• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Navy working to increase enrollment and examine sailor workload

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,231
Points
1,090
Demolish Nelles Block ffs.
The replacement plan is in the works. Procurement delays are not unique to equipment.

Edit to add: Construction to start April of next year. If you know Naden it will b located in the area where the old drill shed used to be.
 
Last edited:

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,404
Points
1,040
CRCN needs to acknowledge to the government of the day the following:

Our ships need to be husbanded to last until 2035 at least;
Institute a plan to take 4 ships out of the rotation and go into a massive structural refit to ensure they are safe and capable for the next 15 years;
Crews from those 4 ships will be absorbed by the other 8 to enable a ship to sail with a full complement of qualified people and allow a sustainable sea-shore rotation;
Sea days will be rationalized and superficial sailings reduced to critical public outreach events;
Ships internal schedules will be rationalized to ensure proper rest and rehab is achievable without inhibiting war fighting capability;
Excess personnel will be posted to schools to fill the training billets;
Shortfalls at the schools will be filled with retired trades who retain the required skillset;


The government will need to know that the Navy will have to make these radical steps if they expect to have a deployable fleet for the next 15 years.
The government will also have to revamp the base housing issue so that sailors and officers can afford to live in the areas they are posted to. This is a Forces wide problem that is critical in retention of serving pers.

Don't know how much of this is achievable, especially in the current international climate.
Is this the same CRCN that drives the current fleetsched that is overworking people?

It's disconnected from reality, and if we dropped 4 ships that wouldn't create excess personnel, just means we could properly crew some ships. We still need people for the massive refits and even mothballed ships need maintenance.

You can maybe occassionally do 6 weeks worth of work in a 4 week work period, but you can't sustain that, and you can't do 3 or 4 of them concurrently. Meanwhile, that's our SOP.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,009
Points
1,010
Is this the same CRCN that drives the current fleetsched that is overworking people?

It's disconnected from reality, and if we dropped 4 ships that wouldn't create excess personnel, just means we could properly crew some ships. We still need people for the massive refits and even mothballed ships need maintenance.

You can maybe occassionally do 6 weeks worth of work in a 4 week work period, but you can't sustain that, and you can't do 3 or 4 of them concurrently. Meanwhile, that's our SOP.
I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,467
Points
1,360
I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?
He does in the same way the Army Comd has influence over the MRP. He doesn't control it but he has influence over it.

The real issue is that most Naval Officers don't understand that the Navy isn't it's own service, rather it's an environment within one single service 😁

Ditto their lack of knowledge WRT the differences between Force Generation vs Force Employment.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,009
Points
1,010
He does in the same way the Army Comd has influence over the MRP. He doesn't control it but he has influence over it.

The real issue is that most Naval Officers don't understand that the Navy isn't it's own service, rather it's an environment within one single service 😁

Ditto their lack of knowledge WRT the differences between Force Generation vs Force Employment.
That line between FG/FE can get pretty blurry. Usually, even aircraft are doing FE, there is still an element of FG involved.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,467
Points
1,360
That line between FG/FE can get pretty blurry. Usually, even aircraft are doing FE, there is still an element of FG involved.
Agreed, I don't really think the terms are that helpful at times. I generally don't use it to describe anything that is below the level of a unit.

The Navy force generates Ships for CJOC which is the force employer.

I also think people confuse the word training with force generation. The two aren't the same thing.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,467
Points
1,360
No but he certainly has influence on what is being accomplished, by setting priorities.
The CRCN and his subordinate commanders absolutely do control the training requirements to force generate a ship for force employment.

The problem is that the Fleetsched and the Trainingsched aren't synced and they also aren't sync'ed to personnel requirements or issues.

It's the same people going out over and over again for WUPS, even though they are already worked up. 😉
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,009
Points
1,010
The CRCN and his subordinate commanders absolutely do control the training requirements to force generate a ship for force employment.

The problem is that the Fleetsched and the Trainingsched aren't synced and they also aren't sync'ed to personnel requirements or issues.

It's the same people going out over and over again for WUPS, even though they are already worked up. 😉
That is one of my biggest bug bear. A simple, but welcome change would be that if you have done WUPS lectures in the past 12 months, you are excused the current set of lectures. That would free up a huge amount of people.

