New Service Academies?

B

BigPapa3

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2019
Messages
12
After last week's TWE massacre (DS received 2 of 3), it struck me that we should look at adding more Service Academies for this country. They offer something that no other schools do - structure, discipline, intensity, physical fitness requirements, leadership training, patriotism, service, amazing summer programs, low student/teacher ratio, etc. From a purely economics model, the demand far outweighs the supply. And when you read about the qualifications of kids getting turned down it's amazing and sad to see. There are a lot of fantastic people wanting to serve. Yes there is ROTC but there is nothing like the SAs. With the population expanding and the number of academies remaining the same, maybe it's time to look at adding more academies? Maybe secondary's to each branch and also civil service academies would be good. These schools are turning down 50% of kids who meet all the qualifications and still get nominations. Liberal Arts schools are shutting down and enrollment is plummeting. People see the value (not just the free education) of the SAs. Heck we'd pay the tuition for it as you can't get that experience anywhere. What do you think?
 
Interesting idea, though flawed. Neither population growth nor acceptance rate drives the size or number of SAs. The SAs exist to serve the needs of their corresponding DOD branches, not to provide college educations for more of the candidates who are applying but are being turned down. As with all things military, mission first!

The SAs provide only a small percentage of the officer corps, and that’s worked well historically. Studies abound that indicate source of accession — SA, ROTC, OCS — has virtually no bearing on quality of officer or longevity of career. SAs are not necessarily the best source of commissioned officers — just a unique one and a very expensive one at that (from a government perspective).

Many (most?) of those declined by SAs end up with ROTC scholarships. ROTC is a noble, honored and challenging path that should not be looked down upon. If it’s held in a lower regard than SAs, I’d argue that this is mainly in the minds of people who don’t fully understand the rigors of ROTC and the quality of officers it produces. Or those who see only the prestige of SAs but not the output of ROTC.

The issue of supply-and-demand you present is from the candidate’s eyes: too many perspective cadets/mids, to few SA spots. But again, SAs don’t exist for the candidates. The supply-and-demand issue that’s relevant is the officer needs of the Navy, Marine Corps, Army and Air Force. And they’re getting exactly what they need, from a tremendous variety of sources.
 
They're called Senior Military Colleges - the cost for each academy graduate is breathtakingly high. The SMC through scholarships can provide a flexible number of new officers every bit as high a quality as the federal schools at a fraction of the cost
 
My son graduated from a mid-ranked state school, commissioned through OCS and...never mind.

Not everybody gets or deserves a trophy.

And as stated above, service academies are very expensive. Adding more would really make the heads explode of those who advocate for their closure.
 
MidCakePa said:
Interesting idea, though flawed. Neither population growth nor acceptance rate drives the size or number of SAs. The SAs exist to serve the needs of their corresponding DOD branches, not to provide college educations for more of the candidates who are applying but are being turned down. As with all things military, mission first!

The SAs provide only a small percentage of the officer corps, and that’s worked well historically. Studies abound that indicate source of accession — SA, ROTC, OCS — has virtually no bearing on quality of officer or longevity of career. SAs are not necessarily the best source of commissioned officers — just a unique one and a very expensive one at that (from a government perspective).

Many (most?) of those declined by SAs end up with ROTC scholarships. ROTC is a noble, honored and challenging path that should not be looked down upon. If it’s held in a lower regard than SAs, I’d argue that this is mainly in the minds of people who don’t fully understand the rigors of ROTC and the quality of officers it produces. Or those who see only the prestige of SAs but not the output of ROTC.

The issue of supply-and-demand you present is from the candidate’s eyes: too many perspective cadets/mids, to few SA spots. But again, SAs don’t exist for the candidates. The supply-and-demand issue that’s relevant is the officer needs of the Navy, Marine Corps, Army and Air Force. And they’re getting exactly what they need, from a tremendous variety of sources.
Click to expand...

Well thought out response. Thank you. To clarify, in no way was my comment meant to undermine or imply the quality of ROTC. In fact, ROTC was the route I took 25 years ago. All I said was there is a difference which is true - the experience and training from ROTC to SA is significant. Senior MCs are great but again there is a difference. Look at the schedule and environment of a SA vs ROTC/MC. At an SA 100% of the student population and faculty are committed to service and the military mission. It's not like that at ROTC/MCs where you have students and teachers not committed to military. I'm proud of my service and ROTC route, but thinking big more SA's may be beneficial to the supply/demand and this country as a whole.
 
