Understood. My memory was that the unit used to try to sell it as they place a lot of pilots. That may be because they recruit and train highly motivated cadets who want to fly. Perhaps the unit did a lot more to make sure their pilots got good OML scores. It was a reputation.
Branching, OML, OMS
- Thread starter the/belligerent/drunk
- Start date
Understood. My memory was that the unit used to try to sell it as they place a lot of pilots. That may be because they recruit and train highly motivated cadets who want to fly. Perhaps the unit did a lot more to make sure their pilots got good OML scores. It was a reputation.
It was a nice course but it also made a lot of promises that seemed hard to keep. The program was also very expensive given the fact that the cadets still had to compete on the same playing field as every other cadet, and quite a few ended up not branching Aviation afte they had completed the program. Probably why they finally axed the program.
Last edited:
I think CC disagrees seeing that reportedly SC and AG are on the list for "specialized degrees" with a 2.75.
I suspect that there are certain slots they want to make sure have officers that a broader understanding of the field.
And there is a lot of that "We can train 'em into the job" mentality out there both in the military and the private sector that in my experience "somewhat works".
When I graduated college, I went to work for a large IT outsourcing company that liked to hire "anyone with a college degree" and train them to be a COBOL programmer. By and large, they did just that. In fact, they shied away from hiring Computer Science majors because as one of their in-house instructors liked to say, "we have to un-train them first".
This company was exceedingly good at what it did - taking over a company's IT department, standardizing its procedures (right down to the indentation and documentation in the code) and wringing out all the inefficiencies in the existing IT processes.
I almost like to compare it to working at McDonalds. One of Ray Kroc's missions in life was to have a hamburger be identical no matter which restaurant you got it from. They hired people who didn't know how to cook and trained them to do things the McDonald's way.
Both of these things worked great in the early part of the process. However, where do you go for more customer satisfaction once you've got the perfect assembly line going and rock bottom prices?
Just as people have found McDonald's food rather bland and not innovative, my previous employer ran into a bit of a growth problem once the market got to cheap and reproducible. Competing on these traits is rather self limiting.
In my later years there, I found it difficult to find programmers who had a broader vision of solving the larger customer problems and managers who were graded on the existing business model that was about cutting costs and boosting revenue without a vision of serving the needs the customer didn't realize s/he had. My best work in this area (a generous 8 figure annual savings to the end customer when conservatively calculated) took a couple years to find someone with enough imagination to take the idea and make the investment. Didn't generate much for my employer in revenue though, so my rewards was only a choice of next jobs...
Very similarly, there is so little cooking skill and creativity at McDonald's restaurants, they were stifled in developing new dishes for their increasingly satiated customers. Yeah, corporate comes out with McRib, but there is too little considering the size and assets of the company.
In the military, putting officers in branches where they have a passion for the subject matter goes beyond the "train 'em into the job" mentality that pervades institutions that get stuck in their rigid thinking.
To the extent that this program puts students with technical degrees in branches were a little creative outside thinking may be useful, this is a great thing.
Obviously there are no college degrees that I can think of that prepare you for Combat Arms branches.
However, I think there is some meat still on the bone for other branches to align talent/mind set with assignment - Transpo (I think a few more officers with modern logistics degrees could shake things up over time) and MP (don't underestimate the social science mindset when dealing with difficult people and cultural issues regarding misbehavior) come to mind here. And given the large number of cadets with social science type degrees (sociology, psychology, CJ, etc), one could make the argument to have MP entirely staffed by social science degrees.
Not sure how CC looks at these other branches, but IMHO there is always room to improve getting people to where they talents best fit the organization. I'll give them credit for trying with what they do.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 403
I think CC disagrees seeing that reportedly SC and AG are on the list for "specialized degrees" with a 2.75.
I suspect that there are certain slots they want to make sure have officers that a broader understanding of the field.
And there is a lot of that "We can train 'em into the job" mentality out there both in the military and the private sector that in my experience "somewhat works".
When I graduated college, I went to work for a large IT outsourcing company that liked to hire "anyone with a college degree" and train them to be a COBOL programmer. By and large, they did just that. In fact, they shied away from hiring Computer Science majors because as one of their in-house instructors liked to say, "we have to un-train them first".
This company was exceedingly good at what it did - taking over a company's IT department, standardizing its procedures (right down to the indentation and documentation in the code) and wringing out all the inefficiencies in the existing IT processes.
I almost like to compare it to working at McDonalds. One of Ray Kroc's missions in life was to have a hamburger be identical no matter which restaurant you got it from. They hired people who didn't know how to cook and trained them to do things the McDonald's way.
Both of these things worked great in the early part of the process. However, where do you go for more customer satisfaction once you've got the perfect assembly line going and rock bottom prices?
