• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

VMI vs. The Citadel (this thread is for school bashing!)

jt71582

jt71582

How do you fly a Clipper?
pilot
Contributor
DSL1990 said:
yep. i wanted mechanical or aerospace engineering and got university studies. good to know that it's kind of a temp major. so what do you have to do? could i still take engineering courses like engineering 104 if i am university studies?
Click to expand...

It has really been a while DSL. I think pretty much if you're a rockstar in the US program, you have no problem getting into the engineering program. And I do think they have an Engr. Intro type class that the US people take. It's really not a big deal.:)
 
DanMa1156

DanMa1156

Is it baseball season yet?
pilot
Contributor
DSL1990 said:
yep. i wanted mechanical or aerospace engineering and got university studies. good to know that it's kind of a temp major. so what do you have to do? could i still take engineering courses like engineering 104 if i am university studies?
Click to expand...

Why don't you call up the schools to find this info out, rather than relying on alumni whose information may be outdated... Just a thought.
 
P

phrogpilot73

Well-Known Member
lavettenu06 said:
The thing I liked that was different then the federal academies (but I would have gone to the fed academies if given the chance) was being around all the other services..Most of my buddies are in the army, air force and marines, not the navy.
Click to expand...
What's a federal academy?!? They're generally referred to as service academies, and places like FBI, Secret Service and other federal law enforcement agencies academies are federal academies.
 
NUFO06

NUFO06

Well-Known Member
None
I believe i got it from a previous posting. I didnt think it was a big deal. Your right its a Service Academy. My bad
 
Flash

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
phrogpilot73 said:
What's a federal academy?!? They're generally referred to as service academies, and places like FBI, Secret Service and other federal law enforcement agencies academies are federal academies.
Click to expand...

Common term at my school, differentiates between the state military schools and the 'federal' ones. Could be a leftover from 'The War' too. ;)
 
FormerRecruitingGuru

FormerRecruitingGuru

Making Recruiting Great Again
mike172 said:
ROTC rocks. Granted its not as "hard core" as the military colleges ( I assume) but you get that disipline while getting to be a relativly normal civilian. Way to go in my mind. Wait for those other schools. I am actually trying to transfer to GW. I love ROTC I wouldnt want to have gone anyother way.
Click to expand...

And you have a life. Enough said.
 
D

DSL1990

VMI Cadet 4/c, MIDN 4/c
mike172 said:
ROTC rocks. Granted its not as "hard core" as the military colleges ( I assume) but you get that disipline while getting to be a relativly normal civilian. Way to go in my mind. Wait for those other schools. I am actually trying to transfer to GW. I love ROTC I wouldnt want to have gone anyother way.
Click to expand...

from http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA432824&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

The results of this study generally concurred with previous studies that USNA is the most cost-effective commissioning source except for the Surface Warfare Community where NROTC is the most cost-effective. Also, they found that accession source significantly affected the retention and promotion of officers. Their unrestricted line retention model showed that NROTC program accessions were more likely to stay on active service to the O-4 promotion board than USNA graduates. Also, their results suggest that officers who graduated from highly selective universities are less likely to stay in the service because of the high probability of finding better jobs in the civilian market.

The results of the restricted line retention model showed that ROTC-Scholarship and OCS accessions are more likely to stay to the O-4 promotion point than USNA graduates. Having prior service experience had a positive effect on staying in the service for both URL and RL retention models.

On the other hand, officers with technical degrees, who graduated from selective universities, and had high GPAs are less likely to stay in the service.106

The results of the promotion model showed that while USNA graduates were less likely to stay in the service to the O-4 point, they are more likely to promote to LCDR. Also, the graduates of elite universities are more likely to promote to the O-4 point.
Click to expand...

from a usna bgo and former naval aviator on another forum:

This is a Naval Academy forum. Factual information must be presented. Nothing against OCS, NROTC, or any of the other acquisition sources, but, all things being equal, Academy grads are better prepared to enter the fleet, and will subsequently do better. All consoling aside, we can not lose sight of that fact. Those who initially apply are aware of that fact. Those who are initially unsuccessful must ascertain from admissions their chances of subsequent admissions and plan accordingly. For many of these, rightfully so, ROTC is a poor substitute. Performance statistics support this. It should be their decision based on factual Navy statistics, not anecdotal AF situations. If USNA were not the most cost effective source of quality officers, there would be no reason for it’s existence.
Click to expand...

i'm like a bee pollinating between these various forums i'm reading :)
 
P

phrogpilot73

Well-Known Member
I find it interesting that USNA is the most cost effective... I also find it interesting that we're more likely to get out...
 
L

lmnop

Active Member
DSL1990 said:
from http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA432824&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

words
Click to expand...
I also learned from this paper that an O-3 is more likely to get out than an O-1. Well, gee whiz.:rolleyes:

Good on you for citing sources, but the thesis you linked to, written by a Turkish Army Captain, has some seriously inconsistent background info. Outdated is fine, but using old and new info interchangeably doesn't necessarily make for valid conclusions. I'm not a statistician, but if it were me, I wouldn't place too much stock in it.
 
HH-60H

HH-60H

Manager
pilot
Contributor
lmnop said:
I also learned from this paper that an O-3 is more likely to get out than an O-1. Well, gee whiz.:rolleyes:

Good on you for citing sources, but the thesis you linked to, written by a Turkish Army Captain, has some seriously inconsistent background info. Outdated is fine, but using old and new info interchangeably doesn't necessarily make for valid conclusions. I'm not a statistician, but if it were me, I wouldn't place too much stock in it.
Click to expand...
That thesis was accepted by the Naval Post Graduate school, an educational institution that maintains high academic standards.

So what if it was written by a Turkish Army Captain? I don't see how that is relevant. If you are going to attack the work provide relevant specific critiques.
 
L

lmnop

Active Member
HH-60H said:
That thesis was accepted by the Naval Post Graduate school, an educational institution that maintains high academic standards.

So what if it was written by a Turkish Army Captain? I don't see how that is relevant. If you are going to attack the work provide relevant specific critiques.
Click to expand...

I certainly didn't intend to impugn NPS by commenting on this thesis.

I only mention the author's country of origin and vocation because they may cause a lack of familiarity with the US Naval Service. I certainly would miss some of the nuances of the Turkish Gendarmerie if I were to pursue a similar thesis.

One thing which bothered me in section II was the author's mix and match of outdated career paths (NAVEDTRA 12967, NOV 1992) with current career paths pulled from the 2005 NPC website. It creates the appearance that the main goal was to provide visually pleasing tables, regardless of the validity of the information. The 1140 career path, for example, lists ship classes and billets which hadn't existed in ten years when this thesis was written.

The author also combines SPECWAR and SPECOPS, two separate warfare communities with completely different missions and career paths. The statistics generated for this combined community are no more valid or significant than if Aviation and SPECWAR were combined. Just because they both had 'special' in their name doesn't make them the same.

Finally, though it has absolutely no bearing on the statistical validity of his thesis, my favorite typo: 'reverie interdiction'.
 
cfam

cfam

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
It's definitely a well written/researched study, however, it seems like he contradicts himself in the summary and conclusion sections. He summarizes that his results agreed with the previous study that stated USNA officers have less longevity in the service.
However, in the conclusion, he says that due to the longer service life of USNA officers, the navy should continue to focus on USNA as its major commissioning source.
Any thoughts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top