On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 12:10:59 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:

>"brooklyn1" wrote
>
>> There's nothing difficult/unbelieveable about cooking a meal for 144.
>> I used to cook for 400+... three meals a day... often all on my own,
>> including all baked goods from scratch, including breads... typically
>> two main courses, 3-4 different salads, 2-3 appetizers, 1-2 soups, 3-4
>> sides, 2 desserts, plus beverages.
>
>Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship of 400
>is 12 plus the attendant junior folks from other divisions serving their
>'mess deck' time. You'd have never done all 3 meals by yourself. You'd
>never have done any of them yourself. You very well however might have done
>all the bread portion of a day's meals yourself, or all the desserts
>yourself (a good portion of which are pre-made today). You may have done
>much of the soups (many are just open a can and heat today).
>
>For the rest, he's right that a lot of the breads are totally from scratch
>on a US Navy ship. Athough they have many canned goods, each ship varies a
>bit in how much is made in true scratch style as well as how closely they
>follow the 'recipe cards'. The rule of thumb is smaller ships (300-400
>crew) have better food because they don't have to cook for as many at once.
>They are less prone to following 'recipe cards to the letter'.
>
>The food is generally pretty good, with a few disaster days mixed with the
>sublime where everything looks outstanding and you can't choose between'em!
>Sheldon has given a fairly accurate view of what would be served, just not
>the number of folks involved in it. Take out the senior folks and FSO, and
>you'd have about 6 per meal. In port, you'd have fewer on weekends but be
>feeding just the duty section (generally 1/6th of the crew now-a-days but
>may be 1/8th). You'd also have lots of those folks who are doing their
>galley duty to help out.
>

You've never been aboard a ship underway... perhaps a boat but never a
ship. Larger ships that spent much of their time in port received
most of their meals already prepared from on shore galleys.

I served aboard a Sherman class tin can, typical crew of 400. There
would be only 3 cooks aboard for the enlisted men and CPOs, officers
had their own pineapples. At sea (which was 90% of the time) cooks
worked 24 hour shifts, in port 48 hr shifts or longer for holidays or
long weekends, cooks worked out their own shifts among themselves
depending on who could make it home and back, I always workd x-mas, no
one cared, not even the old man, so long as meals were prepared on
time. Mess cooks didn't cook, they cleaned, did deep sink duty,
peeled veggies, and assisted the JOD (Jack of the Dust). War ships
have very limited storage space for foods, there was very limited
reefer space for baked goods... only baked goods were packaged sliced
bread for maybe three days out of port, then all bread was baked from
scratch. There was no freezer space for ice cream, the cook made ice
cream in huge batches from scratch, all cakes, pies, cookies were made
from scratch. There was no canned soups, there'd be no space to store
cans that were mostly water... there was bouillion powder but soups
were made entirely from scratch, even veggies were mostly dehys.
The galley on a tin can is small, there was never more than one cook
on duty at a time. they'd only be in each others way. Baking was very
easy to accomplish between cooking, and cooking between baking... when
one knows how... obviously you don't cook[period]

"brooklyn1" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote:

>>Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship of 400

> You've never been aboard a ship underway... perhaps a boat but never a
> ship. Larger ships that spent much of their time in port received
> most of their meals already prepared from on shore galleys.

LOL! Dont even try it kiddo. The non-miltary here may believe you but
anyone with Navy experience at sea tags you fast.

You exaggurated a wee bit *too* much.

> I served aboard a Sherman class tin can, typical crew of 400. There
> would be only 3 cooks aboard for the enlisted men and CPOs, officers
> had their own pineapples. At sea (which was 90% of the time) cooks
> worked 24 hour shifts, in port 48 hr shifts or longer for holidays or
> long weekends, cooks worked out their own shifts among themselves
> depending on who could make it home and back, I always workd x-mas, no
> one cared, not even the old man, so long as meals were prepared on
> time. Mess cooks didn't cook, they cleaned, did deep sink duty,
> peeled veggies, and assisted the JOD (Jack of the Dust). War ships
> have very limited storage space for foods, there was very limited
> reefer space for baked goods... only baked goods were packaged sliced
> bread for maybe three days out of port, then all bread was baked from
> scratch. There was no freezer space for ice cream, the cook made ice
> cream in huge batches from scratch, all cakes, pies, cookies were made
> from scratch. There was no canned soups, there'd be no space to store
> cans that were mostly water... there was bouillion powder but soups
> were made entirely from scratch, even veggies were mostly dehys.
> The galley on a tin can is small, there was never more than one cook
> on duty at a time. they'd only be in each others way. Baking was very
> easy to accomplish between cooking, and cooking between baking... when
> one knows how... obviously you don't cook[period]

