U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-15-2018, 10:29 AM
 
12,399 posts, read 11,889,362 times
Reputation: 16935

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Tradition is the thing that makes the navy hard to take, sometimes. Scrapping a lot of what is traditional would do wonders to make the navy more palatable. No one is "throwing dirt". Just changes. When Seaman 2nd class and Seaman 1st Class were abandoned for more modern titles, no one was injured.
While I do agree the Navy does take the tradition thing a bit too much, even absurd sometimes (but will toss it when convenient for the brass), calling an admiral a general I think is a bit too much. It is not only US Navy tradition, it is the tradition of seamanship.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
I was exceptionally well trained in electronics - 2 solid years of school - and I can assure you that my initial specialty of radar technician would be easily used by either air force or army.
While the theory is the same, the equipment operations is completely different, hell, even between classes of ships they are different and require retraining, some of it significant. For example, a comms operator from an SSN would not have a clue how to run comms on an SSBN, they are different systems, different missions, even having some of the same equipment it is organized and set up differently.

Also, the operational environment is different. A ship at sea is different than a land-based anti-air system. You will have different resources at your disposal, you will have different actions based upon circumstances, all require specific training. Last thing the military needs is a jack of all trades, master of none.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Later, as I made E-6, I became responsible for communications and radar. Train me in one radar, I can learn them all; train me in one radio, I can learn them all.
Disagree, I disagree because I even dealt with this first hand. I was in comms on an SSBN, and it would take a fast boat guy about a year (two deployments basically) to qualify comms operator, and longer for supervisor. I have been on a DDG before and I did not have a single damn clue how to operate their comms systems there, I did not even know how to couple the HF and mast together to transmit, lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2018, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
8,052 posts, read 5,710,920 times
Reputation: 5083
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
It would not save any money, and essentially would just replicate what we have now, with the "branches" being the services we have.

At that, they already have the services doing joint things, there are joint commands, task forces, joint operations, etc. The USAF will fly Navy SEALs for special ops, and have an Army attack helicopter as assistance. Navy EOD assisting the Army. USAF assisting Navy support activities. There are numerous examples of the services working together as you described, happens all of the time.
Facilities have also been consolidated to some extent as well: for example, medical training has been consolidated for all armed forces branches at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, TX.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2018, 03:22 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
11,155 posts, read 7,255,409 times
Reputation: 16772
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
While I do agree the Navy does take the tradition thing a bit too much, even absurd sometimes (but will toss it when convenient for the brass), calling an admiral a general I think is a bit too much. It is not only US Navy tradition, it is the tradition of seamanship.



While the theory is the same, the equipment operations is completely different, hell, even between classes of ships they are different and require retraining, some of it significant. For example, a comms operator from an SSN would not have a clue how to run comms on an SSBN, they are different systems, different missions, even having some of the same equipment it is organized and set up differently.

Also, the operational environment is different. A ship at sea is different than a land-based anti-air system. You will have different resources at your disposal, you will have different actions based upon circumstances, all require specific training. Last thing the military needs is a jack of all trades, master of none.




Disagree, I disagree because I even dealt with this first hand. I was in comms on an SSBN, and it would take a fast boat guy about a year (two deployments basically) to qualify comms operator, and longer for supervisor. I have been on a DDG before and I did not have a single damn clue how to operate their comms systems there, I did not even know how to couple the HF and mast together to transmit, lol.
Subs are a whole nother deal, aren't they? Once you're a bubblehead, you're in it for life, as far as I've seen. I went to ET'B' school with several nukes.

The surface fleet is different. Didn't matter what ship you put me on the electronics was basically the same. Air search radars took some special school - 'C' schools. But surface search were all the same. By the time I got out there was nothing on a ship or an airplane that I could not learn quickly.

I'm not saying everyone should be swapped around willy-nilly. But an awful lot of occupations (OK... ratings) are interchangeable between the services.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2018, 03:24 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
11,155 posts, read 7,255,409 times
Reputation: 16772
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverkris View Post
Facilities have also been consolidated to some extent as well: for example, medical training has been consolidated for all armed forces branches at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, TX.
I was not aware of that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2018, 12:41 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
5,893 posts, read 3,182,849 times
Reputation: 3630
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
I did 20 years and retired as an ET1/SS.

Thank you for your service.





Having 4 unique branches does not cost 4 times more than having one branch. [I am counting Army, AF, Navy [marines are a segment of the Navy] and CG] Servicemembers are paid from the same paycharts.

You would still have extremely high costs for equipment. Jet fighters are expensive, airports for those fighters [whether land-based or on-ships] are expensive, tanks are expensive, submarines are expensive.

What would save money is closing down military bases on foreign soil. >150? Do we really need so many bases on foreign soil?

Agree; however, there are some stateside bases that exist for the sole purpose of providing a living to god forsaken towns. Those need to be closed too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2018, 12:55 AM
 
5,873 posts, read 2,405,049 times
Reputation: 3721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Subs are a whole nother deal, aren't they? Once you're a bubblehead, you're in it for life, as far as I've seen. I went to ET'B' school with several nukes.

