BDCP Full

[Swanee]

Well then they should go work for GE .

Performance wise, are the OCS guys/gals on edge still, do the academy grads seem to be 4 years ahead or is it just individual performance regardless of comm. source?

You have shit bag Academy types as well as shit bag OCS types.

 

[helolumpy]

Well then they should go work for GE .

Performance wise, are the OCS guys/gals on edge still, do the academy grads seem to be 4 years ahead or is it just individual performance regardless of comm. source?

Saw a study that found there was zero correlation between the performance of an individual in their command tour with regards to their commissioning source.

It was the only performance based study I've seen regarding long term success of one source over another.

 

[Sapper!]

In regard to having crappy officers from any source:
My thought seeing things from the Army side was that, in order to get through the BS that OCS accelerated or otherwise as well as ROTC, you had to have a pretty sustained level of motivation for being there. Otherwise you just didn't get through anyway, but once the said officers got to their units it seemed that sometimes the unrealistic expectations or the OPTEMPO ( balls deep into two 18 month deployments with 10-12 months dwell time between the two, no end in sight, with 3 years left on commitment) is what wore them out early or shut a recent grad down. There isn't much mechanism to cope in the Army, once officers get placed, it seems that is it, you are stuck, and the army isn't going to spend any money on doing much else. if you are s*#$ hot then you can have it made, but even then I have seen many combat units be so incredibly low on officer man power that they can be top quality and get turned down for schools and career courses. Mainly because deployments are so rapid for line units and their commanders need them so badly to carry out regular duties and training cycles.

That is what is attractive about other services, when I heard crazy stuff like "you can transition" or you can "have a dream sheet", better yet "you can go from Navy to Marine during training" I seriously almost crapped my pants. Then I even heard things like, "during TBS, I asked the CO what the hell was up with my package and can I go to IOC instead" I DID crap my pants. Honestly, when I was up for re enlistment, my CO was awesome about flying me up to BAF to take the AFAST because I wanted to fly. Mentioning that to someone else, that i got that special privilege they weren't surprised because it was me, just that it happened period giving me a WTF look....dunno. Just some .2 cents, sorry to ruin the thread.

Edit: I even remember a guard pilot telling an active duty fellow that because he transferred states (IST) that he was allowed to re train on a new airframe. The active WO dropped his jaw as well, the guard guy said "it the best scam in the army!"

 

[wink]

Sounds pretty good. ...

Had some trouble fishing up details about the other programs. Then I realized why. NAVCAD stopped in 1966. AVROC is also an old program. Why are they relevant to the discussion? We're talking about the pros and cons of various modern recruitment programs.

Who said we were debating modern programs? Programs come and go. When you have been around as long as me you see it all. For instance, while NAVCAD did go away in the 60's, it also came back in the 1980's. Today we have a limited Warrant Officer pilot/NFO program, years ago, the USMC actively recruited WOs from the Army. They flew into the 1980s. We also had a Limit Duty Officer Aviator program in the 1990's, but that wasn't an assession program. If it worked in the past there is no reason to not consider it again. There is ample data about the past programs available. If one was looking for a less expensive alternative to BDCP, then consideration should be given to past successful programs, like AVROC.

I was under the impression that NROTC and OCS (with or without BDCP) were apples and oranges. As with Annapolis, it's 3 different programs that breed naval officers. NROTC and the academy produce a naval officer in 4 years, where at OCS it's done in 12 weeks. I have gone through none of them yet, it it seems they can't be compared, better or worse. Is this the case or are they more similar than I'm led to believe?

They all lead to commisions. They all cost money. Since the final product is the same (in that they produce ensigns) they can be compared to determine the relative value of the programs.

Are the differences in commissioning sources noticable in the fleet?

Often debated. In my experience it isn't noticable after the first several months in the fleet.

 

[CStudent]

Why is it important to note that BDCP is a much firmer commitment than ROTC? What are you basing that on? NROTC requires students receiving benefits to sign a contract after freshman year that states that they will either pay back their tuition costs or serve an enlistment if they fail to earn a commission. During their four years these students maintain academic and physical standards while receiving additional training in preparation for a career as an officer. In what way is this less firm than BDCP?

What's the difference between being a civilian and active duty? When you are in BDCP, you are sworn in and subject to military law. Try getting a drug charge in ROTC vs in BDCP. A DUI. Try getting in a fight. I promise you, there is a difference. In both the standards you are held to, and the consequences for failing to meet them.