Just as people have found McDonald's food rather bland and not innovative, my previous employer ran into a bit of a growth problem once the market got to cheap and reproducible. Competing on these traits is rather self limiting.
In my later years there, I found it difficult to find programmers who had a broader vision of solving the larger customer problems and managers who were graded on the existing business model that was about cutting costs and boosting revenue without a vision of serving the needs the customer didn't realize s/he had. My best work in this area (a generous 8 figure annual savings to the end customer when conservatively calculated) took a couple years to find someone with enough imagination to take the idea and make the investment. Didn't generate much for my employer in revenue though, so my rewards was only a choice of next jobs...
Very similarly, there is so little cooking skill and creativity at McDonald's restaurants, they were stifled in developing new dishes for their increasingly satiated customers. Yeah, corporate comes out with McRib, but there is too little considering the size and assets of the company.
In the military, putting officers in branches where they have a passion for the subject matter goes beyond the "train 'em into the job" mentality that pervades institutions that get stuck in their rigid thinking.
To the extent that this program puts students with technical degrees in branches were a little creative outside thinking may be useful, this is a great thing.
Obviously there are no college degrees that I can think of that prepare you for Combat Arms branches.
However, I think there is some meat still on the bone for other branches to align talent/mind set with assignment - Transpo (I think a few more officers with modern logistics degrees could shake things up over time) and MP (don't underestimate the social science mindset when dealing with difficult people and cultural issues regarding misbehavior) come to mind here. And given the large number of cadets with social science type degrees (sociology, psychology, CJ, etc), one could make the argument to have MP entirely staffed by social science degrees.
Not sure how CC looks at these other branches, but IMHO there is always room to improve getting people to where they talents best fit the organization. I'll give them credit for trying with what they do.
I see what you're trying to convey with your response. However, I do have "some" insight into the issue. Don't let the caduceus and my screen name fool ya'. I'm also a graduate of the Signal Captain Career Course, a former CIO, and I earned a Master of Information Technology Management from Webster University.
MOST CS/IT majors will be disappointed with the Signal Corps. The majority of Signal Corps deals with military radios, not CS/IT. That's why a History major could be branched SC and be taught how to "manage" his/her Soldiers.
I'm not going to lie, I struggled HARD during SCCC. It wasn't because I was technologically inept; it was because I wasn't exposed to advanced tactical radios as a junior AMEDD Officer. The poly-degreed 25As, who were exposed to advanced tactical radios, PBXs, TACLANEs, JNNs, etc as Signal 2LT had to provide me with OJT.
I can speak to and provide insight for Army Signal Officers; by virtue of civilian education and military training. I stand firm in my assertion that assessing tech majors into Signal Corps won't provide the boost CC is looking to provide.
However I would argue if a SC officer remains in the Army past their initial obligation, they COULD specialize as a FA53/24. By this time the 25A should be seeking graduate education in their given field of interest anyways.
Last edited:
I'm not a fan of CS/MIS degress as a whole for Army SC officers for the most part (although a few specialties like GIS have some promise - mapping your assets/concerns spatially over time can be very useful to seeing the battlefield). And I'm not too impressed with the graduates of most of these programs anyway. They don't teach real Computer Science these days - how a computer really works, mathematical algorithms for solving problems - that is left for the EEs (who SC should be targeting).
If you get an EE who understands network related disciplines, yeah they should be leaders in SC. As the new technology rolls in (our networked soldier isn't that far off in the future), s/he will be in a position to understand what is and is not going to work for his/her soldiers in the field.
So is CC clueless in technology, or trying to get ahead of the curve? You may be right in that they are wasting their time right now. However, I think having people who have a greater appreciation of what CAN BE will more likely to be looking for an opportunity to implement. Yeah, the initial SC assignments today are more than likely to have the EE searching for civilian work after their obligation is served, but at some point, the technology will catch up to the job and we don't want to be lacking the inspiration at that point in time.
BTW, interesting life story. I wish more cadets would be exposed to the ways that one can re-invent yourself in the military. So many cadets think, I got X branch, my life is over.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2013
- Messages
- 403
I feel a comprehensive branch orientation should take place at the ROTC Battalions. In regards to SC, I believe it's misrepresented.
"Oh you like computers! You should be Signal Corps!"
No further research or orientation is provided until branch orientation at LDAC (do they still have branch orientation?). I believe the Army can start to encourage STEM degrees "IF" cadets could directly assess to FA53/24; instead of waiting 6+ years for "shot".
Just a suggestion/observation...
As for me, I'm just using the attributes of my branch to the fullest extent. What makes Medical Service unique to all the other branches of the Army, is I can perform ALMOST any job I want under the auspices of "medical". I can be a pilot, perform human resources, finance, logistics, engineering, administration, information technology, intelligence, etc..
