snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Military

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 14 June 2009, 09:43 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,386
Icon605 Submarine cooks are highest paid non-coms

Comment: Want To Make Money? Cook On A Submarine

THE highest-paid non-officer in the military is not an elite SAS Sergeant
fluent in three languages taking out Taliban bomb makers in Afghanistan,
but rather a Leading Seaman cook on a Navy submarine. A senior sub-sea
chef with more than six years of experience under his belt earns up to
$200,000 a year, the same money as a junior Admiral. The cooks receive
base pay of just $58,806 a year, but when all the submarine and
critical-trades allowances are added up, the figure jumps to almost
$200,000. Such is the reluctance of qualified cooks to live and work in a
steel ressure-tube deep under the sea and prepare three hearty "comfort"
meals a day for up to 58 people, that even $4000 a week can't attract
enough starters. Submarine cooks are employed in a category known as
"individuals critical to the navy" and attract a bonus of $50,000 a year
just for turning up. An experienced cook also gets a capability bonus of
$40,000 a year, a seagoing allowance of $22,254 and a submarine service
allowance of $26,703.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 14 June 2009, 10:41 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 6,769
Default

Well, the food on Submarines is supposed to be among the best in the Armed Forces. High quality food requires high quality cooks, and the pay would likely reflect that.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15 June 2009, 02:43 AM
Majorsam Majorsam is offline
 
Join Date: 17 December 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 184
Default

Hmmmm...


The base pay is close to being accurate assuming your have an E9 (the highest enlisted paygrade) over 18 years of service...I'm a ground pounder, but having an E9 on a submarine seems wrong. I'll defer to my colleagues with webbed feet on that, though.

On the bonuses, I don't believe that's accurate. Sub pay & sea pay for an E9 would be $1,045/ month which while a nice chunk of change is hardly in the same league as the OP. As An E9 with 18 years and assuming they get sea & sub pay every month (I was always under the understanding it was only for a month they were actually at sea...) that would be about $60K+ a year. A bit short of $220K

Lastly, bonuses. The Navy did offer an up to $90,000 selective re-enlistment bonus, but currently up I could only find the $75,000 bonuses. Checking the list CS (culinary specialist) isn't on it. Unsurpringly the list is dominated by NUC (figure what that one is) and EOD (which I assume is Explosive Ordnance Disposal) with Navy Seals, Special Boats and Corpsmen being in there as well. Even when you go to the $60,000 level that list is pretty much the same adding, as far as I can tell, only navy Divers.

Even when we go to the $45K range CS guys still don't make it, although cryptographers and fire control dudes do.

It's possible when the OP was written there were higher bonuses...bonuses change like the wind, and recently the Army bonuses plunged dramatically since our recruiting is doing so well. But my gut tells me know. Cooks traditionally are easy to get in the Navy. And cooks on a submarine doesn't seem all that different than cooks in, say, a DDG. Food on a Sub is traditionally good (I'm sure some submariners can set me right on that) which would actually make the job more pleasent, I would think.

Anyway, unless there's something about the navy bonus system that I really don't understand, this sounds like a lot of hooey.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15 June 2009, 04:40 AM
ET1 (SS)
 
Posts: n/a
Default with all due respect your numbers are off

I served 20+ years in the US Silent Service.

First allow me to say that there is no such thing as a 'leading seaman cook'.

Cooks are not seaman. A seaman may strike for cook, however when he first becomes a cook he is an E4, an NCO.

By the time a cook is at 6 years, he should likely be an E4 or E5.

Cooks may have an SRB but it is not a terribly high SRB.

Granted they will not pay income taxes, no submariner pays income taxes.

But his take home should not exceed $60k/year at that point.

Your idea of base pay is off too. As the previous poster said E9 maybe but not E4.

Also on subs we are served 4 meals every 24 hours. Not 3.

Every sub that I served on [three] had 135 crewmen onboard. Not 58.

I was not a 'nuc', however my rating did qualify for SRBs equal to nuc SRBs.

The most that I got for Re-Enlisting was $65k. I retired in 2001, when SRBs were raised to $90k.

My take home pay during the second half of my career, as an E6, was commonly hovering around $70k/year tax-exempt.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 15 June 2009, 07:08 AM
Em's Avatar
Em Em is online now
 
Join Date: 11 July 2005
Location: Waikiki, Western Australia
Posts: 2,940
Default

You're looking at the figures for the wrong country. It's the Royal Australian Navy, and the story was in the news over here a couple of days ago.

As an officer, I don't get capability allowance, so there are sailors just out of training who're getting paid almost as much as I do after my almost 12 years of service.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 15 June 2009, 07:24 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 18,985
Australia

Quick, somebody make a joke about "down under". I dare you.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 16 June 2009, 04:18 AM
Majorsam Majorsam is offline
 
Join Date: 17 December 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 184
Australia

Well, color me beet red with embarrassment! My apologies to my antipodal colleagues. Reading it again I see the reference to the SAS which I somehow missed. My apologies for my rampant US-Centrism.

