|
I'm one.
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2009 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
Fraser CDN posted:Reporting in. I was thinking of creating a Canadian goon thread. what is everyone trade? Sonar Operator, Master Seaman running a section at a shore facility. It's an OK job. Passed Aircrew Selection (CFASC) earlier in the year, so hopefully I'll be a 32U (pilot in training) come the spring.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2009 18:14
|
|
|
Frank Dillinger posted:How terrible is it being a vehicle maintenance tech in the army? I'm almost finished my Apprenticeship, and I'm looking for a secure job. Is it something that would make me hate my life? Probably not, but I make sure to tell anyone thinking of joining to NOT plan on it as a full career. But there's certainly nothing wrong with taking a few years for the experience; it may drive you crazy so keep an easy out open. As a skilled tradesman you would presumably get a pretty substantial signing bonus, and likely pushed up to Corporal on the day you graduate basic, so it would be fairly lucrative. That would probably depend on how badly the trade is needs people - I don't have access to the matrices until I go back to work, but it's probably hurting as almost all of them are.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2009 19:07
|
|
|
Nephirim posted:Cf goon here, former infantry and sigop. Yeah oddly enough (not really that odd considering), infantry is one of the very few trades heavily in the green. Lt. Jebus posted:Nice to see you are still alive. They volunteered for submarines and are thus considerably more unique than the rest of us.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2010 02:18
|
|
|
Fraser CDN posted:- The military losing my med documents for 4 months. This happened to me, but it was closer to a year. I was on a course in Halifax, which had all the students involuntarily screened for submarines (which, incidentally, has not happened since due to the cluster is was...). So, my ship had to send my med docs out to the Halifax base hospital. Then my ship deployed, so I guess they couldn't return the docs or something, and they disappeared into the aether until sometime the following year. Trying to do an aircrew medical without med docs is pretty difficult, which is to say impossible. The sub screening thing was also interesting. I was unfit as I can't clear my ears in deep water, and I have a signed form declaring me unfit dive/sub ops/training. But the sub guys in Ottawa would not stop bugging me. "Have you finished your screening yet?" "I'm unfit. I have paperwork proving it." [silence for a few months] "Have you finished your screening yet?" And so on for almost exactly 3 years. The last time I finally got a response back, and the guy said he would remove me from his list. We'll see.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2010 06:11
|
|
|
Everyone's broke, dude. Lots of budget cuts to pretty much everything. I found the outcap matrix for 09/10, and I doubt it's much different for the upcoming year. There are very few green occupations, the remainder are red or yellow. What that means is that most anything you want to apply for should be accepting applications - a number of the green trades are not direct entry, like SARTECH and Clearance Diver. As well, that should mean don't let the recruiter change your mind if you want something in particular. He may have recruiting targets for certain occupations, but it's your career.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2010 19:44
|
|
|
Even the Olympics security guys took a big hit, or at least, they received a lot less than what they wanted. Good for me and alot of others, because I get to continue with real work instead of being TD to Vancouver for three months, checking IDs or whatever. We only have to supply one guy, as opposed to what we were told in the summer - that the unit was shutting down and everyone was going.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2010 22:42
|
|
|
grover posted:Anyone been chanting the mantra "yellow is the new green" yet, and intentionally breaking programs that are working well because their success means they're getting too much money? Possibly, but I don't see it from my seat. Most of our trades are too small for that degree of politicking. There's also a fun colour that's not really official as far as I can tell - black. That means the trade is unrecoverable, and is more strongly tied to the PML/TES (preferred manning level/trained effective strength) at different rank levels. Normally, of course, you want a bunch of people at the lowest rank level to feed the upper ranks. Well, there are a some trades that now have single-digit TES numbers at the Ordinary Seaman/Private level. There will be no easy way to recover from that recruiting deficit.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2010 04:46
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:Small world, I'm not in the military but I've lived in Kingston all my (very short) life. I'm applying to be a pilot, and have completed aircrew selection. Generally, you have about a 1 in 250 chance of completing selection and being screened medically fit. 50% of my ASC course passed, which was actually quite high, the average number is closer to 30%. Then the forces still have to want you, so odds are still not good. Actual flying experience doesn't necessarily help, but it looks good on an application. I just took ground school. It may actually behoove you to not get a license, because if you don't pass ASC, you must get the next level of license before you're allowed to try again - if you have no license, you have to get a private, if you have a private, you have to get a commercial. Worked for me, anyway. That said, the percentage odds are a little misleading because there's very little chance involved. They just indicate the percentage of applicants that have the aptitude for the job. As for RMC, Jebus is your man for that because he went there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2010 07:07
