First Assignments from West Point

[Impulsive]

There are no official numbers published. My roommate was "force branched" infantry, #17/17 on her list. There are ~20 women going Infantry (as far as she is aware) which is significantly higher than the five-ish of years past. She wanted logistics and BRADSO'd for all of the logistics branches.

I am just a little curious as to the number of "detail' infantry assignments vs "true" Branching infantry? I know quite a few our or son's friends BRADSO'd to get the Branch they wanted but ended up getting infantry as a detail for their JO tours?

If it is true Branching infantry I am wondering if someone higher up (Pentagon or Congress) decided that infantry needed more "Diversity, Equality, Equity" and therefore diverted Firsties into Combat Arms Branches? I hope that is not the case, no one should get #17 out of 17 because someone wants more of something reflected in the stats. If they want retention (the supposed reason for the "new' branch model) don't be giving new officers things they have absolutely no interest in, they will just force people out after five!

 

[TX2023]

There were a number of 2023 branches this year outside the top 3 preferences. Heard about more than one female that was "force branched" Infantry after ranking it 17/17 and many of the females had Infantry well outside their top 3. The military makes a lot of decisions in the best interest of the military and apparently, they believe they need more qualified female officers in Infantry.

As for why combat arms may be down this year, there is a lot of turmoil in the world and confidence in our government to navigate that turmoil may not be at all-time high. Further, this is the class that affirmed on the same day as the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan. Not to get political, but it doesn't take a lot of effort to connect dots.

 

[UHBlackhawk]

Well, women raised a stink about wanting to be in combat arms. With that comes some females being forced into combat arms, especially at the SAs where there is a push that has gone from about 70% to up to 90% getting combat arms.
A female may put infantry last, but if the “powers that be” feel she is a good fit for infantry she may well get infantry.

 

[jl123]

For the Class of 2023 the only initial information published was comments from two cadets who were very happy with their branch assignments - no numbers for each branch and no statistics regarding preferences.

This is in stark contrast to the announcements for previous classes including the Class of 2022, for which a portion of the announcement follows:

Accessions Chief, Lt. Col. Eric Gust, provided the Pointer View with the following West Point branch statistics of branch/number cadets entering the branch:

• Air Defense Artillery: 60; Adjutant General: 13; Armor: 97; Aviation: 97; Chemical Corps: 8; Cyber: 42; Engineers: 133; Field Artillery: 145; Finance Corps: 7; Infantry: 199; Military Intelligence: 70; Military Police: 14; Medical Service: 21; Ordnance/EOD: 16/16; Quartermaster: 26; Signal Corps: 41; Transportation Corps: 21 — with a total of 1,026 cadets notified of a branch assignment.

Seventy-four percent of cadets received their number one branch choice while 92% of cadets received a top three choice preference. Gust noted that the willingness to serve an additional three years for branch of choice was a determining factor for many cadets.

Seventy-eight of 90 cadets who incurred a BRADSO required it to receive their number one branch preference.

 

[NavyUMO]

So if you take your number one branch choice, the obligation goes from 5 years to 8 years? What is the payback for aviation and when does that start?

 

[dddad]

So if you take your number one branch choice, the obligation goes from 5 years to 8 years? What is the payback for aviation and when does that start?

No. If you BRADSO for a branch, your active duty service commitment is increased by 3 years. You can BRADSO for choices beyond your first choice as a way of increasing your chances of being selected by the Branch. Not everyone who BRADSOs for a Branch is charged with the BRADSO. One cannot BRADSO for Aviation.

 

[Roadking]

There were a number of 2023 branches this year outside the top 3 preferences. Heard about more than one female that was "force branched" Infantry after ranking it 17/17 and many of the females had Infantry well outside their top 3. The military makes a lot of decisions in the best interest of the military and apparently, they believe they need more qualified female officers in Infantry.

Is it really in the best interest of the Army to force females into Infantry? Especially those who rank this choice last or near the bottom of their preferences. The best interest of the Army is to WIN not to be gender diverse. Just my 2 cents.

