Author Topic: HMCS Algonquin (Read 8943 times)

chadk · « **on:** July 07, 2011, 19:17:28 »

Hi out there. I have been posted to the Alqonquin and was hoping there might be someone that could tell me about her.

yoman · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2011, 19:25:41 »

Quote from: chadk on July 07, 2011, 19:17:28

Hi out there. I have been posted to the Alqonquin and was hoping there might be someone that could tell me about her.

She caught fire on my first day at sea...

The crew likes to pick on NCdt's... (some funny stuff though and was kinda expected)

They like to play binder clipper wars...

Anything else?

I only spent a little over a month on her so I'm not the best person if your looking for more detailed info/more recent info.

Chief Stoker · « **Reply #2 on:** July 07, 2011, 19:28:53 »

Try a google search, lots of info there. Their CO is Tim Kerr an excellent guy.

chadk · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2011, 19:30:57 »

Sounds like an intersting ship....even if you only spent a limited time on her. I am hoping to find out a bit more about the camaraderie aboard, maybe a bit about her crew. How easy going the crew is, etc.

chadk · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2011, 15:13:01 »

Any Stewards from the Algonquin around here?

darkskye · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2011, 15:21:21 »

You can also take a look here, http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/algonquin/0/0-s_eng.asp for more information about the HMCS Algonquin. It's one of my choices.

Jaydub · « **Reply #6 on:** July 18, 2011, 16:05:35 »

Quote from: chadk on July 07, 2011, 19:30:57

Sounds like an intersting ship....even if you only spent a limited time on her. I am hoping to find out a bit more about the camaraderie aboard, maybe a bit about her crew. How easy going the crew is, etc.

I'm on the Algonquin. I'm fairly new onboard. The first thing I noticed was how tight the crew is. There's a lot of good people.
Although I would have preferred to stay on a Frigate, the crew has made the posting enjoyable.

The CO is awesome. He was my XO on HMCS Winnipeg.

When do you get here?

Pusser · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2011, 00:48:19 »

Quote from: Jaydub on July 18, 2011, 16:05:35

I'm on the Algonquin. I'm fairly new onboard. The first thing I noticed was how tight the crew is. There's a lot of good people.
Although I would have preferred to stay on a Frigate, the crew has made the posting enjoyable.

The CO is awesome. He was my XO on HMCS Winnipeg.

When do you get here?

Don't they let you inside? You must get cold sometimes (and wet)!

The correct terminology folks is that we serve in ships.

NavalMoose · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2011, 10:38:38 »

"Don't they let you inside? You must get cold sometimes (and wet)!

The correct terminology folks is that we serve in ships"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit of a nitpick there, yes we serve in ships but who actually says "hey I'm in the Algonquin now...etc?"

MARS · « **Reply #9 on:** July 19, 2011, 11:08:43 »

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit of a nitpick there, yes we serve in ships but who actually says "hey I'm in the Algonquin now...etc?"
[/quote]

Nobody does. Because someone who says "the" is likely to say "on". They either get it right or doubly wrong.

Yes, I nitpick. Such is my current lot in life.

Pusser · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2011, 13:29:38 »

Quote from: NavalMoose on July 19, 2011, 10:38:38

"Don't they let you inside? You must get cold sometimes (and wet)!

The correct terminology folks is that we serve in ships"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit of a nitpick there, yes we serve in ships but who actually says "hey I'm in the Algonquin now...etc?"

I have always referred to it as serving in ships. I once had an XO who threatened that anyone who talked about serving on the ship would have to sling a hammock on the upper decks and would not longer be allowed inside. He got his point across. To paraphrase the Captain of COMPASS ROSE, it may be a small thing, but you may as well get it right. Attention to detail is pretty important in the profession of arms.

CDN Aviator · « **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2011, 14:02:12 »

Quote from: Pusser on July 19, 2011, 13:29:38

Attention to detail is pretty important in the profession of arms.

Oh dear........

Pusser · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2011, 14:05:33 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 14:02:12

Oh dear........

You disagree?

CDN Aviator · « **Reply #13 on:** July 19, 2011, 14:08:53 »

Quote from: Pusser on July 19, 2011, 14:05:33

You disagree?

The details that mean life or death are important. The details that get someone paid or not are important. "Left" and "right" is important. "Do this" and "dont do this" is important......

"on" ships ot "in" ships......they both say "i sail in the Navy"................"on ships" isnt going to get somebody killed "profession of arms" or not.