Even IMSRT/BSRT should be used with a bit more thought. If almost everyone onboard has done a set of WUPS in the past year or so, maybe a modified or short program could be put in place, just to knock off the rust and gel the team?
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,009
Points
1,010
The HELAIRDETs are victims of this system, because they move from high readiness ship to high readiness ship. Yes, the Det composition changes somewhat, but there are only so many techs and aircrew.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,467
Points
1,360
That is one of my biggest bug bear. A simple, but welcome change would be that if you have done WUPS lectures in the past 12 months, you are excused the current set. That would free up a huge amount of people.
I mean I try to explain the nuances of training, force generation and force employment to Naval Officers all the time but they unfortunately suffer from institutional incest in that they have very little experience outside of either Halifax or Esquimalt.

They don't listen to what I tell them and look at me as if I'm speaking Greek. What can be really done for those that do not want to help themselves 🤔
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,404
Points
1,040
I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?

There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like 'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).

Those anchors drive everything else.

We used to hold deploying ships to a much higher material standard, but now it's just aiming for basic safe at sea. Standard readiness ships also to be at least basic safe at sea, plus things like helo-capable.

We've so massively compromised on standards argue about basic things like, yes, fire detection in high risk spaces is a basic requirement, and no, you probably shouldn't cover things in plywood and trim. On commercial ships the quals would just be pulled until it's rectified, but we just (sometimes) risk assesss things away. When you have over a thousand defects though, really hard to figure out the cumulative impacts, and let alone figure out what might happen if you sail with a skeleton crew.

If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,467
Points
1,360
There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like 'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).

Those anchors drive everything else.

We used to hold deploying ships to a much higher material standard, but now it's just aiming for basic safe at sea. Standard readiness ships also to be at least basic safe at sea, plus things like helo-capable.

We've so massively compromised on standards argue about basic things like, yes, fire detection in high risk spaces is a basic requirement, and no, you probably shouldn't cover things in plywood and trim. On commercial ships the quals would just be pulled until it's rectified, but we just (sometimes) risk assesss things away. When you have over a thousand defects though, really hard to figure out the cumulative impacts, and let alone figure out what might happen if you sail with a skeleton crew.

If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.
That's why anyone with any ability to do anything else should be jumping ship as fast as they can.
 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,231
Points
1,090
There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like 'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).

Those anchors drive everything else.

We used to hold deploying ships to a much higher material standard, but now it's just aiming for basic safe at sea. Standard readiness ships also to be at least basic safe at sea, plus things like helo-capable.

We've so massively compromised on standards argue about basic things like, yes, fire detection in high risk spaces is a basic requirement, and no, you probably shouldn't cover things in plywood and trim. On commercial ships the quals would just be pulled until it's rectified, but we just (sometimes) risk assesss things away. When you have over a thousand defects though, really hard to figure out the cumulative impacts, and let alone figure out what might happen if you sail with a skeleton crew.

If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.
Octobob just came from the MARPAC and now is CJOC. So as the FE he should have enough residual knowledge about the state of the fleet that he should be able to tell the FG, "You are full of s*** Craig to tell me that WIN and CAL are ready to go, they were barely holding on when I was MARPAC and I sure a shit know that fairies and gnomes haven't arrived at dockyard since I left."

So who says no to whom? Has the minister been briefed on the state of all of our equipment (CAF wide)? Would have loved to been a fly on the wall when she was briefed on that and then the look she would have gave the former minister at the next cabinet meeting.

Cripes I was listening to Gen Day (Ret) talking about the state of our tanks and if that is transferred to the rest of the CAF inventory then we are fubared beyond belief!
 

Furniture

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,036
Points
1,110
If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.
On my ILP last April the RCN Chief was asked about what they were doing to address burn out in the sailors, his response was to say that they would work people until they "take a knee", and ask for help.

Essentially saying "we will knowingly drive you until you break", and now the RCN leadership wonders why people are getting out, and not recommending the navy to others.
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
281
Points
930
When we break an occupation, we like to start with the technical tradesmen that actually have to maintain and operate all this equipment. The navy isn’t alone, they share this approach to personnel with the army and the air force.

A fleet without enough techs isn’t a fleet. Just as running tanks without enough RCEME isn’t a good idea, although the army is trying. And failing.
 
Top