Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Submarines and Females honeypot

Author Topic: Submarines and Females  (Read 20665 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline boundless

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 1
Submarines and Females
« on: Feb 06, 2014, 12:53 »
Hello all :) Im a potential nuke leaving for rtc in about 13 days, super pumped for training after! When I first dep'd in last year I was informed that since I am a female then my only ship option is going to be a carrier. I have been hearing little bits of news about females starting to be placed on the submarines and was wondering if anyone knows any more information on this. I expect that if it is starting to happen or is being tested now, then perhaps in the 2-3 years Ill be in school that I could be looking at being placed on a sub. Just trying to be a little more prepared for the potential future :)

I was also curious on if its typical for you to request a type of ship over another? It is not something I had previously looked into since I was informed my only route would be a carrier.

Thank you for your replies / opinions!

Offline SpaceJustice

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • SRO ILT
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #1 on: Feb 06, 2014, 01:27 »
Unless you become an officer you are not eligible to be on submarines, so your only choice will be carriers.  It is unlikely that they will start putting enlisted females on subs by the time you have completed the pipeline.

Offline MMM

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 582
  • Karma: 79
  • Gender: Male
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #2 on: Feb 06, 2014, 07:42 »
I think in the next couple years they will probably move ahead with putting female enlisted on subs. However, they will be starting at the CPO level so the junior enlisted have some mentorship when they get there. Most likely, E-6 and below will start being assigned to subs in 5+ years.

Offline SpaceJustice

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • SRO ILT
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #3 on: Feb 06, 2014, 03:32 »
I think in the next couple years they will probably move ahead with putting female enlisted on subs. However, they will be starting at the CPO level so the junior enlisted have some mentorship when they get there. Most likely, E-6 and below will start being assigned to subs in 5+ years.

Really, that fast?  I mean I have no idea what the intended timeline is, but that is fairly impressive for making such a large manning change.  I know RC Div wouldn't mind some extra bodies on a sub.

Offline ChiefRocscooter

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
  • Karma: 198
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #4 on: Feb 06, 2014, 05:16 »
"Really, that fast?"  They have only been debating it for 20 years (well more but 20 sound good!).  My guess, it will be on boomers 1st when it happens, as for CPO level now you have made the chicken and egg argument!  No SS female chiefs and any SW nuke female chief will be up against a huge learning curve face it there is no room in a sub crew for "learner" leaders.  Either they will have to increase the senior "manning" or there will be problems with them not knowing the job.  A sub MMC/EMC/ETC nuke is not the same as a Carrier one!  Hell I saw a boomer Chief come to a fast attack and end up getting booted because he could not function at the "fast attack" pace.  Yes, I know that's just one example but it makes the point that there will be problems.  Will they be over come, of course the Navy always "get it done" just sometime the pain is great while the gain is little. 
Being adept at being adaptable I look forward to every new challenge!

Offline boundless

  • Very Lite User
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 1
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #5 on: Feb 06, 2014, 05:44 »
thank you all for your replies

Offline spekkio

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • Karma: 188
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #6 on: Feb 06, 2014, 07:35 »
There are no officially released plans to place female enlisted sailors on subs.

My personal speculation is that it would never happen on fast attacks, not with 1/2-2/3 the crew already hot-racking on mission. You'd have to make 21-man a female berthing area and then you'd have to somehow always have nearly exactly 21 females per sub.

Offline DLGN25

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 170
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #7 on: Feb 07, 2014, 02:13 »
The entire movement of placing women on submarines or in combat units has nothing to do with the fighting force.  Rather it has to do with the officer corps and the inability of women to become generals or admirals without command experience.

Unless I misread the press, there is not a staffing problem on submarines, or for that matter surface ships.

Sorry ladies, but women on boats is not a good idea, and it is not about sex, (whether ladies on ladies or men huffing and puffing) it is about, well, give it a try and see how it goes.

Living on a ship or a boat is not all that pleasant.

Surely oak and three-fold brass surrounded his heart who first trusted a frail vessel to a merciless ocean.  Horace

Offline SpaceJustice

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: 18
  • Gender: Male
  • SRO ILT
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #8 on: Feb 07, 2014, 06:12 »
"Really, that fast?"  They have only been debating it for 20 years (well more but 20 sound good!). 

Well they just put female officers on subs fairly recently and I figured they would be getting data from that for a couple of years before moving into enlisted.

