Military Roll Call! Veterans, GTFIH!

[Phr3121]

The female DIs (we were on the same training schedule as one of the female companies) on Parris Island were either hot or butt ugly but it was very hard to take any of them seriously.

 

[Phr3121]

I bet dudes were pissed who were about to go through the 3 week RIP and then they had to do the 8 week RASP instead. lol maybe that's what fucked Spencer Rapone up.

Rapone was a 'fuck-up' from the time he was at West Point. Being a 2nd Lieutenant with the 10th Mountain Division did not help things out. Real Army caught up with him in due time and kicked him out. I'm sure good NCOs played a role in that decision. You have two issues:
. Promotion: Time in grade, schools, and evaluations.
. Assignment: Being selected or assigned to a position. You can theoretically promote yourself out of the U.S. Army if you don't have a position to fill -- MOS dependent. My experience with NCOs was that seniority took care of the position, but not always. I had two NCOs that were good soldiers but not leadership material. They had their time, schools, and evaluations, but lacked the leadership part of the equation. In a way I think neither wanted a leadership position. Too much work and responsibility. The unit had to find a place to put them.

Not sure how a Ranger Regiment deals with that situation, but I would think that all things being equal, the NCO that scores high on his NCOER would get the position. It is another Army. You have PFCs (E-3) barking orders to Privates (E-2). For fuck's sake, they are both Privates, but that is not how things work at a Ranger unit.

Even OERs and NCOERs can be biased depending on the rater (politics). Officers and NCOs can get 'screwed' on an evaluation, but that is just how things work.

Awards is another area where I found 'politics' raising its ugly head. Soldiers getting the 'Bronze Star' for not doing shit while others who did do something got the award denied.

 

[Mike Hagger]

Rapone was a 'fuck-up' from the time he was at West Point. Being a 2nd Lieutenant with the 10th Mountain Division did not help things out. Real Army caught up with him in due time and kicked him out. I'm sure good NCOs played a role in that decision. You have two issues:
. Promotion: Time in grade, schools, and evaluations.
. Assignment: Being selected or assigned to a position. You can theoretically promote yourself out of the U.S. Army if you don't have a position to fill -- MOS dependent. My experience with NCOs was that seniority took care of the position, but not always. I had two NCOs that were good soldiers but not leadership material. They had their time, schools, and evaluations, but lacked the leadership part of the equation. In a way I think neither wanted a leadership position. Too much work and responsibility. The unit had to find a place to put them.

Not sure how a Ranger Regiment deals with that situation, but I would think that all things being equal, the NCO that scores high on his NCOER would get the position. It is another Army. You have PFCs (E-3) barking orders to Privates (E-2). For fuck's sake, they are both Privates, but that is not how things work at a Ranger unit.

Even OERs and NCOERs can be biased depending on the rater (politics). Officers and NCOs can get 'screwed' on an evaluation, but that is just how things work.

Awards is another area where I found 'politics' raising its ugly head. Soldiers getting the 'Bronze Star' for not doing shit while others who did do something got the award denied.

Instead of the NCOER centralized board determining future jobs, Rangers who promote need to go back to a selection, which includes basic tasks, physical assessment and a board. In the end Regiment decides if you’ll be a leader in their unit, or if they’re non-selecting you and pushing you out of the unit.

NCOERs in my opinion do a moderate job at actually grading the guy. The whole bullet format is lame, and the secretive nature of the centralized board is not beneficial.

One the soldiers are at the mercy of officers and senior NCOs writing. I mean not bad writing just literally that what that guy wrote did not compare with another inflated NCOER by a different NCO/O - even though both soldiers did the exact same thing.

The system is changing, to an extent, it’s happening this year and as a SNCO I have no clue what’s happening, yet but hopefully soon the new process will be explained. NCOERs just changed, in format and content they’re better, but the system still sucks.

In my opinion, we should do peers. What do your peers and subordinates think about you. I’d start this for E6-7 and above.

