Does not everyone now pay for their mess? In the CG, it was all enlisted afloat were RIK, and officers were on BAS and had to pay chowbills. Chiefs, having their own mess, paid mess attendants, mess dues, but not meals as they were RIK. Did the Navy operate the same, or different? Also, nowadays, everyone is on SEPRATS, including afloat sailors, and chowbills are paid automatically, similiar to what RIK achieved. It’s a good program because enlisted sailors pocket what little is left over, an extra $30 or so a month.
Nope. E6 and below on sea duty receive RIK (Rations in Kind) which means the unit feeds them. Shore duty is a different story–depends on the Food Service Officer at the base–there’s some regulation that provides for what number of Enlisted members may be permitted to “subsist” without benefit of the mess. E7 and above on sea duty received a mess bill which included the number of meals they actually consumed. Yet another disparity between the higher ranks and us lowly E6 and below–if we didn’t eat the meal, we didn’t get a refund (except for certain unusual, but covered in the regulations, circumstances).
Since the Navy’s main mission is a bit further away from the coast than the Coast Guard’s, there’s a bit of difference in how the feeding’s done.
On a Naval Carrier there is an officer or chief informally known as an Air Boss, responsible for the integrity of the air space around the vicinity of the vessel.
His authority in this matter is absolute.
No captain, admiral, or other superior officer may overrule his judgement in operating the take-offs, landings, or holding patterns: not even Air Force One can fly overhead without his express permission.
Enola:
That’s another example of positional authority.
Yes, and yes–but no Marine would ever <i>want</i> to take an order from someone in the Air Force. 
Take this one from a Lance Corporal.
Padeye, where are you getting your info? While I’ve never served on board a carrier, I have served on an AOE, and I have visited and eaten on a carrier. On the AOE, as a JO, I ate with the skipper and other senior and junior officers in the wardroom. On the carrier, IIRC, we ate in one of a couple officer messes. Senior and junior O’s ate there. The food was fine. On both ships, AFAIK, all the officers chip in to a general mess fund. Not just JO’s. This practice carries over to the squadron world, where all the officers chip into the wardroom fund, which pays for officer social functions.
I should also point out the tradition of the Bull Ensign, which is the senior Ensign on a ship or in a squadron. This guy, if he so chooses, can wield quite a bit of power, and if you look closely at many commands, Yeah, he may even have is own parking spot near the skipper’s.
I think you misunderstood this a bit. I was pointing out how military service is not slavery. If the NCO’s service commitment is running out and they don’t like the situation they are in, they can leave. You can’t leave slavery. Or, instead of extending at the particular unit they are at, they can take the opportunity to change station. The point wasn’t that this is what should be done, just that it the slavery comment makes no sense. Personally, I think the best course of action is one that tries to fix the problem, because bad Lts can become more trouble as they get promoted.
**
I was thinking more an intra-unit scenario in this case. Assuming that the Lts behavior is such that the other officers would recognize it as wrong, the average NCO knows how to get that behavior addressed. Maybe going to a more senior NCO, or an officer they have a good relationship with.
As for the different service situation, I’d agree that countering with your own officer would be the quickest way to solve the problem.
Okay, I’ll grant you that – at least, until they start Drafting recruits again.
Speaking from experience:
When I arrived in Viet Nam, I was fresh out college and my second louie bars were fresh out of the box. Realizing this, my commanding officer called my first sergeant and me into his office and told me that this NCO was on his third tour in Viet Nam and also had extensive peace-time service. He pointed out that the sergeant would take my orders no matter how stupid they were. He said he had seen him do it before with other raw officers. He said, however, that it might be best if I didn’t do too much of that and I might consult with Martin (the sergeant in question) rather than “order” him.
I took his advice and came out of the conflict with my life and many an enlisted man thought I was a good and effective officer (which I have been told since). Little or none of that was deserved however, most of it came from listening to Martin.
Regarding the other question in the OP, my father used to tell a story about when he was in the Navy and walking down the street with my mother, whom he was only dating at the time. An Army officer walked by and my father saluted. My mother was impressed and said she thought it was nice how polite my father was for saluting someone not in his service. My father responded, “Well, they are sort of our allies.”
The salute is a symbol of how an officer is superior in rank no matter which service and thus deserving of obedience.
In traditional war situations (which haven’t been seen in some time) ranking enemy officers even rate salutes (but you don’t have to take their orders).
Hijack …that chart military ranks reminded me of something I’ve wondered about for years.
Since we have knowledgeable military types about , maybe someone can explain it. How come a major outranks a lieutenant, but a lieutenant-general outranks a major -general ? As in, how come the the addition to the “general” ranks goes in reverse order to how the additions go as ranks on their own ?
williambaskerville: The Perfect Master has answered that one: http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_325a.html
Short answer - Major General is short for the original Sergeant Major General. And Major is short for regimental Sergeant Major, which is senior to a company-level Lieutenant who is senior to a company-level Sergeant Major ( the ones we still have by that title today ).
- Tamerlane
I don’t think this is true (anymore?) According to my CG Bluejackets Manual, under whom to salute:
This is from the 7th edition I got in bootcamp. I think they are up to 9 or so, so I don’t know what the most recent one says. Realizing this isn’t an official doc, it’s info comes from applicable regs, and I haven’t heard of any changes in that area.
By the way, that was excellent story of your time in Vietnam and your relationship with Martin. I think it illustrates the points raised in this matter to a T. Thanks for sharing that.
I suggest that instead of checking out the Bluejackets Handbook which is a commercial non-official publication, you check out the regulations for the Service concerned regarding “rendering of honors.”
Carrier food isn’t bad if you’ve been in port recently but fresh fruits and vegtables soon become a distant memory. I’m not say it was awful bad, but that the squardon OODs would look for any opportunity to eat in the enlisted mess.
Bull Ensign? Interesting concept. We only ever had one ensign billet in F-14 squadrons. He’d usually be assigned to maintenance control as a paperweight. Aside from that only O2s and above to one O6 for C.O.
I believe the reference was to the Bluejacket’s Manual. This site and this one seem to think highly of it.
A high school friend of mine joined the navy right out of school and trained at Great Lakes. The first thing he was issued, he told me, was a Bluejacket’s Manual and they had to study it every night. The Manual celebrated its 100[sup]th[/sup] birthday in July. When my friend got his the book was [sob] only 38.[/sob]
I just remember a couple of things from the Bluejackets book that were in direct contradiction of the actual regulations. One such is that the BJ says that Merchan Marine officers are to receive salutes from Active Duty Enlisted Members. They aren’t.
[William Saffire]OsOD[/WS]
Well, I’ll stick with the good old AR 600-25 (Salutes, Honors, and Visit of Courtesy), 1-3©:
Bolding mine.
I would assume that if you are in the presence of an enemy officer and are thinking about whether to salute or not, then one of you is a POW. And, IIRC, prisoners are allowed to neither receive nor present salutes.
From Coast Guard Regulations, COMDTINST M5000.3:
These are CG regs, YMMV.
Horseflesh: There’s a huge difference between a Prisoner of War and a Prisoner. The latter are those who are being disciplined (as the military calls it). The former are merely members of the enemy combatant force. POWs are not restricted from rendering military salutes. Prisoners who are not POWs are restricted from that privilege.
Chandeleur: You’re talking about ceremonial salutes such as firing of cannon. What’s being discussed at the moment is the hand salute.