|
|
|
Yeah that sounds like St. Jean alright. I forgot about the people that show up and don't exist in the system - I wonder if you could just walk in off the street and into the Mega and join up. It would probably take someone with a personality disorder to pull it off, but there are a lot of those in the CF anyway. Get used to filling out the same form multiple times, it's one of the CF's signatures. CEOTP means Continuing Education Officer Training plan, and you don't need a degree or even need to have started one. You basically promise to finish one on your own time (more or less) before your period of service expires. It's mostly for operator MOCs, like infantry and pilot, where the degree you get or hold doesn't need to have any particular relevance to the job. It's used when they are having problems making recruiting targets, so it opens and closes periodically. It's not very good if you actually want to get a degree, if my conversations with people in the program are anything to go by. Between training and operations, it's difficult to find the time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2010 17:05
|
|
|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:I was talking with my father recently, and he was apparently told he's not able to reenlist in the militia anymore because he never graduated high school, and because of the glut of young dudes who did who want in as well. A reality check is that the people looking at your file have no clue how great you are at something, they essentially just want to see all the boxes checked. It's one of the shittier things about the selection process. That said, who knows and it just might work out. Worth a shot, and you could always get a GED or something in the meantime, if you really want the job.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2010 06:03
|
|
|
LemonAIDS posted:I just got back from the recruiting center and I was told to wait until April when more positions will be opening up. Next week I'm going for my CFAT and the person I talked to recommended me the NCM subsidized education program. I was looking into joining infantry or something similar but was told those positions fill pretty fast and can be hard to get into. I noticed a lot of positions relating to communication that are open and several navy positions. Can any of you give me some insight to joining as infantry or the NCM-SEP program? NCM SEP is kinda cool if you want to get a real civilian trade qualification, but the recruiter is pushing it because he or she has been told to. Naval tech trades are in rough shape as far as manpower goes and are a top recruiting priority. You do get paid to go to a civilian school, but then you have to return a period of obligitory service. It's not all that onerous, considering the free school + salary, if you want that. The number one thing to remember in joining the CF is don't apply for what you don't want. If you want infantry, apply for infantry. edit - holy poo poo I just read the recruiting site abstract for my trade, Sonar Operator. It must be among the worst written on the site, it tells you nothing about the job and makes it sound ridiculously boring at the same time. Astounding. compressioncut fucked around with this message at 00:37 on Jan 21, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2010 00:33
|
|
|
melon cat posted:Hey CF dudes- question for anyone who can help. I've been looking into training to become an Air Combat Systems Officer for a few years, now. Almost ready to take the plunge. Anyone have anything to share about this career choice? Hell, anything about being a Commissioned Officer in general, for that matter? I think there was another guy earlier in the thread. I was interested in it and wrote the test battery for it three years ago. Then the air force lifted the laser eye surgery ban for pilots and the rest is history (hopefully). The test is fairly difficult, but not impossible. All the officers at my place of work are ACSOs. The abstract says that they are still trained as acoustic sensor officers - unless something changed, that's wrong information, and the job is being given to AESOPs (we teach the new course). There were some depressed dudes wondering what they did with twenty years of their lives when that news came down. Can't really comment otherwise.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2010 06:59
|
|
|
FuhrerHat posted:Does anybody know the format of the Air Navigator test? Is it multiple-choice, or do you fill in the blanks; computerized, or hand-written? Multiple choice, hand filled in using a seperate question book. Quite simple questions but there is a lot of time pressure, which makes it more challenging. If you really want to over-prepare, there are a lot of online resources for pilot aptitude test prep that will help out (yes I said pilot). Fast and accurate is the key, although you shouldn't have any problems if you've taken any math recently.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2010 02:35
|
|
|
