Submarine Admirals Move Around
As USS Albany (SSN 753) returned from a European deployment yesterday that featured some decent port visits, they came home to the news that there will be new Admirals in two important Submarine Force jobs. From the DoD press release:
The Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert announced today the following assignments:Is this a "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" situation, or do you think we'll see some changes in how the Submarine Force trains and operates?
Navy Rear Adm. Barry L. Bruner, will be assigned as director, Programming Division, N80, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, D.C. Bruner is currently serving as director, Undersea Warfare Division, N97, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
Navy Rear Adm. (lower half) Richard P. Breckenridge, who has been selected for the rank to rear admiral, will be assigned as director, Undersea Warfare Division, N97, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Pentagon, Washington, D.C. Breckenridge is currently serving as commander, Submarine Group Two, Groton, Conn.
Navy Rear Adm. (lower half) Kenneth M. Perry, will be assigned as commander, Submarine Group Two, Groton, Conn. Perry is currently serving as vice commander, Naval Mine and Anti-Submarine Warfare Command, San Diego, Calif.
posted by Bubblehead at 9:07 AM
74 Comments:
I've met all three several times but never served with any of them. RADM Brunner is the sharpest of the bunch, which is probably why they are sending him to N80 to do the financial battles.
I would not expect anything significant to change at N97 or CSG2. That is not intended to be negative; all three of them are well respected.
3/09/2013 10:20 AM
I don't know if we will see any big changes; however, CSG2 is on the chopping block for FY15. About frakkin time. What do they do at CSG2 besides write their fitreps?
3/09/2013 5:40 PM
Rear Admiral Bruner is one amazing man!!!
3/09/2013 6:41 PM
RADM Bruner was one of my top 2 CO's to serve with. He was my 2nd CO on the Florida, he drove that boomer like a fast boat. I never ONCE saw him get excited or suprised.
hagar
3/09/2013 8:30 PM
Still making history alright, though they probably did nearly the exact same mission they did on their previous deployment. They even hit the same 4 foreign ports!
3/10/2013 11:01 AM
Adm. Breckenridge is a great guy, he was my CO onboard USS Memphis. Good to see him move up the food chain, he cares about the little guy.
3/10/2013 12:06 PM
Bruner was happy to be full of lies for the justification of women on subs. Never met him, but I perceive him to be a weasel because of that.
3/10/2013 4:37 PM
First off shitbird, that's RADM Bruner to you. Secondly, it must chap your hide to see these women do the same job the rest of us have done for years without any of the drama that you promised. As for your claim that he was a weasel, what did he leave out that would have swayed the outcome otherwise? I am biased as I did serve under his command, but more importantly I support what he has done integrating women into our force and you should follow suit or vote with your feet. Need directions to PSD?
3/10/2013 4:56 PM
Do not feed trolls!
3/11/2013 7:31 AM
Met RADM Bruner myself a couple of times (Sub ball at King's Bay, later in DC) and though I haven't served with him, I can say that he's earned my respect at least.
I actually feel a bit sorry for him going to N80 though... everything I've heard from LTs who know what's what at OPNAV is that the job is very demanding and just drags you down.
3/11/2013 8:57 AM
I think we all gotta consider that the Submarine Force is much smaller than it used to be and that it is likely to get even smaller. This is something that can be said for the whole Navy. Where I am going with this is that there are fewer and fewer opportunities for our people to gain breadth of exposure and variations of experience. There are only so many jobs to be had and the higher these guys move up, the fewer opportunities there are. IRT the comment about "CSG-2, what do they do?" A better question might be What CAN/COULD they do? Been awhile for me, but in my day they had capacity to help the ships more than they did. IRT women on submarines I always figured that if it would make us better we should do it, if it would make us worse we should not do it and if made things the same then we would need to really ask ourselves why.
3/11/2013 11:03 AM
RADM Bruner deserves the best. I hope he continues to move up on the food chain!
3/11/2013 5:05 PM
Well, Duh. They always have the capacity to do more than they actually did.
Speaks volumes of the recent and current ISIC / GRU manning and leadership.
