"... the place of a midshipman definitely became during the 18th century the most important stepping stone for a young gentleman who wished to become a naval officer. In fact it became the lynchpin of the whole system which enabled naval officers to fulfil their double function as seamen and military gentlemen. ... And, of course they all hoped to procure for themselves after two years as midshipmen and after passing an often rather perfunctionary examination by the captain, (or) a commisssion, as naval lieutenant. " (Norbert Elias Archive (part 1), Inv.-Nr. 513, p. 9, cited from Moelker 2004, p. 383).

[French officers often complained ... (follows a translation of a French text)]: ["English seamen are superior to us, not for their courage nor for their partiotism, but for their experience, i.e. turning theory into practice, ... An English captain is always the best sailor on board"]. "... French observers, over a long period of time, noted again and again the same differences between French and English naval officers. In practical seamanship the latter were far superior to the former. There can be little doubt that this superiority was one of the principal and one of the permanent factors which helped to decide the long struggle between the two countries for naval supremacy and the control of North America and India in favour of England." (Norbert Elias Archive (part 1), Inv.-Nr. 513, p. 16, cited from Moelker 2004, p. 383).

sources: 
Norbert Elias Archive (Marbach/BRD), 
René Moelker: Norbert Elias, marine supremacy and the naval profession, in: British Journal of Sociology (London/UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul), vol. 54 no.3 (2004), pp. 373-390