Grin, very cute and very much inaacurate. You do not make your own ice
cream when storage of pre-made takes less space for example. You dont work
48 hours straight nor even 24 straight. No ships are at sea 90% of the time.
The highest percentage is FDNF amphibs at 9.5 months of the year average.

The soups were a combination of dried 'add water' and canned, but the better
ones were real scratch made from scraps. Fort Mchenry specifically was
really good at that one. JC Stennis was pretty decent. Essex wasnt too
shabby. GW was actually pretty good. Juneau sucked at it. Harpers Ferry
wasnt great but had a bang up pastry chef!

And BTW, best I can guess, I have more time at sea than you had in the Navy.

ITCS(SW/AW) USN Ret, 26 years 1983-2007, 12 years shore duty. You do the
math.

I usually leave you alone but you arent going to lie blatently to the
civvies here about the Navy and not expect to be caught. The crew CS
complement for 400 remains 12. It's 3 per 100 members. Surge ships with
variable marine compliments, get 4 per 100 to cover the gap.

Sorry to the rest, tagged and bagged. I just couldnt sit by and watch him
lie that the navy uses 1 cook for 400 people. He's got his cool points, but
he tends to try to be more knowledgable and it is really obvious to Navy
folks who did the full 20+ years.

On Sun, 4 Oct 2009 16:52:10 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:

>"brooklyn1" wrote
>> "cshenk" wrote:
>
>>>Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship of 400
>
>> You've never been aboard a ship underway... perhaps a boat but never a
>> ship. Larger ships that spent much of their time in port received
>> most of their meals already prepared from on shore galleys.
>
>LOL! Dont even try it kiddo. The non-miltary here may believe you but
>anyone with Navy experience at sea tags you fast.
>
>You exaggurated a wee bit *too* much.
>
>> I served aboard a Sherman class tin can, typical crew of 400. There
>> would be only 3 cooks aboard for the enlisted men and CPOs, officers
>> had their own pineapples. At sea (which was 90% of the time) cooks
>> worked 24 hour shifts, in port 48 hr shifts or longer for holidays or
>> long weekends, cooks worked out their own shifts among themselves
>> depending on who could make it home and back, I always workd x-mas, no
>> one cared, not even the old man, so long as meals were prepared on
>> time. Mess cooks didn't cook, they cleaned, did deep sink duty,
>> peeled veggies, and assisted the JOD (Jack of the Dust). War ships
>> have very limited storage space for foods, there was very limited
>> reefer space for baked goods... only baked goods were packaged sliced
>> bread for maybe three days out of port, then all bread was baked from
>> scratch. There was no freezer space for ice cream, the cook made ice
>> cream in huge batches from scratch, all cakes, pies, cookies were made
>> from scratch. There was no canned soups, there'd be no space to store
>> cans that were mostly water... there was bouillion powder but soups
>> were made entirely from scratch, even veggies were mostly dehys.
>> The galley on a tin can is small, there was never more than one cook
>> on duty at a time. they'd only be in each others way. Baking was very
>> easy to accomplish between cooking, and cooking between baking... when
>> one knows how... obviously you don't cook[period]
>
>Grin, very cute and very much inaacurate. You do not make your own ice
>cream when storage of pre-made takes less space for example. You dont work
>48 hours straight nor even 24 straight. No ships are at sea 90% of the time.
>The highest percentage is FDNF amphibs at 9.5 months of the year average.
>
>The soups were a combination of dried 'add water' and canned, but the better
>ones were real scratch made from scraps. Fort Mchenry specifically was
>really good at that one. JC Stennis was pretty decent. Essex wasnt too
>shabby. GW was actually pretty good. Juneau sucked at it. Harpers Ferry
>wasnt great but had a bang up pastry chef!
>
>And BTW, best I can guess, I have more time at sea than you had in the Navy.
>
>ITCS(SW/AW) USN Ret, 26 years 1983-2007, 12 years shore duty. You do the
>math.
>
>I usually leave you alone but you arent going to lie blatently to the
>civvies here about the Navy and not expect to be caught. The crew CS
>complement for 400 remains 12. It's 3 per 100 members. Surge ships with
>variable marine compliments, get 4 per 100 to cover the gap.
>
>Sorry to the rest, tagged and bagged. I just couldnt sit by and watch him
>lie that the navy uses 1 cook for 400 people. He's got his cool points, but
>he tends to try to be more knowledgable and it is really obvious to Navy
>folks who did the full 20+ years.