 

[My Spot]

Rapone was a 'fuck-up' from the time he was at West Point. Being a 2nd Lieutenant with the 10th Mountain Division did not help things out. Real Army caught up with him in due time and kicked him out. I'm sure good NCOs played a role in that decision. You have two issues:
. Promotion: Time in grade, schools, and evaluations.
. Assignment: Being selected or assigned to a position. You can theoretically promote yourself out of the U.S. Army if you don't have a position to fill -- MOS dependent. My experience with NCOs was that seniority took care of the position, but not always. I had two NCOs that were good soldiers but not leadership material. They had their time, schools, and evaluations, but lacked the leadership part of the equation. In a way I think neither wanted a leadership position. Too much work and responsibility. The unit had to find a place to put them.

Not sure how a Ranger Regiment deals with that situation, but I would think that all things being equal, the NCO that scores high on his NCOER would get the position. It is another Army. You have PFCs (E-3) barking orders to Privates (E-2). For fuck's sake, they are both Privates, but that is not how things work at a Ranger unit.

Even OERs and NCOERs can be biased depending on the rater (politics). Officers and NCOs can get 'screwed' on an evaluation, but that is just how things work.

Awards is another area where I found 'politics' raising its ugly head. Soldiers getting the 'Bronze Star' for not doing shit while others who did do something got the award denied.

Rapone didn’t go back to the 75th after West Point?

 

[Phr3121]

Rapone didn’t go back to the 75th after West Point?

No.
He was assigned to the 10th Mountain Division. I don't think the 75th would want anything to do with that guy.

 

[Strychnine]

No.
He was assigned to the 10th Mountain Division. I don't think the 75th would want anything to do with that guy.

Wow!

 

[Phr3121]

NCOERs in my opinion do a moderate job at actually grading the guy. The whole bullet format is lame, and the secretive nature of the centralized board is not beneficial.

I think the NCO promotion process is better than the officer promotion process in the U.S. Army. NCOs get to go before a board face-to-face and plead their case (knowledge). Officers never get to sit in front of a board. They are just a name on a folder in some faraway office.

* That little box on the back of DA Form 67-10 (back page, bottom left, Part VII, a) was all that mattered. No one cared about the other information. I think that is the first thing all officers looked for when they got the form back after being evaluated. Everyone dreaded hitting below center mass. You really wanted to hit above center mass. Our 'hero' here, Captain John Davis, did a good job:

 

[Phr3121]

NCOERs just changed, in format and content they’re better, but the system still sucks. In my opinion, we should do peers. What do your peers and subordinates think about you. I’d start this for E6-7 and above.

Peers and subordinates doing the evaluation? I don't know. Those would be people of your rank and below, not really a supervisor with experience. This too would have problems - in my opinion. Pros and cons. It could easily turn into a 'popularity' contest or a vendetta. Subordinates that you might have had to discipline may get their chance to 'screw' you over in a review. Do you want to be popular, feared, or respected by your subordinates? Imagine a George Patton or John Pershing being evaluated by their peers and subordinates, both made a lot of enemies in their time in the U.S. Army. On the plus side, these would be the people that would know exactly the kind of leader you are. Challenging your superiors on a particular issue can also get you in trouble - even when you are right. I think there is no 'best' way of doing this, but I think it is working well for the majority of officers and NCOs. A few will be unjustly failed by the system due to circumstances beyond their control. I'm sure you have seen your share of good soldiers being 'screwed' by an evaluation as an E-9 in the U.S. Army and the SOF community.

 

[Strychnine]

When I first joined the AF, my cousin who was an Army Vietnam vet said "Join the Masons, I was on a board in the Army and this package came to us and we all said NO. The E-9 in charge said "He's a Mason. PROMOTE HIM." I told him that the USAF doesn't work that way and he didn't understand.