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 17049
  • Karma: 5147
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #9 on: Feb 07, 2014, 09:51 »
Navy Examining Enlisted Female Integration on Subs


Commander, Naval Submarine Forces in Norfolk established a flag officer-led task force in May to focus on effectively integrating enlisted women Sailors on board multiple submarine platforms.

Vice Adm. Michael Connor stood up the task force to specifically look at best integration practices for SSBNs, SSGNs, and VIRGINIA-class SSNs.

Commander of Submarine Group Two, Rear Adm. Kenneth Perry is leading the task force. The group is charged with developing a comprehensive Plan of Actions and Milestones (POAM) by January 2014.

This POAM will mirror the previous deliberate process used to successfully integrate female officers by including feasibility studies, potential courses of action and candidate timelines. Pending the results, a detailed implementation plan will be presented to the Chief of Naval Operations by March 2015.

Female officers have been successfully integrated on board OHIO-Class SSBNs and SSGNs, and will be integrated onboard VIRGINIA-Class SSNs in fiscal year 2015.
 
 The Navy is working with industry to design the Ohio replacement SSBN to support both officers and enlisted mixed-gender crews.


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/06/08/navy-examining-enlisted-female-integration-on-subs.html

Offline leavingreality

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: 1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #10 on: Feb 07, 2014, 11:20 »
Navy Examining Enlisted Female Integration on Subs


Commander, Naval Submarine Forces in Norfolk established a flag officer-led task force in May to focus on effectively integrating enlisted women Sailors on board multiple submarine platforms.

Vice Adm. Michael Connor stood up the task force to specifically look at best integration practices for SSBNs, SSGNs, and VIRGINIA-class SSNs.

Commander of Submarine Group Two, Rear Adm. Kenneth Perry is leading the task force. The group is charged with developing a comprehensive Plan of Actions and Milestones (POAM) by January 2014.

This POAM will mirror the previous deliberate process used to successfully integrate female officers by including feasibility studies, potential courses of action and candidate timelines. Pending the results, a detailed implementation plan will be presented to the Chief of Naval Operations by March 2015.

Female officers have been successfully integrated on board OHIO-Class SSBNs and SSGNs, and will be integrated onboard VIRGINIA-Class SSNs in fiscal year 2015.
 
 The Navy is working with industry to design the Ohio replacement SSBN to support both officers and enlisted mixed-gender crews.


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/06/08/navy-examining-enlisted-female-integration-on-subs.html

This should be fun.

Offline DLGN25

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 170
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #11 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:04 »
What is sad is this is not a staffing issue, it is a political issue.  There is nothing that I can find to indicate that women on boats will make them more efficient.

It is a sad joke...  No, no a sad joke, just sad.

Surely oak and three-fold brass surrounded his heart who first trusted a frail vessel to a merciless ocean.  Horace

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #12 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:11 »
They'll do just fine.

Offline DLGN25

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 170
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #13 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:17 »
They'll do just fine.
Or so it will be reported.
Surely oak and three-fold brass surrounded his heart who first trusted a frail vessel to a merciless ocean.  Horace

Offline DLGN25

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 170
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #14 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:19 »
They'll do just fine.
how many women are in your world?
Surely oak and three-fold brass surrounded his heart who first trusted a frail vessel to a merciless ocean.  Horace

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #15 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:27 »
A lot. Two are which are engineering officers in the navy and I will put them against any man.
Heck you are just a skimmer puke.
What do you know about life on submarines?

HeavyD

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #16 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:47 »
Putting women back into the program was never about efficiency, neither was allowing them to serve aboard combatant vessels.

If they can physically do the job, then the Navy will attempt to find a way to make it work.

In my 20 years I saw plenty of women Chiefs and Officers who could run circles around men of the same rank in the areas of leadership ability, plant knowledge and watchstanding capability.  I've seen the same thing in my short time in the commercial world.  The gender of an individual is often gives zero indication as to whether or not they can actually perform at a given task or succeed in a given role in a given environment.

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #17 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:50 »
Well said HeavyD!

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 17049
  • Karma: 5147
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #18 on: Feb 08, 2014, 10:23 »
   Most arguments (reasonable ones anyway) against women on submarines had nothing to do with capability of the women. The Ohio class subs removed most of those arguments. I don't know what the lay out of the Virginia class boats is, I was a 637 class sailor, but until newer ones are designed specifically for a mixed gender crew I am a little doubtful that staffing them with women is anything but PC BS.

