SeaKingTacco said:Control is the term defining who actually is "driving" the ship- similar to the aviation context. For example, even though the CO maybe on the bridge, sitting in their comfy chair, the OOW has control. Unless the CO sees something that scares the crap out of him/her, then he takes control from the OOW and issues the corrective conning orders. Things go really badly when it is not clear to the bridge crew who has control. That transfer has to happen quickly and clearly.
I'm sure an NWO will be along shortly to correct me. It is what they live to do... 8)
stoker dave said:It has been about 30 years since I first qualified as OOD. However, I distinctly recall my first board for that qualification: I failed. In the board, I was asked how I would handle a situation where I was told to move the ship from one berth to another in harbour.
I was 24 years old, fresh out of RMC, and had about six months experience on the ship. During the board, I asked who was on my duty watch. I was told the POOD was a senior bos'n with 20 years experience. I failed the board because I basically turned over the task to the POOD to execute: someone who I am (to this day) confident could have done the job safely and easily. I had never even seen such a move; never mind be in charge of such a thing.
As OOD I was overall responsible for the safety of the ship. I still think the idea to delegate the execution of this task to POOD was the right one.
Lumber said:Care to elaborate? There are actually situations in the RCN where the NCM is running the show and the officer is just supporting.
Lumber said:Care to elaborate? There are actually situations in the RCN where the NCM is running the show and the officer is just supporting.
MARS said:Around the NWO has arrived
That was actually pretty accurate SKT. But what you explained as Control, is still likely Charge, in your example. Everything else is correct.
I rarely gave up Control, unless I needed to, for sleep purposes, mostly, or for training purposes. Control involves a greater latitude for autonomous decision making than Charge. The OOW with Charge follows the planned route, adjusts speed within pre-defined limits, to maintain course or make the ETA and other decisions such as that, as an example. Greater course or speed requirements require a call or a report to me, as the CO, to explain and recommend the new COA since I am likely retaining Control. So there is a significant amount of decision making going on and orders being given, but all within the limits of Charge. The occasions for the OOW to call me are numerous, mine (and most COs) were about 30 different occasions, where their requirement to make a decision and give a new order exceeded the limits of Charge.
Control is divided into 3 distinct areas, involving maneuvering, the employmentweapons and sensors and the tactical employment of the ship itself.
In layman's terms and without quoting the MARCORD/NAVORD itself, the person with whatever aspect of Control they have been delegated is the person who gets called to make decisions on that matter. So if I delegate Control of maneuvering to the XO overnight, then in my scenario above, the OOW with Charge calls the XO if they need to exceed the limits of Charge (i.e. a massive course or speed change). The XO may still need to call me for certain things, but basically that is the deal.
Lumber said:Care to elaborate? There are actually situations in the RCN where the NCM is running the show and the officer is just supporting.
Navy_Pete said:I guess I'd have failed the same board!
stoker dave said:Thanks for the validation.
This thread (or perhaps another) was saying how the advice of senior NCOs was being ignored by very junior officers. The point is that I think some of the very junior officers were trained (or at least somewhat influenced) that way as illustrated in the example above.
As a follow up, I passed my second OOD board. When presented with a scenario in which I had little or no experience, I was the "take charge" guy who was hands-on directing everything. I am sure that would not have ended well and certainly isn't how I would approach a real situation, but I passed the board. But I think that speaks to another problem altogether.
I guess the pinnacle of my OOD experience was during Gulf War I. My duty watch was over 100 people including an air defence battery and armed soldiers. But I digress. Sorry for the thread drift.
Good2Golf said:If you mean "we" in a RCN sense, I'll acknowledge that. CAF-wide, that is not always the case. Some organizations within the CAF have a different (and non-personal relation based) experience/responsibilities valuation environment, where rank is not the prime discriminator of who directs what actions; however, not all CAF members may have been exposed to such an environment.
Regards
G2G
SeaKingTacco said:Aircrew. It is not at all unusual to have a lower ranking aircraft captain legally entrusted with directing the actions of a crew composed of higher ranking individuals- including in some cases the aircraft captain's own Commanding Officer.