You are an idiot.

"brooklyn1" wrote

>>And BTW, best I can guess, I have more time at sea than you had in the
>>Navy.

> You are an idiot.

I was a little snarky there. Sorry. I don't denigrate your experience but
you shouldn't do that with mine either.

I find it more than a little irritating if you mis-represent the US Navy. I
can understand exaggeration to an extent but you took it too far.

How many years at sea did you have? How many years total did you do? I
won't beat you up if less than 20 as not all are suited to do 26 years or
even 20. You did more than most here and that's worth alot.

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 20:12:35 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:

>"brooklyn1" wrote
>
>>>And BTW, best I can guess, I have more time at sea than you had in the
>>>Navy.
>
>> You are an idiot.
>
>I was a little snarky there. Sorry. I don't denigrate your experience but
>you shouldn't do that with mine either.
>
>I find it more than a little irritating if you mis-represent the US Navy. I
>can understand exaggeration to an extent but you took it too far.
>
>How many years at sea did you have? How many years total did you do? I
>won't beat you up if less than 20 as not all are suited to do 26 years or
>even 20. You did more than most here
>and that's worth alot.

For that alone I don't believe a word you say, you are definitely a
low IQ imbecile... and I know you can't cook[period]

brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 20:12:35 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> >"brooklyn1" wrote
> >
> >>>And BTW, best I can guess, I have more time at sea than you had in the
> >>>Navy.
> >
> >> You are an idiot.
> >
> >I was a little snarky there. Sorry. I don't denigrate your experience but
> >you shouldn't do that with mine either.
> >
> >I find it more than a little irritating if you mis-represent the US Navy. I
> >can understand exaggeration to an extent but you took it too far.
> >
> >How many years at sea did you have? How many years total did you do? I
> >won't beat you up if less than 20 as not all are suited to do 26 years or
> >even 20. You did more than most here
> >and that's worth alot.
>
> For that alone I don't believe a word you say, you are definitely a
> low IQ imbecile... and I know you can't cook[period]

So much for redemption!

Sky

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

In article >,
"cshenk" > wrote:

> "brooklyn1" wrote
> > "cshenk" wrote:
>
> >>Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship of 400
>
> > You've never been aboard a ship

> LOL! Dont even try it kiddo. The non-miltary here may believe you but
> anyone with Navy experience at sea tags you fast.

Military or non-military doesn't matter. Anybody who's been here a
little while learns that most of what Sheldon posts is total BS.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> "brooklyn1" wrote
>>> "cshenk" wrote:
>>>> Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship of 400
>>> You've never been aboard a ship
>
>> LOL! Dont even try it kiddo. The non-miltary here may believe you but
>> anyone with Navy experience at sea tags you fast.
>
> Military or non-military doesn't matter. Anybody who's been here a
> little while learns that most of what Sheldon posts is total BS.
>
Sad isn't it even old army dogs can see shelly is pulling it ?

"atec 7 7" wrote
>> "cshenk" > wrote:

> Sad isn't it even old army dogs can see shelly is pulling it ?

Hey just curious, because i know little of Army, but at an established camp,
how many cooks would they have for 400? I assume they also have the junior
guys do a time of what Navy calls 'Mess Deck or Mess cranking' duty. Those
folks handle the dishes, much of the serving line, storage breakout (mostly
as a real CS will be there too directing it), and some of the basic food
preps. I'm not talking in the field with MRE's, but where they actually
cook. Just curious.

