Posted on 08/19/2007 9:26:47 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
There’s only one thing I like better than a woman in uniform.
>>>What in the hell is the headgear she is wearing?
Appears to me to be construction yard hardhat.
With only three women, this is not about diversity, this is about quarenteening a sexual relations issue.
The logical extension is to give ALL crew privacy. The only way to do this is to drastically reduced crew size to make it an engineering possibility.
Somehow I do not see this as the complete story. Social engineering and the military are a formula for guaranteed defeat.
For most of RN history is was where each mess (The unit of community life as lived in one of HM ships; hence, the place where each unit lives and eats; hence also, the naval verb for both inhabiting and eating. The context must show whether living or eating is referred to.") did.
It's only in the last 60 years that the RN introduced "centralised messing" with every "mess" eating in what Americans call "shaudere halls". And what 60 years against 1200 years of tradition?
Hey , let me onto that ship!
Sounds like nice privacy for a bit of snogging between watches, so it does!
Move over you wankers.
Good Luck to the swabs of the now grogless British Navy.May your liberal anchors still seek bottom instead of floating.
No grog for the swabbies!
“Yes, because as Iran’s seizure of the Cornwall demonstrated, it’s important for Royal Navy crew members to be as comfortable as possible before surrendering to the enemy.”
I don’t think Iran would have seized a Frigate with a few motorboats. They did seize an inflatable that was operating from the Cornwall.
Where did you get that HMS Cornwall was seized? It was the boarding party in rigid inflatables that were seized.
HMS Cornwall is a Destroyer. The Iranians seized a rubber dingy.
Which is admittedly pretty bad, but then the ROE for dealing with Iranians has been out of whack since 1979.
So the once great Royal Navy caves in to women’s lib; perhaps they should rename the HMS Daring the HMS Timid. Or simply the HMS Panties.
I was thinking the same thing. Too bad that hauling shoring, damage control equipment, and fire hoses still requires a little "brute strength" from time to time.
Surely the costs for creating all this “Disney” Cruise Line-style accomodations could be better spent on weapons’ systems. Why not just have two kinds of ships: those with male crews, and those with female crews?
It's called a hard hat.
Well it has an advanced weapons system and electronics suite so obviously the money was there.
Well, could it use more missiles, bullets, or torpedoes? What about fuel? Or supplies? Could it use more room for any of those things?
Even if you replaced all the DVD players & other toys,you would barely have enough to buy a 20 mm gun.The Daring & the American Arleigh Burke class are almost of the same size,but the Daring has about 150 less persons to crew them.Now thats what saves a lot of money.
It doesn't seem under-armed, it's range is greater than a Burke class, and the electronics seem more than adequate for its mission. What's wrong with crew comfort? Have you ever spent a 7 month deployment living in the same compartment as 80 other people? It's isn't pleasant, I assure you.
Yes...yes I have.
If I hadn't done so myself, I wouldn't be objecting. I was in the U.S. Navy in the mid-80's to 1991, where I spent a little time in the Persian Gulf, wishing for a private shower.
Too funny, I thought of exactly the same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.