MS gave me the opportunity to tryout administrative, tactical, information technology, and clinical before I made a decision (I think I'm done changing AOCs). I'm just lucky because MS was my second choice.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,332
Just a stab in the dark but I think CC is looking at the thought processes and critical thinking and or analytical skills required of say of a EE or comp sci major. It's just a different way of thinking and going about problem solving. Just like how a LA major may have better experiences with working in situations requires interpersonal tact or the human rather than technical side of situations. However this just might be biased considering that's what my father has always said about his job and he is a computer engineer who came from the age where employers trained you to do your job because degree programs weren't readily available yet.
But you have to agree for most 70B MSC the clinical hands on type of medical work never comes into play unless they seek further degrees like everyone else ( I don't consider PAD clinical) but I do agree with the AOC specializations it is a very broad branch.
But you have to agree for most 70B MSC the clinical hands on type of medical work never comes into play unless they seek further degrees like everyone else ( I don't consider PAD clinical) but I do agree with the AOC specializations it is a very broad branch.
Last edited:
I think it really depends on what kind of unit you get put into. A SIGO in an infantry battalion deals a lot more with the tactical side of the house than a SIGO in an aviation unit. It's a diverse skillset. The one SIGO with a CompSci background that I did know was a giant headache because he would constantly micromanage his automations NCOs. Nothing makes a soldier more uncomfortable than when an officer reaches farther down than he needs to. He knew his stuff, but his soldiers were more than willing to throw him under the bus whenever possible because of he came off as condescending.
On another related topic to Branching, has anyone gotten guidance as to how large this year's AD number is?
With all the talk of reducing the number of brigades in the near future, at some point they are going to have to reduce the number of LTs commissioning AD and the sooner they do that, the less severe the cuts will have to be to future classes.
And if they do reduce this year's AD numbers, that means what would have been a top 10% cadet, may not be. And the lower half may be starting at a higher OMS.
With all the talk of reducing the number of brigades in the near future, at some point they are going to have to reduce the number of LTs commissioning AD and the sooner they do that, the less severe the cuts will have to be to future classes.
And if they do reduce this year's AD numbers, that means what would have been a top 10% cadet, may not be. And the lower half may be starting at a higher OMS.
While this is far from a definitive answer, our PMS told my class not to expect a significant change in AD numbers for this cohort. He said he anticipated (emphasis on anticipated) that if cuts in numbers happen, it would probably start with next year's cohort.
DD was a 2013 LDAC camp commissionee, recently submitted AD request.
Major - Comms/Minor Business (BS degree)
LDAC - S
GPA - 2.9
Top Choices
AG
Quartermaster
Finance
MI
Transportation
Engineers
Any idea what her chances might be for an AD slot?
Let me make sure I understand this right.
Your daughter was an end of Camp commission?
Do end of camp commission's submit their Branch requests after they commission?
What was her ranking in the Battalion, and APFT scores, that will determine a lot of her points.
Has she received her OMS score yet.
I would say she is on the bubble, if she makes AD her chances will most likely be Quartermaster, Transportation and then AG.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,332
How many dimensional Es? Overall Es? Just S doesn't tell us much.
Any extra currics? Schools? PMS Eval also plays a big role as well as APFT
Too many variables for me to guess
Last time I checked CC hold over slots specifically for EOCC for that FY year but I don't know if that has changed. For AD I would say she would get TC or QM.
Yes, end of camp commission.
Yes, they submit their final list upon completion to their home battalion.
APFT - 250
Not sure on the OMS.
Received 5 E's at camp.
Sorority 4 yrs, officer 1.
PT Job 4 yrs. Interned at DoD contractor 3 summers.
CULP
5E's at camp.
scoutpilot
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 4,479
How heavily is the APFT weighted? 250 is a fairly weak score, especially for a young female.
There's no telling until the results are published, but I would start working on Plan B. If I were accessing with that GPA and PT score and banking on active duty I would be very worried.
re: APFT weighting, the fall and spring MSIII apfts are 3.5 points a piece. I think LDAC is 6.5.
re: APFT weighting, the fall and spring MSIII apfts are 3.5 points a piece. I think LDAC is 6.5.
runslikeajohndeere
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2012
- Messages
- 163
What are some valid extracurriculars that garner points for OML and accessions? DS doing Ranger Challenge, academics, and all ROTC activities required.
Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app.
Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app.
runslikeajohndeere
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2012
- Messages
- 163
Found Xavier document of 2009 that cites a rough table of extracurriculars. Seems a cadet needs to focus on academics, pft and SoM classes and too much can over extend a cadet.
Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app.
Sent using the Service Academy Forums® mobile app.