The Navy BTW has gotten away recently from having multiple cooking kitchens
on the smaller ships and gone what is called 'open mess' meaing one master
cook spot who then sends the food off to the main enlisted galley, CPO mess,
and officers mess. The Officers mess part was still in transition when I
retired. The CPO mess equipment was used as an ancillary kitchen for the
main food needs as I left the Essex. Many feared it would reduce the CPO
mess quality (I was a CPO) but having been in an 'open mess' ship before, I
assured folks it would be ok and it was. I know the CS Senior was happy to
have me chime in with experience of such.

It allowed a person who truely excelled at something, to hit all the various
'messes'. For example, it *seems* to me Sheldon was a really good pastry
and bread chef. He'd in the more recent era have done that all the time for
400 people with 2 general duty guys 'mess deck assistants' to assist him.

On the ESSEX, we had a team of 5 in the bake shop who handled upwards of
3,000 people a day. I remember battling with SURFOR to get $$$ to send them
to pastry chef schools. Just 1 or 2, but they could train the rest on
fancier stuff. The ROI was quite high as we didnt have to purchase some of
the premade things. 1 pastry chef well trained cost 12,000$ from Sasebo
Japan and equaled savings over premade of 39,500$ per year and you'd get a
clear 2 years of savings. That same one would in turn often teach the next
set well enough you didnt have to send another 2 years later.

Navy cooks are generally pretty good. If i rag on Sheldon at times, it's
when he fakes things out or makes them horrid hot dogs. He's probably a
relatively able sort in his specialty.

cshenk wrote:
>
> "atec 7 7" wrote
> >> "cshenk" > wrote:
>
> > Sad isn't it even old army dogs can see shelly is pulling it ?
>
> Hey just curious, because i know little of Army, but at an established camp,
> how many cooks would they have for 400? I assume they also have the junior
> guys do a time of what Navy calls 'Mess Deck or Mess cranking' duty. Those
> folks handle the dishes, much of the serving line, storage breakout (mostly
> as a real CS will be there too directing it), and some of the basic food
> preps. I'm not talking in the field with MRE's, but where they actually
> cook. Just curious.
>
> The Navy BTW has gotten away recently from having multiple cooking kitchens
> on the smaller ships and gone what is called 'open mess' meaing one master
> cook spot who then sends the food off to the main enlisted galley, CPO mess,
> and officers mess. The Officers mess part was still in transition when I
> retired. The CPO mess equipment was used as an ancillary kitchen for the
> main food needs as I left the Essex. Many feared it would reduce the CPO
> mess quality (I was a CPO) but having been in an 'open mess' ship before, I
> assured folks it would be ok and it was. I know the CS Senior was happy to
> have me chime in with experience of such.
>
> It allowed a person who truely excelled at something, to hit all the various
> 'messes'. For example, it *seems* to me Sheldon was a really good pastry
> and bread chef. He'd in the more recent era have done that all the time for
> 400 people with 2 general duty guys 'mess deck assistants' to assist him.
>
> On the ESSEX, we had a team of 5 in the bake shop who handled upwards of
> 3,000 people a day. I remember battling with SURFOR to get $$$ to send them
> to pastry chef schools. Just 1 or 2, but they could train the rest on
> fancier stuff. The ROI was quite high as we didnt have to purchase some of
> the premade things. 1 pastry chef well trained cost 12,000$ from Sasebo
> Japan and equaled savings over premade of 39,500$ per year and you'd get a
> clear 2 years of savings. That same one would in turn often teach the next
> set well enough you didnt have to send another 2 years later.
>
> Navy cooks are generally pretty good. If i rag on Sheldon at times, it's
> when he fakes things out or makes them horrid hot dogs. He's probably a
> relatively able sort in his specialty.
>

You go girl!!!! My dad was a (Navy) requisition officer many years
back early in his 'military' career, and he told me that CPOs and the
enlisted always had better food than the officers! That's as it
should be, eh?!

Sky, former Navy brat

--
Ultra Ultimate Kitchen Rule - Use the Timer!
Ultimate Kitchen Rule -- Cook's Choice!!

