• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
mlooney

Things that go bang

Recommended Posts

My father, who was drafted during the Vietnam War, was of the opinion that they like to screw with you for the sheer enjoyment of being bullies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ijuin said:

My father, who was drafted during the Vietnam War, was of the opinion that they like to screw with you for the sheer enjoyment of being bullies.

I would say he's not entirely wrong, but that is not the whole story. There is a lot of truth to the adage, "Do not attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance."  When you are on the bottom of the pile, everything looks like malign hatred directed at you, but often the leadership is clueless, makes a decision, then rationalizes it and forces compliance. Given the sample set, "drafted during the Vietnam conflict", this is especially true. We had no business being there, our presence was entirely a misguided political misstep, and the high ranks complied, leading to an overall situation where no good can come from this.

Harassment and stress is built in to the initial training. The goal, after all, is to take a bunch of overgrown miscreants who have been coddled for two decades and convince them that mommy is not going to clean up your mess and you need to man up and take responsibility for yourself. Not an easy task. Recruits are put though grueling experiences and they learn that they can accomplish amazing things. It's not pretty, but I guardamntee you that they are not the same person when they graduate from Basic Training that they were when they left high school.

Lieutenants are pretty much universally maligned from both above and below. The problem with lieutenants is that when they are manufactured, they are filled with all kinds of learning, and it takes a while after the shrink wrap is removed for reality to sink in. It may be a year or two before they temper their belief in the party line with some insight into what makes the organization tick. I'll tell you that I stood in a chow line listening to a major mouth off about how much he hated lieutenants, me thinking, "You son of a bitch, the only difference between you and them is that you have absorbed a greater degree of cynicism. They'll catch up to you." Unfortunately, in a Vietnam situation, people will likely die until they do.

It really all comes down to the people in power, the politicians and their ilk, or money interests. If you're going to hate on someone for screwing you over, hate on them. They put you in this mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mlooney said:

I've always felt that the best officers came from OCS.  The worst came from VMI

VMI is definitely a weird source; it acts like an academy, although, I think technically the graduates are ROTC grads, not sure. The Interwebs say, yes, ROTC scholarship, but surprisingly, only about one half of grads, I thought it was 100%. Army has the biggest program there, in fact, it's the largest Army ROTC program in the US. 

I did not know enough VMI grads to have an opinion on their quality as ossifiers, the one I knew in the Air Force was a radar engineer, and knew his stuff technically, so I suppose at least  the education is good.

Per the Wiki article, aspects of the VMI experience are tougher than the service academies, which might lead to more starry eyed true believers in need of a longer reality check. Since it functions in somewhat the same bailiwick as a service academy, the lack of focus on any one service seems that it would be a drawback, no?

 

The VMI cadets acquitted themselves reasonably well during the US Civil War. While not yet soldiers, they were used in battle in support of Virginia to repel and imminent Union victory in the Shenandoah Valley at The Battle of New Market. The Union retaliated by destroying the school. Oops. I believe this situation was possible at the time due to long distance transportation being in its infancy, and the cadets identifying as Virginian, it seems less likely that this would happen again.

It is interesting that you view the OCS grads as the best of breed. OCS is the shortest training toward being an officer (of the three major routes), being only three months, vs a few years. A difference is that those three months are intense and focused, you are not distracted by other concerns; even in the academies you have other activities and academics. Another difference is that in the US during our lifetimes, you have to have a four year college degree to be an officer. In a service academy or ROTC, you are earning that concurrently with your commissioning, for OCS, you have to already have the degree, thus you will be at least a bit older and have a major accomplishment under your belt. All of the prior service officers that I can recall came in through OCS, some advancement programs mandate it. I think it's possible to have prior service and get an ROTC commission, not sure. The prior service officers bring much to the table, they already have the rough edges worn off before they graduate.

Medical personnel and I think lawyers have a different route to commissioning available to them. I do not know the details, what i recall is that military training is minimal, a few weeks, and I think the medical personnel at least get a rank bump; I do not recall ever having seen an Air Force doctor lower than an O-3.

How are you qualifying 'best' and 'worst'? Was Patton a good general? 'Old Blood and Guts' was widely hated, but accomplished a lot. 'Wins the battles and gets me and my buddies home in one piece' helps me overlook a lot of 'is full of himself and kind of an asshole'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

How are you qualifying 'best' and 'worst'?

Knowing what they are doing, having a good working relationship with their platoon sergeants, being technically proficient and having good leadership skills.  VMI grads, at least in the early 80's, tended to have a whole other view of how unit cohesion is supposed to work.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mlooney said:

Knowing what they are doing, having a good working relationship with their platoon sergeants, being technically proficient and having good leadership skills.  VMI grads, at least in the early 80's, tended to have a whole other view of how unit cohesion is supposed to work.  

