. If I was an operator I'd want to do as much HR as possible. As an MSE type the operations were the break and recharge time after being driven into the ground in the preceeding year up to it, and honestly it was kind of boring at times to just have everything working and available, with proper support when it broke (unless the coast was being stupid and telling us we didn't need equipment essential to what we were doing, because they weren't reading our actual mission updates and thought were were doing rounds of cocktail parties in friendly waters).

FG included a few missile shoots, a lot of gunnery shoots, operating with fast air and submarines etc. Conversely spent weeks on the NATO just patrolling a box in the Med/Black sea and doing some very basic TG things with some allies. Could have been more exiting, but we had no ROEs to do boardings, and doing 'intelligence gathering' as a ship is interesting to about 10 people onboard and just tedium for the other 240.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> On the commercial side they avoid that by having things as red lines that just get fixed or the ship doesn't sail. We just talk it until it's yellow and hope nothing happens.


That is not a risk mitigation strategy...


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I can't imagine doing nothing but RIMPACs and Force Generation sails my entire career.  What a boring existence.



Meanwhile, sangar sentry enters the chat


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Jul 2022)

dapaterson said:


> That is not a risk mitigation strategy...


But we talked about it, and wrote it down....

Frequently there are 'mitigations' on paper that don't actually do anything, or don't get implemented, but god forbid you ask why the risk isn't being tracked a 'pre-mitigated' levels. Some days I hate the RCN, especially when the risk assessments take more time than the repair.

Because we are exempt from the Canada Shipping Act and self regulate, the RCN always has the option of sailing below SOLAS, as long as they accept the risk the tech side puts in. At the moment, common sense only kicks in if the RA comes out as 'intolerable' which is difficult to actually do with independent defects because of how the risk management policy is set up.

Different story when you start aggregating things, but with that many defects it's very hard to do. Even cutting it down to a slice of related defects generally get push back that the risk is assessed as too high.

Even if something terrible happens and people get hurt or killed, very little confidence of any changes as the RCN will just bury the BOI and overclassify it. Pretty shitty to document things as a CYA but when you recommend something is fixed before they go to sea, and the RCN does it anyway, not really anything else you can do (short of being a whistle blower I guess).


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> My non-operational sailing was probably more 'exciting' compared to the operational tour, but probably varies by department/trade. If I was an operator I'd want to do as much HR as possible. As an MSE type the operations were the break and recharge time after being driven into the ground in the preceeding year up to it, and honestly it was kind of boring at times to just have everything working and available, with proper support when it broke (unless the coast was being stupid and telling us we didn't need equipment essential to what we were doing, because they weren't reading our actual mission updates and thought were were doing rounds of cocktail parties in friendly waters).
> 
> FG included a few missile shoots, a lot of gunnery shoots, operating with fast air and submarines etc. Conversely spent weeks on the NATO just patrolling a box in the Med/Black sea and doing some very basic TG things with some allies. Could have been more exiting, but we had no ROEs to do boardings, and doing 'intelligence gathering' as a ship is interesting to about 10 people onboard and just tedium for the other 240.


My ”non-operational” sailing on the west coast came far closer to killing me (twice) than any of the named Ops that I did…just sayin…


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I can't imagine doing nothing but RIMPACs and Force Generation sails my entire career.  What a boring existence.


Can't be worse than MAPLE RESOLVEs followed by "MAPLE RESOLVE but in Latvia" for an entire career...


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jul 2022)

PuckChaser said:


> Can't be worse than MAPLE RESOLVEs followed by "MAPLE RESOLVE but in Latvia" for an entire career...


This is literally what we are paid to do: drill and practice.

Consider yourself lucky if you go an entire career without going hot…


----------



## dimsum (2 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Consider yourself lucky if you go an entire career without going hot…


Yup.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (2 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> My non-operational sailing was probably more 'exciting' compared to the operational tour, but probably varies by department/trade. If I was an operator I'd want to do as much HR as possible. As an MSE type the operations were the break and recharge time after being driven into the ground in the preceeding year up to it, and honestly it was kind of boring at times to just have everything working and available, with proper support when it broke (unless the coast was being stupid and telling us we didn't need equipment essential to what we were doing, because they weren't reading our actual mission updates and thought were were doing rounds of cocktail parties in friendly waters).
> 
> FG included a few missile shoots, a lot of gunnery shoots, operating with fast air and submarines etc. Conversely spent weeks on the NATO just patrolling a box in the Med/Black sea and doing some very basic TG things with some allies. Could have been more exiting, but we had no ROEs to do boardings, and doing 'intelligence gathering' as a ship is interesting to about 10 people onboard and just tedium for the other 240.


Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.



SeaKingTacco said:


> This is literally what we are paid to do: drill and practice.
> 
> Consider yourself lucky if you go an entire career without going hot…


It's still boring 😉

Running in to Iranians was way better 😁


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.
> 
> 
> It's still boring 😉
> ...


Meh. The Iranians gave me waaay less grief than the Omanis.

Op Apollo joke: You know what the difference is between an Iranian P3 and a Canadian Aurora?

The Iranian P3 can be counted upon to show up on station everyday….


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Meh. The Iranians gave me waaay less grief than the Omanis.
> 
> Op Apollo joke: You know what the difference is between an Iranian P3 and a Canadian Aurora?
> 
> The Iranian P3 can be counted upon to show up on station everyday….


Hey, it was taco Tuesday, and two for 1 margaritas at the hotel, of course they won't be on station? It's called operational planning, you plan around all the specials at the hotel. Wednesday is meat loaf night? Yep let's go on patrol


----------



## dimsum (2 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Meh. The Iranians gave me waaay less grief than the Omanis.
> 
> Op Apollo joke: You know what the difference is between an Iranian P3 and a Canadian Aurora?
> 
> The Iranian P3 can be counted upon to show up on station everyday….


I'm convinced that Kuwaiti local ATC was more of a threat than Daesh.


----------



## FSTO (2 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Meh. The Iranians gave me waaay less grief than the Omanis.
> 
> Op Apollo joke: You know what the difference is between an Iranian P3 and a Canadian Aurora?
> 
> The Iranian P3 can be counted upon to show up on station everyday….


We were supposed to have an Aurora flyby during a CoC during Op Apollo. I’m sure the Iranians had theirs on standby. Just in case. 😉


----------



## TacticalTea (2 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.


That is 100% true and I hate it. So I always do my darndest to try and inform them as much as possible of what we're doing, either as part of the job or just in casual conversation.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> That is 100% true and I hate it. So I always do my darndest to try and inform them as much as possible of what we're doing, either as part of the job or just in casual conversation.



It doesn't matter... it just sucks as soft cargo


----------



## Lumber (3 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Meh. The Iranians gave me waaay less grief than the Omanis.


I had the opposite experience. The Omanis were great! The Iranians would hails us and ask us questions non-stop during the entirety of our Hormuz transit, questions they _knew_ we couldn't answer, but they clogged up the air waves anyway. On our third transit through, the Omani coast guard came on and essentially told the Iranians to shut up, leave us alone, and get the fuck off the channel.


----------



## TacticalTea (3 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> It doesn't matter... it just sucks as soft cargo
> 
> View attachment 71798


On my last deployment we had a large map put up on the wall next to the galley, so the crew would walk by it at least thrice a day, and it showed where the ship was, where it was going next, along with blurbs and pictures describing our current operations. 

HUMINT suggests it was greatly appreciated.


----------



## brihard (3 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> On my last deployment we had a large map put up on the wall next to the galley, so the crew would walk by it at least thrice a day, and it showed where the ship was, where it was going next, along with blurbs and pictures describing our current operations.
> 
> HUMINT suggests it was greatly appreciated.


“Keep your followers informed of the mission, the changing situation and the overall picture.”

