The thought-provoking contribution by Cmde Kesnur above, encouraged me to share some additional angles to the issues he flags. In my readings of the archives of the British Naval Review (NR), the rationale of what action messing meant became a bit clearer. I was writing a book review essay for the NMF’s Maritime Affairs journal in mid-2013. The book was Dreadnought to Daring—100 Years of Comment, Controversy and Debate in the Naval Review. The book covered a wide variety of issues that have been discussed mainly by RN officers candidly in the first 100 years of the NR from 1912-2012. Here is a passage from the review essay that refers to action messing:

“Tactical improvements like action messing at action posts, ear defenders for gun crew and, as the war prolonged, the three watch instead of two watch system had all been junior officers’ideas in the NR in its very early issues and while the First World War was on. (Incidentally, the action messing in/ near action posts was reinitiated by the RN in the Falklands war of 1982 in preference to the more elaborate, but actually undoable methods in the dining halls in actual combat. Older IN officers would also remember the adequacy of ‘paratha- in- newspaper’ meals brought to action posts in wicker baskets and eaten together with the men.”

In days of sails and beam firing guns, sailors of course slept on the decks where these were fitted. Their food was cooked in makeshift galleys and eaten in these action/living spaces which is why they came to be called mess-decks. All of us recall being puzzled why sailors’ accommodation were called mess decks while they actually “messed” in dining halls!

What was the purpose of action messing? The logistics department (or “supply” as in my earlier days) always had a very vital purpose in action. Some formed what was termed lower gun crew working in magazines and supplying ammunition. Others were vital members of the damage control and fire-fighting parties. Logistics officers helped with action encryption and decryption. In the “Alpha-to Echo” method that evolved from the late 1980s, a ship’s actual overall readiness (call it a ship cleared for action) actually fell because of two important reasons that higher staffs did not recognise. One, that the logistics sailors, especially cooks, were actually not available from before meals to after meals in their action posts. Their “action posts” now became galleys and the serving lines in dining halls and wardrooms instead of the more important action tasks they were supposed to do for combat efficiency and survivability of a ship in combat. The second was that a little over one-fifth of a ship’s crew was not at their action posts in action stations because they were in dining halls and the wardroom.

The third consequence is always a feeling of puzzlement in the rank and file about what was the question to which this was the answer? This has been seen elsewhere in meaningless jargon; camouflage uniforms that never asked the question what we were camouflaging against in the navy; or some tactical “innovations” (again as a misreading of the RN’s Falklands experience) in anti-missile defence that defied logic. A fourth consequence specific to action messing was that it became an end in itself; to be conducted almost daily at sea in a fleet exercise programme (FXP) and always at lunch. I am happy that Cmde. Kesnur states he has seen it being conducted occasionally for dinner and breakfast. This would have been rare, and I have never seen it although I did question some fleet staffs on this and other incongruities, unsuccessfully I may add. The corollary is that one would require a considerate enemy to test us only during lunch and not during other meals. This would be a curious twist to the Nelsonic toast of “a willing foe and sea room!” in the RN.

As the extract above shows, the RN too discovered that action messing does not, umm, work that well in action. There could be issues with my memory of “parathas in newspaper” meals. For one, more easy options and more flexible packaged meals are now possible. Food quality, rationing efficiencies have improved very significantly since the 1970s and 80s. Galleys have become more automated; MRE variants are available and victualling improvements and organisation in submarines could provide pointers. And, yes, wrapping in newspapers with questionable ink as “dressing” is perhaps avoidable.

Hygiene concerns could be overcome with individual care and simple moves like eating outside a darkened action post in a flat or lobby. I recall Rogues’ Yarn Messing with Action! action post nominees collecting ready to eat packages in baskets and some of us would eat in a small lobby outside the “Forward Volna TS”. It took no more than a couple of minutes to eat a roll, after all. The important point was that action readiness was not really impacted.

The final point, therefore, not that food is not important; it is in harbour, and during cruising, defence or action stations. Action messing, however, requires rethinking because it does not add to action effectiveness but actually messes with it.