Jump to content


Photo

Hms Queen Elizabeth


  • Please log in to reply
333 replies to this topic

#41 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Looking at Tamarama Beach, Sydney, Aust
  • Interests:Degree in History and Politics. Interests are Military History, military models,

Posted 02 December 2014 - 0647 AM

When I looked at Wiki I notices something interesting.

 

The ship will have a normal average crew of about 670.  It will have 67 'catering staff'.  One cook for every ten crew members...

 

Now, the ship can accomodate up to 1400 crew / aircrew / (Royal) Marines but that is still a lot of cooks.



#42 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,831 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 02 December 2014 - 0742 AM

"Cooks". Uh-huh.

 

steven-seagal-casey-ryback-under-seige.j



#43 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Reading, Berkshire
  • Interests:Too many to list all, but include military, economic &technological history. And cycling.

Posted 02 December 2014 - 0752 AM

When I looked at Wiki I notices something interesting.

 

The ship will have a normal average crew of about 670.  It will have 67 'catering staff'.  One cook for every ten crew members...

 

Now, the ship can accomodate up to 1400 crew / aircrew / (Royal) Marines but that is still a lot of cooks.

They have other jobs. For example, one of my cousins was a navy cook. He spent a lot of time on mine watch in the Persian Gulf in January 1991 & February 1991, & after he retired (as a CPO, which I think is about as high as you can go in that line), got a job in fire safety, based on his RN training in that role.



#44 Charles

Charles

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,095 posts
  • Location:Highland's of Scotland
  • Interests:AFV, Military History

Posted 02 December 2014 - 0902 AM

I just want to know how many they have looking after the Wine Cellar. :)

Oh dear God, its the Port old bean, the port. :P .

BTT.

 

I believe the lack of trained crew for not just the RN's future F-35 airwings, but for simply manning vessels of the QE's size will hamper us for well into the 2020's.

 

Charles



#45 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,978 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 02 December 2014 - 0950 AM

Just press some of those asian men into the RN the old fashioned way. If there's enough to bolster ISIS, there's enough for the RN pressgangs. 



#46 Anixtu

Anixtu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Afloat

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1011 AM

It will have 67 'catering staff'.  One cook for every ten crew members...


"Catering staff" includes stewards as well as cooks.

#47 Anixtu

Anixtu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Afloat

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1025 AM

you can imagine the difficulties the Royal Australian Navy is having with our present government's apparent insistence on having the Camberra class LHD (27,000t) of being able to handle a small airwing of F-35 aircraft, on a ship too small to properly handle them, with no appropriate storage for aviation fuel or stores, and no maintance facilities,


I am struggling to imagine. Aren't those capabilities part of the design of the Spanish ship on which the Australian LHDs are based, in order to support its secondary role as a training carrier? Doesn't it have tanks for aviation fuel to support helicopter operations and maintenance spaces, and workshops for the same? And weapon magazines for the embarked land forces?

Does Australia now have a stated requirement for acquisition of F-35B?

#48 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,640 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1053 AM

Are some of hte complaints about the OZ ship part of the Carlo Kopp KoolAid?



#49 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,028 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1105 AM

The 67 cooks and stewards might include the portion contributed by the embarked troops/aviation det.

 

Aviation capable ships have fueling and limited avionics/servicing, but the aviation ordnance/servicing would be the most troublesome. If it has been designed for, then all right; after all it has the displacement of the original Essex Class CV of 1940.



#50 Anixtu

Anixtu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Afloat

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1504 PM

I considered the possibility that the 67 included embarked enhancements, but in the context of the source of the number, I think it is unlikely.

 

Embarkations usually do bring a steward or two and perhaps a cook, but not in proportion to the size of the embarking unit. The proportion of caterers in the ship's complement of a carrier or amphibious ship therefore has to be higher than on other types in order to absorb the increased workload of embarkations. 10% actually seems quite modest. I had SoCs for auxiliaries on hand for comparison and the proportion of cooks and stewards in the crew of those is typically 10-15%.



#51 mnm

mnm

    Plague doctor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,712 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where the sun doth shine!
  • Interests:Totally uninteresting.

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1716 PM

Perhaps those 10% also cater for the maintenance of those three excelsior Traditions of the Royal Navy and I'm not alluding to Faith, Hope and Charity. The detached service men and women of the USMC will live through interesting times.



