![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RFA personnel wear uniforms generally identical to those of the RN, issued or bought from RN stocks, but with RFA insignia. RFA uniform regulations are based closely on BR81. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 22:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Do RFA officers hold the queens commision? (They do not - although some have signed up for the RNR(Royal Naval Reserve) no RFA officer holds a queens commision) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.1.156 ( talk) 23:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I removed the mention of "Royal Navy personnel... operating weapon systems (many RFA ships are armed with defensive weapons)" as with a few exceptions the weapons on RFAs are manned by RFA personnel and thus the text was misleading, implying that all weapons were manned by RN. The principal exceptions are Vulcan Phalanx on Fort Victoria (removed) and Fort George which are operated and maintained by RN personnel. Otherwise, almost all GPMGs, 20mm and 30mm guns on RFAs are manned by RFA civilian personnel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
True, the guns are normally manned by the stewards (Or Deck Department) (if the ship is in danger) (Or if required by passage... Straits of Hormuz or Gib transit, Entering or leaving ports in the Gulf)
As of mid 2015 manning of weapons is now almost exclusively carried out by the desk dept - including LH(D) acting as Local Gun Director(LGD). Also can someone add a mention of the Mk44 since it's not mentioned in the main text. ASCG on the Wave Knight is probably already covered by the 30mm section but might be worth mentioning as an upgrade(?) to visually aimed weapons, Also the upcoming Tide boats are due to be fitted with ASCG on arrival in UK from build(TBC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.52.140 ( talk) 22:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
New Rumours within the fleet are that stewards will be put back on weapons , will update page once have Confirmation from HQ. SuperNexus ( talk) 17:13, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
"...in 1905 to provide coaling ships for the Navy in an era when the change from sail to coal-fired steam engines..." Surely steam powered warships had been in use for 50 years by then? Alansplodge ( talk) 00:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I have not removed these entirely from the page because they are relevant to UK naval shipping, but they are in no way part of the RFA. They are not managed by the RFA but by a private contractor. They are not manned by the RFA but by employees of the contractor. They are not directed operationally by the RFA. There is no connection between these and the RFA other than that they carry out a role formerly partially assigned to the RFA. Anixtu ( talk) 00:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
It is still clear to the reader that the Point-class are not owned by the RFA or the MoD, but instead that they are available to the MoD under a long term PFI. I no-longer have my hard-copy of "The Royal Navy Handboook - The definitive MoD Guide 2003" I sold it (and others) over eBay. To be honest, nowadays I would only have a vague idea what it mentioned in relation to the Point class, only that the Point-class were indeed very relevant to the capabilities and force structure of Royal Navy and RFA. I do however have "The Military Balance 2010" published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. It lists the Point-class, including them under the RFA. That's now three authoritative sources (RN Handbook, DASA and IISS Military Balance 2010) that list the Point-class as relevant, especially in relation to the RFA.
How did you get the impression that the DASA merely footnoted the Point-class? They were clearly listed with equal importance. Not being included under "Operational" or "Undergoing refit" only bears reference to the fact the job of maintaining the ships at an operational condition is the job of the PFI, not the MoD.