Wether i say "i fly on airplanes" or "i fly in airplanes", you get what it is i do.

Oldgateboatdriver · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2011, 14:14:25 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 14:08:53

Wether i say "i fly on airplanes" or "i fly in airplanes", you get what it is i do.

Waaaaay too wordy! Why not just say "I fly airplanes"?

Besides, didn't flying on airplanes disappear with the end of the "barnstormers at the local fair" era ?

Ex-Dragoon · « **Reply #15 on:** July 19, 2011, 16:00:53 »

I have been saying I am sailing on the HMCS Bloggins for years and have never been corrected. When I was RCD, I was a crewman on a Cougar or an M113. There were no corrections there either. I am more concerned on whether my sailors can do their job as an Operator as long as they do it correctly and accurately and when required to be a sailor if they can do so safely and correctly.

NavalMoose · « **Reply #16 on:** July 19, 2011, 18:55:35 »

Pusser said "I once had an XO who threatened that anyone who talked about serving on the ship would have to sling a hammock on the upper decks and would not longer be allowed inside"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow, you must have joined when ships were wood and men were iron

NavalMoose · « **Reply #17 on:** July 19, 2011, 19:01:08 »

I'm sure we can agree on "aboard" which means "on" or "in" a ship

cupper · « **Reply #18 on:** July 19, 2011, 21:02:29 »

That's just going to lead to the inevitable debate "On Board" vs "Aboard".

milnews.ca · « **Reply #19 on:** July 19, 2011, 21:15:31 »

Attention to detail is one thing, but holy "pepper vs. fly s**t", Batman....

Edited to add: Someone better get the CF Info-Machine on that one....
http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/villedequebec/5/5-s_eng.asp

Quote

.... In 1989, I served on HMCS Gatineau for a period of 4 months prior to being selected for a posting to PARAMAX Montreal as an instructor for the new type of SONAR on the newly built Frigates ....

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/cms/3/3-a_eng.asp?category=47&id=142

Quote

.... While serving as the ASW Director on HMCS FREDERICTON, one of the first females to serve on that ship, she was deployed on her second NATO tour ....

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/halifax/2/2-s_eng.asp?category=232&title=1511

Quote

.... Before the news conference the Prime Minister met some of the sailors who serve on HALIFAX ....

FSTO · « **Reply #20 on:** July 19, 2011, 21:29:12 »

You start slipping up on little things and it is a slippery slope to big issues.

When training junior MARS officers we are all over them for terminology and the proper sequence of a report. So that means that we will hammer them for not saying galley, fore and aft, port and starboard which will result in them working twice as hard to make contact and track reports in the proper sequence.

CDN Aviator · « **Reply #21 on:** July 19, 2011, 21:50:38 »

Quote from: FSTO on July 19, 2011, 21:29:12

You start slipping up on little things and it is a slippery slope to big issues.

Oh for the love of all that is good and pure...............

"in"......."on".......its not going to get somebody killed. Its not letting performance standards going down.

Only the Navy.......

Occam · « **Reply #22 on:** July 19, 2011, 21:59:19 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 21:50:38

Only the Navy.......

"100 Years of Tradition, unimpeded by Progress."

Chief Stoker · « **Reply #23 on:** July 19, 2011, 22:02:19 »

I guess this is a big deal for some people, I personally think there are bigger things to worry about on a ship.

airmich · « **Reply #24 on:** July 19, 2011, 22:14:20 »

Quote from: Chief Stoker on July 19, 2011, 22:02:19

I guess this is a big deal for some people, I personally think there are bigger things to worry about on a ship.

And in a ship too! Sorry, couldn't resist!

gcclarke · « **Reply #25 on:** July 19, 2011, 22:19:15 »

In, on, around, I don't care. As long as no one makes the fatal error of having the word "The" before "HMCS".

FSTO · « **Reply #26 on:** July 19, 2011, 22:29:23 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 21:50:38

Oh for the love of all that is good and pure...............

"in"......."on".......its not going to get somebody killed. Its not letting performance standards going down.

Only the Navy.......

You seem to have a real issue with the way the Navy goes about its business. If you are so annoyed with the way skimmers talk then why do you bother commenting on these threads? I am sure there are more important things going on in your life.

CDN Aviator · « **Reply #27 on:** July 19, 2011, 22:47:53 »

Quote from: FSTO on July 19, 2011, 22:29:23

You seem to have a real issue with the way the Navy goes about its business.

