Destroyer/Or Frigate

[guns_and_roses]

What type of ship is better to serve on? What are more capable, What type of ship is most deployed? Any answers are welcome, thanks for the help!

 

[jollyjacktar]

That is all a matter of opinion.  Some of us like CPFs, some 280's and others like Tanker life.  Each platform has its ups and downs dependant upon your trade and how well you sail.  Each of the girls have their own way of doing things, and their own way of moving at sea. 
I have always been a Tanker guy pretty well and like this lifestyle.  I look at the others on the warships and say it's not really for me, too fussy and pusser.  Others I know, look at me and say the same thing from their side of the fence that they think the Tankers suck.  In the long run, the CPFs will be around longer than the 280's and are the future for present.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Deployment wise...it depends on whats going on in the world. If they want flagship capabilities they send a destroyer, if they want a general purpose warship they send a frigate. If they need to send a Task Group they generally send a 280 plus up to a couple of frigates and maybe an AOR.

They don't generally ask you what type of ship you want to serve on, you are placed where needed.

 

[STONEY]

The crew is the most important factor. A good CO,XO and a crew thats works together and  have a happy ship make all the difference in the world. On the other hand if that certain spark is lacking and your ship is not a happy one ,life can be really miserable. I've been on several of each type and its hard to pin down what exactly what makes it work but some do and some don't and the difference is quite remarkable.

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The crew is the most important factor. A good CO,XO and a crew thats works together and  have a happy ship make all the difference in the world. On the other hand if that certain spark is lacking and your ship is not a happy one ,life can be really miserable. I've been on several of each type and its hard to pin down what exactly what makes it work but some do and some don't and the difference is quite remarkable.

Cheers

Agree 100%...too bad so many forget how important the crew is but it happens.

 

[Springroll]

They don't generally ask you what type of ship you want to serve on, you are placed where needed.

Here they do ask you what your preference is (CPF, 280 etc), but if you get it or not, is another story!

 

[SoF]

They never asked me what class of ship I wanted, just the coast I prefer which didn't matter anyways because I knew I was going east. I'm very happy being on a 280; before next year I'll have a gulf tour under my belt.

 

[Springroll]

They never asked me what class of ship I wanted, just the coast I prefer

Maybe it is just the way my staff were, but every class that has come through the section in the last few years has been asked.

 

[Donaill]

They, the Div Office, usually asks whether you want 280 or Hlaifax and if you have a preference for a certain ship. Though it is just a small input because if you put down Charlottetown and the Toronto needs a comm tech, well off to the Toronto you go.

 

[copecowboy]

Preserver is awesome, never been on a 280, didn't like the frigs

 

[Jack Nastyface]

I'm a "280 Lady", having served 12 yrs in ATH and 2 yrs in IRO. I did the 2nd Gulf War in MTL and she was a comfortable ship. The only trouble with 280s is that they are a command and control platform. So, invariably, you get the commodore and his staff (aka the "Good Ideas Club") onboard looking over your shoulders. And for the OP-you never serve "on" a ship. You serve "in" a ship.

 

[Harley Sailor]

I'm a "280 Lady", having served 12 yrs in ATH and 2 yrs in IRO. I did the 2nd Gulf War in MTL and she was a comfortable ship. The only trouble with 280s is that they are a command and control platform. So, invariably, you get the commodore and his staff (aka the "Good Ideas Club") onboard looking over your shoulders. And for the OP-you never serve "on" a ship. You serve "in" a ship.

With 30 years in the navy, and having lived with my father while he was in the navy, I've never once heard anyone say they sailed "in" a ship.  When ever I'm asked it's "what ships have you sailed on".

As for what ship is better, the old steamers were the best. It was a harder life, but it pulled the crews closer together.  When the 280's came out the Ladies all left for them.  When the CPFs came out it was the steamer crews who crewed them.  This ment it was the tight knit crews who first sailed on them, making them the best. For the ride, I would say CPFs are far better. As for crews, everyone has been right, it depends on the CO, XO, and Cox'n.  One thing to look at is that the 280s will be the first to be changed out so their crews will most likely get the new ships.

 

[Jack Nastyface]

With 30 years in the navy, and having lived with my father while he was in the navy, I've never once heard anyone say they sailed "in" a ship.  When ever I'm asked it's "what ships have you sailed on".

Harley, maybe you should have paid a little more attention to correct naval terminology during your 30 years in the mob. As quoted on the Canadian Tribal Association web site: http://jproc.ca/cta/theships.html

"Past and present sailors of the CTA must have sailed in at least one of twelve particular ships to qualify as 'ordinary' members. The ships are listed in alphabetical order which comprise the original eight Tribal class destroyers built during World War 2 and the four Iroquois class successors."

If you would like a little Dog Watch instruction in correct naval terminology and slang, I would be happy to oblige. :

 

[Harley Sailor]

Harley, may you should have paid a little more attention to correct naval terminology during your 30 years in the mob. As quoted on the Canadian Tribal Association web site: http://jproc.ca/cta/theships.html

"Past and present sailors of the CTA must have sailed in at least one of twelve particular ships to qualify as 'ordinary' members. The ships are listed in alphabetical order which comprise the original eight Tribal class destroyers built during World War 2 and the four Iroquois class successors."

If you would like a little Dog Watch instruction in correct naval terminology and slang, I would be happy to oblige. :

So because one site says it's true then you beleive it...kool

 

[Jack Nastyface]

So because one site says it's true then you beleive it...kool

Well, perhaps 15 years of sea time as a MARS officer gives me a wee bit of insight. From your "Verbal Warning" I see that you are one of the problem children here. Oh, you might want to brush up on your spelling as well as your naval terminology.

 

[aesop081]

Both of you move on...........theres plenty of verbal warnings available to go around.

Milnet.ca staff

 

[Jack Nastyface]

Both of you move on...........theres plenty of verbal warnings available to go around.

Milnet.ca staff

Rgr, out.

 

[Harley Sailor]

Both of you move on...........theres plenty of verbal warnings available to go around.

Milnet.ca staff

No thank you, I already have one.

But I just can't let this drop with out one last comment.
We sail In the Navy and On(-Board) ships. 

 

[MARS]

1. Maybe we should start a new thread on the useage of "in" vs. "on"...
2. At the risk of beating a dead horse, I do believe the proper useage is "in"...derived from the term being "borne in a ship".  It has nothing to do with "serving", "sailing" or being "posted" to a ship.  However, it has commonly fallen out of useage and now most people say "on", simply because they haven't been taught the proper usage.  It is similar to using the definitive article "the" before ship's names, as in "I sailed on in the HALIFAX".  Makes no sense, sounds funny, but lots of people say it that way.  Ship's names are proper nouns - they do not require "the" before them. It is like using "the" before the word "McDonalds" (as in the fast food chain).  You don't say "I am going to the McDonalds" - you simply say "I am going to McDonalds"

 

[Jack Nastyface]

I like the cut of your jib, MARS!