HMS Queen Elizabeth
Discussion
saaby93 said:
Speculatore said:
Now it transpires that his wife was using it for school runs...... I said at the start that there was more to this story...
Suggested earlierIt's what wives can do if there's a car sitting on the drive that needs using.
Who's to argue?
Wasnt her car.
Wasnt his car
Was she insured.
What if she had an accident, (see above)..............Stop being so narrow minded
mikal83 said:
saaby93 said:
Speculatore said:
Now it transpires that his wife was using it for school runs...... I said at the start that there was more to this story...
Suggested earlierIt's what wives can do if there's a car sitting on the drive that needs using.
Who's to argue?
Wasnt her car.
Wasnt his car
Was she insured.
What if she had an accident, (see above)..............Stop being so narrow minded
Of course it's insured - how would it end up on the drive if it wasnt
Lurking Lawyer said:
Looks like Nick Cooke-Priest is still in command for the trip from Scotland back to Portsmouth - apparently because there's no-one else available to take over before the end of the month.
Why would you need anyone to 'take over'? Getting a ship from Scotland to Portsmouth when nobody is shooting at you is hardly a strategic challenge. What would happen if the captain was taken out my enemy action?Munter said:
In any event it's not about costs. It's about process, and attitude.
Things that are important if you are in charge of an aircraft carrier.
Utterly pathetic to the point of being pedantic in a retarded way though. I wholeheartedly agree that a Captain of his responsibility and stature needs to be above board in all matters and so censured in this instance accordingly as rules were apparently broken. Things that are important if you are in charge of an aircraft carrier.
However, to lose his Captaincy on this ship over it? Ridiculous! If someone is deemed to have the quality required to lead a flagship into war - and by that I mean the capability to make the right decisions in combat - then to lose such a person's ability over such a relatively trivial - and yes, it is trivial in the grand scheme of things - is retarded.
Good to know though, I guess, that the UK can afford not to use its 1st choice Captain in a conflict situation on account of his wife using a Ford Galaxy without permission! Moronic - and I don't care who disagrees!
saaby93 said:
mikal83 said:
saaby93 said:
Speculatore said:
Now it transpires that his wife was using it for school runs...... I said at the start that there was more to this story...
Suggested earlierIt's what wives can do if there's a car sitting on the drive that needs using.
Who's to argue?
Wasnt her car.
Wasnt his car
Was she insured.
What if she had an accident, (see above)..............Stop being so narrow minded
Of course it's insured - how would it end up on the drive if it wasnt
Coolbanana said:
Utterly pathetic to the point of being pedantic in a retarded way though. I wholeheartedly agree that a Captain of his responsibility and stature needs to be above board in all matters and so censured in this instance accordingly as rules were apparently broken.
However, to lose his Captaincy on this ship over it? Ridiculous! If someone is deemed to have the quality required to lead a flagship into war - and by that I mean the capability to make the right decisions in combat - then to lose such a person's ability over such a relatively trivial - and yes, it is trivial in the grand scheme of things - is retarded.
Good to know though, I guess, that the UK can afford not to use its 1st choice Captain in a conflict situation on account of his wife using a Ford Galaxy without permission! Moronic - and I don't care who disagrees!
Top brass: Stop putting extra miles on the car that you can't account forHowever, to lose his Captaincy on this ship over it? Ridiculous! If someone is deemed to have the quality required to lead a flagship into war - and by that I mean the capability to make the right decisions in combat - then to lose such a person's ability over such a relatively trivial - and yes, it is trivial in the grand scheme of things - is retarded.
Good to know though, I guess, that the UK can afford not to use its 1st choice Captain in a conflict situation on account of his wife using a Ford Galaxy without permission! Moronic - and I don't care who disagrees!
Captain: f
k off I'm captain of the flagship, what are you going to do about it, sack me and cause a lot of negative press.Top brass: Fair enough, carry on
That's how you think this should have gone?
mikal83 said:
saaby93 said:
mikal83 said:
saaby93 said:
Speculatore said:
Now it transpires that his wife was using it for school runs...... I said at the start that there was more to this story...