The surface fleet is different. Didn't matter what ship you put me on the electronics was basically the same. Air search radars took some special school - 'C' schools. But surface search were all the same. By the time I got out there was nothing on a ship or an airplane that I could not learn quickly.

I'm not saying everyone should be swapped around willy-nilly. But an awful lot of occupations (OK... ratings) are interchangeable between the services.
I dont think its a skill set issue, I think there are alot of smart folks in the military and alot of people could cross train. The issue is people LIKE doing certian things and they signed up for what they signed up for for a reason, so unless the military is hard up and really needs to force a move it breaks down trust and creates turn over once peoples contracts expire (sometimes sooner if they can find an out). They might get away with it for a bit in a bad economy but once things pick up people will be getting out, they may even come right back with their vet pref points and apply for the civilian job then they cant just be moved around willy nilly.

I have talked to some military electronics folks and aircraft mechanics and things are getting REALLY bad trying to maintain DEEP levels of knowlage on high tech equipment and the military is having to lean more and more on the civilian contractors that built the equipment, but once the assembly lines shut down those civilian folks start going away (lay offs, what ever).

I think its already starting to effect military readyness. I dont know if it is due to gross incompetence at the high leadership level or what but if you have a 10 year tech with a BS in EE who knows all the systems you dont dick with them you just leave them where they are and let them do what they do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2018, 01:00 AM
 
5,873 posts, read 2,405,049 times
Reputation: 3721
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDnurse View Post
Agree; however, there are some stateside bases that exist for the sole purpose of providing a living to god forsaken towns. Those need to be closed too.
Yep, and when there is even an utterance of one of those base closures or even a down sizing people loose their s*it, national congressmen get involved they hold big town halls. They made a big stink in my town when they suggested just reducing the number of troops (albit by a non trivial amount). There must be a little rothchild business in each of these towns because all of the sudden its a big deal.

No one cares about the little guy trying to make a living (otherwise at-will employment would not exist) in these towns so there must be someone in each of these places making BIG money with a lot of influence off the existence of any given base.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2018, 06:05 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
29,584 posts, read 47,128,593 times
Reputation: 17307
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
... I have talked to some military electronics folks and aircraft mechanics and things are getting REALLY bad trying to maintain DEEP levels of knowlage on high tech equipment and the military is having to lean more and more on the civilian contractors that built the equipment, but once the assembly lines shut down those civilian folks start going away (lay offs, what ever).
In the submarine fleet, civilian contractors hangout mostly in shipyards. They can not deploy on the subs.

The Navy has gone through phases where it has gotten hard to keep high skilled technicians on the job. The answer has been to bump up the re-enlistment bonuses. During all of my career the SRB levels were capped at $60k every four years. The year that I retired they bumped the SRB cap up to $90k every 4 years.

Whenever they have too many people leaving, they just wave more cash at them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2018, 11:59 AM
 
8,746 posts, read 7,208,038 times
Reputation: 11663
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDnurse View Post
Agree; however, there are some stateside bases that exist for the sole purpose of providing a living to god forsaken towns. Those need to be closed too.
I believe some of those foreign and stateside bases should be moved to our nationís southern border to act as the supporting muscle behind the US Border patrol since the many in the Mexican military and police either work for or provide support to the drug gangs and human smugglers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2018, 05:31 PM
 
Location: East Helena, MT
752 posts, read 459,971 times
Reputation: 1952
Coming from the aviation community, there are some very big money wasters that I witnessed first hand.


1. The requirement that all Navy aircraft must be launched with a full fuel load. I hope that when the Navy transitions to electromagnetic catapults, this will change. The way it works now, is each aircraft has a metal "holdback" fitting, that is a measured thickness. This holds the aircraft in place, while the engines are put to full power. Once the catapult is launched, it snaps the fitting, sending the aircraft down the deck, and into the air. Because of this system, the aircraft have to be launched with a consistent weight. How does this cost money. We would load 1,900 gallons of fuel into the aircraft, launch as the "alert tanker", it would fly for 10 minutes, dump all but 300 gallons of that fuel into the ocean, turn around and land. Because of the antiquated arresting gear, all aircraft have to dump fuel to reach a target weight before they can land, to prevent stress on the arresting wires. I bet that millions of gallons of jet fuel are dumped every year into the ocean by the Navy.


2. The parts supply chain is broken. When the Military signs contracts with aircraft manufacturers, they give up all cost control of the parts. I will again speak from first hand knowledge. NAS Jacksonville ran short on main mount tires. We were literally removing tires from one aircraft, to put them on another, so it could fly. The tires were made by Goodyear. There was a model number on the tire. I went and looked it up on the internet. The tire, on the civilian market was around $900.00 each. I went and talked to the Petty Officer in our parts department. The Navy was purchasing the same tire for $1,400.00 each. I even reported this to the waste and abuse number, and was later politely told to worry about my own shop.


That is just two instances.


I do agree that the Air Force should be turned back into the United States Army Air Core, it restores it to what it was in the beginning, and will knock them down a peg or two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top