Respectfully;

An apologetic Majorsam
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 16 June 2009, 04:42 AM
Eddylizard's Avatar
Eddylizard Eddylizard is offline
 
Join Date: 15 June 2006
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK
Posts: 17,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Quick, somebody make a joke about "down under". I dare you.
I had a "sinking" feeling somebody might.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Majorsam View Post
Well, color me beet red with embarrassment! My apologies to my antipodal colleagues. Reading it again I see the reference to the SAS which I somehow missed. My apologies for my rampant US-Centrism.

Respectfully;

An apologetic Majorsam
Er well, when a comment mentions $ my first thought too is to think of the USD rather than any of the many other countries that call their currency dollars. Sorry and all that other countries that call their currency dollars.

I thought that the reference to the SAS was a reference to the British SAS, but was globalising the payscale, rather than pinning down the country - for shame I never new the Aussies also had a regiment known as the SAS.

ETA: Why is the Collins class a diesel electric rather than a nuclear - isn't that a bit out of date? Even we cash strapped Brits have nuclear powered subs. Though we still refuse to build nuclear powered surface ships for some reason.

Last edited by Eddylizard; 16 June 2009 at 04:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 16 June 2009, 06:44 AM
Em's Avatar
Em Em is online now
 
Join Date: 11 July 2005
Location: Waikiki, Western Australia
Posts: 2,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddylizard View Post
ETA: Why is the Collins class a diesel electric rather than a nuclear - isn't that a bit out of date? Even we cash strapped Brits have nuclear powered subs. Though we still refuse to build nuclear powered surface ships for some reason.
We don't have nuclear-powered anything. It's a public relations minefield no politician down here wants to go wandering through.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 16 June 2009, 12:34 PM
CannonFodder's Avatar
CannonFodder CannonFodder is offline
 
Join Date: 27 February 2004
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 5,285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddylizard View Post
ETA: Why is the Collins class a diesel electric rather than a nuclear - isn't that a bit out of date? Even we cash strapped Brits have nuclear powered subs. Though we still refuse to build nuclear powered surface ships for some reason.
Diesel subs have certain tactical strengths that still make them viable as attack platforms.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 16 June 2009, 01:28 PM
Dondi's Avatar
Dondi Dondi is offline
 
Join Date: 02 March 2005
Location: Lexington Park, MD
Posts: 1,605
Default

Quote:
Er well, when a comment mentions $ my first thought too is to think of the USD rather than any of the many other countries that call their currency dollars. Sorry and all that other countries that call their currency dollars.

Even given this into account, isn't there something like a $7 Aus to $1 U.S. exchange rate (it was some 12 years ago when I was there). If that's the case, then $200K would only come out to about $28,500 U.S.

ETA: Scratch that. The current exchange rate is $1 Aus to $.8 U.S.

Last edited by Dondi; 16 June 2009 at 01:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 16 June 2009, 02:17 PM
Nick Theodorakis Nick Theodorakis is offline
 
Join Date: 05 November 2005
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 6,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CannonFodder View Post
Diesel subs have certain tactical strengths that still make them viable as attack platforms.
Particularly for home-water defense, in which their disadvantages are not so important.

Nick
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 16 June 2009, 02:48 PM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 18,985
Icon605

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondi View Post
Even given this into account, isn't there something like a $7 Aus to $1 U.S. exchange rate (it was some 12 years ago when I was there).
Man, you must have really got ripped off.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 16 June 2009, 02:50 PM
ET1 (SS)
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A nuc boat has far more advantages in deep blue water.

However diesel boats tend to stay out of blue water, and they find many strategies which give them major advantages in combat.

Out in the blue it is not uncommon for a nuc boat to tow a mile of cable to an array of long-distance listening devices [towed array sonar]. Which can give that boat sensory information from 1,000Km away. However all that cable seriously limits your speed and steerage options. And you sacrifice short distance sensory input. So it works best for targeting long distance ordinance.

Diesels with hull mounted arrays can be submerged and drop anchor right at the 100 fathom curve. Behind them is the noise from the shoreline, so from the blue they are impossible to detect. Sitting stationary at the 100 fathom curve they can detect a great deal, reaching out a few hundred Kms into the blue as well as up and down their coast line.

A common strategy among Soviet boats was to 'ice pick' or upward anchoring into the underside of a small berg. The noise of the berg will cover their own internal noises. While allowing them to drift into waters that are heavily trafficked and remain invisible. From underneath a berg they can detect and track everyone in their region.

Diesel boats can be very good advantages to have, and they are considerably cheaper to build and maintain.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.