Three of Everything
The transition from civilian to sailor began remarkably quickly.
A new recruit arriving at the Annexe at Shotley Gate in 1971 did not spend days gradually becoming accustomed to naval life. The process began almost immediately. After arrival, recruits signed their contracts in a classroom, received a simple introduction to Navy life in the form of a "sticky" and a bottle of milk on the parade ground, and then, while still wearing civilian clothing, were sent for their first visible transformation.
The haircut came first.
The kit issue followed.
In a very short space of time, a fifteen-year-old boy who had arrived carrying his civilian identity was handed responsibility for a large collection of Royal Navy equipment. From that moment onwards, every item had to be accounted for, maintained and produced when required.
To a new recruit, the quantity of kit could appear overwhelming.
There seemed to be clothing for every possible circumstance: working rig, parade clothing, outdoor clothing, headgear, footwear, bedding and numerous smaller items whose purpose might not yet be obvious. It was common among recruits to describe the system simply by saying that Pusser issued “three of everything”.
Strictly speaking, that was not quite true.
The reality was more practical.
The Navy issued equipment according to use.
Items that were worn frequently and required regular washing were generally issued in greater numbers. Other items were supplied in pairs or singly because they did not require the same constant rotation.
The logic was straightforward. A sailor needed to have what he required available at all times. Clothing was not simply provided for appearance; it was part of readiness.
For working clothing and personal items, the system was especially clear. A recruit could wear one set, have another available and have another being cleaned. The rotation allowed daily life to continue without interruption.
The Navy was not interested in hearing that a recruit had forgotten to wash something, misplaced something or simply failed to plan ahead. The system had already allowed for such problems. If an item was unavailable, the responsibility rested with the person who had been issued it.
This was one of the first practical lessons of naval life.
You looked after your own equipment.
The issue system itself was carefully organised. Recruits received a Seamanship manual that explained matters such as kit musters and locker arrangements. On the messdeck walls were examples showing how equipment should be laid out. The Navy did not expect recruits to understand everything instinctively. The method was demonstrated, explained and then enforced.
The Junior Leader and experienced ratings within the mess also played an important part in passing on practical knowledge. They understood the system because they had already lived within it. A new recruit could ask questions, although the answer was not always delivered in the most straightforward manner. Naval humour occasionally meant that discovering the correct procedure required a little persistence.
Nevertheless, the information was there.
The standard was clear.
The responsibility was personal.
The locker became the visible expression of that responsibility.
It was not simply a cupboard in which clothing was stored. It was a carefully arranged working space where every item had its place. A recruit needed to know where everything was, because everything might be required at short notice.
The arrangement was taught, practised and inspected.
There was little opportunity for disorder to develop. Lockers were left open during the day whether recruits were present or not. Instructors could inspect them at any time. A recruit who understood the system did not need to panic when inspection occurred because his equipment was already arranged correctly.
The purpose was not merely to produce a tidy appearance.
The purpose was reliability.
A sailor aboard ship might be required to produce equipment quickly, often at inconvenient times and sometimes in difficult circumstances. The habit of knowing where everything was and ensuring it was ready was therefore not an artificial training exercise. It reflected the realities of naval service.
The same principle applied to replacing worn or damaged items. A recruit's kit was marked with his name using a black ink stamp and wooden marking block issued as part of his initial equipment. This simple system served a practical purpose. Clothing and equipment belonged to individuals, and individuals were expected to know what belonged to them.
The personal marking of kit also reflected another important part of lower-deck culture: trust.
Despite several hundred young recruits living together, stories of kit disappearing were extremely rare. That was not because there was no opportunity. There was plenty of opportunity. It was because the Navy made clear from the beginning that taking something which did not belong to you was not merely foolish but unacceptable.
The message was simple.
If it was not yours, you left it alone.
Among recruits, that expectation required little explanation. Theft was regarded as a serious failing of character and carried consequences that everyone understood. A person who could not be trusted with another man's equipment could not reasonably expect to be trusted as a sailor.
In that respect, the kit system was doing more than managing clothing.
It was reinforcing the relationship between responsibility and trust.
Kit musters are often remembered primarily as intimidating events. For a young recruit, standing while every item of equipment was examined could certainly be stressful. Yet the purpose was practical. The Navy needed sailors who could maintain their own equipment without constant supervision.
The worst outcome was not simply an untidy locker or a misplaced item.
The real failure was demonstrating that a recruit could not manage a responsibility which had been placed directly in his hands.
A dirty or missing item suggested a breakdown in the system.
That breakdown began with the individual.
This explains why the apparently excessive standards of recruit training made sense within the naval environment of the time. The Navy was not simply teaching young men how to fold clothing neatly or arrange a locker for inspection. It was establishing habits that would later be required in a far less forgiving environment.
On a ship, equipment had a purpose. Clothing, tools and personal gear were not decorative possessions. They were part of the sailor's ability to do his job.
Long before a recruit learned the complexities of seamanship, he learned a simpler principle.
Be prepared.
The first demonstration of that principle was not carried out on the parade ground or in the classroom. It began with a pile of issued kit and the expectation that every item would be understood, maintained and ready.
Looking back, the phrase “three of everything” captures the recruit's first impression of the system. It suggests abundance, perhaps even excess.
The reality was rather different.
The Navy issued what was necessary to support a routine in which a sailor was always expected to be ready. Some items were issued once, some twice and some three times, but every item had a reason.
Nothing was accidental.
Nothing was without responsibility.
For a fifteen-year-old arriving at HMS Ganges, kit issue was one of the first moments when the difference between civilian life and naval life became clear.
The Navy had not simply given him a uniform.
It had given him responsibility.
Responsibility part 3 - Pusser Even Taught Us How to Brush Our Peggies
Annexe 127 - Primary source: RN-012
RN-E-152
Comments