You seem to be confused. I did not say that the AF is losing well qualified people because they thought they were getting "shafted". I said quite clearly I believe the "type" system of scholarships that the AF uses hurts in recruiting the best people REGARDLESS of their economic status. I don't really care how many people the Army or Navy loses, just whether the AF is losing some well qualified people because of their "type" system.They don't lose anymore "well-qualified" people than the Army and Navy. All the services waste money on a few people every year. Its inevitable. But there's no disproportionate number of AF people ditching because they feel they're getting "shafted".
I would think that they (Army & Navy) might be even less successful overall at recruiting than the AF. This opinion doesn't change the fact that by marketing $175K+ opportunities all the branches are also going to attract some candidates that will accept a ROTC scholarship for primarily financial reasons. I believe they (the military) know this and not only accept that fact, but also believe the 4AD + 4IR is a worthwhile "trade" in exchange for that $175K+ money.How successful would the Army's or Navy's recruiting effors be without those promises.
Career officers who are not involved in meeting military recruiting goals probably want to believe that only those that primarily want to be career commissioned officers make it through and receive commissions. I'm sure every branch (especially the AF) can quote examples of ROTC candidates being released from the program for inappropriate behavior or failure to meet ROTC standards, but seriously how high is that bar? The military wants and needs ROTC officers and if you attend regularly, demonstrate a "good attitude', pass your classes & PT tests....you'll get through at most non-military schools (VMI - Citadel ect). The officers in the college's ROTC program are often the same ones that made the recommendation that the candidate be accepted (interview). Of course they will get rid of the seriously "bad apples" but they really want to meet their recruiting goals and demonstrate their excellent personnel evaluation skills. Just my opoinion of course....
I'm not surprised about this. The Army has HUGE recruiting needs and is (as has been pointed out several times in this thread) involved in two land wars. Unlike the AF (and Navy) they cannot be as discerning in all the people they recruit.They Army wastes alot more time and money on "unqualified" people than the Air Force. One of the AD Army officers here admitted that they hand out scholarships like candy and they have many people there who are wasting their time and wont end up commissioning.
Yes and no. Yes the AF is more selective and yes overall they probably get more qualified people than the Army (and to a lesser degree the Navy). But again, IMHO they are losing some some well qualified people to these other branches because of their "type" system.The AF is more selective and therefore get more "qualified" people at the start than the other services.
Has this turned into a Ra Ra thread for the Air Force? Has someone in this thread said anything derogatory about the AF OTHER than their scholarship type system is flawed? You don't need to "preach" the benefits of the AF to me.....I'm a member of the choir.When AFROTC cadets mess up in some form or fashion and get kicked out or lose their scholarship, they go to the Army. In my time here I've never heard of someone screwing up their time in AROTC and then having to go to the AF. But I have personally see again and again people not meeting AF standards and going to the Army for another shot.
Now which service do you think gets the cream of the crop?