Posted on Aug 24, 2017
Collisions: Part I—What Are the Root Causes?- By Captain Kevin Eyer, U.S. Navy (Retired) | U.S....
542
17
13
4
4
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
One of the commenters said it best:
1. Naval Aviators take between a year and a half to three years in the training pipeline before they get to their squadrons as Nuggets.
2. Marine infantry Officers go through TBS, and IOC, as well as any other schools, before getting to their first combat assignment.
Nukes go through NPS and Prototype before ever setting foot on their first Submarine.
3. SEALs go through a grueling and exhaustive BUD/S and follow-on SEAL training before being assigned to their first team.
4. SWOs get their college degree and walk aboard their first ship.
Which of these is not like the others in our professional Navy?
1. Naval Aviators take between a year and a half to three years in the training pipeline before they get to their squadrons as Nuggets.
2. Marine infantry Officers go through TBS, and IOC, as well as any other schools, before getting to their first combat assignment.
Nukes go through NPS and Prototype before ever setting foot on their first Submarine.
3. SEALs go through a grueling and exhaustive BUD/S and follow-on SEAL training before being assigned to their first team.
4. SWOs get their college degree and walk aboard their first ship.
Which of these is not like the others in our professional Navy?
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SN Greg Wright Did you just assume their training level?!? Microaggression alert!!!
But seriously, you would think that difference would've been noticed a long time ago. And those leaders in other areas are constantly going through training BEFORE being given a new command. Hell, my cousin is in line for O-5 w/ the MO Nat'l Guard & he is currently sitting in Kirtland AFB learning what his next command is all about before he gets assigned to it. I mean, why the hell wouldn't someone in charge want to have an idea of what they'll be in charge of before getting said charge?
But seriously, you would think that difference would've been noticed a long time ago. And those leaders in other areas are constantly going through training BEFORE being given a new command. Hell, my cousin is in line for O-5 w/ the MO Nat'l Guard & he is currently sitting in Kirtland AFB learning what his next command is all about before he gets assigned to it. I mean, why the hell wouldn't someone in charge want to have an idea of what they'll be in charge of before getting said charge?
(1)
(0)
LT Brad McInnis
SN Greg Wright Sadly, this is so true. The training stopped 2003 or so, I think. They have since re-started a different version.
(1)
(0)
This article is spot on, in my opinion. I remember when the "New" CBT came along and these officers were coming to the ship with a stack of CD's. The problem is what it always is, we need to cut budgets at all costs regardless of the "costs." In this case, we were sending brand new officers who barely knew port from starboard to a ship, and telling already over worked Wardrooms, Chiefs Mess and Ships crew that you need to teach these O's. Name me one other rating, program, warfare, whatever, that doesn't have some kind of schoolhouse training before you get to the command. When we tried to bring up concerns, we were told to suck it up and get over it, this was happening. The decision was made at the Pentagon, without the input from any fleet officers. I am not saying that these weren't good officers coming to the ship. Many were, but more often than not they were shuffled to the side and told to work on their CD's because we didn't have the time to teach the basics to them. True story... I was Chief Engineer. We have a maintenance system for all gear called PMS (Planned Maintenance System). When I asked one of these new O's what they knew about PMS, he told me that he doesn't talk about that stuff with his girlfriend! And he was totally serious.... SN Greg Wright
(2)
(0)
LT Brad McInnis
SSgt (Join to see) - I don't know if it is toxic leadership, frankly not even sure what that means, but I do know that if wholesale changes are going to be made without even consulting those that will be affected, then that is a recipe for disaster. I have also seen the flip side, where very senior leaders told us this is the problem, fix it, and we will back you on whatever you come up with.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LT Brad McInnis - And those leaders are the ones that we all need - the ones that will back their people to the end, if they are in the right. I hope that the good thing that comes out of these collisions is that training is revamped to be what it needs to be.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LT Brad McInnis - agreed. I only really ran into 1 bad one. His issue was that he had hit his ceiling at E-7. He had missed his chances to promote & took it out on us.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see) Thank you for this post. As a land lover I haven't understood some of the debates and comments by our sea dwelling brethren regarding the recent collisions and this article help bring it into perspective for me.
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) same here, sir. I noticed I have few Navy/Coastie connections here on RP. It is something I am trying to remedy.
(0)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
The bottom line is that surface warfare officers have too many boxes to check, so they generally are ok at lots of things and stellar at nothing. That mindset is coming home to roost, now, and they're going to have to do something about it. Other career paths (aviators, submariners, SEALs etc) require years and years of training and workup, yet a newly-minted Ensign can wind up as officer of the deck. That needs to change.
(1)
(0)
LT Brad McInnis
SN Greg Wright - In a nutshell, that is it... I remember poking my head up when this change was in the pipeline, and I got beat down HARD.... The chickens are coming home to roost, so to speak. Again, this is why I think there needs to be an LDO/WO type deck officer.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next