The Valley Stared posted:

After two visits from the SevNAV and now the CNO, I am not unconvinced that current leadership thinks that we just need to keep learning from Silicon Valley because they have all the right ideas.

florida lan posted:

How exactly does the Navy operate by fleecing investors with a nebulous social media concept before inevitably pivoting into adtech?

The Valley Stared posted:

After two visits from the SevNAV and now the CNO, I am not unconvinced that current leadership thinks that we just need to keep learning from Silicon Valley because they have all the right ideas.

It is also probably a bad sign when the entire auditorium gasps a little at the word "2017" even when the question that contained that word had nothing to do with the collisions. Question had to do with a report that came out in December 2017 and asked what the navy was doing to promote innovative thinkers and how we were thinking outside of just technical backgrounds.

Also, more ships! We just need more ships.

Absolutely no mention about the congressional testimony yesterday and what we're doing to train and maintain the current fleet.

He only answered 5 or 6 questions. He sounded legitimately upset about the above question, and yet somehow didn't seem to answer it at all despite rambling on about it for 10 minutes.

That was the impression I think most of us came away with: he spoke for a very long time, took some questions, gave unclear and unhelpful responses, and left.

I didn't go up to ask a question because I was trying to not grind my teeth, and that probably would have come through in my voice. I did have SpaceSDoorGunner's question written down, but given his reaction to legitimate questions, not sure that would have gone over very well.

And what Godholio said.

Laranzu posted:

I somehow feel like for a few years buttplug was less of a fart huffing Navy bootlicker. Maybe I just had him on block though.

Hanging around silicon valley techbros will do that I guess.

Laranzu posted:

I somehow feel like for a few years buttplug was less of a fart huffing Navy bootlicker. Maybe I just had him on block though.

Hanging around silicon valley techbros will do that I guess.

Mr. Nice! posted:

buttplug was shitposting back in the a/t thread and its impressive that he hasn't changed at all.

I remember when he posted opplan information in a thread. I wonder if his opinions on kurds has improved at all, or if he still thinks they're cockroaches.

SpaceSDoorGunner posted:

Well thanks, and it’s probably best since I phrased it pretty aggressively. I’m still not entirely over my time as a deck seaman.

And I know it’s already been said but after reading more about the collisions you were really the brightest spot among all the officers involved. Almost enough to make me consider putting SWO on my package for a second.

SpaceSDoorGunner posted:

Well thanks, and it’s probably best since I phrased it pretty aggressively. I’m still not entirely over my time as a deck seaman.

Godholio posted:

THEN gently caress HIM. PEOPLE HAVE DIED FOR THIS poo poo.

M_Gargantua posted:

The Silicon Valley tech will do nothing to fix any of the navy's core problems.

It will at best be an expensive bandaide and within expectation be even worse for the enlisted.

Laranzu posted:

I was discussing this with my wife this morning. It's strange to loathe the same person on the internet for 12 years but here we are.

piL posted:

That parenthetical in my poo poo post was meant to be explanatory, not to justify. It seems unlikely to me that someone who doesn't prioritize career over all of the other elements won't get beaten out by someone that does 95% of the time. When you're talking about flag level, there's too many dice rolls favouring that product--you're multiplying rare outcome by rare outcome over and over again.

If you want out of that loop, you need to find a solution that somehow rewards honest admission, accurate prediction, and decisive action.

Because you obviously want to pick those who accomplish more with less, you will select for those who a: are naturally or intentionally adept at maximizing the apparent outcome of their actions and b: tend to ignore risks that will make themselves appear unfavourably. You have to track not just action, but predictions, actions in support of which predictions, and their success. That system dangerously might require even more beauracratic load to function, or may fail to prioritize mission accomplishment.

Regardless, I struggle to imagine a mechanism to implement such a system. I've heard it said that command is the only job in the military you can quit. If everyone who accurately communicates risk has to perform weakly against peers, reducing chance of promotion or quit in order to communicate that risk, that's what you'll be left with at the top.

Push button promotions from O-1 to O-3 is probably the only reason we retain any honest and honourable talent past the first commitment despite the free rides it may give to the dregs along the way.