Only on moving into a non-CAF career have I come to really appreciate the super simple wisdom that CAF managed to achieve with the ten principles of leadership we taught to 19 year olds. Disappointing that stuff like this would get missed on an operationally deployed ship. It’s way easier to give a shit if you know what you’re supposed to be giving a shit about.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> We were supposed to have an Aurora flyby during a CoC during Op Apollo. I’m sure the Iranians had theirs on standby. Just in case. 😉


They probably would have, just for a lark.

It got to the point where we could tell which crew was out, just by the sound of the Iranian TACCO’s voice on 16…


----------



## Furniture (3 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> On my last deployment we had a large map put up on the wall next to the galley, so the crew would walk by it at least thrice a day, and it showed where the ship was, where it was going next, along with blurbs and pictures describing our current operations.
> 
> HUMINT suggests it was greatly appreciated.


I've sewn similar things done on ships, and it was always appreciated by the crew. 

For many occupations sailing in the South China Sea is no different than sailing in the West Coast Firing Area... As a Met Tech my job was 100% real every time we were underway, regardless of whether the helo was flying for an exercise or an operation.  

Getting the bigger picture through pipes, and a map on the bulkhead makes a difference.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Jul 2022)

Furniture said:


> I've sewn similar things done on ships, and it was always appreciated by the crew.
> 
> For many occupations sailing in the South China Sea is no different than sailing in the West Coast Firing Area... As a Met Tech my job was 100% real every time we were underway, regardless of whether the helo was flying for an exercise or an operation.
> 
> Getting the bigger picture through pipes, and a map on the bulkhead makes a difference.


I like the monitor outside the swain's office (or a similar high traffic spot) with a ppt rotating through the mission update and other announcements. It's a great, cheap and easy way to spread some info.

Seeing as this has completely derailed, the UFC 276 card is awesome; got to see Strickland get knocked out, unfortunate that didn't get the same with O'Malley. Volk looked better than ever, the main card is going to be crazy. Cannonier is huge, but Adensaya has the speed and technique advantage.


----------



## RangerRay (3 Jul 2022)

Lumber said:


> The Iranians would hails us and ask us questions non-stop during the entirety of our Hormuz transit, questions they _knew_ we couldn't answer, but they clogged up the air waves anyway.


Like this?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Jul 2022)

RangerRay said:


> Like this?


Kind of. They would do things like call on 16 and “Cdn warship 341, what is your name”?

I mean- spend the $1000 bucks and buy a Janes subscription, like the rest of us…


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Kind of. They would do things like call on 16 and “Cdn warship 341, what is your name”?


Ans: ‘Bali…’ 😆


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.



Unfortunately, we are about to lose one of the best ways to disseminate operational info to the ship's company .... because they are terminating the stewards.


----------



## Underway (3 Jul 2022)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Unfortunately, we are about to lose one of the best ways to disseminate operational info to the ship's company .... because they are terminating the stewards.


The smoke hole is still the best way to disseminate info though.  It doesn't even smell like smoke anymore with all the vape flavours floating around.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Jul 2022)

Wait! There are still smokers in the Navy! I would have thought that would have been driven out of sailors by now with all the obstacles to smoking that were put in their way.


----------



## TacticalTea (3 Jul 2022)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Wait! There are still smokers in the Navy! I would have thought that would have been driven out of sailors by now with all the obstacles to smoking that were put in their way.


It's all vaping nowadays. Smoking is ''cringe''.

The practice is startlingly rampant actually.


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Jul 2022)

"I never trust a fighting man who doesn't smoke or drink" 

-William "Bill" Halsey


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> "I never trust a fighting man who doesn't smoke or drink"
> 
> -William "Bill" Halsey


“I never trust a CAF person who doesn’t have their DLN course done”

-updated, 2022 version…


----------



## Halifax Tar (3 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> “I never trust a CAF person who doesn’t have their DLN course done”
> 
> -updated, 2022 version…



The key to any military victory is obviously now DLN coursing.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> The key to any military victory is obviously now DLN coursing.


Well, obviously.


----------



## stoker dave (4 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.


As the Assistant Marine Systems Engineering Officer I once found myself in the Machinery Control Room at 2:00 am and not much was going on (operationally) and the ship was just steaming along (enroute to Bermuda from Halifax, as I recall).  I was chatting with the on-watch engineering crew and they started asking me where the ship was going, where we were, etc.  

I picked up the phone and called the OOW (who was also my cabin mate).  He said he had a few minutes so I hosted a sort of 'ask me anything' where the on-watch engineering crew could ask the OOW anything they wanted to know.  Normally this is WAY outside of bounds and outside the normal scope of procedures.   So for about 20 minutes the OOW answered questions about where the ship was, if we were in the Bermuda Triangle, when we would arrive, weather, other ships nearby,.... basically just a view to what was going on 'outside'.   I realized at that time how poorly informed these guys were.  They got on the ship in Halifax.  They did their job.  They got off the boat in whatever port they found themselves.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (4 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> As the Assistant Marine Systems Engineering Officer I once found myself in the Machinery Control Room at 2:00 am and not much was going on (operationally) and the ship was just steaming along (enroute to Bermuda from Halifax, as I recall).  I was chatting with the on-watch engineering crew and they started asking me where the ship was going, where we were, etc.
> 
> I picked up the phone and called the OOW (who was also my cabin mate).  He said he had a few minutes so I hosted a sort of 'ask me anything' where the on-watch engineering crew could ask the OOW anything they wanted to know.  Normally this is WAY outside of bounds and outside the normal scope of procedures.   So for about 20 minutes the OOW answered questions about where the ship was, if we were in the Bermuda Triangle, when we would arrive, weather, other ships nearby,.... basically just a view to what was going on 'outside'.   I realized at that time how poorly informed these guys were.  They got on the ship in Halifax.  They did their job.  They got off the boat in whatever port they found themselves.


I always made a point of stopping in the MCR for 10 minutes prior to taking my watch so I could chat with the fellows and let them know what was up and what we planned on doing.

There are a lot of the rank and file that do a very good job but have no idea where the Ship generally is or what we are doing.  I would personally hate that, but that's just me.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> As the Assistant Marine Systems Engineering Officer I once found myself in the Machinery Control Room at 2:00 am and not much was going on (operationally) and the ship was just steaming along (enroute to Bermuda from Halifax, as I recall).  I was chatting with the on-watch engineering crew and they started asking me where the ship was going, where we were, etc.
> 
> I picked up the phone and called the OOW (who was also my cabin mate).  He said he had a few minutes so I hosted a sort of 'ask me anything' where the on-watch engineering crew could ask the OOW anything they wanted to know.  Normally this is WAY outside of bounds and outside the normal scope of procedures.   So for about 20 minutes the OOW answered questions about where the ship was, if we were in the Bermuda Triangle, when we would arrive, weather, other ships nearby,.... basically just a view to what was going on 'outside'.   I realized at that time how poorly informed these guys were.  They got on the ship in Halifax.  They did their job.  They got off the boat in whatever port they found themselves.



So, like just about every one of my O Groups as a platoon commander then?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (4 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I always made a point of stopping in the MCR for 10 minutes prior to taking my watch so I could chat with the fellows and let them know what was up and what we planned on doing.
> 
> There are a lot of the rank and file that do a very good job but have no idea where the Ship generally is or what we are doing.  I would personally hate that, but that's just me.


I thought the MCR was a mandatory stop on the way to the bridge for the oncoming OOW. Did that change recently?


----------



## FSTO (4 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I thought the MCR was a mandatory stop on the way to the bridge for the oncoming OOW. Did that change recently?


It had better not. WTF is Venture teaching these days?