That might suggest one bad instructor in their training, or someone with influence shading what the instructors taught. It might only apply to that era.

My limited experience with Army guys taught me that the Army places more emphasis on being a team and working together. The Air Force does so, but does not underscore it to the same degree, and tends to stand a bit more on being competitive with each other and individual effort. I think someone that wasn't a team player would stand out more in your environment, might fade into the woodwork more in mine.

I like your criteria. It is interesting that you single out platoon sergeants; my experience says that the middle enlisted ranks do the bulk of the real work in the military and ultimately keep everything moving in the right direction.

That said, a high rank that truly has their shit together is like gold. Will keep things moving, rather than clog them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

That might suggest one bad instructor in their training, or someone with influence shading what the instructors taught. It might only apply to that era.

Based on what was said about VMI and the Citadel when they were forced to accept women, it's more than just "one bad instructor", it's a whole systemic problem.

 

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

It is interesting that you single out platoon sergeants

I left out a " 's " . Should have read "platoon`s sergeants"  Treating your E5 and E6 troops. never minded your E7 sergeants, like the were crap, regardless of their technical or tactical skill is Not A Good Thing.  Over the course of my military career in Air Defense, I had 3 2LT that were VMI grads.  They all sucked.  The OCS and West Point ones didn't, or at least in differing ways, as all 2LT have issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mlooney said:

Based on what was said about VMI and the Citadel when they were forced to accept women, it's more than just "one bad instructor", it's a whole systemic problem.

I seem to recall the academies having somewhat similar issues, although not to the same degree.

I can't recall running into a Citadel graduate. Are they perhaps more focused on Army?

 

10 minutes ago, mlooney said:

I left out a " 's " . Should have read "platoon`s sergeants"  Treating your E5 and E6 troops. never minded your E7 sergeants, like the were crap, regardless of their technical or tactical skill is Not A Good Thing.  Over the course of my military career in Air Defense, I had 3 2LT that were VMI grads.  They all sucked.  The OCS and West Point ones didn't, or at least in differing ways, as all 2LT have issues.

I would still attribute it to 'ill prepared' rather than 'these folks were bullies for their whole lives'. Maybe the VMI environment fosters that. The Rat run did not impress me as a good thing when I heard about it.

Seems career suicidal at the very least. Your NCOs will know ways to get back at you, sir ...  Or, in situations like Vietnam, it turned into homicides ; not a good thing on either side, I'm sure the perpetrators were haunted afterward, still, you don't want to be at the center of that kind of cautionary tale.

It must be said that some clueless folks are an actual hazard to the folks around them. Especially when things that go boom are involved.

I would not want to be a Russian right now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I would not want to be a Russian right now.

The Russians have lost more general officers in the 4 months of the war in Ukraine than they did in the whole of their Afghanistan war.  When commanders of combined arms armies are being killed, something has gone very wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the new Top Gun last night. It wasn't bad, engaging and entertaining, but if inaccuracies rattle you, avoid. While it was good, there was a lot of 'Watch this movie that's a lot like our other movie' going on.

I'll give Tom Cruise this, the man can act. He's a bit too much the center of everything, but the rest of the central cast gets their moments in the sun. He and Jennifer Connelly have aged well (she wasn't in the first, just saying).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to Mr. Cruise's beliefs about psychotherapy I will not watch any movie that he is in.  Plus the errors of omission and commission of the 1st Top Gun drove me nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mlooney said:

Due to Mr. Cruise's beliefs about psychotherapy I will not watch any movie that he is in.  Plus the errors of omission and commission of the 1st Top Gun drove me nuts.

Right, not in my top ten favorite individuals, but I tend to like his movies. I've never heard anyone say anything great about him as a person. OTOH, he must keep it to himself on set; the other actors don't seem rattled by his presence.

It has been a long time since I saw the first, but this one seemed, uhm, maybe more odd; the previous was a straight forward scenario of training, this was about a man who has a 40 year service record, is only O-6 (I questioned whether you are allowed to stay in that long as an O-6), is basically a maverick, living up to his call sign, but is a literal top gun. The first one took liberties, this second one had me questioning the overall movie from the start - testing a hypersonic flyer that was clearly not a Navy program, the entire staff was Navy. It got better; the bulk of the movie was about training a cadre for a believably realistic scenario, although why they didn't just take out the obstacles ... I mean, if it's an act of war already, are you going to get even more butt hurt if your SAMs are taken out? And they did indeed launch from a carrier, justifying their involvement.

There's a lot to find fault with, so if that sort of thing drives you crazy, avoid the movie.