Offline jams723

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
  • Karma: 72
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #19 on: Feb 08, 2014, 10:24 »
I agree.  If they are competent and do their job without expecting allowances to be made because they are female they will be accepted and do just fine.  

The problems would come if there was an entitlement attitude or they say they cannot do some aspect of their job.

Just like in commercial power, prove you can do the job, don't back down to a challenge and you will be accepted.

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #20 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:09 »
Just as many men feel entitled as women. Heck look at the baby nukes coming out these days.

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #21 on: Feb 08, 2014, 12:16 »
how many women are in your world?

Don't they usually have about 5 ELTs aboard when fully staffed?  8)

Offline spekkio

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • Karma: 188
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #22 on: Feb 08, 2014, 02:02 »
  Most arguments (reasonable ones anyway) against women on submarines had nothing to do with capability of the women. The Ohio class subs removed most of those arguments. I don't know what the lay out of the Virginia class boats is, I was a 637 class sailor, but until newer ones are designed specifically for a mixed gender crew I am a little doubtful that staffing them with women is anything but PC BS.
This. I have no doubt that female JOs can dance with the one-eyed-lady (man now?) with the best of them, sound semi-intelligenct on the 1MC/2MC/7MC, and do QA vertical audits like a champ.

The issue is whether the costs of putting women on submarines are offset by maintaining warfighting readiness. What are those costs?

-Women leave the Navy at a much higher rate than men after their initial tours. The sub force has enjoyed high retention over the past few years thanks to a tubbed economy and a supposed culture shift among XO/COs to take better care of their wardrooms, but the economy will eventually recover.
-There is a big push from Big Navy to make more senior female COs and Major Commanders, and you know that the first female submariner who wants to stick around long enough will be put on the highway to command at sea. This results in pressure on COs to give females higher marks on fitreps for equal or sometimes lesser work.
-Fraternization is one of the leading causes of COs/XOs being relieved, many of whom were probably otherwise very capable Officers. It's easy to point your finger at them and say 'you should know better,' but Mother Nature is what it is -- you work in close quarters with someone for months on end and this stuff will happen.
-Inconveniencing a crew that is already living in spartan conditions, many of whom chose it because of the culture onboard submarines that doesn't involve having women around.

The SecNav and SecDef have decided that it is worth the cost, so who am I to disagree. I just haven't really heard them present what the benefits are to warrant having to deal with these new set of challenges, nor have I ever met a woman who said "You know, it's totally bullshit that I can't be a submariner." But we'll adapt and overcome, it's what we do.
« Last Edit: Feb 08, 2014, 02:03 by spekkio »

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #23 on: Feb 08, 2014, 02:03 »
Unless I was on board. Then you only need one.

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 17049
  • Karma: 5147
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #24 on: Feb 08, 2014, 03:22 »
This. I have no doubt that female JOs can dance with the one-eyed-lady (man now?) with the best of them, sound semi-intelligenct on the 1MC/2MC/7MC, and do QA vertical audits like a champ.

The issue is whether the costs of putting women on submarines are offset by maintaining warfighting readiness. What are those costs?

-Women leave the Navy at a much higher rate than men after their initial tours. The sub force has enjoyed high retention over the past few years thanks to a tubbed economy and a supposed culture shift among XO/COs to take better care of their wardrooms, but the economy will eventually recover.
-There is a big push from Big Navy to make more senior female COs and Major Commanders, and you know that the first female submariner who wants to stick around long enough will be put on the highway to command at sea. This results in pressure on COs to give females higher marks on fitreps for equal or sometimes lesser work.
-Fraternization is one of the leading causes of COs/XOs being relieved, many of whom were probably otherwise very capable Officers. It's easy to point your finger at them and say 'you should know better,' but Mother Nature is what it is -- you work in close quarters with someone for months on end and this stuff will happen.
-Inconveniencing a crew that is already living in spartan conditions, many of whom chose it because of the culture onboard submarines that doesn't involve having women around.

The SecNav and SecDef have decided that it is worth the cost, so who am I to disagree. I just haven't really heard them present what the benefits are to warrant having to deal with these new set of challenges, nor have I ever met a woman who said "You know, it's totally bullshit that I can't be a submariner." But we'll adapt and overcome, it's what we do.

