Talk:List of United States Navy ratings

November 2004
Just wondering if all these are current? Just browsing through I believe Torpedoman (TM) is now Machinist Mate Weapons MM(W). Patternmaker is probably obsolete as well. The Navy is also phasing out Signalmen. (SM)

Maybe for future we could also put the phased-out rates from WWI, WWII. Any suggestions, question, qualms, bitches, moans, groans, gripes or complaints? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.137.18 (talk) 07:14, 14 November 2004 (UTC)


 * Concur wholeheartedly! (Don't know who I'm concurring with, though...). I put in a link that goes to the authoratative source for Navy rating information; someone just needs to take the time to cross-check the information. The obsolete ratings would also be very interesting. It would also be nice to have at least a thumbnail graphic of the rating badge for each rating. Ray Trygstad 07:13, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * I made a few adjustments, like moving PR and PH into the aviation communities and noting that IT used to be RM. I think we'll need to keep things like conversions in, to keep people from back-adding in obsolete ratings if they've been out for a while and didn't know about the changes. Izuko 16:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Um, I don't see Aircrew listed anywhere in this list. Aircrew, with 6 subspecialties, is a rating of the US Navy (iirc, the 6 aircrew jobs were AE, AT, AD, AM, AO, and AW. don't quote me on that though..) Drew5252 (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Shipmate, the Aviation community is most definitely represented. First section of the list in fact.  Unless I'm misreading what you wrote ;-)
 * Supersquid (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Squid, you are misreading what I wrote. Aircrew is not 'aviation community', but rather one of the fewer specialty warfare rates in the USN.  SEAL, EOD, Navy Diver, SWCC, and Aircrew/RSS are specialty rates that although they have (or used to have) subratings, they have a separate staff and perform a separate duty.  Just as the comment below includes Nuclear Field as a rate, even though they have subrates (which subrate is my way of saying some attend "A" schools which are not 'Nuclear Field'), so also I have suggested Aircrew to be listed as a rate.  CT or cryptological technicial is another field that has a variety of subratings.  Aircrew used to have 6 subrates of AE,AT,AM,AD,AW, and AO (don't quote the AO, but the other 5 for sure)  They have now been combined into one rate of "AW".  There is a subspecification to this new AW, as follows: AWO (Operational level, typical "AW" school graduate), AWS (Sierra Class Helicopters), AWR (Romeo Class Helicopters), AWF (AM, AD, AE curriculums are needed to be known for the test, best summarized as 'mechanical'), AWV (V stands for Avionics, students attend AT "A" school). The rescue swimmer is usually an AWS or AWR, i forget which; all I remember is that the Romeo class helicopter is considerably shorter in length for "A" school.  In my new rate of AWF, it is my job to have an overacheiving amount of qualifications (aw/nac/turn/apu/pc/etc), but mainly I load and unload cargo.  Aircrew is the only enlisted rate where personnel actually fly with the aircraft; all other aviation rates stay on the ground to repair it after it returns or before it leaves.  Drew5252 (talk) 18:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)


 * 71.225.36.15 added Nuclear Field to the warfare communities. When did this happen?  As recently as August 2004, we nukes went for SW or SS designations, and there was no (NW) even in the works.  Does anyone know about this, or should we CANNEX it?  Izuko 02:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

No Problem. I've never seen the "NF" before here.--Mtnerd 07:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, since there was no objection, I killed NF. The nuclear qualification is actually indicated as part of the rating, ie MMN is Machinist's Mate (Nuclear), though the N is pretty much only used on the rating exams, I was still an MM1, even with the nuclear qualification.  While we're on the subject, any airdales know if AC is actually used as a designator?  I know y'all have the pin, but I can't remember ever seeing (AC) in someone's signature. Izuko 01:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, what is a FFC? Can't find on any list anywhere. chipm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chipm (talk • contribs) 18:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Probably because FF is not a rating. Izuko 19:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I know this thread is olde, but thought I'd throw in my 2 cents, anyway. Aircrew used to be a group of NECs, assigned flying jobs. The source ratings were AT, AE, AM, AD, AO, PH, and AW, which were never subratings of any other single rating, and have always been distinct ratings, AW is the newest, from the late '60s, as an offshoot of ATW. Recently, all the aircrew NECs and jobs were consolidated under the AW rating, renamed Naval Aircrewman.


