<p>You're right on. Many can and do make good points. And no doubt they, maybe we, all feel better about them. But unlike U. of MD, Slippery Rock and alot of other public institutions, in the end, as you've well noted, the Supe can turn down his 'aid and move on. And he usually does.</p>
<p>RE: the charitable side of things, think what we'd like, but it's just the courtesy of listening. There is no governing responsibility there.</p>
<p>Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that if you are telling mids assigned to a ship to 'go find something to do for a few days before we sail' or they spend their time onboard ships playing video games, that the Navy derives no benefit from that. I would think those are excellent inputs that ANY administration could use to make the program better.</p>
<p>I find those who have posted actual experiences are doing this to assist in making the program better, I don't consider that 'bellyaching'.</p>
<p>Current libery rules sound like the way things existed when the Supe was a mid (and when I was a mid). Not saying that's good or bad, merely that it's not some draconian measure that no one has ever lived under. Frankly, he doesn't need to state a reason for changing liberty; that's always a CO prerogative.</p>
<p>That said, my personal opinion is that there should be a major distinction b/t the way Firsties and the rest of the brigade are treated. In less than a year, the 1/C will be on their own at various schools (Jax, New London, Quantico etc.). In general (I KNOW there are exceptions) their only requirements will be to attend school and study really hard to succeed. There won't be mandatory study hall, liberty restrictions to enforce it, etc. Thus, in my view, it's time to start preparing them now to handle that new-found freedom while maintaining the responsibility to their jobs, their warfare community and their service. But, that's my opinion and SecNav didn't see fit to make me the Supe or Dant. :)</p>
<p>As for the ECAs -- it's important to have things other than the military to keep you occupied. However, it is a military academy. And, you do have leave periods to do other things -- after all, what else are you going to do? -- and have the rest of your life to do these things.</p>
<p>If the ECAs are that important in your life (and that's ok), then you probably are better off doing ROTC or attending a school where you can put a lot of energy into those activities. I'm not being disparaging -- there is great value in many of those activities; just, that a SA may not be the best place if ECA-type activities are of critical importance to you.</p>
<p>"As it should be. That being said though, I sincerely question whether or not time stashed away on a ship is that beneficial in the development of officers."</p>
<p>This is the "Navy", right?</p>
<p>Based on the summer assignments our D has participated in the thing that the summer cruises appear to be lacking (if I take what is written here on face value) is that the mids are put in these assignments as "observers" and not participants. People who observe never take home the kind of experience "value" that participants will. As an example, when a cadet goes out for their cadet leadership assignment with an Army unit they are given specific duties within that unit. When our D went to her's this summer she was assigned as a platoon leader and was overseen by the regular platoon leader. When that platoon leader was re-assigned she was given responsibility for the platoon for a couple of weeks. She was "guided along" by the senior NCO's and had an experience which allowed her to participate in the command of a unit, not just observe it.</p>
<p>Below is an excerpt from USMA's guide to the CTLT:</p>
<p>"In order to maximize the opportunities to practice leadership, it is critical that cadets be given positions with supervisory responsibility. Units should eliminate/limit VIP treatment, tours, and briefings so the cadet can maximize the amount of time actually spent in the leadership position. Furthermore, cadets should not be assigned the role of an "observer" during extended portions of their DCLT/CTLT period. Analysis of DCLT/CTLT has shown that cadets who spend the majority of their time as "observers" experience considerably less satisfaction/leadership development and leave their experience less motivated." </p>
<p>Perhaps that is what is missing on some of these summer cruises?</p>
<p>Folks, Iam only posting here because, frankly, my D and her fellow cadets, the mids at Navy, and Zoomies at AF, are mutually dependant on each other, both now and certainly in the future. There may come a time when the training that someone has or does not have may affect the outcome of something none of us wants to think about but also know is a possibility. There may come a time when a zoomie or Navy flier has to come to the rescue of one of our Marines or soldiers on the ground. Maybe an outcome will be determined when a Naval Officer at sea has to support a mission 1000 miles away on land. I don't want that outcome to be a negative one because of something one of these cadets, mids, or zoomies missed out on during their time at a service academy. To me that is far more important than turning out a "well rounded" liberal arts officer. Frankly, I think both can be accomplished to a satisfactory level but the priority has to be military training, discipline, and leadership. Someone NOT coming home in a body bag demands nothing less.</p>