----------



## NavyShooter (4 Jul 2022)

My rounds as part of my role as an electronics tech on the ship took me pretty much everywhere.  There's SONAR and NAV gear almost everywhere....so I'd get to see most of the ship in the run of a day.  From the bridge to the MCR to OPS, tiller flats, FLYCO, etc.  I knew where we were, what we were doing, and who was around us.  

We had sailors (Stokers mostly) who were literally afraid of going outside.  There was one guy in the 90's - I recall that his wife would drop him off at the brow, and he wouldn't leave the ship until we got back to Halifax.  Like - he never went ashore. 

It takes all kinds.

During the last week of our deployment to Libya, on the transit home - I saw the CO walking on 3 deck.  I asked him if he was lost - it was the first time I'd seen him down that far inside the ship.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> As the Assistant Marine Systems Engineering Officer I once found myself in the Machinery Control Room at 2:00 am and not much was going on (operationally) and the ship was just steaming along (enroute to Bermuda from Halifax, as I recall).  I was chatting with the on-watch engineering crew and they started asking me where the ship was going, where we were, etc.
> 
> I picked up the phone and called the OOW (who was also my cabin mate).  He said he had a few minutes so I hosted a sort of 'ask me anything' where the on-watch engineering crew could ask the OOW anything they wanted to know.  Normally this is WAY outside of bounds and outside the normal scope of procedures.   So for about 20 minutes the OOW answered questions about where the ship was, if we were in the Bermuda Triangle, when we would arrive, weather, other ships nearby,.... basically just a view to what was going on 'outside'.   I realized at that time how poorly informed these guys were.  They got on the ship in Halifax.  They did their job.  They got off the boat in whatever port they found themselves.



While underway with Sea Training, ST makes a point of stopping random sailors and asking if they know anything about what's going on, where we are and what were doing.  Their findings are provided and improvments are to be made. 

Also the IMO/IMD are constantly filling inboxes with updates and goings on ect ect.  

Lastly, during HODs and CHODs information is supposed to be given for important 5 Ws.  And that is supposed to be disseminated in follow on OGroups. 

All this is to say we are trying.  But we aren't great yet.  It would be nice if the flex wouldn't change every half an hour.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

NavyShooter said:


> During the last week of our deployment to Libya, on the transit home - I saw the CO walking on 3 deck.  I asked him if he was lost - it was the first time I'd seen him down that far inside the ship.



A ships company also notices quickly when a CO doesn't visit 3 Deck often.  It's an easy way to gain familiarity with a crew and help foster positive morale, I'm not sure why many don't do it more.


----------



## Underway (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> All this is to say we are trying. But we aren't great yet. It would be nice if the flex wouldn't change every half an hour.


If people don't care to know then they won't know.  It takes 30 seconds in the chow line to ask an Ops type where we are and where we are going.  Lots of folks just don't listen to that info even when you do pass it on.  It has literally nothing to do with their job.  So they don't care.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> A ships company also notices quickly when a CO doesn't visit 3 Deck often.  It's an easy way to gain familiarity with a crew and help foster positive morale, I'm not sure why many don't do it more.



Self-confidence issues, perhaps, as well as no formal training/ mentoring in, or corporate requirements to demonstrate, MBWA related competencies 

The *management by wandering around* (*MBWA*), also *management by walking around*,[1] refers to a style of business management which involves managers wandering around, in an unstructured manner, through the workplace(s), at random, to check with employees, equipment, or on the status of ongoing work.[1] The emphasis is on the word _wandering_ as an unplanned movement within a workplace, rather than a plan where employees expect a visit from managers at more systematic, pre-approved or scheduled times.

The expected benefit is that a manager, by random sampling of events or employee discussions, is more likely to facilitate improvements to the morale, sense of organizational purpose, productivity and total quality management of the organization, as compared to remaining in a specific office area and waiting for employees, or the delivery of status reports, to arrive there, as events warrant in the workplace.






						Management by wandering around - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> If people don't care to know then they won't know.  It takes 30 seconds in the chow line to ask an Ops type where we are and where we are going.  Lots of folks just don't listen to that info even when you do pass it on.  It has literally nothing to do with their job.  So they don't care.



Ok.


----------



## Underway (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Ok.


I'm not saying to stop doing it.  People should know.  And I think you should keep trying to inform them.  It's good leadership. I was just giving you an out if they don't pay attention!  Lol


----------



## stoker dave (4 Jul 2022)

NavyShooter said:


> During the last week of our deployment to Libya, on the transit home - I saw the CO walking on 3 deck.  I asked him if he was lost - it was the first time I'd seen him down that far inside the ship.


So back in my day, junior MARS / NWO were encouraged to be visible everywhere.  But the CO and XO (and any visiting admirals) were rarely if ever seen beyond their cabin, bridge and ops room.   The the MARS / NWO were (following the example set) reluctant go go below the weather deck.  (And I clearly remember, during one battle exercise with everyone in full NBC gear, an admiral walking around in shorts and civilian deck shoes..... how to NOT set an example but that is for another day.)

My memory of seeing a Commander in the MCR is that he looked scared.   Senior officers hated being somewhere where they knew less than the 18 year old junior stoker and knew they might be asked some pointed questions.   And certainly many of the senior stokers had no reason to hold back when given the chance.  I can hear them now in a conversation like this:  senior stoker to XO:  "When the f**ity f** are we going to get some f**ing decent f**ing (beer / food / spare parts) on this f***ing boat or are we just f***ing going to keep f***ing along doing f* all?"

I would like to think things have improved.  Can someone confirm OOW is expected to visit the MCR prior to being on watch?  If so, that is a great policy that should be encouraged.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> So back in my day, junior MARS / NWO were encouraged to be visible everywhere.  But the CO and XO (and any visiting admirals) were rarely if ever seen beyond their cabin, bridge and ops room.   The the MARS / NWO were (following the example set) reluctant go go below the weather deck.  (And I clearly remember, during one battle exercise with everyone in full NBC gear, an admiral walking around in shorts and civilian deck shoes..... how to NOT set an example but that is for another day.)



You could argue that the Army is much the same.

Except that all Army Officers start off on their basic courses doing what their soldiers are required to do, and commanding troops at a very low level. Inevitably, they progress away from the more detailed knowledge conveyed by regular front line leadership roles.

This is not perfect, of course, but at least I'm pretty confident that a guy like Wayne Eyre could speak with some confidence about what the average soldier does on a daily basis, and might even give a few of them a run for their money if required to dig a trench, punch holes in a target, or hump a ruck.

This does alot for a leader's credibility, and effectiveness, of course.

Paradoxically, not that I know much about it but, I think the Navy used to set the standard in this regard with the role of the Midshipman. Learning the job 'from the bilge up' is a great way to grow good leaders, IMHO.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> A ships company also notices quickly when a CO doesn't visit 3 Deck often.  It's an easy way to gain familiarity with a crew and help foster positive morale, I'm not sure why many don't do it more.


For reference, how far down is 3 deck.  Main machinery? DGs, GTs, etc.?


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> For reference, how far down is 3 deck.  Main machinery? DGs, GTs, etc.?



Its the second deck beneath the upper decks.  Its generally where a lot of the NCMs work and live.  Its also where the MCR is, Stores Office, Canteen, Ships Office; and the mess decks and messes.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Its the second deck beneath the upper decks.  Its generally where a lot of the NCMs work and live.  Its also where the MCR is, Stores Office, Canteen, Ships Office; and the mess decks and messes.


Ack. Tx!

So a skipper or XO would rarely be seen on 3 Deck? (Less the MCR). Wow!


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Paradoxically, not that I know much about it but, I think the Navy used to set the standard in this regard with the role of the Midshipman. Leaning the job 'from the bilge up' is a great way to grow good leaders, IMHO.