Also, as you said, if you do your time in ROTC and don't like it, you can get out. Just pay them back the money. Which, on the face of things, can still end up being a pretty good deal for the student. In BDCP, if you don't like it, that's too fucking bad. Your options aren't nearly as palatable.

Having a few friends that did Air Force ROTC or Army ROTC does not make one an expert on the strengths and weaknesses of the Navy's officer accession programs.

*shrug* Sounds a little trollish, to me.

If you can point out significant differences between the various branches ROTC programs, or any errors in what I'm saying, then please do so.

Absolutely. BDCP-types with technical majors always seem to be talking about money and how much more they could have made with GE.

A lot of them are mistaken. Others really aren't looking at the "long picture". But some are genuinely taking a pretty severe pay cut to serve in the military. Hard not to think about the path you didn't take.

Grass is always greener syndrome!

Exactly!

 

[gotta_fly]

You caught me, I'm a troll.

What's the difference between being a civilian and active duty? When you are in BDCP, you are sworn in and subject to military law. Try getting a drug charge in ROTC vs in BDCP. A DUI. Try getting in a fight. I promise you, there is a difference. In both the standards you are held to, and the consequences for failing to meet them.
Exactly!

I don't think you understand the NROTC program. NROTC scholarship midshipmen are also sworn in and, when on active duty, are subject to military law. When in a reserve status (most of the time) they are subject to a very strict set of regulations. Drug policy= zero tolerance (seen someone ad-sepped for this). DUI/ fighting/ drunk and disorderly= very close to zero tolerance (I saw one person ad-sepped and the other paid for a year of tuition out of pocket in a probationary status). Standards and consequences exist throughout the military. While NROTC students enjoy a much more relaxed atmosphere than those at USNA, they are not civilians any more than someone in the BDCP program.

Also, as you said, if you do your time in ROTC and don't like it, you can get out. Just pay them back the money. Which, on the face of things, can still end up being a pretty good deal for the student. In BDCP, if you don't like it, that's too fucking bad. Your options aren't nearly as palatable.
Exactly!

"Just pay them back the money" is not a palatable option, which is why most of the folks I saw separated ended up enlisting. ~$180,000 is not a number most people scoff at.

*shrug* Sounds a little trollish, to me.

If you can point out significant differences between the various branches ROTC programs, or any errors in what I'm saying, then please do so.
Exactly!

You are on a website devoted to the Naval Service, and you are the one who stated that your background knowledge on the subject was obtained second-hand from participants of programs in the Army and Air Force. If you have some other qualification to comment on these programs, then please do share.

If you want differences, look it up or search the thousands of posts on this website. I'm not an expert on the other services, I'm just telling you that your comments regarding NROTC might not be based in fact.

 

[wink]

If you can point out significant differences between the various branches ROTC programs, or any errors in what I'm saying, then please do so.

That isn't the way it works. You step up with facts or first hand knowledge and experience and you will get a debate, even a schooling, by those qualified to respond. You have never been in NROTC and know very little factually about NROTC, but you criticize it based on what you have been told about a ROTC program you also haven't participated in or are factually familiar. You haven't been in the Navy and have no idea why we have different commissioning sources or the different purposes they serve. Army ROTC is huge, everywhere, and the major sources of officers in the Army, not so for NROTC, and you haven't s clue why. NROTC provides officers in the unrestricted line only, not so for other ROTC programs, and you haven't a clue why. NROTC has far different academic requirements then the other ROTC programs, especially Army, you don't have a clue why or how this is important. Summers in the various ROTC programs varies widely, and you can not tell me how, or why that is important to the sponsoring service. I won't even get into how the various cultures of the military services define their ROTC programs. I don't suppose you know anything about that either.

BDCP, OCS, PLC, OIS, STA-21, ROTC, all you need to know is you pick your poison, play by the rules for a time and you will be rewarded with a commission and an opportunity of a life time. Anything else you have to say about those programs is just baseless opinion. Nothing of any value to the guys on AW. Just sit down and shut up.

 

[MIDNJAC]

*shrug* Sounds a little trollish, to me.

So the winged naval officer who has been there and done that, is trolling, while the wannabe BDCP guy with 0 seconds of real military experience somehow knows better? I know your dog in this fight, and I understand the motivation behind your bias, but your posts illustrate a very clear lack of understanding about the USN/USMC ROTC program. None of the commissioning sources are better than another, and when you get a few years into your career, you will see that it is damn near impossible to guess where anyone came from. Either a guy is a good dude, or he isn't, and both types come from all 3 sources.