When I first tested for E-7, I missed by 0.5, I was the #1 non-selectee in the USAF (I made it the next year). I told my brother who was an Army E-7 and he said, "Man! Can't you call somebody to give you the other half-point?"

I said, "Man, there is NO ONE to call. That's it, I'll get it next year."

He couldn't believe it! I told him, that in the USAF as far as enlisted goes, it comes down to your APR'S, TIS, TIG, and PFE/SKT (actual tests) scores.

I was... Pat-esque.

 

[Phr3121]

@Strychnine

 

[Mike Hagger]

Peers and subordinates doing the evaluation? I don't know. Those would be people of your rank and below, not really a supervisor with experience. This too would have problems - in my opinion. Pros and cons. It could easily turn into a 'popularity' contest or a vendetta. Subordinates that you might have had to discipline may get their chance to 'screw' you over in a review. Do you want to be popular, feared, or respected by your subordinates? Imagine a George Patton or John Pershing being evaluated by their peers and subordinates, both made a lot of enemies in their time in the U.S. Army. On the plus side, these would be the people that would know exactly the kind of leader you are. Challenging your superiors on a particular issue can also get you in trouble - even when you are right. I think there is no 'best' way of doing this, but I think it is working well for the majority of officers and NCOs. A few will be unjustly failed by the system due to circumstances beyond their control. I'm sure you have seen your share of good soldiers being 'screwed' by an evaluation as an E-9 in the U.S. Army and the SOF community.

Right, peers and subordinate evaluations would be a part of the equation, assessment would have to come from above as well.

I’m just talking here the reality is that I believe being rated by your peers would scare the hell out of a lot of soldiers, including SGMs. It’s also confrontational which makes people nervous. There’s obviously some drawbacks that would occur but objectively if the board was able to see both perspectives (peers/NCOER) it could be beneficial.

I’m radical though, I would encourage a physical assessment, skills assessment, and interview for positions of E7 and above. These would be job specific of course. I mean for instance in my job if you’re about to be a TM Sgt but you cannot shoot a fairly simple straight forward pistol rifle qualification, then how can you be the guy who is supposed to be the master trainer? Or the one who is supposed to inspire his guys, and partner force fighters?

I mean I’d include a 12 mile ruck with 45lbs, and some other physical stuff too.

I got that in huge career fields like infantry it’s going to be difficult to allocate that type of time but, maybe if soldiers spent less time fucking out with mandatory briefings and bullshit computer training, we might squeeze in the time to train.

Of course it’s tailored to the job, I don’t expect a maintenance dude meet super high physical demands, or be a crack shot, but he should know his job - maybe simple tasks evaluation like an EIB sort of sticks lane, written test.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

When I first joined the AF, my cousin who was an Army Vietnam vet said "Join the Masons, I was on a board in the Army and this package came to us and we all said NO. The E-9 in charge said "He's a Mason. PROMOTE HIM." I told him that the USAF doesn't work that way and he didn't understand.

When I first tested for E-7, I missed by 0.5, I was the #1 non-selectee in the USAF (I made it the next year). I told my brother who was an Army E-7 and he said, "Man! Can't you call somebody to give you the other half-point?"

I said, "Man, there is NO ONE to call. That's it, I'll get it next year."

He couldn't believe it! I told him, that in the USAF as far as enlisted goes, it comes down to your APR'S, TIS, TIG, and PFE/SKT (actual tests) scores.

I was... Pat-esque.

Lol that’s good. That’s how the AF teaches you how to write bullets, too.
Everbody gets a firewall 5.

 

[Phr3121]

@Mike Hagger

 

[My Spot]

No.
He was assigned to the 10th Mountain Division. I don't think the 75th would want anything to do with that guy.

He was there before West Point. He enlisted in 2010 as an 11B Option 40 and went to Afghan in 2011.

 

[Phr3121]

He was there before West Point. He enlisted in 2010 as an 11B Option 40 and went to Afghan in 2011.