The wise aircraft captain knows and understands that his/her power only lasts for the duration of the flight. No one much minds being yelled at in a "preservation of life situation". It is not a good practice to treat your higher ranking "subordinates" poorly in non-urgent situations, however...
Pusser said:In the Navy, position is generally more important than rank. Although the ship's establishment tends to put personnel of appropriate rank into positions, the posting plot does not always cooperate. However that doesn't change the relationship. The captain of a ship is still the captain, even if the ship is carrying more senior officers and even if one of those more senior officers is the captain's boss. I've witnessed a situation where the XO was actually junior in rank to one of the department heads, but he was still the XO and, therefore, held command authority over the department head. As a department head, I myself was of equal rank to the XO, but senior to him - didn't matter.
I was in an interesting situation once though where I had to stand up for my rights. The XO felt that only Naval Ops officers should be OOD in foreign ports (ostensibly because of the "force protection" requirement). He further intended that I (the most senior officer in the Wardroom) would stand foreign port duty watches as 2OOD. We had a closed door discussion where I made it clear that I would not be standing 2OOD under somebody junior to me, particularly anyone who was still in grade school when I was serving my first tour at sea as a HOD. I also explained that not only did I have more actual sea time than most of the other officers on board (certainly all the engineers), but that as a LogO I had spent some time on deployed ops and so I was actually more experienced in force protection than anyone else in the Wardroom. Luckily, he conceded, but I was a little shocked that he had even considered this. Experience and qualifications are all well and good, but that does not mean that rank and seniority are completely ignored.
Eye In The Sky said:Is the AirDet Commander (a Maj, if I'm not mistaken) a HOD or equivalent once they are embarked? I'd be grateful if the command/control relationship between the CO and Det Comd could be explained (or, if already on here, point me to the thread...my search came up with nodda). What happens if the CO says "I want you to put your egg beater in the air in 2 hours" and the Air Maj says "none of my crews are rested, the orders say we can not legally fly for X hours"?
Likewise, how does the Det MWO function with the Cox'n for the things those ladies and gents are concerned with?
Eye In The Sky said:Is the AirDet Commander (a Maj, if I'm not mistaken) a HOD or equivalent once they are embarked? I'd be grateful if the command/control relationship between the CO and Det Comd could be explained (or, if already on here, point me to the thread...my search came up with nodda). What happens if the CO says "I want you to put your egg beater in the air in 2 hours" and the Air Maj says "none of my crews are rested, the orders say we can not legally fly for X hours"?
Likewise, how does the Det MWO function with the Cox'n for the things those ladies and gents are concerned with?
Navy_Pete said:There are dedicated FPOs now, but on my last deployment the OOD rotated through the HODS (heads of departments), WeapsO and OpsO, so basically the senior folks in the wardroom.
That was the nice thing on the 280s with LCdr HODs; there was much less of that kind of thing, as you had the rank as well as the seniority, and the relationship with the XO was quite different.
Navy_Pete said:Not really sure if the comparison works, but guessing it's the equivalent to a platoon made up of sections that come from a mix of inf, log, eng, comms etc all in the field under a single commander. You can each do a good job at your specific area, but unless you coordinate with everyone else, it won't work on the whole.
As was noted by several others, the HELAIRDET Comd is HOD of the Air Dept. according to SHOPs, he/she is actually the final authority on whether it is safe to launch a helo. The Ship CO cannot actually over rule the HELAIRDET Comd in this area (many have have tried). It normally does not come to that. But, I have worked for a few COs who liked to push the envelope more than was prudent and it was clear that they did not actually understand the ramifications of what they were ordering me to do.Eye In The Sky said:Is the AirDet Commander (a Maj, if I'm not mistaken) a HOD or equivalent once they are embarked? I'd be grateful if the command/control relationship between the CO and Det Comd could be explained (or, if already on here, point me to the thread...my search came up with nodda). What happens if the CO says "I want you to put your egg beater in the air in 2 hours" and the Air Maj says "none of my crews are rested, the orders say we can not legally fly for X hours"?
Likewise, how does the Det MWO function with the Cox'n for the things those ladies and gents are concerned with?