Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 > Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page |
PPRuNe Forums(https://www.pprune.org/)
- Military Aviation(https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
- - Royal Navy - Do they have a future?(https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/309581-royal-navy-do-they-have-future.html)
| The Helpful Stacker | 29th Jul 2009 06:14 |
Modern Elmo - The RN could hardly be expected to do that. Such operations would severly hinder the supply of that essential RN boarding party equipment, the iPod. They'd have to re-write their conduct after capture procedures to remove "cry like girl when nasty Iranian takes your Britney Spears" to "push (very) rough, female-shaped munter forward to take one for the team."
| GPMG | 29th Jul 2009 06:55 |
FtR,
when you were advised that the Royal Marines were not part of the Royal Navy and were in fact part of this fantasy 'Naval Service'. Did the Major and Sgt Major say anything along the lines of 'Reet-Deet-Deet'?
You have been had on a 'bight' (a wind up) something military personnel are very fond of and rather good at, and in my experience, especially Bootnecks. Your posts are now looking like either a successful fishing trip or they are dripping with ignorance.
I am telling you as an ex Bootneck: The Royal Marines are part of the Royal Navy.
By the way, having multiple accounts just marks you out as an idiot, top tip, delete FtR and any other accounts except one. Use that one account to make informed comment, ask questions etc. And when given the facts by those who know better than you, wind your neck in. Oh and enjoy banter.
| GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU | 29th Jul 2009 08:03 |
Chaps, I do rather think that some other chaps are being rather beastly to Fear The Reaper. In fairness, irrespective of any incipient bipolar disorder, that House of Commons link is titled
Annex A
NAVAL SERVICE REPORT
That said, it is a report on equal opportunities and will have been written in finest Neddyspeak. He also mentioned BR2. Ive just checked my current copy and, bugger I down dead, hes right there too. CHAPTER 1 COMPOSITION OF THE NAVAL SERVICE AND JURISDICTION OF QRRN Anyway Mr Fear The Reaper, nobody (OK, theres bound to be one!) in 1SLs empire speaks of the Naval Service and it does not appear in any Naval family tree type organisation charts. What does shine through is that the Royal Marines are considered to be firmly an element of Her Majestys Navy. In new Beanspeak, they are in the RN TLB.
| Navaleye | 29th Jul 2009 11:32 |
The term "Naval Service" is an administrative term not an operational one so you are all correct. The RM is subordinate to the RN.
| GPMG | 29th Jul 2009 11:45 |
Unless you lot mutiny again...;)
| Gainesy | 29th Jul 2009 11:53 |
Grenade!!!:)
When did those sneaky Wafu gits drop the last five words from "Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Air Force"?:E
| x213a | 29th Jul 2009 13:28 |
Also worth mentioning - Booties carry RN ID cards. Different format of service number though.
When a bootneck detachment is deployed on a ship they assume the next rank up - apparently.
| airborne_artist | 29th Jul 2009 13:38 |
When a bootneck detachment is deployed on a ship they assume the next rank up - apparently.
Not sure about that?
| x213a | 29th Jul 2009 13:40 |
I read it somewhere. Cant say I ever saw a booty Sgt trying to pull rank on a chief though.
edit:
Just found this:
The Royal Marines rank alongside their army equivalents. However, when borne on the books of any of HM Ships or Naval Establishments Royal Marines are subject to the Naval Discipline Act 1957; in those circ*mstances, many officer ranks in the Royal Marines formerly enjoyed greater status. Second Lieutenants were equivalent to Sub Lieutenants and ranks from Lieutenant to Major were considered equivalent to one rank higher (OF-2 to OF-4). Lieutenant Colonels were considered equivalent to RN Captains with less than six years in the rank, and Colonels were equivalent to Captains with more than six years seniority. Higher ranks followed the equivalence on the table above. This state of affairs ended on 1 July 1999, when Royal Marine officer ranks were fully aligned with those of the Army.
| Yeoman_dai | 29th Jul 2009 13:51 |
The most important thing people always forget about this British Armed Forces Naval/Land/Air command, is...
the uniforms.
