LDAC 2013

I see nothing in the inbox. I'm sure you could "scold" me on the public forum though. Set all the other "wet behind the ears" cadets straight too.

Wow, go away for a couple of days and...

I did not scold you. I'm not that type of person. I just gave you a bit of advice from someone who served for 22 1/2 years and deployed many times, including a combat tour. Glad you got the "E" at LDAC, that is a great accomplishment, but you've got a long way to go and a lot more "x's" to check in your future. I wish you the best and will let it go at that.

I'll check and see what the deal was with the PM and try to send it again if possible.
 
Bull would be one of the last cadets I'd call "wet behind the ears" He got his E at LDAC, thank you.

There were valid reasons for reading the SMC cadets the riot act.

That warning wasn't heeded by one SMC cadet in my daughter's squad who, upon receiving his N (he passed APFT and Land Nav, but otherwise did poorly), was promptly escorted back to the airport - no graduation for him.

I wonder if the commandant will allow him to retake next summer? Or perhaps he will not recommend him for AD.

goaliedad - I'm not arguing over the fact of whether an SMC cadet is worthy or not to be given an active duty slot. I'm sure many are not. I did not create the system. All I pointed out was what it says in the law. If you read the many comments in the thread I posted, you will see that it is a sore subject for many people on this board.

If you don't like the law, write to your Congressman and lobby for it to be changed.
 
Wow, go away for a couple of days and...

I did not scold you. I'm not that type of person. I just gave you a bit of advice from someone who served for 22 1/2 years and deployed many times, including a combat tour. Glad you got the "E" at LDAC, that is a great accomplishment, but you've got a long way to go and a lot more "x's" to check in your future. I wish you the best and will let it go at that.

I'll check and see what the deal was with the PM and try to send it again if possible.

Cool. Sure you looked like you were wanting to put some cadets in line.

Got your PM. I know what the law states and I know what CC says. My comments are in line with both. Glad you had a nice road graduating and commissioning from an SMC back in your day. It won't be so easy in the years to come.
 
Just my 0.019543 cents, so please take it with a grain of salt.

Too many cliches? :shake:

Bird,

-Bull- is the new generation.
My wonderful DH, Bullet was 20 yrs ADAF, now at the Pentagon as an AF GS. He pinned on our DS's AF butter bars in 12.

I am guessing you were in the military the same time frame as Bullet. The military now is not the military the two of you entered 20 yrs ago.

-Bull-

As a spouse the best piece of advice I was ever given, was regardless of rank, if they spent 1 more day in the military than you, than embrace what they are saying. Give them that respect. He spent 22 yrs ADA, he earned it. To him you are wet behind the ears. You have yet to serve 1 day in the AD world.

His approach might have been offensive/brusk to you, but in the AD world as an O1, you will be the FNG, and IMPO, nobody cares about an O1's opinion as much as they care about the O5/O6's opinion.

Our DS got his own feathers up with his Dad as an AFROTC cadet when he too tried to give direction.

Now at UPT he calls his Dad often to ask advice. The point is, at least ADAF, it is a different world than ROTC, and bird may have been giving you great advice regarding ADA.

I want to stress that I am not taking sides for either poster. I am saying both have valid points. -Bull- has been an invaluable poster here regarding ROTC, Bird is an asset for their next step, and life experience in the AD military. (I am guessing their moniker Bird85, means they commissioned in 1985, and retired as a FULL BIRD).

Bird85 can be a phenomenal resource. I don't know their career field, but play the what if game. As a cadet that will commission in a yr from now and they were in your career field as an O6, wouldn't you agree they would be a great resource?

The military is not only what you know academically, but connections than can help you navigate the system.
 
Outsource all commissioning sources to India, close thread, disband forums. Matter resolved.
 
Joining ROTC at an SMC doesn't guarantee ****. Thanks cadet parent for all your awesome knowledge, I guess I missed you in the back of the accessions brief.
Bull -- this is where attention to detail becomes critical.

Let me point out:

- Bird85 is a moniker that might suggest an O-5 or O-6 commissioned in 1985. Could refer to LTC, COL, or could refer to Aviation.

- Bird85 has indicated they are a parent of a current AROTC cadet

Given that knowledge, would you possibly re-think the tone with which you addressed Bird85? Whether current or retired, that experience has earned respect.

As it happens, I take notice when regular posters on this forum are or might be prior service (e.g. Scoutpilot, among others), and a quick look into prior posts confirms this wrt Bird85. I especially notice when they are Field officers. Wouldn't it end up being ironic if you are arguing, using somewhat disrespectul language, about SMC Commissioning protocols with a current or retired Officer who commissioned out of an SMC, and who has a child in an SMC currently? That would be hilarious.