#52 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,028 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 02 December 2014 - 1808 PM

Duty messmen , not cooks.

 

To explain further:

 

There remains a typical set of misconceptions that can cloud the experience of embarkation for all. This is the notion of some uninitiated Marines that the U.S. Navy exists primarily as a taxi service for Marines and should conduct itself in an appropriately service-oriented manner. Then, on the other extreme, are the occasional Navy personnel who think that Marines exist solely to inter­rupt a ship’s routine, clutter spaces, and make a mess of the paintwork on vehicle and cargo areas. Neither concept could fall farther from the truth. The amphibi­ous force and naval aviation doctrines of the Navy and Marine Corps team provide one of the most striking military capabilities of the history of warfare, primarily through the unique concepts of teamwork, cooperation, and integration that have evolved over decades of training and operations. Your first charge as an officer embark­ing with your troops must be to create an atmosphere of teamwork, demonstrate the desired symbiotic relationship with navy counterparts. Accordingly, be prepared to readdress ruthlessly all instances of real and pretended friction that can rise from untrained and inexperienced personnel reacting to the obvious conditions of shipboard life.

 

The CO of troops therefore functions with respect to the ship’s organization as another department head, reporting for the embarked detachments to the com­manding officer and executive officer of the ship. Musters, duty assignments, working parties, and the all-important needs of the troops for training and main­tenance support on board ship require much attention from the CO of troops. Many of the duties of the CO of troops also approximate those of the commander of the Marine Detachments of yesteryear, so your conduct places you equally at the forefront of tradition and an exemplar of Marine Corps virtues to our sister service.

Shipboard duties for Marine officers embarked with their units may include the following: team embarkation officer, ship’s platoon commander, troop officer of the day/guard officer, billeting officer, troop mess officer, officer’s mess treasurer, and troop communications officer. These and other requirements are made clear by the ship CO before embarkation occurs, mainly through liaison with the advance party that your unit will send to the ship. Your unit will pro­vide a standing working party (ship’s platoon), cooks, and messmen on a fair-­share basis to assist in the functioning of the ship, which will be your collective home for the period of embarkation.

 


Edited by Ken Estes, 03 December 2014 - 1312 PM.


#53 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,057 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 09 March 2015 - 0020 AM

198wk4syln6dnpng.png



#54 TonyE

TonyE

    I/Kitsap Militia

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,984 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:Them grate steal beest! and, there history.

Posted 09 March 2015 - 0828 AM

HMS Unexistent



#55 TonyE

TonyE

    I/Kitsap Militia

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,984 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:Them grate steal beest! and, there history.

Posted 09 March 2015 - 0832 AM

Perhaps those 10% also cater for the maintenance of those three excelsior Traditions of the Royal Navy and I'm not alluding to Faith, Hope and Charity. The detached service men and women of the USMC will live through interesting times.

 

Rum and the lash have been outlawed while the last has gained legal protection........ ^_^
 



#56 Lieste

Lieste

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 853 posts
  • Location:Bath, UK

Posted 11 March 2015 - 1354 PM

HMS Planned But Not Built.
HMS Fitted For Not With.
HMS Budget Cut.
HMS Bankers Tax Cut.



#57 Fritz

Fritz

    Master of Panzer

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WW2, armoured combat history, 3D CGI, motorsports

Posted 11 March 2015 - 1405 PM

HMS Rubber Ducky?



#58 TonyE

TonyE

    I/Kitsap Militia

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,984 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:Them grate steal beest! and, there history.

Posted 11 March 2015 - 1428 PM

HMS Plannedbutnotbuiltable.
HMS Fittedfornotwithable.
HMS Budgetcutable.
HMS Bankerstaxcutable.

 

Fixed it just a little to make it more RN. ;)
 



#59 mnm

mnm

    Plague doctor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,712 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where the sun doth shine!
  • Interests:Totally uninteresting.

Posted 11 March 2015 - 1715 PM

1945-I-feel-like-a-GuinnessI-wish-you-we



#60 TonyE

TonyE

    I/Kitsap Militia

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,984 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway
  • Interests:Them grate steal beest! and, there history.

Posted 14 March 2015 - 1508 PM

HMS Unfundable

HMS Exorbitant

HMS Taxcut

HMS Chancellor

 

We wont see a HMS Plenty again anytime soon. :(

 

HMS Indegalbraithable does have a nice ring to it though. :D
 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users