   "In 1995, Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) prepared a report for the Navy about women in submarines. It was not available to the public until just after the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS) Conference, held in San Diego in October 1999. The SAIC report was comprehensive, and laid out many reasons why having women in submarines would not work. A key concern was that complications raised by women on board would undermine the operational effectiveness of the crew. Nevertheless, DACOWITS voted unanimously for a resolution recommending that plans for future submarines should make provisions for women."
   Although I agree with much of what the report says a conversation with a retired admiral mitigated my negative opinion to a point. He stated that there is also a need for quality personnel to staff the boats and excluding women precludes many capable personnel in a very competitive and difficult to staff service. Listening to many complain on this site complain about the low quality of current crop of "Nukes" (perception in my opinion, same stuff different day) and the cheating scandals a little fresh blood may not be a bad thing provided readiness is not compromised. I am still somewhat skeptical but I am also from a different era of "bubbleheads" where we lived inside our machinery spaces, valves were located outboard of some of our racks, the diesel was accessed through the berthing areas, hot racking was common due to lack of berthing, and junior personnel slept in temporary racks placed on the torpedo handling gear (had to make sure their bunk was not parked over a nuke). I suspect the Virginia class has not advanced much beyond that even though design for mix gender crews has been an issue since the before the NSSN (Virginia class) was being designed.

http://www.cmrlink.org/data/sites/85/CMRDocuments/SAPA%20020195.pdf

Offline spekkio

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • Karma: 188
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #25 on: Feb 08, 2014, 03:58 »
Quote
Although I agree with much of what the report says a conversation with a retired admiral mitigated my negative opinion to a point. He stated that there is also a need for quality personnel to staff the boats and excluding women precludes many capable personnel in a very competitive and difficult to staff service.

I have heard this argument; this assumes that the hit to men who volunteer for submarines or continue a career in submarines is equal or less than the women who want to serve in the submarine force.

I'm skeptical of that, particularly because as I pointed out, I haven't encountered any women who were itching to serve in the submarine service. But, for better or worse, I have encountered a lot of enlisted submariners who volunteered strictly to be in a rating that doesn't have to work with women. It's anecdotal evidence, sure, but I'd be interested to see a poll on that across the fleet and some data on what actually happens.

As far as the quality of an entrant: If the submarine force has X slates for women, and Y women volunteer, and Y < X, then your quality will go down, not up. It is the same problem that the nuclear Navy and submarine force faces with men, you're just splitting the quota by gender now. The first group of women had a 100% selection rate from USNA -- not a super-selective process. But maybe every single woman who applied had a 3.5+ GPA and was a rockstar. I have seen what happens when the sub force 'drafts' new Ensigns and it was essentially a gigantic waste of taxpayer money trying to force people, some of whom had reasonably high GPAs in non-technical majors, through a program that they had no business actually being in.

It also takes more female JOs to make a DH because females leave the Navy at a higher rate than men. DH are the critical officer billets that the sub force typically has trouble manning. That means that you either have to A) pick more women and increase the number of JO billets or B) lower the DH (and eventually CPO) screening requirements when your overall retention suffers from women leaving the Navy at their historical rates.
« Last Edit: Feb 08, 2014, 04:01 by spekkio »

Offline hamsamich

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1454
  • Karma: 1358
  • Gender: Male
  • And did I hear a 9er in there?
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #26 on: Feb 08, 2014, 04:46 »
What about 21 man (women!) on 688s?  seems like a reasonable amount of privacy having their own berthing space.  not connected to a bathroom though!  but close.

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #27 on: Feb 08, 2014, 04:55 »

I have heard this argument; this assumes that the hit to men who volunteer for submarines or continue a career in submarines is equal or less than the women who want to serve in the submarine force.

I'm skeptical of that, particularly because as I pointed out, I haven't encountered any women who were itching to serve in the submarine service. But, for better or worse, I have encountered a lot of enlisted submariners who volunteered strictly to be in a rating that doesn't have to work with women. It's anecdotal evidence, sure, but I'd be interested to see a poll on that across the fleet and some data on what actually happens.

As far as the quality of an entrant: If the submarine force has X slates for women, and Y women volunteer, and Y < X, then your quality will go down, not up. It is the same problem that the nuclear Navy and submarine force faces with men, you're just splitting the quota by gender now. The first group of women had a 100% selection rate from USNA -- not a super-selective process. But maybe every single woman who applied had a 3.5+ GPA and was a rockstar. I have seen what happens when the sub force 'drafts' new Ensigns and it was essentially a gigantic waste of taxpayer money trying to force people, some of whom had reasonably high GPAs in non-technical majors, through a program that they had no business actually being in.