FuhrerHat posted:I've been studying a GED handbook to brush up on my math, as well as the pilot training book they supplied me with. Don't get hung up on the math part, it's a pretty small section of the test. The recruiter focusing on math is misleading (my BPSO did the same thing). You absolutely do not need to be a math whiz to be a nav. This is what you want - http://www.cockpitweb.com/aptitude.html the "Numerapt" stuff. I don't know if you want to spend $100 but there are some sample questions. Google similar poo poo from there, surely there's a free app available. If you get good at that you would absolutely blow away the nav test. Fraser CDN posted:Not sure if this will help but I rewrote the aptitude test and maxed it out on the 2nd try. ( I got gen military on the first try 2-3 years ago) What I did to study was to Google aptitude tests, ASVAB ( us army aptitude test) and bought a Sudoku book. It helped me with math which is my weak point. Aircrew tests are more specialized than the CFAT.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2010 04:11
|
|
|
FuhrerHat posted:Is there trig on this section? That's the only thing that hasn't been reviewed in the books I have that I remember being a part of grade 12 math. I'm not allowed to be too specific (they make you promise prior to writing the test not to discuss its content), but there are basic questions about most of the math you learned in high school. Keep in mind there are a few different versions of the test, too, so some may have content that others don't. Like version A-B-C so that people can't easily pass on answers. When I wrote it, I had been out of high school like 13 years, did little prep, and had the worst flu I'd had in years. I didn't find the math terribly bad, and I'm no math geek to begin with. It's the time pressure that is the worst.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2010 07:18
|
|
|
FuhrerHat posted:Ok I did not pass my airnav test. Math is the worst I hate it. Now I have to be MARS. My life sucks. Sorry to hear that - hopefully I didn't steer you wrong. Before you jump off that MARS cliff, surely you have other options. You should be able to rewrite the test in 3 months or am I wrong about that? So long as you have proof you improved yourself in the meantime, by taking Math 12 over at adult learning or something similar, they ought to let you re-write. Second, if you really want to fly there's no reason you have to be an officer. Why not AESOP? The job is almost exactly the same as ACSO - my best friend is an AESOP and loves it. It's also a direct step to ACSO if you still want to do it later. Positive aspect: you will spend a much larger proportion of your career flying. http://www.forces.ca/html/airborneelectronicsensoroperator_reg_en.aspx You do your course at CFANS, you get to wear a flight suit and you get wings. If I don't get pilot this year I'm considering it. I don't want to bash MARS but seriously, don't do it unless your other option is homelessness.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
FuhrerHat posted:There just aren't many officer jobs available right now. If you go as an NCM there are in-service commissioning options, and with a degree already you'd have it made in the shade. Do some time as an AESOP then SCP (Special Commissioning Plan) into ACSO if you still so desire, or find that you like being an NCM. There's a website called the AESOP Lounge http://www.aesoplounge.com/ where I'm sure you could find a lot of useful info. I've never met an AESOP who dislikes his job. Just presenting options. MARS is seriously a bad choice - I have half a decade at sea working closely with them and would never, ever do it. The recruiter will push you into it really hard, but he's trying to fill spots.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2010 00:07
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:This is one of those "what the gently caress are you even thinking" questions, but what trade is most likely to get you placement on a sub? How thoroughly terrible is life on a Victoria-class? Sonar Operator - it's the biggest operator section on the boat sourced from the smallest trade. They are going crazy trying to man them because Victoria is supposed to be floating soon. If you even slightly entertain the thought and vocalize as much, you will be loaded on a Sub Qual literally the next day, at least on the west coast Currently you are supposed to be a QL5 qualified Leading Seaman, which means about 4 years of service, before going boats. It sounds like they will finally take guys right after QL3 (initial training), but that's not yet official. I know all this because I am a Sonar Op and am trying to prevent my section from being gutted.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2010 01:04
|
|
|
Nor are there Mk48 ADCAPs in the Canadian inventory (yet).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:
A major part of the saga of these things has been "Canadianization," which is always a nightmare no matter the platform being Canadianized. It was supposed to save money but obviously didn't - they're now trying to sell the subs as the an interim platform between the O-boats and the next gen sub. But, the sub service has always been a bastard child of the navy and whether there's a next gen sub at all is a very open question. That's life in the navy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2010 20:16
|
|
|
Drama Llama posted:So when I applied, I put down MARS as my only trade choice. In my 1 year in so far, I've only met one person with a positive thing to say about the trade. My contract is to 2020. Yay! The problem with MARS in my mind is that really your only career goal is to command a ship. That makes a dog-eat-dog, highly politicized environment because very few actually end up doing it. It's hard to be successful and not be an rear end in a top hat. That said, I know some successful, socially well adjusted MARS types. The current commander of the Haiti task force was my first XO, and he was great. We had an excellent performing ship and also had a shitload of fun. He went from Lt(N) to Capt(N) in a very short time. A close in-law of mine is a retired Vice-CDS (and Vice Admiral) and he's a very decent, extremely smart man. I've also had a reasonable number of pretty good divisional officers. No need to kill yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2010 03:05