"Sky" wrote
> cshenk wrote:

> You go girl!!!! My dad was a (Navy) requisition officer many years
> back early in his 'military' career, and he told me that CPOs and the
> enlisted always had better food than the officers! That's as it
> should be, eh?!

Hehe there's a reason for that. Officers 'vote' on how much they want to
pay for food that month and purchases are then made accordingly. They are
rather cheap. Enlisted (CPO and E1-6) get 'paid' for food (I have forgotten
the exact, something like 278$ a month?) and the ship gets that money
instead of the person, automatically. I remember the Officers on the Fort
Mchenry voted for 150$ a month. Normally, it's less than what the enlisted
are paying in per person. The CS's who run the officers mess then have to
fit the bill to match the amount.

I've been told it's a fairly painful event to work out? I just remember
lots of cheap hotdogs getting mentioned. I also recall a summer where the
ESSEX was renovating the CPO mess so we all had to eat in the officers mess.
The Officers mess suddenly had the influx of our ?278?dollars a month each.
I belive the Officers had to match it but mostly I noted they got real happy
at eating time.

Officer's messes are referred to as 'closed messes' (they do their own
purchasing and food preparation or 'purchase' for cost some items from the
main mess. CPO messes recently changed off that to 'opem mess' which
generally raised the food for all as we could split the cooks out better so
as to take advantage of more of them with a true gift at some item.

Was the old closed CPO mess pretty good? Sure! Any time you have to cook
for a much smaller population, the food will just be better in general.
It's a matter of logistics. Have a steak and lobster meal for a crew of 300
with 25 or so being CPO's. The E1-6 will have to have it cooked in advance
and held in steam tables. The 25 though, you can 'cook to order'.

Sheldon may know more on this, or if we have any retired Navy officers.
I've given the gist though on how it works.

"cshenk" > wrote in
:

> "atec 7 7" wrote
>>> "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> Sad isn't it even old army dogs can see shelly is pulling it ?
>
> Hey just curious, because i know little of Army, but at an established
> camp, how many cooks would they have for 400? I assume they also have
> the junior guys do a time of what Navy calls 'Mess Deck or Mess
> cranking' duty. Those folks handle the dishes, much of the serving line,
> storage breakout (mostly as a real CS will be there too directing it),
> and some of the basic food preps. I'm not talking in the field with
> MRE's, but where they actually cook. Just curious.
>


In an Infantry Battalion of approx 850 people, there were 3 Messes. OR's,
Sgt's, and Officers.

The OR's being the largest (cooking for approx 700) had (from my memory
going back to the late 70's early 80's) one WO1 Caterer in charge, with a
SGT cook, a couple of Corporals, and anywhere between 4-6 Private cooks.
So a cooking 'staff' of approx 9.

And then you had the GD's....... the guys on Mess Duty, who performed all
the 'menial' tasks of cleaning and clearing, and vegetable prep.

Bread was brought in from bakeries outside the Base.


If sheldon was ever *in* the military, I'd hazard a guess and say he was a
member of the GD's 151st Underwater Panel Beating Squad (Dixie bashers).


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?

"PeterL" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote

>> Hey just curious, because i know little of Army, but at an established
>> camp, how many cooks would they have for 400? I assume they also have
>> the junior guys do a time of what Navy calls 'Mess Deck or Mess
>> cranking' duty. Those folks handle the dishes, much of the serving line,

> In an Infantry Battalion of approx 850 people, there were 3 Messes. OR's,
> Sgt's, and Officers.

Ok, Like a ship, Officers mess, CPO Mess (sgts to you) and 'enlisted mess'
(General mess) E6 and below (your OR would be about same).

> The OR's being the largest (cooking for approx 700) had (from my memory
> going back to the late 70's early 80's) one WO1 Caterer in charge, with a
> SGT cook, a couple of Corporals, and anywhere between 4-6 Private cooks.
> So a cooking 'staff' of approx 9.

Humm! Seems a smaller number. Probably a reason for it. That and
reputedly Navy chow is better.

When I was on the Fort McHenry, we had an Army battalion come underway with
us for a stint. At least, part of it (was about 700 of them). They were
with us for 3-4 weeks and practicing or testing their ability to be
replacement Marine surge troops in case of need. The CPO equivalents were
wow'ed at the food.