From a pure dollars and cents perspective eliminating the service academies and moving the money into ROTC and particularly the SMC makes a lot of sense. I suspect 2 – 3 officers could be had for the price of 1 SA grad. Because of the partial nature of the scholarship program students have more ‘skin in the game’.


With exception of UNG there is a healthy cross-pollination among the services at SMC , with the added benefit of a fair fraction of population that doesn’t truly want to be there, somewhat like what I experienced in the gator navy back in late 80’s early 90’s…


Now this will never happen and nor should it SA all fine institutions with history that’s hard to put a price on the do a fine job of making officers.
 
MidCakePa said:
Interesting idea, though flawed. Neither population growth nor acceptance rate drives the size or number of SAs. The SAs exist to serve the needs of their corresponding DOD branches, not to provide college educations for more of the candidates who are applying but are being turned down. As with all things military, mission first!

The SAs provide only a small percentage of the officer corps, and that’s worked well historically. Studies abound that indicate source of accession — SA, ROTC, OCS — has virtually no bearing on quality of officer or longevity of career. SAs are not necessarily the best source of commissioned officers — just a unique one and a very expensive one at that (from a government perspective).

Many (most?) of those declined by SAs end up with ROTC scholarships. ROTC is a noble, honored and challenging path that should not be looked down upon. If it’s held in a lower regard than SAs, I’d argue that this is mainly in the minds of people who don’t fully understand the rigors of ROTC and the quality of officers it produces. Or those who see only the prestige of SAs but not the output of ROTC.

The issue of supply-and-demand you present is from the candidate’s eyes: too many perspective cadets/mids, to few SA spots. But again, SAs don’t exist for the candidates. The supply-and-demand issue that’s relevant is the officer needs of the Navy, Marine Corps, Army and Air Force. And they’re getting exactly what they need, from a tremendous variety of sources.
Click to expand...


Thank you. I can tell you with my family in 3 generations we had CW2 (Father-in-Law), OCS O-6 (husband), ROTC (oldest child), and soon to be USAFA class of 2023. I agree with you 100% when you said, "SA, ROTC, OCS — has virtually no bearing on quality of officer or longevity of career. SAs are not necessarily the best source of commissioned officers — just a unique one and a very expensive one at that (from a government perspective)." Any of these commissioning sources are based on what an individual makes it to be ....its just different avenue you take. Once you are commissioned, you are the same rank as OCS, ROTC, SA. Each of the commissioning sources bring unique experiences...its value added to the services.
 
An appointment to a Service Academy is a "lotto ticket" . . . congrats to all those who attain that goal . . . use it to prepare yourself to serve . . .

If you look at recent class profiles, approx 12,000-15,000 start a SA application each year . . . with between 10,000-12,000 actually completing the application . . . about 4000 of the 10,000-12,000 get a Congressional nomination . . . roughly 2400 of those 4000 are qualified academically and in physical aptitude . . . the SA then picks 1200 out the 2400 to meet the needs of the SA to form a class that best represents the make up of our socieity and our military . . .

MidCakePa said:
Many (most?) of those declined by SAs end up with ROTC scholarships. ROTC is a noble, honored and challenging path that should not be looked down upon. If it’s held in a lower regard than SAs, I’d argue that this is mainly in the minds of people who don’t fully understand the rigors of ROTC and the quality of officers it produces. Or those who see only the prestige of SAs but not the output of ROTC.
Click to expand...

Many outstanding candidates are not selected to attend a SA each year . . . this is why if one's goal is to serve as an officer (as opposed to just attend the SA) one should also apply for an ROTC national scholarship in parallel with the SA application . . . an ROTC scholarship will pay for tutuion, books uniforms and a monthly stipend . . . to get a 4 yr ROTC national scholarship typically takes a "SA-quality" record . . . due to the way "winning a MOC's slate" works in order to gain a SA appointment, there will be many outstanding candidates from a competitive Congressional district that will not receive a SA appointment, but they will gain a 4 year ROTC scholarship (geographic diversity is not a requirement for award of ROTC scholarships, which is unlike the award of SA appointments where geographic diversity is a key requirement baked into the appointment process).

The Senior Military Colleges (Citadel, Norwich, Texas A&M, UNG, VMI, Virginia Tech) are a great option for those that have earned a ROTC national scholarship and want an "SA-like" experience. ROTC at a "normal" school can also produce an outstanding officer . . .