That's how the engineering officer training  works; has scaled back with the lack of sea time for a lot of people but you basically start out shadowing the most junior watchkeepers and work up from there. Less common now, but use to be a number of EOs with the basic watchkeeping certificate on whatever class of ship they did their Ph 6 on and would occasionally even officially be on the watch rotation. 

Pretty proud moment when the sailors trust you enough not to hurt yourself with tools and include you as part of the watch, and show you how to do basic things in the shop. Basically just OS type activities, but that kind of stuff earns a lot of credibility.

Hard to forget how a system works when you've crawled through the bilge to get to a certain valve, spent days doing routine things like cleaning a fuel purifier or book cell etc. Also makes it really easy to call BS when you've actually done a job when someone tries to lob a ludicrous repair time your way.

The RAN and maybe the RN still actually require the EOs to get officially qualified, although we phased that out a while ago. Takes a while to work through so between the lack of sailing time and number of secondaries it's probably pretty unheard of now to actually get qualified, but the SLts still get into the mix of things to help out as part of 'professional development'. Even if they aren't actively getting qualified, they'll be carrying tools, shadowing people, and generally doing things that don't require the trades training where they can learn without actually getting in the way.

The NWOs sort of do some of this stuff with the deckwork, and do get a lot of exposure to different things, but it's at the 10k foot level so it's enough to kind of know what other departments do but that's about it. THey get flogged like rental cars though with a  lot of pressure to get their quals done, so they simply don't have time to really get into the weeds. Once they get their BWK certificate and can act as Officer of the Watch (OOW) the good ones will start to learn more about other departments, but usually that's when they start figuring out what they want to do next, so will be more focused on a specific ops section.

With the LogOs they show up as Lt(N)s with their trade training happening in Borden (?) so they just get it via firehouse as part of officer of the day training, but the good ones will get into some of the weeds with things that happen in their departments.


----------



## FSTO (4 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> With the LogOs they show up as Lt(N)s with their trade training happening in Borden (?) so they just get it via firehouse as part of officer of the day training, but the good ones will get into some of the weeds with things that happen in their departments.


Huh? They don’t come to the ship as a subbie? WTF?


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Ack. Tx!
> 
> So a skipper or XO would rarely be seen on 3 Deck? (Less the MCR). Wow!


Depends on the class of ship; the Cox'ns office on a CPF is right near the MCR, so the XO was there all the time to at least say hi.  Similarly the laundry and some other spaces are down on 4 deck, so sometimes they'd pop in to get a feel for how things were going.

A lot of CO's do 'management by wandering' but try and limit it a bit to also stay out of folks way to a certain extent, but when there were lulls 2000ish seemed to be a popular time for checking in with different departments. Was never surprised to see the XO/CO talking to the EOOW when I went into the MCR to sign the night order book, and figured out pretty quickly that sometimes it makes sense to pass on minor items that you have under control so they don't hear about it for the first time from the on watch folks.

Some like to get into the various departmental spaces, but that would be more of an informal guided tour with the HOD/CHOD that was pre-arranged, and was to look for some bugbears that we weren't having joy figuring out. Similarly when there is a big repair on usually the COs will stick their head in for morale support and tell the team they are doing a good job. For especially difficult jobs or risky ones in hard to access spots was also useful to show the CO's the location so they would understand why you were recommending to not do it at sea (or at least wait til things calm down)

Big fan myself, but bit of a balance between wandering productively and getting in people's way, plus getting all your own work done.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> With the LogOs they show up as Lt(N)s with their trade training happening in Borden (?) so they just get it via firehouse as part of officer of the day training, but the good ones will get into some of the weeds with things that happen in their departments.



In RCN 1.0 Log Os had to earn a BWK and stand watches on the bridge.  



FSTO said:


> Huh? They don’t come to the ship as a subbie? WTF?



It depends on a lot of factors but our baby Log Os generally show up as a subbie or a very Jr LT.  But the HOD is always an LT and should be on their second ship, and last ship, and OOD, as well as HOD qualified.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Ack. Tx!
> 
> So a skipper or XO would rarely be seen on 3 Deck? (Less the MCR). Wow!



XOs are a different beast with a metric butt load of administrative paper work to accomplish and are often seen at the SHO and Cox'ns office.  

It really depends on the CO.  But the ones who rarely venture to the nether regions of the peasants to say hi and mingle have their absence often noticed quickly.  Many JRs and C&POs take that as a sign.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (4 Jul 2022)

Log Os make the best foreign port duty OODs.

That is not a slag. They are not ruffled when truck loads of stuff shows up on the jetty with no warning; they know what to do when S1 Snuffy has a death in the family and needs to fly home and they don’t get bullshitted by the Chandler.

Log O’s are awesome.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jul 2022)

HT, NP, thanks for the insight! 👍🏼


----------



## SeaKingTacco (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> XOs are a different beast with a metric butt load of administrative paper work to accomplish and are often seen at the SHO and Cox'ns office.
> 
> It really depends on the CO.  But the ones who rarely venture to the nether regions of the peasants to say hi and mingle have their absence often noticed quickly.  Many JRs and C&POs take that as a sign.


I have sailed with some great COs and some not great ones.

It gets noted pretty quickly by the Air Dept, too, which COs (or really, any NWO) is too afraid/busy to step into the hangar and visit during aircraft maintenance. The techs are all too happy to answer questions and give impromptu tours. The great COs were not afraid to wander into the hangar during an engine change (or something equally hard) and chat or just watch.

Actually, I noticed that about all Departments. I am sure that it helps that I wore a flight suit (so was perceived as “non-threatening”) but I used to wander the ship (because I love ships and technology and want to know how things work) and ask people what they were doing and why, or ask to be explained how a certain system works. People are really proud of their trades and are usually only too happy to see you are interested in what they do. They would take you on a tour or even hand you tools and talk you through a repair. It can be a lot of fun!


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> People are really proud of their trades and are usually only too happy to see you are interested in what they do.


 👍🏼 

Leaders who fail to provide the opportunity for members to do so, are both personally and institutionally depriving the force of worthy insight and appreciation/motivation.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Log Os make the best foreign port duty OODs.
> 
> That is not a slag. They are not ruffled when truck loads of stuff shows up on the jetty with no warning; they know what to do when S1 Snuffy has a death in the family and needs to fly home and they don’t get bullshitted by the Chandler.
> 
> Log O’s are awesome.



Do I have a motion on the floor to make all foreign port OODs fall to to Log Os ?


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> On my last deployment we had a large map put up on the wall next to the galley, so the crew would walk by it at least thrice a day, and it showed where the ship was, where it was going next, along with blurbs and pictures describing our current operations.
> 
> HUMINT suggests it was greatly appreciated.


Many decades ago I was the most junior staff officer (called the Staff Learner - which, very accurate described my role) in a brigade HQ. One of my duties, every evening, was to go to the cook truck with large map board and pointer and brief the Signals and support people on the state of the "battle." It was a) a "duty of the staff" laid out, in black and white, in _Staff Duties in the Field_, and b) generally much appreciated by the soldiers most of whom had absolutely vital jobs but never saw the "big picture" unless someone like me was sent out to show into them.


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Depends on the class of ship; the Cox'ns office on a CPF is right near the MCR, so the XO was there all the time to at least say hi.  Similarly the laundry and some other spaces are down on 4 deck, so sometimes they'd pop in to get a feel for how things were going.
> 
> A lot of CO's do 'management by wandering' but try and limit it a bit to also *stay out of folks way to a certain extent*, but when there were lulls 2000ish seemed to be a popular time for checking in with different departments. Was never surprised to see the XO/CO talking to the EOOW when I went into the MCR to sign the night order book, and figured out pretty quickly that sometimes it makes sense to pass on minor items that you have under control so they don't hear about it for the first time from the on watch folks.
> 
> ...