I love working with the Navy. I don't have any issues at all, just amazed how the difference between "on" and "in" can be such a disaster.

Quote

If you are so annoyed with the way skimmers talk

"Some" skimmers............i haven't met too many that care about "on" or "in". Usualy they care about things like JNAP callsigns, VECTACs, aircraft control terms and that we get the datum right. You know, actualy important things.

But, i guess you are right. Off i go.

Jaydub · « **Reply #28 on:** July 20, 2011, 18:31:07 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 22:47:53

"Some" skimmers............i haven't met too many that care about "on" or "in". Usualy they care about things like JNAP callsigns, VECTACs, aircraft control terms and that we get the datum right. You know, actualy important things.

As a SAC, I couldn't agree more!

NavalMoose · « **Reply #29 on:** July 20, 2011, 19:41:15 »

Sigh, so it's different in the non skimmer world?

Oldgateboatdriver · « **Reply #30 on:** July 21, 2011, 08:08:01 »

It sure is.

Trust me, submariners want to make certain that they are "in" the submarine, not "on " it.

MARS · « **Reply #31 on:** July 21, 2011, 08:46:16 »

Quote from: CDN Aviator on July 19, 2011, 14:08:53

The details that mean life or death are important. The details that get someone paid or not are important. "Left" and "right" is important. "Do this" and "dont do this" is important......

100% correct. Not going to debate that angle.

However, the navy has its own language...for everything. Decks, deckhead, bulkheads, galley, bow, stern, athwartships, etc, etc. Why bother with that then? "In" and "the" are simply part of that. Nothing more, nothing less. But somehow, people manage to use those terms but can’t manage "in" or "the"? Why? Not enough room in the brain for that? If "in" or "the" aren’t a big deal for sailors, then lets drop the whole damn thing. The entire tradition of our language. F**k it, unimportant.

But really, no one in the navy, not even those too lazy to wrap their brains around "in" and "the", would go for that.

Seriously gclarke, I dare you to go to your XO and tell him that you saw some 'garbage' on the 'floor' down the 'hall', up the 'stairs' on the 'second floor'. Tell me how that works out for you. Actually, say that to your CO - he and I taught at Venture for years together and spent a great deal of time teaching the customs and traditions of the Navy to JOUTS. Because that is all this is - "customs and traditions". Meh, unimportant, I guess. Did you bother to get your Executive Curl put on your tunic? Again, simply a tradition. Why should the Navy spend money on a tradition like that? Not life or death. Has no impact on how we do our day to day jobs.

I could care less what those from the other elements have to say - they have their own customs and traditions that I find odd - because I don’t fully understand them and where they came from, but they are their customs and traditions. They have a place - if they didn't, they would have been done away with.

Chief Stoker, you are also correct. More important things to worry about, I guess. But Chiefs and Petty Officers are supposed to be the custodians of the Navy's customs and traditions, no? Those who sustain our traditions through thick and thin? Well, if the Chiefs won’t do it, then I guess us XOs will. Seriously, guy, I got this. Don’t sweat it.

Regards,

MARS

Chief Stoker · « **Reply #32 on:** July 21, 2011, 09:19:42 »

Chief Stoker, you are also correct. More important things to worry about, I guess. But Chiefs and Petty Officers are supposed to be the custodians of the Navy's customs and traditions, no? Those who sustain our traditions through thick and thin? Well, if the Chiefs won't do it, then I guess us XOs will. Seriously, guy, I got this. Don't sweat it.

[/quote]

Yes I maintain there are bigger and better things to worry about and I certainly believe in our customs and traditions, please do not infer that I do not. I simply do not go around squaring off pers for making mistakes as insignificant as that and yes I won't sweat it. Boy you must of been a pleasure to sail for.

dapaterson · « **Reply #33 on:** July 21, 2011, 09:26:37 »

Quote from: gcclarke on July 19, 2011, 22:19:15

In, on, around, I don't care. As long as no one makes the fatal error of having the word "The" before "HMCS".

Unless we name a new class of ships after Canada's infantry regiments.

Then we will have The HMCS Royal Canadian. With the leading The. Capitalized.

Oldgateboatdriver · « **Reply #34 on:** July 21, 2011, 11:01:37 »

No, it would still be HMCS THE ROYAL CANADIAN, and HMCS THE OTHER REGIMENT.