 * As for the Q about AC, it has two meanings. As a rating, it stands for Air Traffic Controller. As a specialty designation, it may have gone away, since all the flying folks have their own rating as of 2009. It was formerly used in this manner - AT1(AC) - to denote that someone was aircrew qualified. NavyVet6989 (talk) 08:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The guy I knew used (NAC) rather than (AC) - or are those two different things? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.186.162.89 (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The guy I knew was an ET1(NAC). This was thirty years ago and my memory may be a bit faulty, but as I recall he said that "AC" was used by aviation ratings who would normally serve as aircrew, and "NAC" was used by other personnel (spooks, &c) who completed aircrew qualification. 104.153.40.58 (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Rate colors
Can someone mention the colors of each rate? I'd like to know what colors go with what rate so that I can tell what branch a petty officer is in just by looking at the color. D. F. Schmidt 23:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Dunno exactly what you mean by the question... rating marks all the same color, with the exception of MCPON's rating mark... but that's a whole nother ballgame. The only navy insignia that has differing color are the E-1 to E-3 insignia.
 * Supersquid 13:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I wonder if he's talking about the difference between the red and gold chevrons for Petty Officers and Chiefs.


 * I'm pretty sure he's talking about the white, red, green, and blue stripes for seaman which can be found here United States Navy enlisted rate insignia.
 * If you are talking about the red are gold cheverons all navy PO's cheverons are red and are changed to gold after 12 years of good conduct. As for the coast guard theres are always gold. -- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 21:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thumbnails and other stuff
I've done some preliminary work on adding thumbnails, let me know how this looks and I'll continue the work.

Also thought about adding a brief description of each rate. Comments? Supersquid 13:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * They look very nice. Jigen III 03:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * 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)


 * 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.-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 04:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Quick Comment
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)

Rate Badge pics
I went ahead and replaced the pictures of the rate badges with ones that I'd uploaded previously. The thumbnails may need some tweaking to make the columns line up better. Hope this is acceptable. The sourcing footnotes may need to be redone as well; all pics taken from the BuPers website Supersquid 12:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks good that way I may need to size them down alittle im working on it to go featured and I have a new table im going to use that will change everything alittle plus the descriptions need to be cleaned up.-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 01:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Glad to help. I'd planned to do something similar in the past, but time constraints prohibited my contributions.  This page is looking fantastic, let me know if I can help in any way.  Maybe after this page is finished, you could help me tweak out United States Navy enlisted rate insignia?


 * Supersquid 06:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh I'm with ya that page bugs the crap out of me. I want to get this page featured I have already been going back and forth with two featured list reviewers to get as many ideas on it as possible. Oh Hey did you see I got the Portal:United States Navy featured.?-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 06:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I did read the part where you got the portal featured, but only now took a look at it. WOW!  Very nice, I can see why it's featured!
 * I'd been working on the United States Navy enlisted rate insignia off and on (mostly off) to get it better than what was previously there. I'm still a WikiN00b, although I try to pick up bits and pieces while I've got downtime in-between missions (just got back from Kandahar, hehe).
 * Supersquid 06:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I sent an e-mail to the BuPers Webmaster to see if I can get some back issues of the Uniform Regs for the disestablished rate insignia graphics. I'm not too optimistic about it, though, but maybe it will pay off.  I'm also checking to make sure no current rate has been left out, and checking that all the proper warfare qualifications are listed.  Also, in regards to disestablished rates... how far do we want to go with this?  That list is pretty incomplete, only fairly modern (post 1990) disestablished rates are shown.  Do we list ALL disestablished rates from 1797-now, rates using the modern abbreviation system, or what?