3/11/2013 7:01 PM
"IRT women on submarines I always figured that if it would make us better we should do it, if it would make us worse we should not do it and if made things the same then we would need to really ask ourselves why."
That's one of the most refreshingly honest statements I've ever read here on TSSBP. You're clearly not (politician 3rd-class) flag material. ;-)
My take: It is a bad idea...whose time has come. Were I still on ACDU, I'd click my heels in delight for all-too-obvious personal reasons, regardless of the unavoidable costs and impact on combat readiness (hint: neither is not equal to 'zero'). Just sayin'.
3/11/2013 8:42 PM
RADM Bruner was my CO on the FLORIDA. He was by far the best CO I ever had!
3/12/2013 5:18 AM
I was on the staff of CSS-7 when RADM Bruner was the Commodore. He was the best boss I had while I was in the Navy
3/12/2013 2:21 PM
I was on the staff of CSS-7 when RADM Bruner was the Commodore. He was the best boss I had while I was in the Navy
3/12/2013 2:21 PM
Good lord - I have never seen such an outpouring of ass-sucking smack that is obviously the work of one person.
Bruner was my PCO Instructor (the first ever to have been an SSBN CO). He was a nice guy, but a tactical idiot. As far as I know, they have not put a SSBN CO in the job since.
3/12/2013 5:26 PM
@ Anonymous at 5:26pm
You say RADM was a tactical idiot? While he was the CO of Florida, his boat was the top SSBN in the Pacific for 1999 and 2000 and the top SSBN in the Navy for 2000. He must have been some idiot.
And you obviously don't know what you're talking about. There has been SSBN CO's who have been a PCO since RADM Bruner...........wait for it.......wait for it......RDML Joe Tofalo and RDML Dave Kriete.
3/12/2013 8:17 PM
Secondly, it must chap your hide to see these women do the same job the rest of us have done for years without any of the drama that you promised.
Well, let's get the ball rolling with: Does fucking the COB not count as drama?
3/12/2013 8:27 PM
"Does fucking the COB not count as drama?"
Not if you're an ankle biting, liberal knee-humping lap dog.
Oh, wait...forgot. The knee is too high for these little guys. They have to make do with humping liberal shoe laces after having first drooled on them to get something going.
"Yap-yap-yap!"
3/12/2013 10:35 PM
Most of you that have written degrading comments about RADM Barry Bruner could not carry the man's bags at the airport. So you get promoted and accept a hard position and this blog destroys you? Get real. I am sure your comments are noteworthy and have facts to back them up.
Proud PACNORWEST Sailor!
3/13/2013 4:23 AM
RADM Bruner, "Well deserved"
3/13/2013 4:25 AM
Being the top SSBN has nothing to do with tactical ability - it's all strategic. Again, he's a nice guy, a good leader and does well in the budget arena. But I would not want to be on his ship in a knife fight with an Akula.
3/13/2013 5:34 AM
"Being the top SSBN has nothing to do with tactical ability - it's all strategic. Again, he's a nice guy, a good leader and does well in the budget arena. But I would not want to be on his ship in a knife fight with an Akula."
I wonder if getting two excellents on TREs has anything to do with tactical ability. What does the "T" in TRE stand for?
3/13/2013 7:25 AM
Not much on an SSBN.
3/13/2013 7:30 AM
^^^LOL...!
3/13/2013 8:34 AM
It has come to this. From where do we get these pinheads? Oh wait, USNA.
3/13/2013 9:21 AM
"Bruner was my PCO Instructor (the first ever to have been an SSBN CO). He was a nice guy, but a tactical idiot. As far as I know, they have not put a SSBN CO in the job since."
this statement could not be more wrong
3/13/2013 12:19 PM
Agree, That statement could not be more wrong. I wonder how that guy made it to a PCO class in the first place. Don't suspect he will ever be on any Admiral list. Although, he might make the Navy Crimes.....
3/13/2013 1:24 PM
Yeah, I'm sure the limp-wristed 'members' of the boomer Navy will come up with a way someday to criminalize having too much testosterone in one's bloodstream.
Can see it now...administrative note excerpt from a future NCIS episode:
"The Army and Air Force nonconcurred with the recommendation to establish a cost accounting system for their forensic testosterone examinations. The Army stated that the unit cost analysis is outside current capabilities of DoD and the Army laboratory. The Navy stated that NCIS does not want to divert laboratory dollars and personpower (formerly known in the archaic form "manpower") to do a unit cost analysis study. The Navy concurred with the recommendation to establish standard measurements to accurately define and report forensic testosterone workload statistics. The Army nonconcurred with the recommendation statins the Dod laboratories, including Army, do not have a common denominator for comparing units of work in testosterone forensics.
Et cetera, etc., etc. ...
3/13/2013 2:04 PM
To the person who said that RADM Bruner has been the only SSBN Commanding Officer as a PCO:
A) You're lying about being a CO yourself.
B) You're an idiot.
C) You're a troll.
D) All of the above.
3/13/2013 5:18 PM
Bruner suffered in comparison to the other PCOI (Connor). Connor was a SEAWOLF Class CO and was much better tactically than Bruner. Very apparent in the attack centers. Nothing against Bruner, it is hard to expect any SSBN CO to reach the same level of proficiency as a fast attack CO.
3/13/2013 5:41 PM
3/10 @ 4:26:
I honestly think women on subs is a mixed bag and it is probably too early to say it is absolutely a success or a failure. In the end I think it will be better in some ways and worse in other ways.
I also think there is a valid case to be made for women on subs based on fairness, ability to complete the job, and the fact that the world is changing into a more equal society...but that is not the case Bruner made.
Instead he made the case that
1) recruitment is hard
2) more women in college than men
3) we can't possibly man submarines in the future without opening up subs to women.
This sounds smart, but is actually very stupid if you sit down and think about it. Compared to the 80's, we have a larger population, a higher proportion of which goes to college. The study that cited "more women than men"in technical majors had a pretty loose definition of technical majors, including psychology, environmental science, and a few others that are not traditionally majors for submarine officers.
There are still unanswered questions about the safety of a fetus onboard a submerged submarine that I think should at least be addressed and acknowledged (though it is probably not ethical to actually do any research into this). Additionally (but not as serious) female officers have had poor retention in the surface fleet, and this should have been addressed beforehand as well.
There is still a case to be made for including women, but I thought he could have shown more leadership on the issue as opposed to deflecting questions, ignoring criticism, and shutting down detractors.
I have been out for some years now, but remember the attitude about this as it was going on "we are soliciting your feedback and will answer all of your questions (except for the difficult ones).
Honestly, I don't really care if there are women on subs as it doesn't affect me either way, and I think it may temper some of the more prickish qualities of the Sub force (or breed tyrannical feminazis who are immune to punishment due to their sex). In the end, I just think its a lot of effort to please a tiny minority. There are not many women who want to serve in the Navy, and only some smaller portion of that population that want to serve on subs, and an even smaller population that is qualified and wants to do it. The sub force will always struggle to fill those billets. Maybe it's still worth it, but there was no honest discussion of it.
3/13/2013 7:45 PM
"The sub force will always struggle to fill those (female) billets."
Not really. The inescapable "they" (most specifically and likely, the USNA hierarchy) will simply order graduate women into the pipeline, such as has already happened. Problem solved. (he said with no small trace of sarcasm)
"...it is probably too early to say it is absolutely a success or a failure. "
Even easier to answer: it will NEVER be a failure. You know that, I know that...we all know that. Just as women in surface ships (despite pregnancies, command sexual hijinks, vastly lower retention, etc.) has never been (acknowledged as) a "failure."
And NO ONE is going to follow up on RADM Hugh Scott's warning as a career undersea medical officer regarding environmental threats to pregnancies on submarines until the lawsuits start to fly, and perhaps not even then.
So, for sure...this is all going to be an amazing "success"...and drama-free. Except for the occasional Class A fucking offense, such as has been reported extensively in the case of Dirty Dave. And even in those cases, all you'll hear is the dust going under the rug with the dB(A) of a microfiber mop. [..."Crickets"...]
Having said all that, God bless every single woman in the (now highly politicized and defanged) submarine force. You are valued. The ridiculous, weasel-lipped reasons you're here are not. If you can help in any way to "de-prick" the submarine force, you'll have provided a greater service to your nation than anyone with XY DNA who has ever gone before you.
3/13/2013 8:09 PM
"it is hard to expect any SSBN CO to reach the same level of proficiency as a fast attack CO." Then why do they keep hitting stuff and getting canned?
3/14/2013 4:37 PM
Freenhoo212^^^Because they do more than just "hide with pride" and "three knots to nowhere?"
Y'think?
3/14/2013 5:14 PM
^^^ Because they actually do shit, instead of being escorted into and out of port with a huge aramada, and hiding with pride when at sea. Not too tough, and that's also why SSN Dept Heads who were previously on SSBNs as JOs typically can't drive.
3/14/2013 5:15 PM
High score for an SSBN TRE means they showed a high level of proficiency chasing the yeoman with his fake bomb around the missile compartment with fake guns.
3/15/2013 5:34 AM
To be fair, YN3 smith is a tactical mastermind and 98% of the crew did a damn fine job providing moral support in crews mess.
Also you forgot to mention the crew's skill at "piecing".
3/15/2013 6:52 AM
Sounds like you guys have done some BN time. How about real SSN time, 70 or 80s? I think it has changed a bit. Although, they still keep hitting things...."FAT" all the way!
3/15/2013 11:32 AM
That's why the PACNORWEST has the best of both worlds. SSN 21 and Bad ass boomers!
Best Chiefs
Best Boats
Best Flag Leadership
The list goes on and on!
Want to do a real man's job come on up!
3/15/2013 10:31 PM
^^^ You forgot to metion the pasty white Bremelows
3/16/2013 12:12 PM
Back in our shipyard days at PSNS, A-Div decided to host a two-for-one party (each A-ganger had to bring a date that weighed twice what he did). Although the A-gangers each found such a young "lass" in Bremerton, at some point the ladies figured out what was up. The subsequent stampede wasn't pretty.
Gotta love the PACNORWEST--redefining the "law of gross tonnage" to include local women.
3/16/2013 4:28 PM
^^^^^^^^
Were they bremelos, port orcas, or silver whales? The choice up there is large.
3/16/2013 10:11 PM
Uhhh, aren't like 80% of Navy wives pretty fat?
3/16/2013 10:37 PM
< 120 lbs = Bremelette
120 to 175 lbs = Bremaloe
175 to 225 lbs = Bremapottamus
> 225 lbs = Megalo
Known to eat at Herfy's buffet and wear bowling shirts
3/17/2013 6:06 AM
^^^^^Attack us if you want, we could shut down all other bases besides Bangor and do the job. It is easy to attack the area, but as you can see our records stand alone. I hope the rest of you do not feel guilty collecting a paycheck from the american taxpayers when you don't measure up the sailors in the PACNORWEST!
Call your detailer now, but ask for the PACNORWEST apprenticeship program, because your not men yet!
DD
3/17/2013 7:40 AM
That about says it all. BNs, GNs, the BEST SSNs (21 Class) and even a few other cool things. Not to mention the Mountains, rivers, ocean, STP, RAGNAR, RTP, skiing.... PNW Rules!!
3/17/2013 9:50 AM
You forgot to mention all the queers in the PACNORWEST
3/17/2013 12:59 PM
^^^^What are you a 5th grader? Or from Groton? Grow some...
3/17/2013 8:23 PM
Trident Sailors...part time Submariners. This appears to be nothing more than a bunch of high school girls complaining about the cheerleader uniforms. Grow up and remember the portion of the Sailos Creed..."I will obey the orders of those appointed over me." Oh wait a minute, there is not an officer tha knows the creed!
3/24/2013 3:24 PM
That's because it's the sailors creed, not the Officers creed.
3/24/2013 4:18 PM
This has nothing to do with flag officer moves. I see that the DevRon Deputy was relieving Seawolf CO. But a band was playing? What happended to the PCO and why did the squadron deputy relieve? There must be a lot more to this story. is the submarine force hiding another F*** up? I bet they are!
3/27/2013 11:50 AM
I have personally served with RADM Bruner and agree with the positive testimonials. Our Navy doesn't always get it right when it comes to promoting officers to flag, but in this case we are lucky to have this great American among our leaders. Unfortunately, as N80 he will end up working 12-14 hour days and continue to give 150% to the Navy and 10% of his time to his beloved family. (bull major math!) It is sad, but that's life in the Palace....
3/28/2013 5:35 AM
Sounds like a seriously out-of-whack set of priorities. And when he is working 14 hour days, what is his staff doing? And this is supposed to make me respect him - why?
3/28/2013 9:55 AM
"Sounds like a seriously out-of-whack set of priorities. And when he is working 14 hour days, what is his staff doing? And this is supposed to make me respect him - why?"
Nobody mentioned respecting him because he might work long hours. Stop bitching!
3/28/2013 10:30 AM
The Bruner love just sounds suspiciously like the same person posting over and over and over. As I look at the current crop of submarine one and two star admirals, here are the ones I think more of: Caldwell, Breckenridge, Mulloy, Grooms, Thomas, Foggo, Roegge, Tofalo, Sawyer. Just off the top of my head. There may be more.
3/28/2013 10:43 AM
^^ Agree except for Breckenridge, Tofalo, and Roegge. Not in the same league or as effective for the submarine force as RADM Brunner has been as N97.
Although Breckenridge will get his chance soon as N97. Hope he is half as effective as RADM Brunner has been.
3/28/2013 2:42 PM
wtf......." Unfortunately, as N80 he will end up working 12-14 hour days and continue to give 150% to the Navy and 10% of his time to his beloved family. (bull major math!) It is sad, but that's life in the Palace...."
Consider how many hours the inport port and stbd a-ganger or SRO stands in a typical week. Let's fix the quality of life on the boat first, then the "Palace".....just thinking out loud.
3/28/2013 5:53 PM
Lets get real, your average dude on a boat works more hours than that once you take into account that he stands duty 2x per week. Dude makes six figures, he should BE working hard!
3/28/2013 9:03 PM
14x5 = 70.
Enlisted Sailors might be ON the boat that long or longer in a 3 section rotation, but they don't WORK that long. And if they were in the Navy enlisted as long as any of these flags, they'd be a squadron CMC/EDMC or tucked away in some cushy retirement shore duty that the Navy "owes you" working 20-25 hour weeks and you wouldn't stand any duty at all. I bet if you logged everytime E6 and below physically did work or stood watch, it would come close to 50-70 hours a week, depending on his rating, his watch rotation, and what just happens to be broken through sheer bad luck.
And no, standing around because your LCPO/LPO didn't plan the day properly or because you didn't write the tagout yesterday doesn't count as work, nor does visiting the smoke pit 6x/day. I've seen what a CPO who knows how to plan a large workcenter and actively drives the bus can do -- his guys walk off the pier at 1500-1600 every day. The divisions where the CPO thinks his job is to sit in the goat locker drinking coffee while the 1st class figures it out on his own go home at 18-2000 (or 1000 if you're in weapons department).
That's not to say it isn't a shitty life -- it is -- but exaggerating it just makes you look like a whiner and makes people unsympathetic to you. Yes, you will spend about 1/2 of your life in-port on the ship. Yes, that is incredibly shitty if you want to have any kind of social life. It also shouldn't take an exceptionally gifted CPO to get a maintenance division to go home at a reasonable hour. But saying that the average enlisted Sailor works more than 70 hours a week -- actually doing work -- is probably false.
The only thing the Navy can do to fix that is to make the SSN crew a completely operational crew that does simple PMS, and the maintenance crew is a shore duty assignment. Boat's out? You barely come into work. Boat's in? You do the maintenance to clear the CSMP (including all tagouts -- they are qualified submariners after all), the crew stands duty, does their couple hours of training in the AM, and then goes home. No staying late because a retest failed. No staying late because of job growth. No staying late because you have to critique screwing up a maintenance procedure. That's the shore duty guys' problems. But with all the government cries of poverty, I wouldn't hold my breath for a solution that requires paying 2x the amount of Sailors to do the same work that 1 crew does now.
Having said all that, I don't know what an Admiral could possibly be doing for 70 hours a week in PEACETIME (or why we even need as many as we have), but hey, I guess you don't get that far by choosing family over work.
3/28/2013 11:43 PM
"The only thing the Navy can do to fix that is..."
Well, you mentioned sailors standing around. Every CO can fix a big part of that problem by signing off on CO permission maintenance in advance and using AAOs in all availabilities, but paranoia about getting fired prevents streamlining the process. The silly game of stump the JO on duty could be played the day before when 2-4 people aren't waiting to start work. It would take ISIC intervention by walking around boats at 0815 and telling the CO to stand tall and explain why guys are waiting for permission rather than working to fix it, though, but that's not remotely the closest alligator to ISIC's boat. They're too worried about slowing things down because three boats screwed up RC division maintenance in the last week and will the commodore keep his job if SSN xxx fails ORSE to worry about how to efficiently conduct pierside availabilities, even though the demand on the submarine force stays constant as it stands down its numbers.
3/28/2013 11:55 PM
That's a. Rey convenient definition of what counts as "working", at least if you are trying to prove that admirals "work harder" than guys on the boat.
It is hard to directly compare hours worked between an Admiral and a sub sailor, because little of what an Admiral does would be considered "work" from the point of view of a sailor at all.
But my main points are really this:
1- Being on a boat is more work than being an admiral, even if the Admiral is putting in 14 hour days.
2- putting in a lot of hours doesn't necessarily mean you are any good at your job, and isn't something to necessarily brag about.
One thing I like about the civilian world is you are not judged primarily by what time you leave the office, which seemed to be a very important metric in the military.
3/31/2013 11:03 PM
I define work as producing something for your organization. Playing Xbox on crew's mess on a Saturday afternoon before watch or sleeping in the rack don't count as work, even if you do those activities at the place where you do work. That is why in many civilian jobs one doesn't get paid for lunch, even if you eat in their cafeteria because the 30 min they give you isn't enough time to go somewhere else -- being present at your place of work does not mean you are working.
If you want to count work as doing manual labor, then Admirals don't work and neither do the majority of Americans. Then again, if you want to define work as manual labor then Sailors don't do work if they are writing a chemistry plan, navigation plan, tagout or FWP, either, so you'd have to subtract those hours, too.
Similarly, if you want to define "work harder" as more arduous manual labor, then I will agree that Sailors work harder. If you want to define "work harder" as produce more per hour than the next person, then we can't make a comparison as how to quantify what an Admiral produces and what a Sailor on a submarine produces are apples and oranges.
So if we move away from the manual labor definition of work, I don't know how you can say being on a boat is more work than being an Admiral. For starters, that's a gross generalization as there are over 50 submarines and dozens of Flag positions. Secondly, I'm quite sure neither of us has experience at doing an Admiral's job, so we're talking out of our asses anytime we try to make a comparison between the two outside of the cetainty that Admirals don't do manual labor tasks like participate in field days or clean motor generators.
I do agree that submarine culture reveres those who work longer hours. It really should be the opposite -- those who are able to accomplish the day's tasks and leave at 1500 should be revered, as they clearly have something figured out that everyone else does not.
4/01/2013 7:16 PM
^^^ "It really should be the opposite -- those who are able to accomplish the day's tasks and leave at 1500 should be revered, as they clearly have something figured out that everyone else does not.
I could not have said it better myself! Work more efficiently, get the required work done, then get on liberty!
Working those admired long hours only lets inefficient work practices flourish - long pointless meetings, white papers, memos, admin, etc.
4/02/2013 4:17 AM
^^^^
What he said. (Thanks bro. You saved me from what was once the unthinkable - defending officers. And Admiral-type officers at that!) Close one... ;-)
On the other hand... I'm gonna just go ahead and say it anyway, cuz it just needs sayin'.
@anon 2303:
1) Believe it or not, Admirals are people too, and,
2) I honestly believe they have far too little time (not to mention way too much class) to respond to your ignorant a## comment. Since items 1 and 2 don't apply to me by definition, it's on me.