All joking aside, using the right word in the right circumstances is an indication of professionalism, but like everything else it has to be enforced in a reasonable manner. Minor improprieties can, and should, be corrected in a gentle manner and at the appropriate time, so that ultimately, seaman get it right - but without going stupid. I am with Chief Stoker on that one: I'd rather have a young ABER that knows the procedure for loss of lube oil emergency down pat rather than her naval vocabulary down pat. I remember in the old days MPs giving speeding tickets on base for doing 32 Km/h in a 30 zone: stupid. Giving speeding tickets for doing 90 km/h in a school zone: smart. Everything is a matter of degree.

If you wanted to push the matter, even Pusser, or at least Pusser's nameless XO, got it wrong if they truly threaten that seaman could no go "inside": There is no "inside" for a ship - you are either on deck or below decks- so the threat should have been that these seaman should not be allowed "below".

NavalMoose · « **Reply #35 on:** July 21, 2011, 11:31:12 »

Here's another "tradition" although not naval that is being used more often....."I could care less"..when in fact you are trying to say "I couldn't care less" I am not a grammar nazi but you would think an officer would know better.

mad dog 2020 · « **Reply #36 on:** July 21, 2011, 11:59:44 »

So how about dem Jays? Seems like we veered off course. Talk about pickin the fly poop outa pepper?
Time for a chill pill.
I never knew different as navy people said "I'm on the Toronto" . Made sense as in the middle of the ocean ya wanna be ON something. And I don't mean Charlie Sheen.
Have a great day and stay cool! It is meltin out there.

cupper · « **Reply #37 on:** July 21, 2011, 19:47:46 »

Quote from: NavalMoose on July 21, 2011, 11:31:12

Here's another "tradition" although not naval that is being used more often....."I could care less"..when in fact you are trying to say "I couldn't care less" I am not a grammar nazi but you would think an officer would know better.

Technically he could care less than he does now, because he at least cared enough to make a comment.

NavalMoose · « **Reply #38 on:** July 21, 2011, 19:51:04 »

If it makes you feel ok thinking that, then fine.

CDN Aviator · « **Reply #39 on:** July 21, 2011, 20:07:13 »

Quote from: MARS on July 21, 2011, 08:46:16

However, the navy has its own language...for everything.

MARS,

The AF does as well and, unfortunately it is all navy-based

. "Aft bulkhead", "Port side", my MWOs and CWO are refered to as "chiefs". What you won't hear though is someone getting corrected for calling the aircraft's galley "the kitchen". You certainly wont hear someone say that letting someone calling it anything other than "galley" ( the proper term for it) as a slipping of standards for the profession of arms. You wont hear an officer say to someone "It's called a galley and if you dont call it that we wont let you eat !!!"

Maintaining traditions is one thing and i great. I maintain quite a few myself and i don't let the port touch the table. Implying that "on" a ship is a slip of standards and is somehow going to lead to someone getting killed is a bit of a stretch.

drunknsubmrnr · « **Reply #40 on:** July 21, 2011, 22:09:54 »

Quote

Trust me, submariners want to make certain that they are "in" the submarine, not "on " it.

That's actually a pretty big safety issue. The RAN lost a couple of submariners when they were thought to be in the boat, not on it.

recceguy · « **Reply #41 on:** July 22, 2011, 00:19:48 »

And you dory plugs think us pongos are anal

S.Stewart · « **Reply #42 on:** July 22, 2011, 19:21:39 »

Quote from: MARS on July 21, 2011, 08:46:16

100% correct. Not going to debate that angle.

However, the navy has its own language...for everything. Decks, deckhead, bulkheads, galley, bow, stern, athwartships, etc, etc. Why bother with that then? "In" and "the" are simply part of that. Nothing more, nothing less. But somehow, people manage to use those terms but can’t manage "in" or "the"? Why? Not enough room in the brain for that? If "in" or "the" aren’t a big deal for sailors, then lets drop the whole damn thing. The entire tradition of our language. F**k it, unimportant.

But really, no one in the navy, not even those too lazy to wrap their brains around "in" and "the", would go for that.

Seriously gclarke, I dare you to go to your XO and tell him that you saw some 'garbage' on the 'floor' down the 'hall', up the 'stairs' on the 'second floor'. Tell me how that works out for you. Actually, say that to your CO - he and I taught at Venture for years together and spent a great deal of time teaching the customs and traditions of the Navy to JOUTS. Because that is all this is - "customs and traditions". Meh, unimportant, I guess. Did you bother to get your Executive Curl put on your tunic? Again, simply a tradition. Why should the Navy spend money on a tradition like that? Not life or death. Has no impact on how we do our day to day jobs.