This is a vital aspect of MWBA in the military. I did it (wandered about) a lot, almost daily, in garrison but I was much more careful in the field to not disturb the working elements - I visited a location when I needed to see something for myself, not just to "look and see" or, worse, in my opinion, just to de seen.


----------



## Underway (4 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> I would like to think things have improved.  Can someone confirm OOW is expected to visit the MCR prior to being on watch?  If so, that is a great policy that should be encouraged.


As an OOW you were expected to visit the MCR and OPS to get their input as to what was going on before you get to the bridge to do a turnover.  

That way when you got your turnover on the bridge it wasn't new info that you were down a DA or you had to find some time in the watch to de-coke the generator, and you can catch things in your turnover that are incorrect.

If you were running late you could cheat and skip one, but you were not supposed to be running late.


Good2Golf said:


> So a skipper or XO would rarely be seen on 3 Deck? (Less the MCR). Wow!


XO is there all the time.  Ships Office and Coxn's office and stores office is down there so they make stops all the time.  Some CO's wander, others don't.  Really depends on the situation.

Part of the problem is that the CO needs to be able to quickly be contacted by the OOW for contact reports and by OPS for similar.  So some won't travel far from their cabin, OPS or CCR.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> A ships company also notices quickly when a CO doesn't visit 3 Deck often.  It's an easy way to gain familiarity with a crew and help foster positive morale, I'm not sure why many don't do it more.



Yep. We used to have a name for this: It was called BAD leadership, BAD standing for  Be About the Decks.

P.S.: Works both ways. It is mazing the things you learn about your ship and crew from those impromptu walkabouts.


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Half the Ship's Company generally has no idea where we are or what we are doing WRT operations.


Excellent SOP. If the ship is captured by pirates then the prisoners won't be able to give any intel.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Excellent SOP. If the ship is captured by pirates then the prisoners won't be able to give any intel.


Just give the captured sailors rum and watch the yarns pour out... lol


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (4 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I thought the MCR was a mandatory stop on the way to the bridge for the oncoming OOW. Did that change recently?


Hah yes I re-read what I wrote and realized it sounded weird.  It is a mandatory stop of course.

What I meant was I usually took extra time i.e. 10-15 min just to chat with the MSE Dept.  Also, we had a few EOOW that would come to the bridge before their watch.  I thought that was also a very good practice.


----------



## TacticalTea (4 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Self-confidence issues, perhaps, as well as no formal training/ mentoring in, or corporate requirements to demonstrate, MBWA related competencies
> 
> The *management by wandering around* (*MBWA*), also *management by walking around*,[1] refers to a style of business management which involves managers wandering around, in an unstructured manner, through the workplace(s), at random, to check with employees, equipment, or on the status of ongoing work.[1] The emphasis is on the word _wandering_ as an unplanned movement within a workplace, rather than a plan where employees expect a visit from managers at more systematic, pre-approved or scheduled times.
> 
> ...


Much ink was spilled over this recently in the public sphere, following Zelensky's and his generals' visits to the frontline.



Underway said:


> As an OOW you were expected to visit the MCR and OPS to get their input as to what was going on before you get to the bridge to do a turnover.
> 
> That way when you got your turnover on the bridge it wasn't new info that you were down a DA or you had to find some time in the watch to de-coke the generator, and you can catch things in your turnover that are incorrect.
> 
> *If you were running late you could cheat and skip one, but you were not supposed to be running late.*


All too common sadly. When ''running late'' becomes the standard... MCR gets skipped, upperdecks get skipped, CCR gets skipped... I try to tighten that screw where possible.


Underway said:


> Part of the problem is that the CO needs to be able to quickly be contacted by the OOW for contact reports and by OPS for similar.  So some won't travel far from their cabin, OPS or CCR.


MCR was usually the 3rd call. (Depends on the CO, of course)


----------



## TacticalTea (4 Jul 2022)

Back on the CO relieved topic (though not HAL, but REG):

Can now confirm he reported himself, and the issue is not criminal in nature. (am being deliberate with what I say and do not say)


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> Just give the captured sailors rum and watch the yarns pour out... lol


Did someone say “pirates “ arrrrrr matey. 😉


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (5 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Back on the CO relieved topic (though not HAL, but REG):
> 
> Can now confirm he reported himself, and the issue is not criminal in nature. (am being deliberate with what I say and do not say)


LMAO can the Navy not go ashore for more than five seconds and not have an alcohol incident 😁


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> LMAO can the Navy not go ashore for more than five seconds and not have an alcohol incident 😁


The Army is no better. Two Noble Prize candidates rented a car in Croatia thinking they could go into Serbia - in 1993. The car was seized.

In 1997 two future CAFCWOs (facetious) thought they could climb the wire and go drinking with their civilian employees - Bosnians.

In either case it did not work out well.


----------



## FSTO (5 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Back on the CO relieved topic (though not HAL, but REG):
> 
> Can now confirm he reported himself, and the issue is not criminal in nature. (am being deliberate with what I say and do not say)


On SM it was “burn the witch!” from the uninformed


----------



## Underway (5 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> The Army is no better. Two Noble Prize candidates rented a car in Croatia thinking they could go into Serbia - in 1993. The car was seized.
> 
> In 1997 two future CAFCWOs (facetious) thought they could climb the wire and go drinking with their civilian employees - Bosnians.
> 
> In either case it did not work out well.


You need to combine the two.  Have the Airborne do some "time off" on Protecteur from Somalia.  Three beers in the mess and you had guys climbing the mast refusing to get down, and sailors had to go up to help them safely down.  This also started the policy of bridge rifles being locked up, and the ammo separated.


----------



## Grimey (5 Jul 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Similarly when there is a big repair on usually the COs will stick their head in for morale support and tell the team they are doing a good job. For especially difficult jobs or risky ones in hard to access spots was also useful to show the CO's the location so they would understand why you were recommending to not do it at sea (or at least wait til things calm down)


Just prior to RIMPAC 98 on HUR, we were doing an HSI on the port FT4.  The new (to 280s) MSEO and CO came down for a look.  One glance at the split casing with the combuster cans and half the inlet guide vanes out has their eyes as big as pie plates.
EO:  Er, can you put it back together?
Me: Hopefully


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Jul 2022)

Grimey said:


> Just prior to RIMPAC 98 on HUR, we were doing an HSI on the port FT4.  The new (to 280s) MSEO and CO came down for a look.  One glance at the split casing with the combuster cans and half the inlet guide vanes out has their eyes as big as pie plates.
> EO:  Er, can you put it back together?
> Me: Hopefully


Good Army Leaders are similar with respect to repairs that are concerning

In 1997 the entire fleet of AVGPs were grounded for a short time due to a steering gearbox being defective.  The Colonel commanding the mission in Bosnia dropped in at about 2000 hours to see how we were and what the issue was. After our ET explained it the Col thanked us and went on his way. Yes we were impressed. To top it all off I think he was a Gunner....


----------



## rmc_wannabe (5 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Good Army Leaders are similar with respect to repairs that are concerning
> 
> In 1997 the entire fleet of AVGPs were grounded for a short time due to a steering gearbox being defective.  The Colonel commanding the mission in Bosnia dropped in at about 2000 hours to see how we were and what the issue was. After our ET explained it the Col thanked us and went on his way. Yes we were impressed. To top it all off I think he was a Gunner....


The best leaders I have worked for admit what they don't know and put trust into those underneath them that do.

Most of my job is confusing as shit to people within my own Corps, let alone some of the people force employing us. As much as I can explain it to you, I can't understand it for you. Being able to say "what's up? How long are we down for? Is there anything I can do to help?" is exactly what's needed from higher when shit breaks. 

Yelling over Cpl/S1 Bloggins while they're trying to unfuck the problem doesn't make rounds get on target any faster.