<p>Shogun, your logic makes a lot of sense, and to an extent your right that we all pray that a deficiency in training at a service academy would never result in a negative outcome in the fleet. And because graduates will be facing combat, we should expect nothing less. However, I think its important to keep in mind what we are learning at these institutions, and that is to become officers of character, ready to lead soldiers/sailors/marines/airmen. These Academies need to focus on creating leaders, and any program, group, or ECA that helps create leaders is absolutely indispensable. </p>
<p>If in the future there is a negative outcome because of deficiency in service academy training, it will be because that graduate was not properly taught to be a leader. Maybe they weren't instilled with an unbreakable moral compass, or maybe they haven't learned to command the respect of those under them. Those are the deficiencies that Service Academies need to worry about. Frankly, leadership training in a military environment is good, however, why shut out other avenues of leadership training, just because they are not military in nature? To put it bluntly, an academy grad will not be deficient in military skill or knowledge because of the service academy. No pilot is going to forget how to fly his plane because the service academy didn't teach him, nor will a grunt employ bad tactics because the service academy did not teach him. The Navy has two years of extremely intensive flight training to make sure its pilots are experts before they ever hit their first squadron, and the Marines send their infantry grunts through 6 months of TBS and another several through IOC before they meet their first platoon.</p>
<p>My main argument is that renewing a focus on the military aspect is one thing, but it shouldn't come at the expense of other valuable forms of training.</p>
<p>In the late 70's, youngster cruise/first class cruise was much as USNA69 described it. If mids spend their time playing video games instead of learning how a ship operates, it doesn't speak highly of their maturity. Perhaps they do need mandatory study hours. Enlisted personnel take pride in their knowledge and expertise, if a mid (junior officer) takes initiative and shows interest in how enlisted personnel perform their duties, the mid (junior officer) not only learns something but gains the respect of the enlisted personnel. You can not learn how to do their job in detail, but you can learn how their job supports the ship's mission and become sufficiently technically competent to judge their recommendations.</p>
<p>My youngster cruise was aboard a ship in the Med. I not only learned about the ship but we made port calls in Spain, Italy and France. I would have to say that the experiences of this cruise did indeed contribute to the social "rounding out" of a hillbilly from Virginia. </p>
<p>My first class cruise was aboard a fast attack submarine. I believe this was the first year that mids were allowed to complete the enlisted PQS for silver dolphins. We had a lot of incentive to complete the qualification since the silver dolphins allowed us to receive sub pay after graduation during nuclear power training. I will admit that we did not learn the information to the degree expected of most enlisted personnel (and for this reason I did not wear the silver dolphins), but we learned respect for the enlisted personnel (they signed our PQS books, not officers) and gained an appreciation of submarine capabilities.</p>
<p>I think learning basic sailing fundamentals can contribute to a naval officer's skill set (watch a submarine dock sometime, worst linehandlers in the world), but the benefits of exposure to the fleet can not be replaced.</p>
<p>So a lack of supervision or inadequte pre-planning by those in charge of the ship is somehow the fault of the mid?????</p>
<p>"So a lack of supervision or inadequte pre-planning by those in charge of the ship is somehow the fault of the mid?????"</p>
<p>I don't think anyone is saying that at all. It appears that it is the system that may be at fault. There should be a clear understanding between the academy and the ship's command what the crusie is intended to accomplish and HOW it will be accomplished. From these posts it sounds like this isn't happening to the extent that it should.</p>
<p>itlstallion: Exposure to the "military aspect" in my mind is the most important facet of life at a service academy. To the extent that other activities may interfere with that exposre they may have to make changes (and apparently are). I don't think EC's are being eliminated---just prioritized. There could come a time (it has happened several times before (civil war, WW1, WW2) when cadets or mids may have their 4 year training cut short due to a national emergency and be forced to join "the real world" sooner than planned. They need to be ready.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If mids spend their time playing video games instead of learning how a ship operates, it doesn't speak highly of their maturity. Perhaps they do need mandatory study hours.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So when the Ensign shows them the video room and leaves them there, they are supposed to leave and go wander around an unfamiliar Sub? Were they supposed to "complain" up the chain of command? The Ensign wanted no part of training these mids (he was not an USNA grad nor was either the CO or XO)</p>
