Talk:List of United States Navy ratings

message: I've done some preliminary work on adding thumbnails, let me know how this looks and I'll continue the work.
ABE — Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Launching & Recovery Equipment)
ABF — Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Fuels)
ABH — Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Aircraft Handling)
AC — Air-Traffic Controller
Also thought about adding a brief description of each rate.  Comments?
Supersquid 13:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They look very nice. Jigen III 03:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: New gray-scale badges look much better! How about deleting minimum enlistment terms within the descriptions? They're not listed for all ratings, and they're misleading, since everyone is on the hook for 8 years on their first enlistment regardless. May not even be pertinent to this wiki entry.(?) Highspeed 04:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you and thats going to happen I'm in the process of changing everything over to the new table and then I'm going to clean up the descriptions on everything.--WilsBadKarma (Talk/Contribs) 04:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Thumbnails and other stuff

message: This thing is really looking good.  Once you have that last section finished up I would not hesitate to start putting throught the process to become a featured list.  Great job--Looper5920 22:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Quick Comment

message: Can the spacing be made smaller? If it can ill change the color to official Navy Blue.--WilsBadKarma (Talk/Contribs) 03:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't even know where the color came from!!! :-) I just triple-spaced between the sections.  Obviously (?) it's in the template somewhere. I was thinking that making some bottom border 5px or so should do the trick. Rfrisbietalk 03:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know where the color came from and I can change it but I can't change the size. I want it about half that. I'm going to keep stabbing away at it. I'll get the border in there somehow. Thanks--WilsBadKarma (Talk/Contribs) 03:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this border test has some span issues, but it shows the idea I had in mind. Rfrisbietalk 03:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats what I'm currently trying to fix, but I can't seem to correct the span without screwing up half the table.--WilsBadKarma (Talk/Contribs) 03:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spacing

message: I added in a generic blurb regarding the nuke power rating subsets.  It needs to be expanded, though, and possibly rewritten.  Or, maybe add in a category of Nuclear Field and add nuke-specific rating info there.  
I also removed the ETN branch abbreviation.  It only appears on advancement exams, and would not be used in salutation (ie a nav ET on a sub is referred to as ET1(SS) vice ETN1(SS).)  Ditto with the nuke power or sub comms (former RMs) types.  Yeah it's confusing, especially when I start talking shop to a fellow ET, only to have the person give me a blank look cuz he's a nuke type and I'm a comms/radar/network ET!  :-)
Supersquid 06:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nuke Power ETs, EMs, and MMs

message: For some reason, borders around the tables render intermittently in Firefox.  At first I thought the borders were still being worked on, but when I checked in IE, I see that all the table borders render correctly.  Anyone else having issues with this page rendering properly under Firefox?  
Supersquid 11:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey man go figure something dumb like that would happen.--WilsBadKarma (Talk/Contribs) 11:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Firefox rendering

message: In the early 1990's the IC rating was merged into ET (non-nuke).  
Shortly after 1995 the RM rating also became a part of the ET rating too, making for navigation/radar as well as internal/external communication ET's.
 
Skotfred 05:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Only submariner RM's became ET's. The DP rating was merged into RM, which was renamed as the IT rating in 1999. Horologium 05:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Submarine QMs were also merged into the ET rating.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.153.40.58 (talk) 19:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Submarine Ratings

message: How do you feel about incorporating strikers' designations as well? This entry could be a one-stop shop for figuring that stuff out. So, listing AR, AA, AN; CR, CA, CN; SR, SA, SN; FR, FA, FN. And the sections as they are broken up now fit the partitions for strikers also?? (but I'm not sure). Highspeed 05:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Strikers

message: Storekeeper (SK) and Postal Clerk (PC) were merged into Logistics Specialist (LS)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.41 (talk) 18:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: SK & PC combined into LS

message: Have Gunner's Mate Guns (GMG) and Gunner's Mate Missiles (GMM) been abolished?  If not, they should be added.Solicitr (talk) 18:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: GM service ratings

message: I need some help with the Chester W. Nimitz article.
: made this edit where he changed "two-star Rear Admiral" to "Rear Admiral Upper Half".
:But, according to Rear admiral (United States), "upper half" and "lower half" wasn't officially designated until 1981 or 1985 depending on how your read it.  
:Additionally Rear Admiral Upper Half says 1984.
Either way, long before 1941.  I need a U.S. naval rank expert here. THNKS. > Best O Fortuna (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Help Needed: Chester W. Nimitz article