|
|
|
RC Demoral posted:Hey all! Why do you think pilot is next to impossible? It's very hard but if you want it, surely it's worth trying? Pilot is one of the biggest, in terms of numbers, officer MOCs and there are hundreds (200+) of billets vacant. That doesn't mean the entry standards are relaxed but it's no issue for you to put it as one of your choices - there are spots for three on your application. There's still a lot of luck involved, and your particular set of skills and qualifications might bump you up. Your interview is also worth a lot. I've applied, passed selection, and am awaiting final word. I encourage anyone who wants it to give it a shot.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2010 04:17
|
|
|
acumen posted:As far as the eyes, I had a V4 (I think V1 is perfect, V5 is blind?) for all my training and was told I wasn't even supposed to be in the infantry, although it seems like they just forgot about it. I needed laser eye surgery to go overseas but it didn't impede sniper course at all. Yeah all operator trades (infantry included) are generally V3-required, but it's not all that strictly enforced after your entry medical. The standards also changed recently (2007 I believe), and a lot of people who were previously V3 are now V4 so it gets overlooked a lot. The upside is that it makes it easy to avoid the submarine press gang. I'm still surprised you trained as a sniper with eyes like that, pretty cool. I don't think there's a V5 category, the "5" usually means not assessed, like what most people have for an air factor. Everything you wanted to know about vision standards but were afraid to ask...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2010 08:35
|
|
|
Something like dive officer is normally a straight up volunteer position, but there would be any number of assigned secondary duties you could be holding as a junior officer, like CSD (classified books) custodian, education officer, sports officer, and so on. Everyone has secondary duties they generally don't like but still get reflected on your PER.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2010 15:19
|
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:I really like heavy equipment, machines and big guns and I'd like to do a technically oriented task. I'm also primarily looking at getting into either the ground force or the navy but I'm not sure which branch is looking for people more. Does anyone know if being a MARS is a decent, attainable job? Can I still be an officer and be involved in with things like ASW and sonar? I heard that they're really aching for artillery people right now and that sounds like something interesting to me except that I also heard it's really boring because artillery doesn't get used much. Any position "looking for people" is desperately short of said people, which can make it a pretty ugly work environment. For a lot of reasons, but generally overwork. APPLY FOR A JOB YOU WANT - I cannot stress that enough. MARS officer is not a decent job, but it can be fulfilling if you can handle career phases such as the "Sub Grinder." Sub in this case being short for Sub-Liuetenant. You might get to captain a ship! But you almost certainly won't. Any association with ASW is going to at best be your two year Director tour, but more likely talking to the acoustics section for twenty minutes to get your package signed off. If you want to specialize in ASW as an officer, ACSO is much more likely to lead you that way via the maritime helicopter or TACNAV streams. That all may sound pretty negative but it's best to either apply for something you want and not get it than join and get bitter and disillusioned doing something you despise (or don't give a poo poo about).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2010 03:17
|
|
|
One of the guys on my aircrew selection this time last year was a DEO applicant and he said much the same thing. While he got his app in, the centre said no offers in '09. The pilot training system has extremely limited capacity, so direct entries are hard for it to handle. My UTPNCM app for pilot was turned down yesterday - they will only fund a science, engineering or aviation degree. While I have the bulk of a history degree finished (part way through third year), they would prefer to fund a 4 year aviation degree at the University of the Fraser valley to the tune of $64k in tuition alone. Versus 3 semesters of a liberal arts degree. Oh well, CEOTP is still ongoing though I'm not very hopeful as there are fewer than 5 slots available.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2010 00:17
|
|
|
Nephirim posted:An the aptitude test is sinfully easy. This is true AND, you don't have to score very high to get virtually any job. I was looking at the occupation assignment worksheet today (available on the DND intranet if anyone's so inclined). The bulk of the trades require a 40th percentile score on the CFAT, and by bulk I mean virtually all. Some are lower, mostly combat arms, and cook is the lowest (20th percentile). The highest required percentile score is for AEC (air traffic control officer) and it's 60th percentile. There are some qualifying factors that I don't understand, but the next time someone gets uppity about qualifying for his trade, well, more than likely so did you. I'm sure individual scores play into competition for positions, if there is any, but the CFAT is, well, I know how dumbasses get in now.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2010 23:58