It also takes more female JOs to make a DH because females leave the Navy at a higher rate than men. DH are the critical officer billets that the sub force typically has trouble manning. That means that you either have to A) pick more women and increase the number of JO billets or B) lower the DH (and eventually CPO) screening requirements when your overall retention suffers from women leaving the Navy at their historical rates.


Research shows officers with non technical degrees do better in the nuclear field than officers with technical degrees...

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 17049
  • Karma: 5147
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #28 on: Feb 08, 2014, 04:56 »
What about 21 man (women!) on 688s?  seems like a reasonable amount of privacy having their own berthing space.  not connected to a bathroom though!  but close.

   You would need 21 women that would have to be replaced with a woman with the same NEC. Sea-Shore rotation would be a nightmare.

Offline spekkio

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 629
  • Karma: 188
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #29 on: Feb 08, 2014, 05:01 »
Quote
Research shows officers with non technical degrees do better in the nuclear field than officers with technical degrees...
Do you have a source for that? You'd think the Navy would've caught on if that were the case. Or are you talking about transitioning to civilian utilities?

Regardless of what their degree was, you could easily tell that a lot of these guys weren't cut out for the program and we had much higher than average attrition as a result.
« Last Edit: Feb 08, 2014, 05:02 by spekkio »

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #30 on: Feb 08, 2014, 05:37 »
What about 21 man (women!) on 688s?  seems like a reasonable amount of privacy having their own berthing space.  not connected to a bathroom though!  but close.

We analyzed for that about 3 years ago on NW...

http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php/topic,25368.msg142587.html#msg142587

Offline hamsamich

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1454
  • Karma: 1358
  • Gender: Male
  • And did I hear a 9er in there?
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #31 on: Feb 08, 2014, 11:12 »
Yeah I remember about the 21 man discussion, but someone commented on subs not being designed for 2 genders; 688s seemed like they were at least partially.  We kept all the dou, um I mean first classes down there.

Offline ChiefRocscooter

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
  • Karma: 198
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #32 on: Feb 09, 2014, 12:04 »
Anyone who has "real world experience" in the integration of females into ship crews can see that there are going to be very big "problems" with this process.  The numbers that come out in the publicity material are colored to make things look peachy, but if you take a look at the number of crew members who go on deployment (the number one job of a US warship) and trace it back thru the training cycle thing become a little less so.  Every boat expects to lose a guy or two in the run up to deployment (carriers crews are so big that this discussion really matter much less to them), but every time a guy drops from the roster the pain for the rest of the sub division he was in grows exponentially.  The how to handle the living arrangements problems will pale (IMHO) in the long run with the attrition issues that are special to females, yes guys fall out of the system too but they have to do it by getting hurt or in trouble where in some cases a female can do it by choice and suffer no repercussions.  The Navy will invest a lot of time and money into many of the sailors to have them "walk" away without filing the role they got them for, Sailor on ship headed to sea for deployment.

As for the living arrangements well equal means equal, ever see Starship Troopers?? I am all for that arrangement... the wives and husbands well maybe not so much! :o
Being adept at being adaptable I look forward to every new challenge!

drayer54

  • Guest
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #33 on: Feb 09, 2014, 05:24 »
the wives and husbands well maybe not so much! :o

Nukes never cheat....

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #34 on: Feb 09, 2014, 07:58 »
As for the living arrangements well equal means equal, ever see Starship Troopers?? I am all for that arrangement... the wives and husbands well maybe not so much! :o

There's only room for one person at a time in sub shower stalls for a reason, Starship Troopers or not!  ;)

 [navy sub]

Offline Wojo

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 745
  • Karma: 166
  • Gender: Male
Re: Submarines and Females
« Reply #35 on: Feb 10, 2014, 02:25 »
It may be different now but when I reported to my first boat, I didn't even rate a rack.  I wasn't worthy of a rack until I qualified for my dolphins.  Until then, my "rack" was a Mark 48.  And I "hot-racked" that bunk as well.  So the question is, will a female have to go through the same?  And if yes, how does that work?  and if no, then how do you volunteer for submarines and not cry "bull-s**t"!
« Last Edit: Feb 10, 2014, 06:37 by Nuclear NASCAR »
Lost my boots in transit, pile of smokin leather, nailed the retreads to my feet and prayed for better weather - J Garcia

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2024 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?