What form will they take? The colour and everything is also very important... and the ranks/rank slides?
See this is far more important than any other discussion, as looking ally as f*ck in front of our allies is more imortant than operational efficiancy!
Answers on a postcard please
| x213a | 29th Jul 2009 14:13 |
The uniform does not matter - just as long as correct back pocket discipline is observed.
| Mech one | 30th Jul 2009 02:49 |
Mech one
What an interesting lot you all are. Squabbling about seniority, relative merits of each service, lower deck lawyer-speak, etc., reminds me of a discussion most likely to have taken place in the NAAFI half an hour after tot time. If you know what a 'tot time' is.
Had an enjoyable afternoon at Buck House recently, that was a weird experience...women in matelots uniforms?..WRNS Officers dressed up like proper officers?..cap tallies without an HMS with something about Joint Forces?..is that the way my Navy has gone?
You leave the service in good hands and forty years later you pop back and wonder what the hell has happened? and Gunners Mates walking around with bits of timber under their arms..I ask you!
Oh dear, Please tell me I was only dreaming...:rolleyes:
| sweep complete | 30th Jul 2009 14:25 |
Royal Navy - Do they have a future?
The RN is no more than a few war canoes, and increasingly irrelevant in todays ops. Do they have a future, or should we redirect the funding to bits of the military that are relevant?
Do the UK Armed forces need idiots who spout off with nonsense like this in their ever diminishing numbers? What a :mad:
| GPMG | 30th Jul 2009 14:43 |
Sweep, is the UK armed Forces made up of people like you that go off half co*cked with no research or having not seen all of the data? I hope not.
Here is a hint, read the post at the top of this page which was written by the same poster.
Neck wound in?? There's lovely, isn't it?
| Mick Strigg | 30th Jul 2009 15:20 |
GPMG - the phrase "sweep complete" is normally followed by the words "no echoes".
'Nuff said?
| cornish-stormrider | 30th Jul 2009 16:24 |
No we do not need a navy, same as we do not need an army or an Aunty Betty's flying club (pip pip)
What we need is half a dozen nuclear powered super robots - covered in adamantium armour with plasma cannons and a damage modifier of +12.
Two to cover the home front, two to cover the diplomamcy and walking around being "ally" and two to be in the sh**ty parts of the world giving the Taleban a good hiding. They could all be controlled by ex RAF engineers - the only people with the reflexes and skillset to cope - all those hours spent playing x-box and PS3 have been well spent
Until this momentous day dawns I would like:
Loud pointy chariots driven by arrogant skygod types.
Big mean Booties
Large, medium and small war canoes, co*cktail parties - for the hosting of
Lots of PBI
The "Bomber" as the navy so quaintly call it.
A huge amount of AT, SH, AH, and all the acronyms that come with having a properly supported and equipped purple force, drawn from 3 (and a bit) individual forces
and not forgetting some money in the pot to pay for this all.
Now, which dream is closer to being realised.....?
| Mech one | 30th Jul 2009 17:11 |
Mech one
It is all very well arguing about the value of the Navy as opposed to the RAF ad nauseum but have you had a look at what the brown jobs are up to?...they have over 20 squadrons of ac currently and had only one when I was on loan to them. Sneaky eh? Fisheads and Crabfats beware, redundancy beckons.
| Fear The Reaper | 30th Jul 2009 18:11 |
Right, I'm still trying to track down a copy of Naval QRs on the Defence Intranet - stand fast the final "Q.E.D." answer.
In the interim, here is a link to the Defence Analytical Services Agency - a part of MoD which breaks down the 3 services. It clearly says "NAVAL SERVICE" not RN or RM but "NAVAL SERVICE"...
UKDS 2006 - Chapter 2 - Personnel
I'll get on with the BR2 QR search and, as long as they are not RESTRICTED, I'll post the definative when I find it.
Reaper
PS. Tenacious, moi? ;)
| Union Jack | 30th Jul 2009 18:24 |
PPS More contumacious than tenacious, toi!:ok:
Jack
| Charlie Time | 30th Jul 2009 18:29 |
I thought Navaleye summed it up neatly.
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:44. | Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 > Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.