> And then you had the GD's....... the guys on Mess Duty, who performed all
> the 'menial' tasks of cleaning and clearing, and vegetable prep.

Same for us.

> Bread was brought in from bakeries outside the Base.

That would account for some of it. Can't do that at sea and flour stores
smaller than pre-baked goods. When you have to fit enough onboard for
months at a time potentially, this is an issue.

> If sheldon was ever *in* the military,

I'm sure he was and that he was a CS. Actually, it would have been 'MS'
then. They changed the name of that 'rate' (your version would be MOS).

Dan Abel > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>> "brooklyn1" wrote
>> > "cshenk" wrote:
>>
>> >>Sorry Sheldon but the crew compliment CS (used to be MS) for a ship
>> >>of 400
>>
>> > You've never been aboard a ship



LOL!!! I wonder how Cshenk managed to get to Brisbane whislt serving in
the Navy??

On a surfboard??


>
>> LOL! Dont even try it kiddo. The non-miltary here may believe you but
>> anyone with Navy experience at sea tags you fast.
>
> Military or non-military doesn't matter. Anybody who's been here a
> little while learns that most of what Sheldon posts is total BS.
>


'sheldon the magnificent' says he was aboard Sherman class boats with a
crew of 400.

A very quick check reveals that the full compliment of crew on board a
(Forrest)Sherman class boat was 324.

http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm

DD931 through to DD951.


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia


If we are not meant to eat animals,
why are they made of meat?

"PeterL" > wrote

>>> > You've never been aboard a ship

> LOL!!! I wonder how Cshenk managed to get to Brisbane whislt serving in
> the Navy??
> On a surfboard??

Snicker, I am however more familiar with Darwin. Kitty O'Sheas. Apologies
for watering hole being best memory but us sailors tend to do that.

Brisbane however I recall for the garden which was in walking distance.
Sadly I didnt get to see it at height of season but even in 'winter' it was
nice.

> very quick check reveals that the full compliment of crew on board a
> (Forrest)Sherman class boat was 324.
>
> http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm

As she's not an amphib, she doesnt have the expanded galley suitable to feed
triple the normal crew compliement. But, I'll admit i had fun checking that
page for current pics!

>"PeterL" > wrote
>
>> very quick check reveals that the full compliment of crew on board a
>> (Forrest)Sherman class boat was 324.
>>
>> http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm
>
>As she's not an amphib, she doesnt have the expanded galley suitable to feed
>triple the normal crew compliement.

Ask me what I care what someone can't pour cornflakes says. There may
have been expanded mess decks (to accomodate extra diners?) but I
never heard of an expanded galley... on a DD when weather permitted we
occasionally had a bbq on the fantail... the snipes would always weld
up a couple grills from 50 gallon drums... there was even
entertainment, there was always a bunch of the crew played
instruments, sing, tell jokes... in port we even had French models put
on a show, one of our cooks was a full blooded Cherokee, Bishop was a
wild guy, would put on his own show with polka dot bikini.

The published facts for military are not accurate, the actual specs
are classified, and change significantly from the day a ship is
launched. Top speed for a Sherman class DD is well over 40 knots, was
actually near 50 knots, and the actual number of personel on board
while on deployment rarely drops below 400 (very common to transfer
personal at sea, an Admiral can come aboard for a month to oversee
operations, and bring a compliment of 50+, could have 50 jarheads
aboard too, or as many midshipmen on a cruise). There are two
galleys, the officer's galley is forward, its dimensions are about 6'
X 8', about the size of the typical basic terlit. Officers pay for
their food from their allotment, they're very cheap so they don't eat
nearly as well as the enlisted men. Officers have/had a compliment of
pineapples (Philappinos), one cooked, one waited table, another was
also the ship's barber, they also did officer's laundry, made beds,
generally tidying, etc... I don't think there are pineapples anymore.

I ain't talking about now, I'm talking what used to be, MY
experience... if military personal are anything like today's civvy
young'ns then they are a bunch of lazy *******s and probably can't
cook a lick.

