<p>
There seems to be a record number of relieved commanders this year who would argue that point with you. It is not worth risking ones career to meet a quota.</p>
<p>
Exactly. If it is on one’s preference card, no matter where, then they are not being forced, pure and simple. And no one can be forced to put submarines as a preference. So, someone smart enough to be an Aero major should be smart enough to realize this.</p>
<p>Hopefully, opening up subs to females will alleviate this issue.</p>
<p>Just remember that my young readers when reading a statistic like 94% of all mids got there first or second choice of service.</p>
<p>Figures lie and liars figure. And government bureaucrats–even old retired ones–will shift, and bob, and weasel their way out of being accountable in any way they can. Even if it means sticking precisely to the definition of “forced” or “volunteer.” Hence development of the term: “voluntold”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not really concerned about the relieved commanders and if they might argue the point. Are YOU arguing the point? Stick to it, make yours, please, absent diluting the issue about fired skippers. </p>
<p>I’ll make it simple. Do you think rules are broken? Do you believe Mids and apparently ROTC are coerced, parse your words if you will, and pushed, pressured into submarine assignments? Do you believe that the process is fully honorable?</p>
<p>Do share YOUR opinion, and that’ll be more than enough. But please, escape the equivocation and quibbling.</p>
<p>And to define that somewhat?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bill, if not perfect, pretty damn good!</p>
<p>agree with whistlepig 110%…the navy pays for your school, so its reasonable that they can tell you how to serve, right? if your interests match up with the needs of the navy, then you’re set…if not, it’s tough luck and life doesnt always work out like you want</p>
<p>This is way too much ado about nothing. The mids know the system and what to do to get their top choice. And those who wish to believe that there is a giant conspiracy to screw everyone will believe what they want, no matter what the evidence.</p>
<p>As a casual observer, from what I have been able to pick up over the past few years, any mid in the top third or so of the class, especially with a technical major, will likely be considered for subs if it is listed anywhere on their preference card. So, if subs are one’s first choice, list them. If not, don’t put them on the preference sheet at all. Those in the top third should get their first choice so not being able to list subs as their number 1 backup should not be an issue. Remember, there is an officer rep from each of the other communities fighting for the ‘best and brightest’ as much as the sub guy is.</p>
<p>And I would imagine that each class obtains an in-depth briefing concerning these issues and know going in that the 6% who don’t get first or second choice are those who put subs further down the list.</p>
<p>I had to clarify something with the subject of my knowledge: Subs was NOT on his selection list. I guess he was, in fact, FORCED to take subs. According to my subject, he was not alone in being FORCED to interview for subs.</p>
<p>When you say “voluntary” you mean that it appeared SOMEWHERE on your preference card … even if it was your very last choice.</p>
<p>So, you’re saying those midshipmen who claimed they were victims of the submarine draft, and who did NOT want to go into submarines, are actually “volunteers” because they got their 6th choice?</p>
<p>
Absolutely. It may be a last choice but it is a choice.
He was not FORCED. He was asked to reconsider his preferences and place submarines on his list. He could have declined.</p>
<p>The submarine force is all volunteer as it has always been.</p>
<p>Then your definition of “volunteer” and mine is different.</p>
<p>It reminds me of one of those funny Ally Bank commercials where the guy in the suit is screwing over the little children.</p>
<p>“Say 1 for broccoli, Say 2 for toys.”</p>
<p>Naturally, the kid says “2” and then gets the run around. The only selection that gets any results is if you say “1” for broccoli - and what kid likes broccoli?</p>
<p>I guess you can say that the kid “chose” broccoli, huh? :)</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Ally Bank “Automated”](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1caAJ5CfU2g]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1caAJ5CfU2g)</p>
<p>LOL. You cannot be serious. Comparing first class midshipmen to a group of naive innocent three year olds. I can almost guarantee you that on selection night every midshipman, given his major, his GPA, and his OOM, knows within a percentage point or two his odds of getting subs if he lists them anywhere on his preference card. If he so lists them, he knows the consequences and is willing to accept them. Every since the first night of academics plebe year when he had the choice of doing homework or shining his shoes, he has been responsible for the consequences of these choices. He is prepared. Mids love to complain. What we are hearing is the third derivitive rumors of these guys *****ing and letting off steam.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d beg to say this is more than a bit presumptious and ridiculous. We’ve not a clue about this person’s scenario, beyond what Bill says is true. Now, who do you think should be trusted in this one? </p>
<p>One of the interesting, even valuable insights here might well be the lessons and insights one might glean in the challenge of becoming a leader capable of discernment and decision-making, don’t you think. :rolleyes: A real-life case study …</p>
<p>Ahhh. . . . as usual, one’s experience, forty years removed, trumps PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE, one year removed.