----------



## TacticalTea (5 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> On SM it was “burn the witch!” from the uninformed


Yeah.

As expected. 

Looking at corporate and academic organizations, I can say, as an active participant in this system, that the CAF comparably treats HISB incidents pretty damn well, with empathy for both the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator.

Also, as a senior officer commenting on the case said; in any other organization, this would be a nothing burger. But military command is unique and carries expectations particular to the job.


----------



## Dana381 (5 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> Back on the CO relieved topic (though not HAL, but REG):
> 
> Can now confirm he reported himself, and the issue is not criminal in nature. (am being deliberate with what I say and do not say)





Humphrey Bogart said:


> LMAO can the Navy not go ashore for more than five seconds and not have an alcohol incident 😁



I feel like I am the only one here who doesn't know what is going on. I don't know how to read between the lines on this one. What could the man have done that would have him lose his job but isn't criminal? I would think it would have to be something pretty serious.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (5 Jul 2022)

MilEME09 said:


> Hey, it was taco Tuesday, and two for 1 margaritas at the hotel, of course they won't be on station? It's called operational planning, you plan around all the specials at the hotel. Wednesday is meat loaf night? Yep let's go on patrol



That’s not even remotely accurate…

Tacos are *NOT* worth planning missions around.   The crab dip at the Outrigger Reef Resort in Waikiki…ya, I would be willing to CNX for that…😁


----------



## Eye In The Sky (5 Jul 2022)

dimsum said:


> I'm convinced that Kuwaiti local ATC was more of a threat than Daesh.



Muhhallub!  😂


----------



## Eye In The Sky (5 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> While underway with Sea Training, ST makes a point of stopping random sailors and asking if they know anything about what's going on, where we are and what were doing.  Their findings are provided and improvments are to be made.
> 
> Also the IMO/IMD are constantly filling inboxes with updates and goings on ect ect.
> 
> ...



What’s “the flex”?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 Jul 2022)

Eye In The Sky said:


> What’s “the flex”?


The ship’s internal daily schedule.

So called, because it ends up being pretty flexible…


----------



## Eye In The Sky (6 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> The ship’s internal daily schedule.
> 
> So called, because it ends up being pretty flexible…


 Tks!  

“Flexibility is the key to air power, and indecision is the key to flexibility”


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (6 Jul 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> While underway with Sea Training, ST makes a point of stopping random sailors and asking if they know anything about what's going on, where we are and what were doing.  Their findings are provided and improvments are to be made.
> 
> Also the IMO/IMD are constantly filling inboxes with updates and goings on ect ect.
> 
> ...


I've tried telling the Navy that we have these things called TVs.  You can actually mount them to bulkheads, it's pretty handy.

There is also this program called Microsoft Outlook.  Unlike Excel, it lives in the Cloud and will automatically update whenever changes are made and everyone can see it.  You could plug a SHIPLAN computer in to a TV and have the Flex avail on Outlook for all to see.....

I know.....  crazy talk 😄


----------



## Eye In The Sky (6 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I've tried telling the Navy that we have these things called TVs.  You can actually mount them to bulkheads, it's pretty handy.
> 
> There is also this program called Microsoft Outlook.  Unlike Excel, it lives in the Cloud and will automatically update whenever changes are made and everyone can see it.  You could plug a SHIPLAN computer in to a TV and have the Flex avail on Outlook for all to see.....
> 
> I know.....  crazy talk 😄



Not sure about other fleets, but in LRP we usually have 3 big TVs in Sqn Ops;  2 to display the current and next weeks FLYPRO/schedule and 1 below to display the Sqn pers matrix (what obligations each flyer etc has the next 3 weeks).

Not having that up and on in Ops is as weird as if someone was standing in Ops in an Elvis costume.  

when we fly we have instant access to almost all available info at any tactical station and we are always a short walk to one if something starts happening  (Eg - we’re in the galley destroying a sandwich).

I couldn’t imagine going days on end not knowing where we are or what we are doing.  Weird and uncomfortable to me…


----------



## dimsum (6 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I've tried telling the Navy that we have these things called TVs.  You can actually mount them to bulkheads, it's pretty handy.
> 
> There is also this program called Microsoft Outlook.  Unlike Excel, it lives in the Cloud and will automatically update whenever changes are made and everyone can see it.  You could plug a SHIPLAN computer in to a TV and have the Flex avail on Outlook for all to see.....
> 
> I know.....  crazy talk 😄


Uh, they don't have TVs mounted to bulkheads in the CPFs?  MCDVs have those in the Wardroom, C/POs, and Main Cave.  

The idea of the Flex on TV is pretty cool though.  Put up a nice screensaver of PAO shots from the deployment too.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (6 Jul 2022)

dimsum said:


> Uh, they don't have TVs mounted to bulkheads in the CPFs?  MCDVs have those in the Wardroom, C/POs, and Main Cave.
> 
> The idea of the Flex on TV is pretty cool though.  Put up a nice screensaver of PAO shots from the deployment too.


Oh they do, they just don't use them for anything 😉

I know, revolutionary ideas here, using Outlook for it's intended purpose instead of a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet.  

You can even print Outlook Calendars 😁 and have them all fancy and colour coded.

I'm willing to bet a decade from now that we still use Excel Spreadsheets to display a schedule.  Hundreds of years of tradition unencumbered by progress 😁


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Jul 2022)

Actually I’d like to see Elvis in your Ops Room. Thank you thank you very much….hey mama


----------



## stoker dave (6 Jul 2022)

Eye In The Sky said:


> I couldn’t imagine going days on end not knowing where we are or what we are doing.


It was good enough for Nelson's Navy to keep the crew in the dark. 

The struggle here is against history and tradition with perhaps some 'classism'.  Bravo to those who are working to keep everyone well informed.


----------



## Lumber (6 Jul 2022)

Dana381 said:


> I feel like I am the only one here who doesn't know what is going on. I don't know how to read between the lines on this one. What could the man have done that would have him lose his job but isn't criminal? I would think it would have to be something pretty serious.


Are we still talking about the Regina CO?  I'm not sure. This thread is now 9 pages long but only the first 2.5 pages are about the HAL CO which is the title of this thread. Anyway, if youre asking about the REG CO, then I also don't know what actually happened, but if I was to guess, it would be that it would be either:
1. his performance as CO was simply not up to standard;
2. his attitude/personality was considered toxic (i.e. they saw the damage he was doing to his unit without actually committing chargeable offences); or
3. he had a_ consensual-non-consensual _relationship with a subordinate.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 Jul 2022)

stoker dave said:


> It was good enough for Nelson's Navy to keep the crew in the dark.
> 
> The struggle here is against history and tradition with perhaps some 'classism'.  Bravo to those who are working to keep everyone well informed.


That is the thing- keeping the crew in the dark was never a thing in Nelson’s Navy. When you are in a sailing ship of 1000 tonnes with hundreds of your closest “friends“ doing 6 kts, everybody knew everything about what was going on. Especially if there was even the faintest hint that a prize might be taken. RN ships of the Napoleonic period had harsh discipline compared to the mid 1700s, due to the rapid expansion and vast quantities of impressed landsmen onboard, but it was still remarkably egalitarian compared to the rest of British Society (and the period before that was even more egalitarian with almost no harsh discipline. Professional seamen are valuable- you don’t flog them at the drop of a hat) . All of the Officers had come up from midships, with a very long apprenticeship/tutelage under the watchful eye of the very hands they would later command.

Getting to my point: I think modern NWO training and education is broken. As short of people as we are, I think NWOs need to spend a reasonably significant time learning how ships run from the bottom up, living as cadets being supervised in many tasks by MS and P2s, before moving on to the more esoteric and purely NWO skills. When you do things that way, the pricks are less likely to get through (the NCMs get a vote) and it is embedded into each officer what the conditions are for the crew.