|
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:There is nothing higher than the 40th percentile. I looked at the list no more than three weeks ago in my BPSO meeting. Well, I looked at the form at DMIL-C yesterday. There are hundreds of superseded forms out there, and who knows which one is right, but AEC was/is 60th.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2010 06:24
|
|
|
Aidsteen posted:I had this image in my head where basically you go in, they take some info and theoretically right there on the spot you're in, thats that, be ready to go in a week kind of deal. Bos'n has a very, very strong union (not an actual union) on the ship so they are hardly jacks of all trades. They are specifically involved in upper deck evolutions, of which there are many, but that's basically it. As a bos'n you will generally know what and when you can expect to do certain things, which is good for job satisfaction. Very often they will be directing other trades doing upper deck evolutions, instead of actually doing them, outside of specific tasks, which is nice for them I guess. Most deck apes enjoy their jobs, as compared to many others on the ship. The biggest downside is that there is very little opportunity for shore postings for junior ranks so it's likely you will be at sea for a very long time. Most other trades get a shore postings after about 5 years at sea, which is nice because sailing all the time gets pretty (really) monotonous. They also get paid significantly less because they and NAVCOMs are about the only trades in the Navy that doesn't get specialist pay, which is a pretty good bump. That said bos'n is more likely to get spec pay than NAVCOM at this rate so keep your chin up (a little joke for my flag waving friends).
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2010 03:15
|
|
|
They don't expect you to know poo poo? Unless you are wanting to do semi-skilled entry, but even then I don't know. If you are doing your interview it's easy enough to find out and then add (or don't) the choice. I missed pilot this year. By 3.5 points - the guy from my local PSO office who was selected got 71, I got 67.5. To add insult to injury, the PSO reviewing my file said "I'd have given you an extra point here and here," and she was the one I was originally supposed to interview with! I'd like to bump to 75 this year, too bad it will cost thousands of dollars in flying lessons... Three CEOTP (internal competition) pilot offers Forces-wide. Something like 530 applications for all entry plans this year, just over 100 offers. It has the most applications besides infantry soldier, which was, I think, 1,700 applications. Next year's competition messages probably due out mid-July.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2010 03:12
|
|
|
HammerOfHope posted:Dude, you can totally see underwater! This loving commercial... It's almost like the Forces is actively sabotaging the trade. That commercial says absolutely loving nothing about the job. The guy is reading from the recruiting abstract, and not only is he extremely vague he's (well, the script) actively wrong about some things. Not to mention he's sitting in front of the hull mounted sonar set while supposedly operating the sonobuoy system (and he's an Able Seaman who's not qualified on the system). Maybe some spergy poo poo but they're not difficult details to get right. I also did a recruiting gig because I was expressly told I would be selling sonar op, but ended up talking about electronics techs - perhaps another one of the reasons the trade is distressed? Acoustics used to be a pretty high speed trade, because it's difficult as hell to be good at. But the Navy doesn't care much about it anymore so it lost a lot of the better operators and filled the spots with, well, less desirable people. When I got in almost every one of my peers was an infantry washout. There's a lot of stuff we used to be able to do as a community that most people can't do anymore. I'm a little happier now as I see a few good junior people, and it's possible we might get serious about ASW again. Some cool poo poo happening lately.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2010 04:20
|
|
|
Ruse posted:Its true that they dont care about ASW much anymore. I'm pretty sure FELEX didn't even feature any upgraded ASW-suite. I think that's changed now though. I've "heard" it's because Lockheed/MDA have the FELEX contract while General Dynamics are the ASW guys. There's a super sweet, low cost ASW suite available from GD but it can't interface with CCS. We use them at the ADACs and there's a roll on/off version they test at sea from time to time.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2010 00:03
|
|
|
the balloon hoax posted:How hard is it to become an officer if you join as a non-commissioned member? I'm interested in signals but I don't have a science/engineering BA to qualify me for direct entry. Reasonably difficult. You will need to put in about 4 years give-or-take as an NCM before you even try. There are generally two programs most guys try - University Training Plan for Non Commissioned Members (UTPNCM) and the Continuing Education Officer Training Plan (CEOTP). UTPNCM sends you to university before granting you a commission. You can go to RMC or a civilian school, and there is little rhyme or reason to which you go to. You have to complete at least two university courses beforehand on your own time. CEOTP commissions you right away and you are expected to eventually complete a degree on your own time. Competition is intense, so you need to be