The mid’s preference list was not considered; end of story.
What about blowing the interview? Such “gamemanship” was not advised; in other words, by the time you are “de-selected” as a sub selectee, all other community interviews had been completed and “who knows” what kind of assignment you might then get.
So, one can “decline” instructions [“orders”?] to “do your best” and interview for subs. Interesting thought . . .
Anyway, it happened despite what some think to the contrary.</p>
<p>Go back to the I-Day with which you are most familiar. Visualize the swearing in where instead of asking all the plebes to rise, they only ask the ones who plan to fly F-18s. Odds are the few left seated would also rise when those were called who wanted to be Marines or SEALs. Fast forward to selection night. The percentages for both these career paths have been reduced drastically. Career paths are somewhat self selecting. A na</p>
<p>So, I spoke to my own Firstie son a little about this last night. Navy Pilot selectee, BTW. He told me there were 10 possible choices and they had to put 6 on the dream sheet for service selection. Probability says Nuke subs will likely wind up on a dream sheet with six choices. For the life of me, I can’t understand why any more than 3-4 would be necessary, unless you were completely delusional or undecided about about what you want to do. He also said there were a couple guys who did not put subs on their dream sheet but who were subsequently asked to interview.</p>
<p>I met with a couple Mids last Fall who were not desirous of subs - as I posted earlier - but who were asked to interview. They were also advised not to purposefully “tank” the interviews in the hope of being screened out from the process.</p>
<p>So, what does all this mean to a prospective candidate? It means that the needs of the Navy come first, and you’ll need to be able to deal with that possibility. Sooner or later (probably sooner) you’ll get a set of orders you didn’t really want, or a duty station that was not necessarily on your list of top places to live. You might not get to fly the type of airplane you wanted, the ship type you wanted, or career field you wanted.</p>
<p>It’s no different in the Navy than in the civilian world. Heed the words of the Rolling Stones song; “You can’t always get what you want…” 
Life is 10% what happens to you, and 90% how you deal with it. So, you can make a conscious decision to be miserable, or you can try and find the good things about your assignment and duty station. Sane people usually pick the latter… :)</p>
<p>When I came to USNA in 1980, they had just “drafted” a bunch of Class of '80 guys into Nuke Subs. Our firsties ('81) talked about it obsessively until their service selection - there was no Nuke draft that year. The Class of '82 worried about whether there would be a draft. There was no draft that year. '83 worried a little - no draft. I knew there was no way I was getting drafted for Nuke subs, and guess what? No draft for '84 either. These things are intensely personal, specific to a class year, and change based on the “needs of the Navy”. If you don’t like change, you either will learn to deal with it, or you won’t be happy. “Real life” is like that, too.</p>
<p>My son (2010) was one of those who wanted to fly but was “drafted” into subs and will now be going to nuke school. It was not a matter of one interview, but several over the course of a couple of weeks. It included interviews with individual officers representing the sub community, followed by interviews with a panel comprised of officers from the air, surface and sub communities as well as a representative from the Marines. Once this series of interviews were conducted, if you were chosen you were sent to Washington for your interview with SEA 08 representatives and then Adm Donald. There were many comments about the needs of the Navy during these interviews. To say there was not a draft and that subs is a volunteer force is true, but …</p>
<p>Mombee:</p>
<p>I think what you have described is very accurate. People DO change their minds. And, perhaps, rumors grow about how that metamorphosis occurs.</p>
<p>But we’re not talking about how a midshipman’s aspirations may change from I-Day to graduation; we’re talking about what they have put on their preference card for service selection and what they end up getting.</p>
<p>What if a midshipman came into the academy thinking how cool it would be to serve on a nuclear-powered submarine, armed with ICBM’s? Maybe he’s seen the movie “Hunt for Red October” a million times. Yet, as you’ve described, through his years at the academy, he changes his mind. He is now enamored with flying. He doesn’t want to be in a submarine any longer. He wants to fly F/A-18s.</p>
<p>He works his butt off, has great grades, majors in something technical … places Navy Air #1 on his preference card and has Subs also on his preference card, but much lower. He ends up getting assigned to Subs, after all, while a classmate, with lower class standing, who ALSO had Navy Air #1 on his preference card, is dancing a jig because of his assignment to Navy Air.</p>