----------



## FSTO (6 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> That is the thing- keeping the crew in the dark was never a thing in Nelson’s Navy. When you are in a sailing ship of 1000 tonnes with hundreds of your closest “friends“ doing 6 kts, everybody knew everything about what was going on. Especially if there was even the faintest hint that a prize might be taken. RN ships of the Napoleonic period had harsh discipline compared to the mid 1700s, due to the rapid expansion and vast quantities of impressed landsmen onboard, but it was still remarkably egalitarian compared to the rest of British Society (and the period before that was even more egalitarian with almost no harsh discipline. Professional seamen are valuable- you don’t flog them at the drop of a hat) . All of the Officers had come up from midships, with a very long apprenticeship/tutelage under the watchful eye of the very hands they would later command.
> 
> Getting to my point: I think modern NWO training and education is broken. As short of people as we are, I think NWOs need to spend a reasonably significant time learning how ships run from the bottom up, living as cadets being supervised in many tasks by MS and P2s, before moving on to the more esoteric and purely NWO skills. When you do things that way, the pricks are less likely to get through (the NCMs get a vote) and it is embedded into each officer what the conditions are for the crew.


We had a pretty good system with 4 squadron but it was unsustainable in the end. We have never really replaced that capability.


----------



## Dana381 (6 Jul 2022)

Lumber said:


> Are we still talking about the Regina CO?  I'm not sure. This thread is now 9 pages long but only the first 2.5 pages are about the HAL CO which is the title of this thread. Anyway, if youre asking about the REG CO, then I also don't know what actually happened, but if I was to guess, it would be that it would be either:
> 1. his performance as CO was simply not up to standard;
> 2. his attitude/personality was considered toxic (i.e. they saw the damage he was doing to his unit without actually committing chargeable offences); or
> 3. he had a_ consensual-non-consensual _relationship with a subordinate.



I was asking about both/either. Thanks for the reply. I understand a little better now. Does this kind of info usually become public eventually or do they keep it pretty quiet?


----------



## TacticalTea (6 Jul 2022)

Dana381 said:


> I was asking about both/either. Thanks for the reply. I understand a little better now. Does this kind of info usually become public eventually or do they keep it pretty quiet?


As a CO, you can't have a romantic relationship or interaction with a subordinate, even if consensual.


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> As a CO, you can't have a romantic relationship or interaction with a subordinate, even if consensual.



But a Brigade Commander can be married to his Bde Adjutant, with whom he's had three kids, right?


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> But a Brigade Commander can be married to his Bde Adjutant, with whom he's had three kids, right?


----------



## TacticalTea (6 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> But a Brigade Commander can be married to his Bde Adjutant, with whom he's had three kids, right?


It is traditional for the officer of an MCDV to date a sailor from another MCDV until they get shuffled onto the same boat and realize it makes no sense!


----------



## Navy_Pete (6 Jul 2022)

I like how Nelson's great strategic advantage was actually having a plan ahead of time that he shared with his other ship's captains, and then executing it.

I wish I lived in an era where simply talking to people made you a strategic genius.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Jul 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> It is traditional for the officer of an MCDV to date a sailor from another MCDV until they get shuffled onto the same boat and realize it makes no sense!


If you want incestuous, go work for BC Ferries


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 Jul 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> If you want incestuous, go work for BC Ferries


Come on! That Island was uncharted! It jumped out of nowhere in front of that ferry!


----------



## Grimey (6 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Come on! That Island was uncharted! It jumped out of nowhere in front of that ferry!


Right at the gravey strokes too, dammit!


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Come on! That Island was uncharted! It jumped out of nowhere in front of that ferry!


Bow-chicka-wow-wow…


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Jul 2022)

[/QUOTE]





SeaKingTacco said:


> Come on! That Island was uncharted! It jumped out of nowhere in front of that ferry!



What are you doing, step-ferry?


----------



## Underway (7 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> The ship’s internal daily schedule.
> 
> So called, because it ends up being pretty flexible…


I thought it was supposed to stand for Fleet Exercise, but your interpretation has long supplanted that acronym.  I don't think people know it as an acronym anymore its been used so much as a label.



Dana381 said:


> What could the man have done that would have him lose his job but isn't criminal? I would think it would have to be something pretty serious.


There are a large number of things that it could be.  Financial discrepancies, unreported relationships, non-military civil/criminal investigation, abuse of authority, odd/unusual behavior that raised concerns, inability to perform duties, and other things I can't think of right now.

At the end of the day, a Command appointment is about the* trust the Admiral has in that Commanding Officer*.  Anything that could cause the loss of that trust can be cause for removal of that Command.  And since trust is subjective it varies between relationships the reasons for removal vary as well.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Jul 2022)

Lots of money and resources go into making a Navy Captain (as well as other COs +). 

There is an epidemic of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), non-transparency, and covering behavior up in the CAF.  The sexual misconduct has cost taxpayers at least $2Billion.

Do tax payers have a right to know why us highly paid government employees would lose our job?


----------



## dapaterson (7 Jul 2022)

At least the RCN is announcing; the Army quietly pushes people out without mentioning it.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Lots of money and resources go into making a Navy Captain (as well as other COs +).
> 
> There is an epidemic of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), non-transparency, and covering behavior up in the CAF.  The sexual misconduct has cost taxpayers at least $2Billion.
> 
> Do tax payers have a right to know why us highly paid government employees would lose our job?


I think they do.


----------



## Ostrozac (7 Jul 2022)

dapaterson said:


> At least the RCN is announcing; the Army quietly pushes people out without mentioning it.


The Army used to officially define its own centre of gravity as “institutional credibility” — many interpret that as doing anything you can to avoid airing dirty laundry in public.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Jul 2022)

Ostrozac said:


> The Army used to officially define its own centre of gravity as “institutional credibility” — many interpret that as doing anything you can to avoid airing dirty laundry in public.



Arbour described it nicely:

“The long-established way of doing business in the CAF is anchored in operational imperatives that are often nothing more than assumptions. One of the dangers of the model under which the CAF continues to operate is the high likelihood that some of its members are more at risk of harm, on a day to day basis, from their comrades than from the enemy. This must change.” Canada’s military a ‘broken system’ that’s a ‘liability’ to the country, report finds - National | Globalnews.ca

Which kind of reminded me of this movie:


----------



## Underway (7 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Lots of money and resources go into making a Navy Captain (as well as other COs +).
> 
> There is an epidemic of sexual misconduct (including sexual assault), non-transparency, and covering behavior up in the CAF.  The sexual misconduct has cost taxpayers at least $2Billion.
> 
> Do tax payers have a right to know why us highly paid government employees would lose our job?


He hasn't lost a job, he's lost a position.  Is that the same thing?  There haven't been any charges laid.  Until then investigation is ongoing.

In order to do this properly they will need to make another announcement when the investigation reports its findings and if there are any charges/remedial action to follow.

I'm reminded of Cmdr Eric Lehre's situation where everything was done in public once the offences were known.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jul 2022)

Who wad the submarine captain who was IMO railroaded? 1994 or so?


----------



## FSTO (8 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Who wad the submarine captain who was IMO railroaded? 1994 or so?


Dean Marsaw (sic)
I’m good friends with one of the officers abused. Dean wasn't railroaded.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (8 Jul 2022)

FSTO said:


> Dean Marsaw (sic)
> I’m good friends with one of the officers abused. Dean wasn't railroaded.


Yah, I think the sick prick was the one doing the railroading.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Yah, I think the sick prick was the one doing the railroading.


I see what you did, there…


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Jul 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I see what you did, there…


Shhhh, SKT.  It’s all about him at the moment…



HB: 😛


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Jul 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> Who wad the submarine captain who was IMO railroaded? 1994 or so?