Also, why do you keep removing the Point-class in respects to the total displacement available to the RFA? Since when are the Point-class no longer available to the MoD or RFA? Talk Woe90i 22:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
The wave class are virtually brand new for ships, they are not being replaced so soon it is the Orangeleaf and Rover class vessels that fall into this category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.105.245 ( talk) 11:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The MARS tankers - ordered 2012 from DSME, South Korea were named by press release dated 14 November 2012 as TIDESPRING, TIDERACE, TIDESURGE (all will be the 2nd RFAs to carry the names) and a new fleet name TIDEFORCE. Designed to comply with international maritime legislation they will be double hulled vessels replacing the single hull oilers currently in service, eg, the Rover and Leaf boats. The young Wave class are double hulled vessels already complying with MARPOL regulations for fuel carrying ships. (AuxiliaryTAA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.45.15 ( talk) 00:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
With regard to warships and auxiliaries, the term "commissioned" has specific meaning. The following article is with regard to the USN, but the principle holds for the Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq63-1.htm In the analogous RN/RFA context, RN warships are commissioned, RFAs are not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Isn't it too early to remove her? Sale hasn't exactly happened yet. Cantab1985 ( talk) 15:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I removed her as she is no longer a part of the RFA fleet. SuperNexus ( talk) 16:53, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
RFA personnel wear uniforms generally identical to those of the RN, issued or bought from RN stocks, but with RFA insignia. RFA uniform regulations are based closely on BR81. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 22:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Do RFA officers hold the queens commision? (They do not - although some have signed up for the RNR(Royal Naval Reserve) no RFA officer holds a queens commision) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.1.156 ( talk) 23:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I removed the mention of "Royal Navy personnel... operating weapon systems (many RFA ships are armed with defensive weapons)" as with a few exceptions the weapons on RFAs are manned by RFA personnel and thus the text was misleading, implying that all weapons were manned by RN. The principal exceptions are Vulcan Phalanx on Fort Victoria (removed) and Fort George which are operated and maintained by RN personnel. Otherwise, almost all GPMGs, 20mm and 30mm guns on RFAs are manned by RFA civilian personnel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 22:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
True, the guns are normally manned by the stewards (Or Deck Department) (if the ship is in danger) (Or if required by passage... Straits of Hormuz or Gib transit, Entering or leaving ports in the Gulf)
As of mid 2015 manning of weapons is now almost exclusively carried out by the desk dept - including LH(D) acting as Local Gun Director(LGD). Also can someone add a mention of the Mk44 since it's not mentioned in the main text. ASCG on the Wave Knight is probably already covered by the 30mm section but might be worth mentioning as an upgrade(?) to visually aimed weapons, Also the upcoming Tide boats are due to be fitted with ASCG on arrival in UK from build(TBC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.52.140 ( talk) 22:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
New Rumours within the fleet are that stewards will be put back on weapons , will update page once have Confirmation from HQ. SuperNexus ( talk) 17:13, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
"...in 1905 to provide coaling ships for the Navy in an era when the change from sail to coal-fired steam engines..." Surely steam powered warships had been in use for 50 years by then? Alansplodge ( talk) 00:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I have not removed these entirely from the page because they are relevant to UK naval shipping, but they are in no way part of the RFA. They are not managed by the RFA but by a private contractor. They are not manned by the RFA but by employees of the contractor. They are not directed operationally by the RFA. There is no connection between these and the RFA other than that they carry out a role formerly partially assigned to the RFA. Anixtu ( talk) 00:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
It is still clear to the reader that the Point-class are not owned by the RFA or the MoD, but instead that they are available to the MoD under a long term PFI. I no-longer have my hard-copy of "The Royal Navy Handboook - The definitive MoD Guide 2003" I sold it (and others) over eBay. To be honest, nowadays I would only have a vague idea what it mentioned in relation to the Point class, only that the Point-class were indeed very relevant to the capabilities and force structure of Royal Navy and RFA. I do however have "The Military Balance 2010" published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. It lists the Point-class, including them under the RFA. That's now three authoritative sources (RN Handbook, DASA and IISS Military Balance 2010) that list the Point-class as relevant, especially in relation to the RFA.
How did you get the impression that the DASA merely footnoted the Point-class? They were clearly listed with equal importance. Not being included under "Operational" or "Undergoing refit" only bears reference to the fact the job of maintaining the ships at an operational condition is the job of the PFI, not the MoD.
Also, why do you keep removing the Point-class in respects to the total displacement available to the RFA? Since when are the Point-class no longer available to the MoD or RFA? Talk Woe90i 22:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
The wave class are virtually brand new for ships, they are not being replaced so soon it is the Orangeleaf and Rover class vessels that fall into this category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.105.245 ( talk) 11:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The MARS tankers - ordered 2012 from DSME, South Korea were named by press release dated 14 November 2012 as TIDESPRING, TIDERACE, TIDESURGE (all will be the 2nd RFAs to carry the names) and a new fleet name TIDEFORCE. Designed to comply with international maritime legislation they will be double hulled vessels replacing the single hull oilers currently in service, eg, the Rover and Leaf boats. The young Wave class are double hulled vessels already complying with MARPOL regulations for fuel carrying ships. (AuxiliaryTAA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.45.15 ( talk) 00:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
With regard to warships and auxiliaries, the term "commissioned" has specific meaning. The following article is with regard to the USN, but the principle holds for the Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq63-1.htm In the analogous RN/RFA context, RN warships are commissioned, RFAs are not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anixtu ( talk • contribs) 19:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Isn't it too early to remove her? Sale hasn't exactly happened yet. Cantab1985 ( talk) 15:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I removed her as she is no longer a part of the RFA fleet. SuperNexus ( talk) 16:53, 30 December 2016 (UTC)