 

[UHBlackhawk]

Is it really in the best interest of the Army to force females into Infantry? Especially those who rank this choice last or near the bottom of their preferences. The best interest of the Army is to WIN not to be gender diverse. Just my 2 cents.

Many males are forced into infantry and other combat arms. If females are to be in all the branches as the males then they should be subject to the same policies.

 

[Roadking]

Many males are forced into infantry and other combat arms. If females are to be in all the branches as the males then they should be subject to the same policies.

Agreed but don't do it based on any quota system, do it based upon the soldiers ability and willingness to fight.

 

[prospective2019]

Many males are forced into infantry and other combat arms. If females are to be in all the branches as the males then they should be subject to the same policies.

I agree with this in principle as do most here, but the women who are at the bottom of the class who are physically unfit are going to struggle more to succeed in Ranger school and IBOLC than a physically unfit male as an example. I do not believe the Army is doing itself a favor by putting women who are not eager to serve in IN/AR into those officer roles--there is already a stigma against female combat arms officers and the women who are forced into it have low odds of changing that. I hope that they are able to step up and crush their roles.

 

[dddad]

women who are at the bottom of the class who are physically unfit are going to struggle more to succeed in Ranger school and IBOLC than a physically unfit male as an example

Is there a reason to believe that the women who were force branched IN (or AR if that occurred) were not physically fit and at the bottom of the class? I would have expected that IN would have been looking to increase the number of women Officers in the branch with women who were very capable of succeeding, including at Ranger school. In a market based system, one would expect that if both sides of the transaction were unhappy, then the system is a total failure. So, I would have assumed that the women force branched must appear to have the right mix of talent to succeed.

 

[cb7893]

I agree with this in principle as do most here, but the women who are at the bottom of the class who are physically unfit are going to struggle more to succeed in Ranger school and IBOLC than a physically unfit male as an example. I do not believe the Army is doing itself a favor by putting women who are not eager to serve in IN/AR into those officer roles--there is already a stigma against female combat arms officers and the women who are forced into it have low odds of changing that. I hope that they are able to step up and crush their roles.

It was my understanding that attending RS was almost a requirement of Infantry O-1's or O-2's. Without the tab, then no promotion to O-3. Is that correct?

Is there a reason to believe that the women who were force branched IN (or AR if that occurred) were not physically fit and at the bottom of the class? I would have expected that IN would have been looking to increase the number of women Officers in the branch with women who were very capable of succeeding, including at Ranger school. In a market based system, one would expect that if both sides of the transaction were unhappy, then the system is a total failure. So, I would have assumed that the women force branched must appear to have the right mix of talent to succeed.

If that's the case, then it seems these force branched women would almost be set up for failure, unless there is major tweaking of Ranger School or the IN branch itself. My DS (not Infantry) graduated RS in 2021 and there was only 1 female graduate out of 150-200 and she was not an Officer. He hated it BTW.

 

[RedDragon]

No. If you BRADSO for a branch, your active duty service commitment is increased by 3 years. You can BRADSO for choices beyond your first choice as a way of increasing your chances of being selected by the Branch. Not everyone who BRADSOs for a Branch is charged with the BRADSO. One cannot BRADSO for Aviation.

One of my son’s flight school roommates elected BRADSO and added 4 years to his commitment. This was 2020 or the last class with the 6 year commitment…maybe a special case year?

 

[dddad]

One of my son’s flight school roommates elected BRADSO and added 4 years to his commitment. This was 2020 or the last class with the 6 year commitment…maybe a special case year?

As I understand it, the length of commitment for West Point Cadets branching Aviation is 10 years without a BRADSO (for the class of 2023). So, everyone branching Aviation effectively has the service commitment of your son's flight school roommate. And, those branching AV could not increase the likelihood of branching AV by BRADSOing the branch.