 * Supersquid 12:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I have vector versions of most, if not all, of the Navy ratings insignia on my website. I don't know enough about how to add pics to Wikipedia to do so yet, or if they'd even be welcome, but if they are, and someone would like to add them, you're welcome to do so. --Ryland (talk) 10:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Spacing
Can the spacing be made smaller? If it can ill change the color to official Navy Blue.-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 03:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 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)


 * 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-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 03:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 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)
 * Thats what I'm currently trying to fix, but I can't seem to correct the span without screwing up half the table.-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 03:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Nuke Power ETs, EMs, and MMs
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)

Firefox rendering
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)
 * Hey man go figure something dumb like that would happen.-- Wils Bad Karma ( Talk / Contribs ) 11:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Discontinued ratings
Hey, I see no mention of Boiler Technician (BT), which was merged with the MM (conventional) around 1998 or so? Any chance of having that entered?

152.31.193.130 20:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)retired BT


 * If you are including ratings disestablished since 1990, you need to add Aviation Anti-Submarine Warfare Technician (AX) and Aviation Fire Control Technician (AQ) which were both merged into AT on January 1, 1991. Going back a bit farther, Tradevsman (TD) was disestablished circa 1985 (not sure of precise date) and all of the TD's cross-rated to AT, AQ, or most commonly AX, as all four rates went through the same "A" school. AX's worked on Sonar, MAD, sonobuoy receivers and closed-circuit communications systems, AQ's worked on RADAR and FLIR systems, and TD's worked on simulators.


 * Additionally, Boiler Technician (BT) was merged into MM on 1 October, 1996, Patternmaker (PM) and Molder (ML) were disestablished on 1 October 1997, and Instrumentman (IM) and Opticalman (OM) were disestablished 1 October 1999. I don't know much about these rates, as I never interacted with any of them.


 * Finally, you might also want to include the E-9 only compression rates of Avionics Maintenance Technician (AVCM--AT and AE) and Aircraft Maintenanceman (AFCM--AD and AM). There was once a Precision Instrumentman (PI) compression rating for E9 (IM and OM), but that was eliminated several years before the two source ratings were disestablished.


 * Horologium 19:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * A couple more that have gone away...Illustrator/Draftsman (DM) was merged into MC 1 July 2006; Ocean Systems Technician (OTA/OTM) was merged into STG 1 October 1997; Data Processing Technician was merged into RM on 19 February 1998 (the combined rate was renamed as IT on 4 November 1999; Data Systems Technician (DS) was merged into FC and ET on 1 October 1998; and Torpedoman's Mate (TM) was merged into GM on 26 February 2007.


 * And a couple more Compression Ratings for E9's: Constructionman (CU--BU, EA, and SW); Equipmentman (EQ--CM and EO), and Utilities/Constructionman (UC--CE and UT).


 * Horologium 22:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * CUCM, EQCM and UCCM were all converted to CBCM (Master Chief Seabee) in March of 2021. (See NAVADMIN 054/21.) 104.153.40.58 (talk) 19:17, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * While the article was being worked on to present it as a Featured List candidate, we decided, since we couldn't find good graphics of ALL the disestablished ratings, to only include recent ones that we could find GOOD images of. If we'd added ALL the disestablished ratings (which would be a PITA), not only would it ruin the article's flow (pics of rating symbols for some, but not for all) but it would seriously bog down the list, making the disestablished ones' entry longer than the active ones, if you count back to the days of sail!!!  That would have seriously hurt the list's Featured List candidacy.


 * Might be a good idea to start a disestablished ratings list? All I know is that, now that I'm back from Afghanistan and have much much MORE work to do, I won't be able to start it.


 * Supersquid 18:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This will teach me to read the discussion page first.... I added OTA and OTM to the table, but (of course) I didn't have a thumbnail rating insignia handy. Having read this thread, I've backed out the change. And now I know when the merge took place, thanks to Horologium. What constitutes a good image? If BUPERS doesn't make one available, would a scan from the BJM be sufficient? (I'm not even sure that I still have mine....)


