Lieutenants, appearing soon at an Army basic training platoon near you

Nope...

I do find what you said thought provoking, for numerous reasons...in the main, I do of course agree with you, read what I'd already said above, I'd find your thoughts about my notions of interest...when I was in, I never actually got to rate anyone, at one point, thered been some yakking about my being allowed, I gather, though it unfortunately never happened, for myriad reasons...we had a MSgt in my unit who'd been RIFd as a Capt going for Major, RIFd, not passed over, he was given the chance to stay in enlisted to finish out his 20 yrs, he opted to take it, as a SSgt to start, finishing I think as MSgt, I gathered, as he was when I knew him...I absorbed a good deal of pragmatic day to day working reality of that whole world from him, so, most esp for that reason, I do in fact basically agree with you, in the main...still, as I'd said above, I at least find the concept creative, certainly, esp, if, as I'd mentioned above, 2nd and 1st LTS could be used, if available, who'd been prior enlisted initially, whether Army or another svc...I realize Army has its own unique attributes, of course, it's just that when I was at USAF OTS, I met numerous OTs going through the program, who'd been intersvc transfers, and, as I'd mentioned above, they had a visibly easier time, for the most part, adapting to the program than hose who hadn't initially been enlisted, yours truly in particular, which was why I ultimately had to go through the program twice, having been recycled once...my first flight commander (FC), I never knew if he'd been prior enlisted first, he was a quite senior Capt, who also quite clearly had been around the block, having been in, by my estimate, though I'd never asked, around at least 15 yrs, however, by his personality, I could quite easily tell he might likely have been prior enlisted, I'd never asked...when I was recycled back one class, my next FC was far younger as well as newer, I'd already been seriously oriented by the first FC, so I had at least a glimmering of what was expected of !e the second time through...I !erely !mention that to try to illustrate that, while I as I'd said do agree with much of your critique, I could, I think, were the whole program adroitly handled and supervised, actually prove quite advantageous in the long in, honest, I'd be most eager for your thoughts, hope was of interest, many thanks....

Capt Daniel Goodman - I will break this in to THIRDS. 1st THIRD: For those new LTs that were prior enlisted, sure they will have an easier time filling those billets and working the system the way it is intended. 2nd THIRD: Those new LTs that come in charging like Patton wanting to do things the hardcore way and only their way because they're officers and know better how to run troops than a mere sergeant. We all have come across these kinds before. They never change their thinking because they will never listen to anyone under their rank regardless of experience and will only have that "light bulb" moment once they get their SIX checked and chewed by someone who is a Captain or higher. These are the kinds that will tell a CSM to stand at attention when talking to them. 3rd THIRD: Fresh LTs that are timid, scared, constantly getting in the way by injecting themselves in everything because they want to learn and know they need to learn. While this THIRD mean no harm in their inexperience, it is that innocent inexperience that can cause many stressful situations.

The 1st THIRD will have the easier time as they are aware and know the system. It's the other THIRDs that will be the test of this program. This is where the serious growing pains will take place.

I agree, certainly...good breakdown, clearly...as I'd tried to explain, I entirely realize there'd by all means a need to revise and/or improve the whole scheme over time, though I can quite fathom your rationale as to how you partitioned the whole group of those involved in it...obviously, having not gone in enlisted first, I have no basis for comparison experientially...in retrospect, however, I do certainly wish I'd enlisted first before going in the way I did, I needed far too long to acclimate to the day to day realities of where I found myself, by all means...I'd merely point out that, even with he deficiencies you quite aptly point out, to me, at first glance, although I entirely realize my thoughts might be either ignorant and/or ill-informed, maybe both, if the program were implemented flexibly, taking into account the expected likely defects you mention, if enough prior enlisted Lts could somehow be found and/or involved, I just thought it a quite creative idea, all the same, despite such highly probable problems, that's all I'd been trying to suggest...I'd be quite interested, do you think such an idea completely inadvisable and/or unworkable, to the point of basically deeming it not worth trying? I can certainly think that might be the natural thought, that is, the method that exists now works, hence why experiment with it in tis fashion...then, too, if it were tried by Army, might the other svcs also want to try doing the same with their boot camps? I grant that might not happen, of course, however, one wonders whether if it could be made to work halfway recently for Army, whether the other svcs might also be led to think the same in their environments, you know? I was just trying to permute different variations of the whole scenario, I'd be really interested also how the whole concept arose, and, most esp, what prompted the whole thought process that gave rise to it to begin with, you know?