Oh, the WSO drove me crazy. He's supposed to look at his instruments, instead, he's scanning the sky, not spotting the targets he couldn't do anything about if he did spot them, acting like an untrained idiot. I suppose it made sense to the director.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

(I questioned whether you are allowed to stay in that long as an O-6)

As near as I can tell, your maximum time in service as a O-6 is 34 years or age 62, which ever comes first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, mlooney said:

As near as I can tell, your maximum time in service as a O-6 is 34 years or age 62, which ever comes first.

That's in line with what I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Don Edwards said:

Maybe he's been O-7 a couple times in the past...

From the movie context, no; he has a few buddies looking out for him, Iceman in particular, but his commanders don't like him, because, well, he's a maverick. All he has going for him is an excellent combat flying record. In fact, (very minor spoiler) he basically gets screwed over when Iceman dies - you can see it coming, just from the movie length.

Purely conjecture, it's never come up that I've been around, but an O-7+ that got busted would likely not be retained. If there were some very special reason to keep them around, they would likely avoid busting them. Or, they'd be busted way down on their way to Leavenworth, which I'm hoping happens to a special someone, but I think it would be a first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s the matter that there are only 162 slots combined for ALL Navy officers ranked O-7 and above, compared to over three thousand of O-6 rank. Less than five percent of Captains (O-6) ever get promoted higher. A Captain does not get promoted to Admiral simply due to exemplary service—they are promoted to serve in a specific office on the organizational chart—commanding an aircraft carrier or battlegroup, heading a particular bureau, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mlooney said:

As if deploying T62s wasn't bad enough, lets get some T34-85s in the mix!
https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/1545124521342128130

FXFh0uaXwAU6jwR?format=jpg&name=small
 

I like the guy walking nonchalantly in front of it.

Even a very old tank (more like a 'fighting vehicle' by today's standards) can kill you. Won't hold up well in the battlefield, probably why it's parked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ijuin said:

There’s the matter that there are only 162 slots combined for ALL Navy officers ranked O-7 and above, compared to over three thousand of O-6 rank. Less than five percent of Captains (O-6) ever get promoted higher. A Captain does not get promoted to Admiral simply due to exemplary service—they are promoted to serve in a specific office on the organizational chart—commanding an aircraft carrier or battlegroup, heading a particular bureau, etc.

All good points. Fictional Maverick seems very promotable except for his attitude. They make this clear early on, that he is his own worst enemy; his test program (which is on track) is suddenly cancelled, he grandstands and meets the acceptance criteria. Then he exceeds it (his buddy predicted he would and warned him not to) and destroys the air craft (leads to one of the funniest lines in the movie). The fact that he's ultimately right about how to conduct the mission given the questionable constraints like not taking out the SAMs is the best part of the movie, but remember, it's fiction.

Had he not been an asshole to his superiors over the years, he probably would have been an admiral. He had all the right features to stand out from the herd. He's got leadership out the wazoo (which is admittedly not where you want it, but still), he has skill, he's innovative, and actually, his personal interaction, other than with his superiors, are positive.

Role is another factor in making grade, and combat roles get a leg up, which makes sense. He could be a great accountant or computer programmer, it's necessary, it's needed, it's not going to win your war. Maverick knows the planes, knows the limitations and where he can push the boundaries (let's say more or less within reasonable safe margins ... maybe throw out 'reasonable'), knows the threats, and (in the fictional context) demonstrably knows how to exploit them for a win. This is not just promotable, this is the gold you seek. Instead, he's hung out to dry, because he's pissed everybody off that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Even a very old tank (more like a 'fighting vehicle' by today's standards) can kill you. Won't hold up well in the battlefield, probably why it's parked.

"Won't hold up well" is putting it mildly The T-34 can be penetrated by a M203 DP grenade. All IFV carry a weapon that can kill it.  While it is proof against small arms fire and HMG, anything even slightly armor piercing is going to take it out. It's so useless on the modern battle field  that the WEG doesn't list it and it lists the Degtyaryov LMG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mlooney said:

"Won't hold up well" is putting it mildly The T-34 can be penetrated by a M203 DP grenade. All IFV carry a weapon that can kill it.  While it is proof against small arms fire and HMG, anything even slightly armor piercing is going to take it out. It's so useless on the modern battle field  that the WEG doesn't list it and it lists the Degtyaryov LMG.

Not only that, but it gets horrible gas mileage, and this one does not appear to be accurately marked. And it's on a street, but it's not street legal. Plus it's blocking the road. The driver really needs to be cited for that.

Maybe they were hoping someone would waste an anti-tank munition on it?

It would be fun to get one surplus, and put in a system to have the turret track solicitors as they come to the door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The home brew weapon used in the assassination was accurate enough to not hit people standing near Abe. The crazy miscreant has some mad fabrication skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now