an outstanding NCM. Even then, you need a fair amount of luck. Not all officer occupations are even open for competition year to year - UTP has more options than CEO. You must be a substantive Corporal (QL5 qualified) before you can apply to either, which means three years at an absolute, unlikely minimum, normally more. But as a Corporal you will not be especially competitive because you lack leadership experience compared to the Masters and Sergeants you are in competition with. There are a couple of other options. Special Commissioning Plan is available if you complete a degree on your own time, while serving as an NCM. That's possible but highly unlikely, depending how much of degree done you have already. Time for school as a junior NCM is rare. Then there is Commissioning from the Ranks, which is for Sergeants and "outstanding Master Corporals" where you are commissioned into a spot closely related to your trade (e.g. Infanteer becomes Infantry Officer, but not a Pilot). Anyway I can provide more details if you want. I've tried CEO twice, and should get it next competition if the occupation I want is open. I can describe how you are scored by the interviewing officer and what to focus on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2010 06:14
|
|
|
E.Nigma posted:My interview isn't far off. I would love to know what to focus on. Are you commissioning? Is it an in-service program? That's all I'm really familiar with, and I can't guarantee it applies to other selection interviews. That said, scoring breakdown is probably similar: -1/3 is your score on the CFAT -1/3 is your general conduct in the interview -1/3 is "person/job fit" where they assess your current skill set against the one required for the job you want For a total out of 90 points (30-30-30). If you are just entering as an NCM just dress reasonably well and be polite. My original NCM entrance interview was far less rigorous than the in-service commissioning ones.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2010 01:20
|
|
|
Tom Swift posted:So I didn't get into ROTP this past year by a sliver from what my recruiter told me, he said the best course of action rather then joining the Reserves while in University was to reapply to the ROTP this coming Fall. Anyone got any suggestions as to how I can improve my application this time round. I will be attending UBC in September, another thing to add was with the exception of RMC/ROTP I got accepted into 6 Universities across Canada this past year. I mentioned earlier in the thread that the personnel selection worksheet is basically a three part form that ends up scoring you out of a certain number points. 1/3 for your score on the CFAT, 1/3 on your interview, 1/3 on how well you'd fit the job based on present skills and qualifications. So, you could re-write the CFAT if there are any sections you didn't do as well as you could have done. You could also do worse, and they use the most recent score. Practice your interview skills. They may ask the same questions again so practice answers for them. Acquire skills directly applicable to the job you want. Flying hours and a Transport Canada radio endorsement if you want pilot, for instance. I dunno, maybe Duke of Edinburgh programs for combat arms stuff. Play team sports. That sort of crap.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2010 21:52
|
|
|
In-service commissioning programs are open again - CEOTP and UTPNCM. Only six MOCs open in the former (Inf, Armd, Arty, AEC, Plt and I think MARS), pretty well all of them in the latter. COT program is also open if you want a remuster to something more interesting (SARTECH, AESOP and so on). AESOP would be OK. Will the third time be a charm? I think so. Guy who beat me last year tried three times, and my new CO is a lot more proactive.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2010 00:18
|
|
|
Ruse posted:I quite literally spent about 30% of my career at sea standing on that fucker (starboard bridge wing). Another 20% sitting at the bos'n mate desk (specials bos'n mate), 40% sleeping, and maybe 10% actual doing operator work (5% ops room, 5% drying off the towed array/loading torpedoes/dropping bathies/assorted lovely jobs). Being ashore and a Master is pretty awesome, maybe I'll go to Whidbey Island after all...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
Symbol posted:So, I filled out the online application at forces.ca last week. I'm looking at the NCM-SEP going for Naval Electronics Technician (Sonar). You had better not have illusions about working on state-of-the art gear. All of the sonar is at best early 1980s technology, and is likely to stay that way (see above posts, the navy does not care about ASW). Sorry to sound negative but the navy is a bag drive and you need to know it going in. For instance, expect at least 200+ days at sea per year, on average. I think the techs have improved (cross-training to other specialties and so on) but a year or two ago Acoustics Tech was one of the most distressed trades in the entirety of the Forces.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2010 03:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 23:15 |
|
|
Hatter106 posted:I can't seem to reach any medical personnel at any of the recruitment centres around here, so I'll just ask you guys: http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,55464.0.html However in another post (http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=37674.0), he says that you need to be H2 to enrolled. You would presumably be at best an H3. I not a doc or anything though, so you should definitely continue to make efforts to talk to someone.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2010 21:38
|
|