<p>It was an Ensign that told them what clubs they could probably get into in Honolulu - great roll model. They went to the beach instead. Speaking of maturity who was more mature in this situation?</p>
<p>What has been described here about fleet cruises is the norm. The exception is a valuable cruise experience.</p>
<p>Those who are relating all of their 1981, 1985, 1969 experiences did you ever stop to think that this is not "your" Navy anymore. Have any of you looked at all of the video posted at YouTube to see what goes on aboard ships these days? When was the last time any of you were actually on a ship?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Perhaps they need more mandatory study hours
[/quote]
Ya that will benefit my 4.0 mid. One of the things taken away is the ability for those on the supes list to be able to work out during study time - that would be more beneficial to mine than sitting in mandatory study rehashing what he already has done. He uses his time very wisely when allowed to actually be an adult and be responsible for his own time. Maybe if the Ensign had let him out of the video room he might have actually learned something. But by your analogy USNA81 he was the one at fault. I think not!</p>
<ol>
<li><p>My plebe has told us that my space and you tube are allowed. Just wondering why so strict on some issues and so lax on something like this. Seems to me that alot of this extra study time is going to be put towards research on the above two websites.</p></li>
<li><p>Anyone heard the one about the female "dean"......when speaking at a gathering of much older grads she was asked why the plebes would not be allowed an overnight on PPW. She responded when SHE was a midshipman they were not alllowed an overnight, to which the old timer stated, "Well when I was midshipman there weren't any woman here." </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Anybody know anything about this? Just "curious" as always.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They need to be ready.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly, it appears the only difference seems to be disagreement on how best to prepare them to be officers. I have maintained, and still do, that the best way to prepare them is to teach them how to lead. Obviously that is provided around a military framework, but the essential aspect is learning how to lead. "To the extent" that ECAs that promote leadership development, especially PEER leadership development, are being cut (and from talking mids they are being cut), then I must respectfully disagree.</p>
<p>curious:
I've heard that story too. Except in the version I heard it was the Dant talking to the Supt about weekday liberty for firsties. Personally I just hash it up to an urban legend</p>
<p>Curious:
Your comment #2 was great!!</p>
<p>Again, all my son really wants to the freedom to WORKOUT in Friday night!!!!That has really ticked him off. The kid just wants to be strong/fit. If they gave him that, he's good to go.</p>
<p>Time2, a number of the posts on this thread have asserted that the current mids are being treated as children and are not being given any responsibility. I just made the observation that some, given the opportunity to display responsibility, are apparently failing.</p>
<p>I was personally responsible for the training of a group of midshipmen (2/c familiarity cruises) and my CO pretty much turned the ship into a training platform. We shot water slugs, shot simulated noise makers, did angles and dangles, ran fire drills, etc. Even with all the opportunities we afforded the mids, a number of them made no effort to observe, participate, and learn.</p>
<p>Ship officers assigned the responsibility of tracking the training of mids are sometimes junior officers with other responsibilities including the running of a division, standing their own watches (1 in 3 at best), and attending to their own personnel qualifications. Without CO pressure, they may not see the training of mids as their first priority. I did not say lack of supervision or inadequate pre-planning was the fault of the mids. Failure to take initiative to avail oneself of the training opportunities presented is the fault of the mids. A ship operates 24/7, there are always watchstanders in sonar, radio, the bridge, engineering spaces, torpedo room, etc. There is nothing preventing a midshipman from observing and participating at these watchstations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You tell me yours and I will tell you mine.</p>
<p>TexasNative, I retired in 2002-- 5 years active duty and 16 years in the reserves. There are no seagoing submarine billets in the Navy reserves but I did serve on the submarine squadron staff.</p>
<p>I read that question as suggesting perhaps things have changed since your time in sevice.....not a 'can you top this' request.</p>
<p>Time2, I guess I will have to make it easy for you. TexasNative was disregarding the validity of our opinions due some imaginary hoop she was asking us to jump through. Since she has filled this forum with her opinions, I was just trying to ascertain if she herself had ever jumped through the hoop.</p>
<p>OBTW, the answer is 2003.</p>
<p>Think what I said the other day is still true:</p>
<p>
[quote]
....I don't think it is necessary to personally attack someone on here because your opinion happens to be different from theirs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>TexasNative was stating her opinion based on her recent experience. I think you misinterpreted those comments.</p>