Dorstein posted:

I went to a party at a Canadian regiment house recently. Being in the same unit for your entire career seems to engender real military cultural differences from the US system. People take care of their poo poo, though I guess the trade-off is that bad cultural stuff is even harder to evict.

CMD598 posted:

I disagree. You can just literally evict the problems either somewhere else or out and replace them with fresh personnel.

Dorstein posted:

I... said that? Apologies for not being clearer.

I'm not saying you can't be a homesteader in the US military, just that it's not the default. Also that the incentive to cover busted stuff up until you leave isn't really present if you never leave.

Dorstein posted:

I... said that? Apologies for not being clearer.

I'm not saying you can't be a homesteader in the US military, just that it's not the default. Also that the incentive to cover busted stuff up until you leave isn't really present if you never leave.

buttplug posted:

You actually talk to your wife about people on Internet message boards? Seriously? Lol.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

EBB posted:

How have you failed to grow as a person at all in the last 13 years since we had the proto-GiP A/T thread?

buttplug posted:

LingcodKilla posted:

Woo woo!

The defining moment in my career!

PneumonicBook posted:

I look forward to shoveling dirt with you friend.

McNally posted:

Some people take their fake internet names seriously. It becomes part of who they are.

Thronde posted:

I know that even in NECC commands manning is an issue. My unit is currently supplemented by reservists who just came off a mob to HOA/JEB. The experience is handy, and bodies immensely helpful, but it's a bandaid on a bullet hole. My unit is tasked with mission in 3 locations, but our equipment is 2008 original never overhauled, one of my engines reads over 9000 hours and has never been rebuilt.

I regularly buy parts like connectors and whatnot because our OMMSNG and supply system is so hosed and archaic that even if the part was in OMMSNG, we may never see it because it sits on a shelf at group for years. Case in point, we recently received a pallet of trailer tires we ordered 2 years ago. Several other sailors have to do the same to keep the boats and trucks running to complete mission.

The trucks need replacement badly. Massive safety hits like the rear view mirrors on our stake trucks used to tow our boats across town to the launch ramp falling off mid-traffic. But we've been told things will improve in 4-5 years when the PB40s get here. I don't hold my breathe.

We have 24 bodies, OIC included. To move boats to prep for a mission we have to ferry them around town the day before. Then we still muster at 0330 some days to pick up comms, weapons, and ammo from 3 separate locations while trying to launch boats at a public ramp. So with just those 3 must have items the launch team in down 4 bodies. In a perfect navy I would grant this command 40 bodies OIC included, that would allow rotating crews for maintenance and launch/recover use, and allow those that are actually riding the waves and getting beat to poo poo on mission to show up, operate, and roll.

So largely, yeah, manning is a massive issue. As the unit's lone ET, I can't get schools needed to provide the command the support it needs, I get leave approved only if there isn't a mission because no one else can access the comms as easily as I can; which is my own fault because I should train others, I understand. Even training falls to the side in favor of maintenance and putting out the little proverbial (and occasional literal) fires that come with mission days.

The Navy is a wreck. Overspending on useless pet projects, enforcing frankly stupid requirements for advancing sailors (here's looking at you mandatory specialization pins like ESWS AND EXW), burning out reliable sailors while first classes aren't capable of holding gently caress ups accountable for being gently caress ups. The list goes on. My unit bases a good year on having less than 3 major investigations. That's loving pathetic. But the pace and expected scope of work dropped on us doesn't allow us the time to train, maintain, and enact the poo poo needed to actually fix the issues haunting us.

Laranzu posted:

Providing workarounds enables the behavior. Please tell me it wasn't your own money.

ManMythLegend posted:

If a tasking for your unit is truly that vital, then the Navy will get you something in time to support.

ManMythLegend posted:

Yeah, this is my take as well.

I've definitely had guys (including chiefs) talk about it before and I came down hard on it. I'd much rather they identify the problem in time that it can be properly documented and then I can throat punch the ISIC staff about doing their jobs and figuring out how to get it.

If a tasking for your unit is truly that vital, then the Navy will get you something in time to support.