I could care less what those from the other elements have to say - they have their own customs and traditions that I find odd - because I don’t fully understand them and where they came from, but they are their customs and traditions. They have a place - if they didn't, they would have been done away with.

Chief Stoker, you are also correct. More important things to worry about, I guess. But Chiefs and Petty Officers are supposed to be the custodians of the Navy's customs and traditions, no? Those who sustain our traditions through thick and thin? Well, if the Chiefs won’t do it, then I guess us XOs will. Seriously, guy, I got this. Don’t sweat it.

Regards,

MARS

Talk about over kill. Nice read between the lines there, btw it's a msg board and in my field I am all for professionalism and getting things right however there is right as in the right way of doing things, and right because you can't stand to be wrong, or rather just like the sound of your own voice. Want to talk about professionalism, your little read between the lines, bolded really isn't it, comes across like a little kid whining in the schoolyard to the teacher cause they got pushed.

Pusser · « **Reply #43 on:** July 23, 2011, 22:03:01 »

Wow! How does a simple little joke turn into a major debate? My original point was that someone made a minor (albeit common) mistake in terminology and so I attempted to use humour to correct it.

With regard to attention to detail - No, saying "on" versus "in" a ship is not a matter of life or death, but attention to detail is a mindset. If you don't pay attention to the simple things, how can we be assured you're paying attention to the really important ones. I was in a ship at sea that had an explosion and suffered thousands of dollars in damage (luckily no one was hurt), because someone didn't think it mattered what type of lubricant was used. Does "never pass a fault" have a caveat that says, "unless you feel it's not life threatening?"

I give no credence to anything just because it is published, even by official sources. The article referenced on the first female submariner had a number of mistakes, despite the fact that it was written by a naval public affairs officer. Not only did it talk about being "on" a ship, it also mentioned that the women in question "took" her commission. I'm sorry, but commissions are not there for the taking. They do not come upon request. They are granted after they have been earned. The fact that many folks talk about "taking" their commissions, doesn't make it right.

Yes, you can go "inside" a ship. You open the door and walk in. Many people stand "inside" the bridge and then go "below decks" afterwards.

Yes I have been around since ships were wooden. The minesweepers were all made of wood and incidentally, the XO of which I speak was the XO of a minesweeper. When I joined the Navy, we all wore green and many of our ships were driven by steam.

Finally, my XO, although he did make that threat, he was joking!

He was trying to enforce the concept of getting it right through the use of humour.

NavalMoose · « **Reply #44 on:** July 24, 2011, 11:59:42 »

And here endeth the lesson......hopefully.

chadk · « **Reply #45 on:** July 27, 2011, 21:04:49 »

Quote from: Jaydub on July 18, 2011, 16:05:35

I'm on the Algonquin. I'm fairly new onboard. The first thing I noticed was how tight the crew is. There's a lot of good people.
Although I would have preferred to stay on a Frigate, the crew has made the posting enjoyable.

The CO is awesome. He was my XO on HMCS Winnipeg.

When do you get here?

Barsoom · « **Reply #46 on:** August 01, 2011, 01:09:09 »

Been in the Navy for 35 years. Just got posted off the Algonquin. It's a good ship, with a good crew. Lots of new people but should be an okay trip. I only got to serve ON Algonquin for just over a year but I had some good times.

Happy sailing.

Barsoom

cupper · « **Reply #47 on:** August 01, 2011, 19:18:55 »

Quote from: Barsoom on August 01, 2011, 01:09:09

Just got posted off the Algonquin.

Sure you weren't posted out of the Algonquin?

:sorry:I really couldn't help myself.

jollyjacktar · « **Reply #48 on:** August 01, 2011, 20:28:47 »

Quote from: cupper on August 01, 2011, 19:18:55

Sure you weren't posted out of the Algonquin?

:sorry:I really couldn't help myself.

Nope, it's off. Never, ever have heard some hairybag mutter they have been posted "out" of any thing.

Get Nautical · « **Reply #49 on:** August 31, 2011, 21:20:25 »

Quote from: yoman on July 07, 2011, 19:25:41

She caught fire on my first day at sea...

The crew likes to pick on NCdt's... (some funny stuff though and was kinda expected)

They like to play binder clipper wars...

Anything else?

I only spent a little over a month on her so I'm not the best person if your looking for more detailed info/more recent info.

I forgot about binder clip wars

News:

Author Topic: HMCS Algonquin (Read 8943 times)