Suggested earlierIt's what wives can do if there's a car sitting on the drive that needs using.
Who's to argue?
Wasnt her car.
Wasnt his car
Was she insured.
What if she had an accident, (see above)..............Stop being so narrow minded
Of course it's insured - how would it end up on the drive if it wasnt
saaby93 said:
Does it happen in any other parts of the world 
Boat commander is given car as part of his salary
While he's away, wifey uses it for school run (keeps it in running order)
He gets sack
My mate got the sack when his dad used a "company" car whilst drunk, crashed it. Dad got a driving ban, mate got sacked for letting someone uninsured use the carBoat commander is given car as part of his salary
While he's away, wifey uses it for school run (keeps it in running order)
He gets sack
saaby93 said:
ep - how long would you be on the phone trying to explain it to numerous spouses
About 2 seconds surely, it's not a complicated concept that a vehicle is for work use only. I used to work for a company were we used hire cars a lot for company business, but not allowed for private miles. If someone had a booking before and after a weekend the hire company would often leave the car with you. One numpty in our department got a warning for putting in an expense claim for fuel with a receipt from a Saturday about 100 miles from home. The second time he did it he got fired.
Coolbanana said:
Utterly pathetic to the point of being pedantic in a retarded way though. I wholeheartedly agree that a Captain of his responsibility and stature needs to be above board in all matters and so censured in this instance accordingly as rules were apparently broken.
However, to lose his Captaincy on this ship over it? Ridiculous! If someone is deemed to have the quality required to lead a flagship into war - and by that I mean the capability to make the right decisions in combat - then to lose such a person's ability over such a relatively trivial - and yes, it is trivial in the grand scheme of things - is retarded.
Good to know though, I guess, that the UK can afford not to use its 1st choice Captain in a conflict situation on account of his wife using a Ford Galaxy without permission! Moronic - and I don't care who disagrees!
Tend to agree, but no doubt there is more to this than has been made public. However, to lose his Captaincy on this ship over it? Ridiculous! If someone is deemed to have the quality required to lead a flagship into war - and by that I mean the capability to make the right decisions in combat - then to lose such a person's ability over such a relatively trivial - and yes, it is trivial in the grand scheme of things - is retarded.
Good to know though, I guess, that the UK can afford not to use its 1st choice Captain in a conflict situation on account of his wife using a Ford Galaxy without permission! Moronic - and I don't care who disagrees!
Our company cars were insured for anyone in the company, and their families.
Enlightment
How much would that have saved in this case?
If he'd topped it up during the week and used it at the weekend that would have been ok?
How much would that have saved in this case?
RizzoTheRat said:
About 2 seconds surely, it's not a complicated concept that a vehicle is for work use only.
I used to work for a company were we used hire cars a lot for company business, but not allowed for private miles. If someone had a booking before and after a weekend the hire company would often leave the car with you. One numpty in our department got a warning for putting in an expense claim for fuel with a receipt from a Saturday about 100 miles from home. The second time he did it he got fired.
Thats a bit daft if he's topped it up for work use the rest of the week.I used to work for a company were we used hire cars a lot for company business, but not allowed for private miles. If someone had a booking before and after a weekend the hire company would often leave the car with you. One numpty in our department got a warning for putting in an expense claim for fuel with a receipt from a Saturday about 100 miles from home. The second time he did it he got fired.
If he'd topped it up during the week and used it at the weekend that would have been ok?
Edited by saaby93 on Friday 24th May 16:16
saaby93 said:
Does it happen in any other parts of the world
Boat commander is given car as part of his salary
While he's away, wifey uses it for school run (keeps it in running order)
He gets sack
I'm pretty sure it's not part of his salary unless things have changed since I served. There are no company cars in the armed forces as far as I'm aware.Boat commander is given car as part of his salary
While he's away, wifey uses it for school run (keeps it in running order)
He gets sack
Ships vehicles are well used, and a large proportion of the crew are engineers.so you don't need the wife to keep it running by using it for the school run!
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff