Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Smokestack toppers?  (Read 4743 times)

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2008, 07:24:28 pm »

What I have experienced of the RFA is that it is more pusser than the RN, The Stena Sea spread was run by stena in the Falklands for the RN with 21 crew, the RFA renamed it as Dilliegence and manned it with 45 crew!!!!!
My later comments were not aimed specifically at you...but your post was a bit "off the mark". BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2008, 07:30:20 pm »

.....on the other hand, two Seaforth PSV were taken over by the Admiralty for Falklands duties. The first thing they did was to build on two additional messes and accommodation and then up the manning from 10 to 34. My Lords also frowned on the use of the bow thruster on the grounds that it was unseamanlike..


See my other post. But where on earth did you get the quote that the use of bow thrusters was "unseamanlike"? Rafting up when you have a light ship with masses of power and twin screws is not really a problem. A heavy ship with a single screw can have problems. You should know that! BY.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2008, 09:50:24 pm »

Bryan, PSV also work a 24-hour work cycle while under the Red Duster and which "non-mariners" are you referring to?

Barry M
Logged

Bunkerbarge

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,370
  • Location: Halifax, UK
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2008, 11:12:03 pm »

Gents, Lets try not to get too far into the weeds with this and remember the initial question, which seems to be a bit forgotten now.

Lets also remember that the Merchant Navy and the Royal Navy are both institutions that we should all remain proud of and both of which do thier jobs in thier own different but extreemly competent manner.

I am proud to be a product of the British Merchant Navy and I also have the highest regard and respect for those who work under the White Duster.  Long may we both support each other.

Logged
"Dirty British coaster with a salt-caked smoke stack, Butting through the Channel in the mad March days"

BarryM

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Location: West Lothian
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2008, 09:34:43 am »

.....on the other hand, two Seaforth PSV were taken over by the Admiralty for Falklands duties. The first thing they did was to build on two additional messes and accommodation and then up the manning from 10 to 34. My Lords also frowned on the use of the bow thruster on the grounds that it was unseamanlike..


See my other post. But where on earth did you get the quote that the use of bow thrusters was "unseamanlike"? Rafting up when you have a light ship with masses of power and twin screws is not really a problem. A heavy ship with a single screw can have problems. You should know that! BY.

"Where on earth" was actually the master of one of the Seaforth vessels noted and if ships do not need bowthrusters for demanding manoeuvring then the owners of  a huge number of vessels have thrown their money overboard.  Use what you have instead of mumping about sails being phased out in favour of steam.

My point was that two PSV built for offshore use were able to cope with 10 men to meet the high demands of their service . For this size of crew there was no demarcation of messes which obviously was unacceptable to the RN and so additional messes for officers, CPO and ratings  were installed. Increased crew numbers also meant that the cabins had to be increased. This in turn reduced the cargo-carrying capacity.  End result? No increase in efficiency, a reduction in carrying capacity and a drain on manpower which could probably be used elsewhere.
Logged

Bryan Young

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,893
  • Location: Whitley Bay
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2008, 05:14:41 pm »

.....on the other hand, two Seaforth PSV were taken over by the Admiralty for Falklands duties. The first thing they did was to build on two additional messes and accommodation and then up the manning from 10 to 34. My Lords also frowned on the use of the bow thruster on the grounds that it was unseamanlike..


See my other post. But where on earth did you get the quote that the use of bow thrusters was "unseamanlike"? Rafting up when you have a light ship with masses of power and twin screws is not really a problem. A heavy ship with a single screw can have problems. You should know that! BY.

"Where on earth" was actually the master of one of the Seaforth vessels noted and if ships do not need bowthrusters for demanding manoeuvring then the owners of  a huge number of vessels have thrown their money overboard.  Use what you have instead of mumping about sails being phased out in favour of steam.

My point was that two PSV built for offshore use were able to cope with 10 men to meet the high demands of their service . For this size of crew there was no demarcation of messes which obviously was unacceptable to the RN and so additional messes for officers, CPO and ratings  were installed. Increased crew numbers also meant that the cabins had to be increased. This in turn reduced the cargo-carrying capacity.  End result? No increase in efficiency, a reduction in carrying capacity and a drain on manpower which could probably be used elsewhere.
Barry, I really think you are wrong on all counts here; but in the interests of harmony and with no desire to get into an argument that will have no result I am withdrawing from this topic......unless someone else really gets up my nose! Cheers. Bryan.
Logged
Notes from a simple seaman

farrow

  • Guest
Re: Smokestack toppers?
« Reply #31 on: December 22, 2008, 11:03:34 pm »

The Dilligence crew, usually have a RN maintenance team aboard to work on the maintenance of other RN vessels. The crew only maintain their own vessel and usual shipboard services.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up