Roger gotcha thanks for setting me straight


----------



## KevinB (8 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Yah, I think the sick prick was the one doing the railroading.


Was that the guy putting cigar tubes up folks rectums?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (8 Jul 2022)

KevinB said:


> Was that the guy putting cigar tubes up folks rectums?


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Jul 2022)

KevinB said:


> Was that the guy putting cigar tubes up folks rectums?


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jul 2022)

Underway said:


> He hasn't lost a job, he's lost a position.  Is that the same thing?



That's true, he still has his a job. That point might be lost on the the public though. A Captain of a navy ship was fired from being a Captain of a navy ship, so what are we going to pay him $130,000 a year to do?

The Navy has come a far way transparency wise, but is it far enough? Do they need to go father?

I'm not sure we need to communicate everything we do to the public just so Joe Dirt from Twitter can get their two cents in on how we should do our business. 

Then again, there seems to be some times where the CAF's response has been  "it's not a big deal" and the public said "yes, actually it is a big deal". Cue senior leaders apologizing for not getting it. So maybe we do need to be babysat by the public.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (8 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> That's true, he still has his a job. That point might be lost on the the public though. A Captain of a navy ship was fired from being a Captain of a navy ship, so what are we going to pay him $130,000 a year to do?
> 
> The Navy has come a far way transparency wise, but is it far enough? Do they need to go father?
> 
> ...


This is one thing that doesn't make sense in the CAF.  If you screw up so bad that you lose Command, you probably shouldn't be collecting that big fat salary anymore and should be shown the door.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> This is one thing that doesn't make sense in the CAF.  If you screw up so bad that you lose Command, you probably shouldn't be collecting that big fat salary anymore and should be shown the door.


Disagree.  Some folks are damn good staff officers but sucked/would suck as CO.  Sometimes, the system pushes those great staff officer onto the succession plan to their detriment.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (8 Jul 2022)

Just a small point of vocab, Jarnhammar. While Captain is a colloquialism for any person heading a ship's crew, the actual designation for a commissioned vessel is Commanding Officer (CO) and for a military but not commissioned vessel (such as the Orca) the designation is Officer in Charge (OIC). In the merchant services, the designation is Master.

Therefore, your "A Captain of a navy ship was fired from being a Captain of a navy ship" could be rendered as "A ship's Commanding Officer was removed from command".

Sorry, I know, Pedantic. I plead the fifth.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jul 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> This is one thing that doesn't make sense in the CAF.  If you screw up so bad that you lose Command, you probably shouldn't be collecting that big fat salary anymore and should be shown the door.


Probably have to leverage it against what we can afford to lose. I've seen officers and SNCOs that "weren't allowed to be in charge of troops". Incompetence driven, not medically.

A couple years ago I cross paths with FSA Sergeant who didn't want to sergeant anymore. His job was photocopying paper, pulling staples out of paper, and shredding paper. If it was up to me I'd demote him to private. Maybe we should have a pte/2lt payscale for people who can't do their job (without a medical reason).


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Probably have to leverage it against what we can afford to lose. I've seen officers and SNCOs that "weren't allowed to be in charge of troops". Incompetence driven, not medically.
> 
> A couple years ago I cross paths with FSA Sergeant who didn't want to sergeant anymore. His job was photocopying paper, pulling staples out of paper, and shredding paper. If it was up to me I'd demote him to private. Maybe we should have a pte/2lt payscale for people who can't do their job (without a medical reason).



Or get rid of them, like most other organizations do with chronically poor performers.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Or get rid of them, like most other organizations do with chronically poor performers.


But most organizations don't look down on those who don't want to 'go higher" like they are the scum of the earth.  Lets face it, stay in long enough and almost everyone is one step above their competency level, and a lot of times not from choice.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (8 Jul 2022)

SupersonicMax said:


> Disagree.  Some folks are damn good staff officers but sucked/would suck as CO.  Sometimes, the system pushes those great staff officer onto the succession plan to their detriment.


Then they shouldn't have been there in the first place.  Let's be honest as well, very few COs (almost none in fact) get removed for "Performance" issues.  (Because performance really doesn't actually matter for the most part in the CAF).

They do get removed for "Conduct" issues though and they should be sent packing if they are found to be complacent to poor conduct.



Jarnhamar said:


> Probably have to leverage it against what we can afford to lose. I've seen officers and SNCOs that "weren't allowed to be in charge of troops". Incompetence driven, not medically.
> 
> A couple years ago I cross paths with FSA Sergeant who didn't want to sergeant anymore. His job was photocopying paper, pulling staples out of paper, and shredding paper. If it was up to me I'd demote him to private. Maybe we should have a pte/2lt payscale for people who can't do their job (without a medical reason).


If someone is garbage at their job, it would be better if they weren't even there 😉.  

If an Officer gets removed from Command or the organization determines they aren't a fit for whatever reason, they should just resign and go do something else.

If I was removed from Command or had some other slight committed against me I would personally consider it an attack on my honour and would resign out of principle.


----------



## Dana381 (9 Jul 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> That's true, he still has his a job. That point might be lost on the the public though. A Captain of a navy ship was fired from being a Captain of a navy ship, so what are we going to pay him $130,000 a year to do?
> 
> The Navy has come a far way transparency wise, but is it far enough? Do they need to go father?
> 
> ...



Everybody needs accountability or bad shit happens, the CAF apparently hasn't had enough lately.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Or get rid of them, like most other organizations (_those on the public payroll in most Western countries being notable exceptions_) do with chronically poor performers.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Jul 2022)

Dana381 said:


> Everybody needs accountability or bad shit happens, the CAF apparently hasn't had enough lately.



In contrast, I just saw this in the news. Suncor seems to be flexing their accountability muscles these days:


Suncor says president and CEO Mark Little has stepped down​
Suncor Energy Inc. chief executive Mark Little has stepped down as president and chief executive officer and resigned from its board of directors just one day after the company announced its oilsands operations have suffered another workplace fatality.

Little’s departure is effective immediately, the Calgary-based energy company said in a release Friday.

“Suncor is committed to achieving safety and operational excellence across our business, and we must acknowledge where we have fallen short and recognize the critical need for change,” said board chair Michael Wilson.

On Thursday, Suncor announced that a contractor had been killed at its Base Mine north of Fort McMurray, Alta., the latest in a string of workplace deaths and safety incidents that have plagued the energy giant. Since 2014, there have been at least 12 deaths at Suncor sites, more than all of its oilsands rivals combined.










						Suncor says president and CEO Mark Little has stepped down  | Globalnews.ca
					

Suncor Energy says Mark Little has stepped down as president and chief executive officer and resigned from the board of directors, effective immediately.




					globalnews.ca


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (9 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> In contrast, I just saw this in the news. Suncor seems to be flexing their accountability muscles these days:
> 
> 
> Suncor says president and CEO Mark Little has stepped down​
> ...


Suncor has really crapped the bed the past couple of years.  They should be making money hand over fist at the moment but have underperformed in a number of ways given their position and advantages they have over their competitors.

Cdn Natural Resources has performed far better and given better value for their shareholders over the past few years.


----------



## Dana381 (9 Jul 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> In contrast, I just saw this in the news. Suncor seems to be flexing their accountability muscles these days:
> 
> 
> Suncor says president and CEO Mark Little has stepped down​
> ...



12 Deaths since 2014 is unthinkable, I'm glad someone is being held accountable. As much as I would like to see someone charged with negligent homicide these problems usually happen when the company wide safety culture erodes. This erosion is usually the result of many bad decisions by many different people over a long period of time. When safety culture gets corrupted and lazy it usually takes a big shakeup to correct things. Hopefully this shakeup works and they turn around their safety practices.


----------