 

[Monikat]

This is a fascinating conversation and one I'm trying to decode with the acronym list. I need a little help! Feel free to copy/paste and fill these in! Thank you (or should I say, TY)

ADSO = Active Duty Service Obligation
AV
NG
USAR
CA = Combat Arms or Civil Affairs
CM
TC
OD
QM
LG
CY
AR
IN
FA
BRADSO

 

[justme]

This is a fascinating conversation and one I'm trying to decode with the acronym list. I need a little help! Feel free to copy/paste and fill these in! Thank you (or should I say, TY)

ADSO = Active Duty Service Obligation
AV
NG
USAR
CA = Combat Arms or Civil Affairs
CM
TC
OD
QM
LG
CY
AR
IN
FA
BRADSO

NG and USAR would be National Guard and Reserves.
The rest are likely abbreviations for these: ( I was following and trying to learn, myself.)

Air Defense Artillery:
Adjutant General
Armor
Aviation
Chemical Corps
Cyber
Engineers
Field Artillery
Finance Corps
Infantry
Military Intelligence
Military Police
Medical Service
Ordnance/EOD
Quartermaster
Signal Corps
Transportation Corps

 

[jl123]

NG - National Guard
USAR - US Army Reserve
LG - Logistics Branch (comprises Transportation, Ordnance, and Quartermaster branches). Not selected for 1st branch assignment. Starts at O-3 level I believe.
BRADSO - Branch Active Duty Service Obligation (volunteer BRADSO to get better chance of branch preference in exchange for additional 3 years of active duty obligation)

 

[UHBlackhawk]

I agree with this in principle as do most here, but the women who are at the bottom of the class who are physically unfit are going to struggle more to succeed in Ranger school and IBOLC than a physically unfit male as an example. I do not believe the Army is doing itself a favor by putting women who are not eager to serve in IN/AR into those officer roles--there is already a stigma against female combat arms officers and the women who are forced into it have low odds of changing that. I hope that they are able to step up and crush their roles.

… are treated no differently from men at the bottom of their class and are physically unfit for infantry. They either will get in shape or they will wash out. That’s how it works in the military,
Officers have complained about being forced into infantry since a Nomes’ son complained to the pharaoh that he belonged in the chariots, not the infantry. In WWII the US was so short infantry officers that they started pulling officers out of other branches and, with no additional training, throwing them into the line. It was a steep learning curve. Most didn’t survive their first firefight. The same happened to enlisted. My father was lucky as he was artillery and it took too much training to replace him. Supply clerks, cooks, admin types, and many other MOSs found themselves handed an M-1, told they’d been reclassified, and in combat a few days later.
I would suggest anyone forced into a combat arms get in shape for it. BOLC and Ranger School may be tough, but the consequences of being unprepared if you wind up in combat is worse.

 

[prospective2019]

Is there a reason to believe that the women who were force branched IN (or AR if that occurred) were not physically fit and at the bottom of the class? I would have expected that IN would have been looking to increase the number of women Officers in the branch with women who were very capable of succeeding, including at Ranger school. In a market based system, one would expect that if both sides of the transaction were unhappy, then the system is a total failure. So, I would have assumed that the women force branched must appear to have the right mix of talent to succeed.

I speak only to the specific case of my roommate, who fits my previous description (without disclosing personal information on her). She was ranked "least preferred" for IN, meaning she did not fit the talent priorities of the branch. She is going to work hard but feels screwed over and doomed to fail.

Most cadets in general who are "force-branched" into combat arms are at the bottom of the class. There are slots left over after the one-for-one matchings of talent and preferences, and those slots have to be filled.

 

[Impulsive]

I speak only to the specific case of my roommate, who fits my previous description (without disclosing personal information on her). She was ranked "least preferred" for IN, meaning she did not fit the talent priorities of the branch. She is going to work hard but feels screwed over and doomed to fail.

Most cadets in general who are "force-branched" into combat arms are at the bottom of the class. There are slots left over after the one-for-one matchings of talent and preferences, and those slots have to be filled.

It's unfortunate that ANYONE gets "Forced Branched". Especially from a SA, JMHO but if the services need to force branch people it should be ROTC folks. The SA grads are the one I would think the services want to keep past their ADSO. Sticking them into careers they don't want or can't succeed at only makes their desire to get out even stronger. I though the whole idea behind the "new" branching model was to increase retention, not get more "five and dives"