Intel officer versus enlisted

[6strings78]

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I'm not a power point guru by any means, but I suppose better than average. Is there a patch for that too?

 

[Spartan43]

Is there a patch for that too?

 

[exNavyOffRec]

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I'm not a power point guru by any means, but I suppose better than average. Is there a patch for that too?

Kind of joking, but they did say they used powerpoint quite a bit and the level of knowledge about it backed it up, I can't quantify "quite a bit" though.

 

[LET73]

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. I'm not a power point guru by any means, but I suppose better than average. Is there a patch for that too?

Kind of joking, but they did say they used powerpoint quite a bit and the level of knowledge about it backed it up, I can't quantify "quite a bit" though.

At my last command, I built/reviewed three briefs a day for a while. Powerpoint is a popular (and sometimes even effective) way to convey information, and conveying information and providing analysis is what we do. Right now I've got a bit less powerpoint in my life, and I am completely OK with that.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Unfortunately, as revan says, most squadron intel Os end up stuck doing collateral duties all the time. A part of that is because of the attitude that.... Which isn't always true, and is toxic to the intel community. Squadron intel Os are underutilized, which leads to a lack of good training, which leads to collateral duties. Further, the bad reputation scares off promising first/second tour officers, which hurts the squadrons. As you can see, it is a vicious cycle, but it is one that is getting attention among CAG AIs (wing intel Os for the unfamiliar) and is hopefully changing in the future. The training is getting better for all navy intel Os, as are the resources for squadron AIs to learn independently. There are some damn good squadron AIs out there that can help even patch wearers better understand the threat, whether it is about enemy IADS, AAMs, and even some stuff at the tactical level (this last bit I will concede is pretty rare). In short "they don't know shit" is a bad approach for both the spy and the squadron, as they won't actually get the most out of each other.

Fully agree with everything you said here. I think it is more on our shoulders than anything else to teach them. Maybe not the beeps and squeaks of how to procure raw intel, or other such intel specific stuff....but we do owe it to them to explain the things that are important to us, how they can contribute, and hopefully excel in the AI world. When I say they don't know shit, that is simply to say that coming in the door out of intel school, they generally don't know what they don't know. It is absolutely not to say that we should write them off....rather that it is incumbent on us to make sure they gain that knowledge, whether we are Intel O's, aircrew, or other parties that have a vested interest in their success. I've known smart, dedicated squadron AI's, so my comments weren't intended at all to be a slam. But it is an area we need to work on. I know there are folks like yourself who recognize this issue, and are working to fix it.