<p>It happens. It HAS happened. Is it VERY, VERY common? No! But it happens enough that it gets discussed and causes many to have their stomach churn when service selection comes around. In my opinion, that should NEVER happen.</p>
<p>There is some truth in what you have characterized as “rumors.”</p>
<p>USNA84:</p>
<p>I can’t argue with your description of how important it is to be adaptable and to make the best of one’s assignment. And, yes, even CIVILIAN life has these harsh realities.</p>
<p>But I always thought the Naval Academy was a special place where young men and women who have achieved much in their young life have been competitive enough to gain entrance. I think they deserve a little preferential consideration.</p>
<p>They are a very select group of individuals.</p>
<p>In my opinion, there is plenty of time for these young, motivated, high-achieving individuals to learn the harsh reality of “the needs of the Navy” in their career. As you’ve stated, perhaps they will not get the ship assignment they had hoped for -or- maybe they will not fly the aircraft they had dreamed about -or- maybe they will be assigned to the East Coast when they really wanted a West coast assignment … whatever.</p>
<p>But to assign them to a community they have little desire to pursue, to me, is simply too harsh right out of the starting blocks. There will be plenty of time for disappointments, even within their desired community. I ask, can’t the disappointments wait for another day other than service selection?</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong - some midshipmen are wholly unqualified for their 1st choice. That is evident on their record and through the interview process. A midshipman desiring to go Subs, who has majored in English and graduated with a 2.2, probably understands why he did NOT get subs. Even a midshipman desiring to fly understands that quotas DO kick in at some point, and, since he is at the very bottom on his class, he is unlikely to go Air.</p>
<p>But we’re talking about the individuals who rank relatively HIGH in their class and end up getting a lower choice while a classmate, with LOWER class rank, gets “his” slot.</p>
<p>Like I said - I realize that this is not common - but it happens enough to make headlines. And, yes, perhaps these stories are blown out of proportion. But it DOES happen. </p>
<p>I say it should NEVER happen.</p>
<p>Memphis, you describe the situation well [and accurately, compared to some who do not care to acknowledge reality]. The [now] Ensign of whom I speak accepts the “needs of the Navy”, the reality of his situation, and took the “blood money” that came along with the assignment. His new reality is that he will resign as soon as his commitment is fulfilled; that is not what he oringally intended. Perhaps his mind will change as he gets to spend more time under the water looking at screens and dials. Perhaps not.</p>
<p>The interesting thing that seems now to be the case is how plane assignments are being distributed. Assume, for a moment, that everybody’s first choice is a jet. In a group of pilot-selectees, they go through API and then start sorting out. Apparently, number 16 in a group may or may not get his choice ahead of number 51. For example, if there 150 pilot trainees, number 51 may get his first choice and number 42 his third choice. The new thinking is that helicopters [assuming that is a lower choice for most] should not have to suffer the botom of the barrel. This coincides w/ your notion that a mid [officer?] w/ a lower ranking may get a more coveted spot. </p>
<p>Oh, and just to clarify, this kid’s grades were excellent, no demerits, at various times a platoon and/or company officer, etc., etc.</p>
<p>
As Bill pointed out, ever since the T-34C and the ensuing revised syllabus came on line, there has been a valid reason for doing this. However, the last time they tried it back in the mid-80s, there was such a hue and cry that it didn’t last long. This go around probably won’t either.</p>
<p>In my day, they had a “Jet Draft”. If your grades reached a certain level, you were going to go jets whether you liked it or not. If you had very low grades - you flew helos. The Maritime Pipeline guys came from that middle group who didn’t have “jet grades” but had better than “helo grades.”</p>
<p>I was told that this process had little to do with the notion that a jet is more difficult to fly than a helicopter. It was a COST consideration. Jet training is MUCH more expensive than helo training. Sending Student Naval Aviators with demonstrated high performance into the jet pipeline tended to reduce the attrition rate in jets. It was VERY expensive for an SNA to get as far as the TA-4 and find out that the gunnery pattern is too dynamic for him, or that ACM (Air Combat Maneuvering) is too big of a challenge to his spacial relationships processing.</p>
<p>In the long run, I theorize that giving people what they want, balanced with what the Navy needs, is the BEST policy. Good performance should be rewarded. And, fundamentally, I think the low performers understand why they didn’t get their first choice.</p>