Originally Posted by dagenham
...If double crewing means the asset can be on patrol nearly double the time it might actually be efficient as it replaces purchasing and maintain two of " insert craft / vessel / item of choice "...
RN surface ships are already being operated at a knackering pace with deployments of up to nine months and SSNs deploying for up to ten months. Even if it were feasible to operate them for twice the duration with double the payroll, what money would be saved if they wore out in half the time and required replacing? Also, what about their need for the planned and unplanned maintenance that is required as much as crew downtime? Despite what some people may think, it's not as though ships are parked in a hangar or garage each night with their hundreds of complex and often temperamental mechanical, electrical and electronic systems and sub-systems switched off.
The RN website contains an interesting insight into current global commitments here:
Operations. The bit covering ships
alongside contains these sage words:
Originally Posted by RN website
Alongside - Ships
Ships and submarines are complex pieces of kit, packed with hard-working sailors - all of whom need some time alongside once in a while. Hectic as a ship or boat's programme can be, there will always be some time alongside at her home port of Faslane, Devonport or Portsmouth, or away in the hands of the engineers for refit and maintenance.
Ships and submarines are complex bits of engineering, and just as your car needs a regular service, the process of upkeep and maintenance for Naval vessels is ongoing and demanding. And people need upkeep too; so when a ship is alongside in her home port, the ship's company will be not just looking after their ship, but committed to training and other tasks to keep life on board running smoothly.
Originally Posted by Coutney mil
From the reports in the press recently, it looks like the crew needs to spend more time maintaining their vessel and less time being worried about morale and being deployed, right, Hangarshuffle? I hope the guys from Babcock don't get too upset about having to go and sort out the RN's mess.
Rather a snide comment about the RN, even for you. With the myriad systems on board, evaps are probably among the most prone to break down, particularly if operated at unusually high capacity for extended periods.
Originally Posted by Courtney Mil
I was more worried about the poor crew that needs to go home.
Your concern is laudable but I believe they only deployed two months ago (sometime in April?). Although they would have had some preparatory seatime in home waters before that, it still leaves another six or seven months of normal RN deployment to go, if necessary, although I'm sure every effort would be made to give them a mid-deployment break and bring the ship home in time for Christmas.