SECNAV to Implement Sweeping Changes

[Flash]

False sir,

Navy Reserve Merchant Marine Warfare Badge was first authorized in 1915...granted they took it away from us a few years ago and replaced it with something lame..

HA HA! Wait, your serious?

After doing a little Googling the assertion seems a little thin, with only some sort of insignia to be worn back in 1913 with no pics of what it was. The 'chicken' that was current until 2011 wasn't created until the late 30's. So to call it the oldest 'warfare pin' is a stretch to say the least. Not only that but the original appears to be less a 'qualification' than an insignia for merchant mariners in Navy service. It all sounds like some great propaganda on the part of the maritime schools, they seem to have taken a lesson in that from the Marines.

So, not so much.

 

[Duc'-guy25]

Eh, details are not important sir, we can beat history into submission with blunt force (learned that lesson from the Marine Corps). I was always told the venerable Sea Chicken was the oldest warfare badge, I'd have to actually look up what the 1915 one looked like, it could be substantially different for all I know. "Warfare" is perhaps a stretch... Qualified though, is certainly not.

As for the Sea Chicken which was beloved and held dear...

It was decided it was too big, didn't look anything like any other badge, had USNR on it, and made people ask questions.

So now Merchant Marine Reserve is known as the Strategic Sealift Officer Program and we have the Strategic Sealift Officer Warfare Insignia

It has swords and a "PQS"

 

[Flash]

Eh, details are not important sir....I was always told the venerable Sea Chicken was the oldest warfare badge, I'd have to actually look up what the 1915 one looked like, it could be substantially different for all I know....It has swords and a "PQS"

You have learned well apparently when it comes to 'history'. I wouldn't mind seeing what the original looked like but I have a feeling that as a 'badge' it didn't exist, possibly just some sort of uniform insignia like the Coastie shield or staff corps insignia.

 

[Recovering LSO]

Not DoN or SECNAV specific:


I'm interested to see how this course material turns out. I'm sure it won't be suggestive at all..... Full disclosure, I skimmed the article, will read in greater detail later, but from first glance I get the impression that CO, XO, and CMC are going to be the "local" faces of this similar to DADT and SAPR. On the surface, that's not a bad thing, but it is one more thing.

 

[Hopeful Hoya]

Currently the proposal is only for O-3s/O-4s in technical fields, but I wonder if this will eventually open the door for a 15-20 year patched super LT?

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/06/09/pentagon-promotion-up-or-out/85638312/

 

[Uncle Fester]

Currently the proposal is only for O-3s/O-4s in technical fields, but I wonder if this will eventually open the door for a 15-20 year patched super LT?

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/06/09/pentagon-promotion-up-or-out/85638312/

When I've talked about this with the more senior gorillas, it seems like there's still enough bad institutional memories of the "Flying LDO" program from the '80's that nobody will give anything resembling it any consideration. To whit, they sucked up the billets the career-minded guys needed, like AOPS, WTI, etc. Personally I think it'd be great if it's managed right, but nobody asked me.

 

[hscs]

When I've talked about this with the more senior gorillas, it seems like there's still enough bad institutional memories of the "Flying LDO" program from the '80's that nobody will give anything resembling it any consideration. To whit, they sucked up the billets the career-minded guys needed, like AOPS, WTI, etc. Personally I think it'd be great if it's managed right, but nobody asked me.

Same thing with the Flying Warrant - doomed to fail because they didn't let the Warrants have the billets that they should (QAO, NATOPS, etc.). Those are the billets that you want institutional knowledge.

The irony of this whole thing is that we write the rules for what jobs are important. No where in Title X does it say that the Navy can't promote a JO if they haven't been WTI, QAO, NATOPS......

 

[Spekkio]

Currently the proposal is only for O-3s/O-4s in technical fields, but I wonder if this will eventually open the door for a 15-20 year patched super LT?

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/careers/2016/06/09/pentagon-promotion-up-or-out/85638312/

This is a good effort, but I'm not convinced this would appreciably change anything for the vast majority of people in URL jobs.

You're talking about taking a select few people who apply for a specialty program to go off the traditional career rails at around 5-8 YCS. Then you're going to keep them around for another 12-15 years in that billet, including the schooling, which means that the few opportunities that exist for such a job will become permanently filled for a long period of time.

I think you'll just end up with the same 'timing is everything' situation that people gripe about now. "I did a good job and want to be a permanent flying LT/go to NPS to get a MS in systems engineering and help design radars/whatever, but some LT is sticking around clogging up my opportunity. The Navy shouldn't keep those guys around so long." Also, as one comment aptly pointed out, the 'reward' for a hot runner who makes it into this kind of program is that he has a flat pay scale for the duration of his military career.

 

[Recovering LSO]

This is a good effort, but I'm not convinced this would appreciably change anything for the vast majority of people in URL jobs.

I don't think this is aimed at URL jobs.

 

[ChuckMK23]

I never understood the reasoning why you could never "just fly" and be really good at that and nothing else.

 

[hscs]

This is a good effort, but I'm not convinced this would appreciably change anything for the vast majority of people in URL jobs.

You're talking about taking a select few people who apply for a specialty program to go off the traditional career rails at around 5-8 YCS. Then you're going to keep them around for another 12-15 years in that billet, including the schooling, which means that the few opportunities that exist for such a job will become permanently filled for a long period of time.

I think you'll just end up with the same 'timing is everything' situation that people gripe about now. "I did a good job and want to be a permanent flying LT/go to NPS to get a MS in systems engineering and help design radars/whatever, but some LT is sticking around clogging up my opportunity. The Navy shouldn't keep those guys around so long." Also, as one comment aptly pointed out, the 'reward' for a hot runner who makes it into this kind of program is that he has a flat pay scale for the duration of his military career.

Army makes it work just fine....

 

[IKE]

Army makes it work just fine....

Or maybe it's that it works just fine for the Army.
It seems like the number of up-or-out, URL, commissioned officers in Naval Aviation should be directly related to the number of URL Flag slots the Navy wants filled with aviators. Perhaps the Army doesn't desire so many aviators in the top ranks.

 

[Flash]

Army makes it work just fine....

Big Army aviation also suffers as a result of a lot less regular officers in aviation.

 

[Recovering LSO]

Army

work just fine....

These are not words that should be put in the same sentence, in that order.

 

[hscs]

So what do you all want - keep flying thru 20 years or 200 flag aviators?

It is ok to explore new ideas. If you can't, you are no better than the people you slam on these threads.

It is even worse if you submit an opinion and have never worked extensively with Army aviation.