The main galley is mid ship, about 16' X 24' (don't hold me to exact
dimensions, I never measured), which includes the deep sink area (one
mess cook in charge, either a shit job or a tit job, depends on
attitude - a good deep sink willy got lots of extra priviledges - mess
cooks rotated every three months, everyone takes a tour when they
first arrive, even moi), a small upright fridge for galley butter,
yeast, cook's treats, even booze, but mostly cookware storage
(roasting pans, loaf pans, sheet pans, bowls, etc.... there are no
pots in the main galley, there is no stove (three 80 quart koppers
instead - steam jacketed kettles - can cook an awful lotta food and
super fast), the food prep area is about 16' X 20', includes the steam
table for serving the chow line. There are four banks of electric
ovens like pizza ovens, each three high (12 ovens total), two large
electric griddles, a 60 qt stand mixer, a 50 loaf proof box, a meat
slicer, a bread slicer, a conveyer toaster, a large deep fryer, a
commercial hand can opener, a knife locker, and all the other items
one needs but nothing extra/extraneous... a very well planned area and
everything fitted for rough seas.

It's just as easy to cook for 400 as for 800, as for 1,200... often in
home port (Newport RI) or major foreign ports during holiday etc. when
dignitaries and civilian families were aboard the main galley could
easily feed well over 1,000... one cook did all the cooking... I did
Thanksgiving three times when in Beantown navy yard for retrofit, no
biggie doing turkeys and fresh hams with all the trimmings for a
thousand, in port I didn't have to do much baking. Mess cooks were
not permitted in the galley (in fact no one was permitted in the
galley without the express permission of the duty cook, not even the
Captain could enter without permission, not unless he wanted to take
the keys and the shift... the galley is a dangerous place,
can't have folks wandering in and about. Mess cooks had a separate
vegetable prep compartment, usually two were assigned but often just
one could handle it. There are only 3 cooks aboard, it was very rare
more than one cook would be in the galley at the same time and only
for brief duration, occasionally to do prep for their upcoming shift,
like get the jello prepped so it'd set up in time... the difficult
part was to schlep the ten gallon SS tubs to the reefer, one deck
below and 50' forward, a real balancing act, each cook moved their own
chow... no one wanted the responsibility of a **** up. The only
difficult thing about cooking aboard a ship is when underway, ships
rock n' roll... ya lern the tricks (and there are many) and get used
to the ceaseless motion.

Everyone else stood a 4 hour watch but a cook's watch was 24 hours
because the cooks cooked the entire 24 hours, can accomplish a lot of
cooking in 24 hours straight. There was no such thing as no chow due
to weather, I can still bake a hundred 2 1/2 lb loaves of bread while
serving eggs to order for 400 (all fed in 45 minutes), while the ship
is doing 40º rolls... of course during rough weather hardly anyone
showed up to eat but I still had to cook for those who did. I never
got sea sick except once on a small fishing boat out of Sheepshead
Bay, only time I wished I was dead. Typically for Sunday lunch the
cook got a break, just served soup, salad, and horsecock sammiches.
Oh, and there is actually a 4th meal, "midrats", had to feed the
midnight watch, but that was less than 1/3 the crew and only half
would wanna eat... would be maybe tube steak, or tuna salad, or mac n'
cheese... something quick, or LOs from dinner. And naturally when in
port there'd be like 2/3 the crew on liberty so there'd be far fewer
meals to prepare.

Circa 1962; me on the mess decks with a slew from an orphanage in
Rome:
http://i36.tinypic.com/k2bcm1.jpg

Too bad there were no digicams back then.

brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> Ask me what I care what someone can't pour cornflakes says. There may
> have been expanded mess decks (to accomodate extra diners?) but I
> never heard of an expanded galley... on a DD when weather permitted we
> occasionally had a bbq on the fantail... the snipes would always weld
> up a couple grills from 50 gallon drums... there was even
> entertainment, there was always a bunch of the crew played
> instruments, sing, tell jokes... in port we even had French models put
> on a show, one of our cooks was a full blooded Cherokee, Bishop was a
> wild guy, would put on his own show with polka dot bikini.

Did anybody ever do any fishing from the boat?
It seems to me that any fresh fish which could
be incorporated in the meals would extend the
stores and improve efficiency, because fresh
fish wouldn't have to have been transported
or kept frozen.