BigPapa3 said:
Look at the schedule and environment of a SA vs ROTC/MC. At an SA 100% of the student population and faculty are committed to service and the military mission. It's not like that at ROTC/MCs where you have students and teachers not committed to military.
Click to expand...

I would say it may depend on the SMC . . . our experience with VMI is that its schedule and environment is very "SA-like" . . . the entire student body is in the Corps of Cadets . . . all wear the cadet uniform . . . the school day is set around military formations, academic class, physical fitness . . . ROTC is taught by active duty and many of the academic instructors are former/retired military (they even still wear the uniform) . . . and although the entire graduating class doesn't enter the military (though about half of each graduating class does commission), all members still have to participate in ROTC all 4 years . . .
 
Last edited:
There have actually been articles discussing the opposite point, that we should close the SA's because of the crazy cost (322k at USAFA) vs much cheaper methods like ROTC and OCS that provide the same end result: a 2nd Lieutenant.
 
As falcon said VMI is the most SA like , probably even more spartan - those cats spend 4 years sleeping in hay ...

Citadel is next in they get actual beds, though nobody sleeps in them they sleep on them ... there are a limited number of day students, veterans and active duty mil. Citadel has graduate and undergraduate evening classes. So there are more 'not cadets' around than at VMI or SA. On the plus side some highly qualified cadets can do graduate level work while cadets and even graduate with BA/MA or BS/MS at the same time in rare cases.

The other SMC are co-located with traditional colleges so they get a mix of traditional and military experience - all of which provide quality military officers
 
BigPapa3 said:
In fact, ROTC was the route I took 25 years ago.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that was a WOW, OMG comment.

You are basically saying as a ROTC grad, aka officer you felt you were inferior to an SA grad.
Colin Powell was not an SA or SMC grad, he was a traditional AROTC grad, but in the end became a 4 star and the SOD.
Gone are the days that to make flag officer you have to be an SA grad. Gen. Jeannie Flynn Leavitt (1st AF female fighter pilot) was an AFROTC UTA grad. 50% are now ROTC.

I am a very proud wife and Mom of AFROTC grads, both were/are rated. There is no doubt in my mind that they are just as great as officers as any USAFA grad. DH was not scholarship, DS was.
 
Pima said:
BigPapa3 said:
In fact, ROTC was the route I took 25 years ago.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but that was a WOW, OMG comment.

You are basically saying as a ROTC grad, aka officer you felt you were inferior to an SA grad.
Colin Powell was not an SA or SMC grad, he was a traditional AROTC grad, but in the end became a 4 star and the SOD.
Gone are the days that to make flag officer you have to be an SA grad. Gen. Jeannie Flynn Leavitt (1st AF female fighter pilot) was an AFROTC UTA grad. 50% are now ROTC.

I am a very proud wife and Mom of AFROTC grads, both were/are rated. There is no doubt in my mind that they are just as great as officers as any USAFA grad. DH was not scholarship, DS was.
Click to expand...

In all due respect you need to learn to read. Nowhere did it say inferior. All I said was different experience. Please read the entire post before coming to these conclusions. Thank you.
 
Pima said:
There is no doubt in my mind that they are just as great as officers as any USAFA grad. DH was not scholarship, DS was.
Click to expand...
Isn’t that a little biased coming from the parent? Not saying your son is a bad officer but I’m sure all parents think their kids are good leaders.
 
BigPapa3 said:
In all due respect you need to learn to read. Nowhere did it say inferior. All I said was different experience. Please read the entire post before coming to these conclusions. Thank you.
Click to expand...
So if the ROTC/SMC experience is different, but it's a difference that doesn't matter to the outcome, then why go through a zillion changes that would also ultimately end the ROTC programs? The military needs only so many officers. I also think their are a zillion ROTC and SMC enrollees who would challenge your statements about commitment to service and the military.
 
Last edited:
I suspect the question that needs to be answered is not how many TWEs of excellent applicants there are, but if the military is being supplied with the right number of sufficient officers.

If the current system (with foundations, prep schools, SAs, and ROTC) provides the needs currently, then it’s not needed.
 
AROTC-dad said:
I'm going to ask everyone to take a deep breath and not escalate things.

The topic is obviously interesting but the mods are encouraging everyone to be respectful to one another.

Mods will be watching closely.
Click to expand...
I am on "self proclaimed forum probation" so I am not going to touch this topic:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top