Navy-afloat and ashore!?

[Rog123]

Hello,

Given that the strength of the royal navy reached about 400,000 during WWI, how much of this number would have been afloat at any one time?For example,if a ship were at sea for say 6 months, would it on return to port get a new crew whilst the old crew took leave and then depart again with the new crew more or less immediately?Or, would the same crew on returning to port have a period of leave and then return to the same ship?I guess what Im trying to ascertain is what would have been the turnover of crew within a given year.Would it be fair to say that if at any one time a third of the navy was at sea, the remaining two thirds must be land based?If this were the case is it fair to say that within any given year a third of the navy would always be land based.This is all conjecture and I would appreciate any input.I would appreciate it also if anyone could indicate whether a similiar procedure would have operated during WWII?

Regards

Ron

[per ardua per mare per terram]

Are you including the Royal Naval Reserve? Have you excluded those on the strength of the Royal Naval Division and Royal Naval Air Service serving on shore stations?

What do you regard as being at sea? Was being stationed Scarpa Flow being at sea?

Do you regard a destroyer that only has a limited range being at sea or shore based, even though the men would be on an accommodation or depot ship between patrols?

[joseph]

Ron,

There was no Sea Shore ratio during the Great War, you went and did as you where told. This said the function of the navy depended on stores, victuals and base facilities, so some branches of the service would by their job, spend more time ashore. In naval terms no person 'served ashore' everyone was attached to a sea going ship. At a guess I would say 4:1 the shore being on leave, courses or sick/wounded.

The current sea shore ratio is 1:1 and I would be very suprised if this is achieved.

Regards Charles