message: Interior Communications (IC) in this article is listed under engineering but from what I know it is now considered a part of combat systems (FC's, ET's, GM's, etc.).
Though, IC's E-3 and below are still considered Firemen and from what I've heard they still work in the engine room.
Should it be moved or do you guys think it's fine where it is?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.174.219.194 (talk) 00:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In my day IC was part of Engineering Department and bunked with the Electricians (EM)... but that was a dozen years ago. Eric Cable  |  Talk  11:24, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: According to http://www.navycs.com/navy-jobs/ and http://www.navy.mil/navydata/nav_legacy.asp?id=263 (an official Navy website), IC falls under Engineering.  Since the official Navy website is a bit dated, I don't know how relevant it is to the discussion. --McChizzle (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: IC

message: My uncle was a Chief Patternmaker. He was in before and during WWII? When was the last Patternmaker rated? I came in in 1970 but do not remember it being an active rate at that time. --Gerald a. Lee BT2  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.161.123.89 (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Gerald, checkout a book titled, San Diego's Naval Training Center by Jennifer A. Garey, specifically page 54.  Also, you will see a reference to the Patternmaker rating in the February 1997 edition of All Hands, see page 6. --McChizzle (talk) 12:08, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patternmaker rate 

message: What about Molder (ML)?  Are they still around, or were they merged into something else?  73.186.162.89 (talk) 15:43, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Molder 

message: We have a nice section on many discontinued ratings and the dates -relative recent history and easy to find. What about some information on dates established for the ratings - I know that would take some time and effort. Such As IN 1900 (117 years ago as I write) there were probably only about a dozen or so rating in existence (airplanes not yet invented, No submarines yet in the Navy). I know this would take time and effort. 
Wfoj3 (talk) 21:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The U.S. Coast Guard has a good document covering such things: https://www.uscg.mil/history/docs/USCGRating_Warrant_Marks.pdf   I've not found such a document from the U.S. Navy.  If there's no official U.S. Navy history document (a trustworthy source) that covers such things, it will be hard to find someone with the time to do the original research.  Plus, the administrators doesn't like it when we post original research on Wikipedia. --McChizzle (talk) 23:46, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See Compilation of Enlisted Ratings and Apprenticeships, U.S. Navy, 1775 to 1969  Maybe this cover that and can be used. --Wfoj3 (talk) 00:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Established and Discontinued Dates for Ratings  

message: "U.S. naval ratings are the equivalent of military occupational specialty codes (MOS codes) used by the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps, the ratings system used by the United States Coast Guard, and Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSC) used by the United States Air Force and United States Space Force." No, NECs are the equivalent of those other codes; ratings are more like the Army's branches and functional areas, or the Marine occupational fields.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.153.40.58 (talk) 23:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  MOS equivalents 

message: Interesting section in the Article. I think perhaps a better title is necessary. The Section is necessary - but should be changed. How about "2016 Proposed Ending of ratings" .TO My recollection ratings never technically ended - it was proposed, then shelved before implemented.  Hmm - it states "The Navy stated that the decision was motivated by a desire to assist former sailors in obtaining employment after their naval service by making naval job titles more congruent with their civilian counterparts, as well as to make said titles more unisex"- I did not realize that. Most Naval Enlisted personnel will remain in the same rating - but not necessarily ALL. I have no idea as to if the navy has authority without servicemembers consent to move personnel between ratings. I think that might have been a first step toward such; as manning levels and needs change. Those Naval Enlisted personnel that change ratings usually are the servicemembers request - for better advancement opportunities. In some cases may be forces upon service member something has occurred - not discharged, but no longer eligible for current position. (think Mess management Specialist Chief Casey Rybeck - fictional character 2 early 1990s movies). Actually Navy needs to for their NECs do some changes - get something similiar to Army and USMC. both NECs and MOS are 4 digit codes. With MOS - 2st 2 digits indicate a general area - similar to the navy Ratings - 2nd 2 digits are a specialty with the area.  the codes for 1st 2 digits for the Army and USMC are very diffferent- ought to get redone to match./ Wfoj3 (talk) 22:19, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporary End of Ratings ?  

message: "Sailors from pay-grades E-1 to E-3 that have no rates, are considered to be in apprenticeships or training for a rating, thus the slang term "undes" (Pronounced UN-DEZ) (un-designated) when referring to them as a group."
Please provide some reference or substantiation for this.  To my experience the correct term for E-1 to E-3 has always been "non-rate". 2600:8805:8000:3D:583C:9255:A34F:F1A2 (talk) 23:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undes? 

message: I have found on the Hospital Corpsman wikipedia page that Navy Corpsmen have their own ranks from E-4 to E-9 that are not mentioned in this article. I believe that they should be on this article and if anyone would like to see for themselves, type in "Hospital Corpsman" into the Wikipedia search bar, and scroll down to the section titled "Rate/Rating Structure" to find out more. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Chewingvanilla (talk) 01:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hospital Corpsman Petty Officer and Chief Petty Officer Ranks 

message: Why am I not seeing any rating for a Chief Engineer? There has to be someone in charge of Engineering. Nosehair2200 (talk) 03:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States Navy Chief Engineer Rating