Subj : Re: ships To : Frank Reid From : Carol Shenkenberger Date : Mon Apr 23 2001 10:51 am *** Quoting Frank Reid from a message to Carol Shenkenberger *** CS> The Navy has been trying to pretend that us DP's are RM' and RM's are CS> DP's for 4 years now. Its not working. FR> I have to admit I played a role in that. While detailing in the mid 8 So did I, but from the teaching end. I was a DP "A" school instructor from 89-95. (CNO priority extension made it that long). I rewrote personally, 50% of the curriculum used in the new combined school. FR> one of my functions in PERS-406 was working with the community manager FR> build a curriculum capable of cross-breeding the DP and RM ratings. O FR> plans were sound, being based on the reality that Radiomen were operat FR> maintaining many new automated data systems that kept creeping into th FR> shack. Until that point, communications and data processing were clea FR> established and independent disciplines, as you aptly described. Yes. Unfortunately, except for the 'small boys' it's still a problem and always has been. I *do* understand the reasons and outside of Fidonet (at work) work to the hilt to make it functional. I think we can do it with the 'kids' but only by swapping them about so they see both on the bigger platforms. Otherwise it's kindalike 'tracking' in schools. They dont see both sides of the job. It's painful to get 80% RM background (traditional) in a 100% DP background job and get them functionalin a timely way. Been there, done that. Voluntarily took 2 of my 4 people who were pure RM (1 message center, 1 Tech controller) and *painfully* brought them to some level of speed at ADP security (a subset field). It was not fun. I must have had them both out for at least 6 months of a 3 year tour (in schools) and they still had problems grasping the concepts due to lack of background experience. I'll do it again though. Eventually if we all do, it will fix up. Takes many years though. FR> ratings would establish something more equitable along the lines of 3x FR> That part of the plan apparently worked out! But to the wrong billets. The problem is those shore billets required heavy skillsets that the previous RM's havent gained yet. I know, bear with it. . The logical conclusion you probably dont know about. The Navy is about to outsource all those shore billets to contractors. In short, it didnt work and now all the billets go back to the 5/2 sea/shore rotation by eliminating the shore side. No gain overall. In fact, it's gonna get worse I suspect. They will have to open out some of the 'general billets' to make room for shore duty for IT's. That or all NCTS billets have to shift to not require previous RM NEC's, and my fellow ITC types need to work with training them up. This 'bites' expecially in the senior ranks. CS> ones who know what 'ZDK' means but are communications only oriented CS> and terrified of a CLI install. FR> Fear not, Carol... you'll pick it up quickly. System concepts are par FR> to both disciplines. Many DPs possess very highly developed troublesh FR> skills that make them better RMs than their counterparts! I on a dire Grin, so I have heard. The derivation of that was simple. The ASVAB scores for the 2 rates were radically different. RM had barely above MS until the combination. DP had not the highest, but near it. I admit to a chuckle as the first class graduated that had the combined WK/AR skill requirement at 108 (lowest DP waiver allowed, some 20 points higher than RM?). The instructors literally did not understand why the classes went so fast and they had to graduate them early. I kid you not. I was there. The RM "A" school instructors had to have it explained to them. I'm not saying RM's are 'dumb' but that there is a mid-level gap that will take years to get past. This too was expected. *some* of the previous RM's just lack the reading skills to be usable as other than leadership jobs. It really bites if you get too many of them at one time at a command! Conversely a previous RM1 tends to have more experience leadership wise than a previous DP1 so this can be a bonus if you dont have too many at once . The combination did one thing right. They went with the higher ASVAB. That was critical to training the new ones at both jobs. It wouldnt work without that. FR> expertise on the IT side will be invaluable to them! Yes. I go to a ship who's never had an ISSM/real network security specialist although I gather I have an ex-RM (now IT1) from small-boy background who's not too bad. Doesnt know security accreditation because that became a specialty field vice a required PAR for advancement but he's on his way. Sorta. I'll teach him. Wish us luck! xxcarol --- Telegard v3.09.g2-sp4 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS Norfolk VA 757-486-3057 28.8 Dual (1:275/100) .