Given Bird85's prior Field Officer experience, and current experience of having a child in AROTC, I would think you'd want to establish a positive relationship with said current or retired Field officer... who knows, it might benefit you at some point down the line. It also goes to show that you sometimes never know who is standing behind the internet curtain, and using courtesy is a less risky approach than bravado. Lesson learned, I hope.

Bull -- I enjoy your posts very much, and find them valuable. My comments are not meant to criticize your posts in a general sense... just this particular little exchange could serve as an object lesson to attempt to understand with whom you are arguing.
 
Last edited:
First let me apologize for being part of what has been getting this thread out of control. My tone in my previous post addressing Bird85 was not of my better work.

That being said, let me establish some facts.
1) -Bull- accurately described what was being presented in Accessions briefing when he said that SMC cadets were not guaranteed AD. This was a warning to those who might become complacent because of their status because, last I checked you still have to successfully complete Warrior Forge (LDAC) to commission, regardless of commission source.
2) Bird85 replied to remind folks that officers commissioned through SMCs were guaranteed AD. I think this is where things started to come unglued. I think Bird85 may have taken -Bull-'s statement as a poke at SMC cadets (which would include his son from what I am reading). I believe -Bull-'s comment was actually meant to reassure FullMetal (a SMC cadet who was unhappy with the overall OML scoring process) that the "cadets who couldn't lead anyone out of a paper bag" would not be commissioning (OML becomes inconsequential) because they would wash out of LDAC.
3) -Bull- did not seem to appreciate what he perceived to be a lecture about the advantages of commissioning through an SMC and became a bit testy in his reply (probably not doing his research on Bird85).
4) I missed -Bull-'s post with the attitude before replying with my own regarding the SMC cadet who was removed from LDAC after getting an N, which was probably not the best way to address Bird85, as it could be construed to be another poke at Bird85. Not my intention at all. I was following up to support -Bull- who has a history on this board of posting useful information from a cadet's perspective and who had given the best feedback on this year's LDAC experience to date. I didn't take the comments as a poke at SMC cadets and I don't have anything against them myself, nor have I ever poked at them. In fact, going back a ways in my posting history, I've been one to encourage prospective cadets to do overnight visits at one particular SMC (one that my daughter did an overnight at before deciding that she didn't feel the need for an SMC experience - her preference). Hence, I was a bit surprised at Bird85's reply to my post defending the law that established SMC advantages in commissioning. I actually support that concept as SMCs provide an infrastructure for developing officers regardless of the state of ROTC during any period - a necessary insurance policy. My support of -Bull-'s post was to provide an observed data point to back up the concept that SMC cadets should not expect a free pass at LDAC to commissioning.

Having talked to my daughter (who did consider an SMC) a little more about said SMC cadet who did not complete LDAC, this cadet kind of shook her confidence in the SMCs. This cadet seemed intelligent enough, but was ill-prepared in many of the basic ROTC skills necessary to conduct the most basic exercises, not knowing proper procedures, etc. for nearly every task he was in charge of. I think she spent her own leadership time planning around this particular cadet's issues.

Thus, I find myself wondering if the SMCs are required to send every cadet who requests commissioning (not a requirement to attend an SMC) to LDAC, or can the commandants be allowed to screen out the clearly ill-prepared, so LDAC cadre do not have to read them the riot act during Accessions briefings.

I hope I haven't further offended anyone with this post. I'm just trying, like others here, to clear the air a bit so we can move on with a shared learning experience.
 
Almost time to fire up an Accessions 2014 thread. I'm curious to see how things go this year. Anyone find out their standing with their PMS yet?
 
I knew Birds background when posting today.

I posted what I knew as fact directly from cadet command. And continued to post sticking to those facts. Nothing against SMC's or their cadets (I turned down multiple to attend my current school). I know I'll be high enough to get active duty, so I'm not worried about any SMC cadet.

Regardless of any background, if someone is told something directly from the top, I'd hope they'd share it with everyone. Regardless if they're 2 or 200.

Bird PM'd me. He meant to make a joke of parents getting involved in areas they may not know much about. Obviously, it's hard to convey jokes on a forum without 50 smileys and whatnot.

Thanks for the advice. I understand the networking piece. I just briefed a room of field grade officers on something I'm running at CTLT. Briefing was half the reason I was interested in talking to them.
 
Back
Top