"brooklyn1" wrote
> >"PeterL" wrote

> she doesnt have the expanded galley suitable to feed
>>triple the normal crew compliement.
>
> Ask me what I care what someone can't pour cornflakes says. There may
> have been expanded mess decks (to accomodate extra diners?) but I
> never heard of an expanded galley... on a DD when weather permitted we

Thats because you have never been on a larger ship. Surely you realize a
galley that cooks for 1,000 is not going to be the same size as one that
cooks for 300 right?

> occasionally had a bbq on the fantail... the snipes would always weld
> up a couple grills from 50 gallon drums... there was even
> entertainment, there was always a bunch of the crew played
> instruments, sing, tell jokes... in port we even had French models put
> on a show, one of our cooks was a full blooded Cherokee, Bishop was a
> wild guy, would put on his own show with polka dot bikini.

Sure, steel beach picnics. We still have them.

> The published facts for military are not accurate, the actual specs
> are classified, and change significantly from the day a ship is
> launched. Top speed for a Sherman class DD is well over 40 knots, was

Sorry, another bullhockey alarm. Not with that engineering plant.

> generally tidying, etc... I don't think there are pineapples anymore.

No, we do not call members of the US Navy that anymore. We tend to avoid
being derogatory to our fellow members now.

> pots in the main galley, there is no stove (three 80 quart koppers
> instead - steam jacketed kettles - can cook an awful lotta food and

They still have the koppers. They also have large sized professional ovens
such as you would see in a commercial kitchen.

> It's just as easy to cook for 400 as for 800, as for 1,200... often in
> home port (Newport RI) or major foreign ports during holiday etc. when
> dignitaries and civilian families were aboard the main galley could
> easily feed well over 1,000... one cook did all the cooking... I did

There you go again.

> Circa 1962; me on the mess decks with a slew from an orphanage in
> Rome:
> http://i36.tinypic.com/k2bcm1.jpg
>
> Too bad there were no digicams back then.

Grin, cute pic!

"cshenk" wrote:
>
> http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm
>
> But, I'll admit i had fun checking that page for current pics!
>
>
Did you know that you are brain damaged... what current pics?!?!?
That ship hasn't had a crew for nearly 30 years... for you "Dumb ****"
is a very MAJOR upgrade.

"Operational and Building Data
Laid down by Bath Iron Works, Bath ME January 18 1954.
Launched May 7 1955 and commissioned April 5 1956.
Decommissioned December 20 1965 and recommissioned September 23 1967.
Reclassified as Guided Missile Destroyer DDG-32 March 15 1967.
Decommissioned December 15 1982.
Stricken in 1986.
Fate Sunk as target off California January 31, 2001."

brooklyn1 wrote:
>
> Fate Sunk as target off California January 31, 2001."

I wonder if they salvage any parts of the galley
before sinking a ship like that. I'd bet parts
from a ship's galley would make for a very efficient
kitchen on land.

"brooklyn1" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote:

>> http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm
>>
>> But, I'll admit i had fun checking that page for current pics!

> Did you know that you are brain damaged... what current pics?!?!?

The ones of other ships still in commision. Curtis Wilber for example.
Sweet design. Not everyone centered in on your specific class you know. I
was looking at Stennis pics.

brooklyn1 wrote:

> "cshenk" wrote:
>>
>> http://www.navsource.org/archives/05idx.htm
>>
>> But, I'll admit i had fun checking that page for current pics!
>>
>>
> Did you know that you are brain damaged... what current pics?!?!?
> That ship hasn't had a crew for nearly 30 years... for you "Dumb ****"
> is a very MAJOR upgrade.
>
> "Operational and Building Data
> Laid down by Bath Iron Works, Bath ME January 18 1954.
> Launched May 7 1955 and commissioned April 5 1956.
> Decommissioned December 20 1965 and recommissioned September 23 1967.
> Reclassified as Guided Missile Destroyer DDG-32 March 15 1967.
> Decommissioned December 15 1982.
> Stricken in 1986.
> Fate Sunk as target off California January 31, 2001."


<chuckle>


--
Best
Greg