Yes. I know about his military history (Spenser Rapone). He was not assigned to the 75th Ranger Regiment after graduating from West Point. He was assigned to the 10th Mountain Division and was out in less than a year. Now he has to refund the government for his free education at West Point. Speaking of which, Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City bombing - 1995) aspired to join the U.S. Army Special Forces. After returning from the Gulf War, he entered the SF selection program, but washed out on the second day of the 21-day assessment and selection course.

 

[Strychnine]

Lol that’s good. That’s how the AF teaches you how to write bullets, too.
Everbody gets a firewall 5.

I've given out my share of 4's. I TOLD them this is what they need to do to earn a 5. They'd always say "Yup! I'm on it!"

They NEVER did it. It wasn't like I was asking them to rescue a Nuns from a flaming bus-wreck either.
SMH...

 

[Phr3121]

I've given out my share of 4's. I TOLD them this is what they need to do to earn a 5. They'd always say "Yup! I'm on it!" They NEVER did it. It wasn't like I was asking them to rescue a Nuns from a flaming bus-wreck either.

That sounds like an interesting issue and story. Why do you think these Airmen, and females I'm presuming, did not follow your advice? Which brings up an interesting point. In your many years in the U.S. Air Force, did you find that females performed better than males? Did females tend to listen more than males? Women seem to ask a lot more questions than men when learning something.

"Female trainees generally listen to and understand instruction better than males and follow directions better. They study the SMART book and ask more questions. They are more easily motivated to learn than males."

 

[Phr3121]

Came across this one. A real 'jewel'.

"Are there any smart people who sign up for Infantry?"
Link: https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-smart-people-who-sign-up-for-infantry

...I love the answers. Many answers and some are really long:

. Robert Patter - studied Infantry at US Army Fort Benning, wrote:
"Yes there are, but they are very few and you may not recognize them."
...more.

. Dallas McKay - I'm aware of how dumb I am, so I learned to compensate by shutting up, wrote:
"Some of the smartest and most educated people I've ever met are Infantry and related combat MOS."
...more.

 

[Strychnine]

That sounds like an interesting issue and story. Why do you think these Airmen, and females I'm presuming, did not follow your advice? Which brings up an interesting point. In your many years in the U.S. Air Force, did you find that females performed better than males? Did females tend to listen more than males? Women seem to ask a lot more questions than men when learning something.

"Female trainees generally listen to and understand instruction better than males and follow directions better. They study the SMART book and ask more questions. They are more easily motivated to learn than males."

Gotta make this quick, I'm on my way to church!

Females 99% of the time outperformed the males in the shop! They would ask questions and just work their butts off! The males would always try to find a way to shave the edge and cut corners. Now I knew the ins and outs, I knew what would work and what wouldn't. If I gave someone instructions, it was always the steps that had been pared down but within the regs.

If you went outside of the regs, that's when stuff went sideways. I had females with kids, take their kids with them to volunteer to do a trash clean-up, coach youth sports, etc. A lot of the males just wanted to hang around the dorm, play loud music, and drink beer.

The best shop I had was when I was NCOIC of a bunch of females. I didn't have to worry about jack squat! I NEVER had a female subordinate get a D.U.I. All of those males, with all of that potential... They just refused to TRY to excel.

 

[Strychnine]

Came across this one. A real 'jewel'.

"Are there any smart people who sign up for Infantry?"
Link: https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-smart-people-who-sign-up-for-infantry

...I love the answers. Many answers and some are really long:

. Robert Patter - studied Infantry at US Army Fort Benning, wrote:
"Yes there are, but they are very few and you may not recognize them."
...more.

. Dallas McKay - I'm aware of how dumb I am, so I learned to compensate by shutting up, wrote:
"Some of the smartest and most educated people I've ever met are Infantry and related combat MOS."
...more.

The BEST Pharmacy personnel I EVER worked with all former Infantry. I'd ASK that SSgt. so-and-so to make my IV's and meds any day if I were ever a patient! They were brilliant!