 * Eric Petrich (talk) 06:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, but what about things like Watertender, Shipfitter, or Turret Captain? I don't even see them mentioned in any of the articles... a lot of the ratings from WWII are missing entirely... What's up with that? Magus732 (talk) 03:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Submarine Ratings
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)


 * 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)
 * 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)

Strikers
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)

CT (I)
when i was in the navy many years ago (all right, 1964-68) there was a rating 'communications technician', one of the specialties of which was 'CT(I)', communications technician (interpreter). the language schools were at monterey california. i assume this has been merged into another rating. question is,what? or does the navy no longer employ tranlators?Toyokuni3 (talk) 16:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Cryptological Technician Interpreter is what you're referring to I think, and yes they are still around.
 * Supersquid (talk) 02:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * There were 6 fields in the Cryptologic Technician community. I was a CTT but will start this with my knowledge and others, hopefully from the respective fields, can refine the document as needed.  Keep in mind personnel in these rates have clearances so this information will NOT be in detail  :-)


 * CTA (Admin) were the Yeoman's of the classified nature that handled clearance stuff as well as other classified documents
 * CTI (Interpreter) are the linguists for the Navy. They take a test, before entry into the rating, to determine their proficiency to learn languages and are given a language or two to learn in an accelerated course, NOT easy stuff.  Some of the things I have seen them used for are talking with personnel from other countries in situations like approaching aircraft or ships, or when we enter a foreign port.  Lots more, more important jobs, but I'll stop here.
 * CTO (Communications) are (were, rating no longer exists) the higher classified equivalent to the legacy Radioman (RM) and new IT ratings. Those ratings required a basic clearance but not at the level required for CTO.  Advanced communications/networking skills utilizing some advanced equipment over restricted networks.
 * CTM (
 * CTN (Networks) are the computer network defense experts and I will leave it at that.
 * CTR (Collection) are very versatile in their ability to collect and provide technical analysis of analog and digital communication signals.
 * CTT (Technical) are the electronic warfare experts. They use specialized equipment to intercept and identify radar signals.  Their information is used to build and update national databases and build anti-ship missile defense tactics.  They are the recognized experts on enemy equipment and capabilities and the enemy offensive capabilities and friendly defensive tactics.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.194.77.3 (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

SK & PC combined into LS
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)

GM service ratings
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)

Help Needed: Chester W. Nimitz article
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)

IC
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)


 * 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)


 * 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)

Patternmaker rate
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)


 * 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)

Molder
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)

Never mind - I just noticed that they include in the "Disestablished Ratings" section up there. 73.186.162.89 (talk) 15:45, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Established and Discontinued Dates for Ratings
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)


 * 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)


 * 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)

I'm back. McChizzle link appears dead - I find both media.defense.gov 27-Mar2-2002 USCG RATING WARRANT MARKS and uscglightshipsailors.org USCG Rating Warrant Marks.pdf - not a thorugh look both appear to be the exact same file. Wfoj3 (talk) 17:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

MOS equivalents
"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)

Temporary End of Ratings ?
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)

Undes?
"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)

Hospital Corpsman Petty Officer and Chief Petty Officer Ranks
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)

United States Navy Chief Engineer Rating
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)


 * A Ships Chief Engineer is a position - not a rating. typically a single officer by billet on a ship. While Underway there will be a Single Engineering Officer of the Watch - this varies it might be a mid-grade to senior Enlisted of the Engineering Ratings (Gas turbine Tech, Engineman, Macinist mate) - or a Junior officer - after they have completed the qualifications. Wfoj3 (talk) Wfoj3 (talk) 13:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Size of each Rating Field
Ok - there are now only 58 ratings in the Navy. Back in the 1980s I guess there were at least 80. Any one have any information on the relatives size by number of people in different ratings? Relative size is adequate - You will probably see the top 5-8 ratings be >20% of navy, and the "bottom" 12 ratings <10%. - A personal perspective - the temporary discontinue of ratings may have been an aim/ message that a career sailor today has a much higher likelihood to change their rating during their career. Wfoj3 (talk) 14:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)