There's all kinds of work that needs to be done to keep our Navy operating. Just because you may not recognize what Admirals have to deal with as "work" does NOT mean they're just wasting the days away sipping tea while negotiating their next manicure. Different environment, different players, methods and results.
They deal with more folks who have even bigger egos than you before lunch, than you were ever on speaking terms with in your whole life. They get paid to move mountains on molehill budgets while walking a circus wire without a net. You weren't the only one out there doing it all by yourself, you know. Get over your self.
Thank you for all your hard work and for doing it right even when it sucked and you really didn't want to. Your shipmates thank you for your good work, the Navy thanks you and your country thanks you. And I thank you too.
You're a pretty smart guy, or you wouldn't have been out there with us. Next time, please try applying those smarts across a less narrow perspective, it should be well within your capability.
And to you Admirals out there busting it every day to make sure we got what we need to do it right - a most sincere "Thank YOU!" (Couldn't have done it nearly as well without you).
Just Another Raghat(SS)
4/02/2013 5:42 AM
I get the feeling you have not dealt with many flag officers on a regular basis. I honestly don't mean any disrespect by this, but they are nothing special (mostly). The delta from the middle of the road guy to the guy that gets picked is not that high, and there is as much luck involved as skill, maybe more. I've sat there and briefed admirals that clearly didn't know much about the issue being discussed and watched them derail the conversation into parts unknown, not because of incompetence, but because they often get shifted around frequently, and sometimes are not very experienced in their particular job.
I'm not sure where the hero worship comes from, at the end of the day the flag officers are just another guy in the Navy, just with a loftier position.
The Navy is not exactly a well-oiled machine, if the Admirals don't deserve the blame, then who does?
4/02/2013 11:15 PM
^^^ That's certainly the lament of lifer-dog civil servants...that the admirals get shifted around too often to know much.
YMMV...but most *submarine* admirals I've met and spoken with at some length are sharp cookies that pack a lot more wisdom than most people.
That's not to say that a flaming asshole doesn't make it through the O-7 filter once in a while. They do. The occasional dunce does as well, but the members of this particular group are truly outliers, except in the surface navy: when you're picking stones out of a box of rocks, that's pretty much your field of choices.
And as far as the Navy not being a well-oiled machine: sometimes people only see what they look for. Great accomplishments happen, too. The worst things about the Navy are largely due to the turds that float their way from the nation's much-disrespected political dung beetles. Just sayin'.
4/03/2013 9:37 AM
@anon 2315
No disrespect intended here either, but it seems to me you're either talking about Admirals sans fish, or some other Navy entirely. (Bolivia?). In my own admittedly limited experience (an enlisted sub sailor), I guess I must have had an unusually fortunate run of good luck in comparison with your own experiences.
My "hero worship" as you term it comes from Vice Admirals Eugene Wilkinson, Kenneth Carr, and Rear Admiral Austin Scott. They all appeared to me as very knowledgeable and competent men. I seriously doubt you'd come away from an encounter with any of them with the impression they were bumbling incompetents.
I met Vice Admiral Wilkinson in Atlanta where he was working in his post-Navy career. (early 80's). If you've never heard of him, he was the first skipper of the Nautilus.
I don't know what community's Admirals you're used to dealing with, but the ones I met were all submariners - and top shelf.
Just Another Raghat(SS)
4/03/2013 8:19 PM
Read the Design for Undersea Warfare. While it makes it obvious that ADM Richardson is a smart man because of his vocabulary, it is also obvious he thinks too highly of himself and thinks he knows more than he does. A submariner in 2013 has no credibility when he talks about warfare, regardless of rank.
4/06/2013 6:09 PM
Many messages from other Admirals are similar. They spend way too much time making up buzz phrases to reinvent the wheel or kick-start initiatives so they can get a 2+ star position where they can actually start to have a say in planning joint operations.
"Last month I wrote this long essay about warfighting. In it I compared warfighting to playing sports and included conjecture on how a Marine scout sniper does his job. This month, I'm reminding you that I wrote that because I'm noticing that people are ignoring me. My 5 pillars of submarining are so insightful, you should read it!
So I now task all commands to do an internal audit on RC div maintenance, compare it to my 5 pillars, and report your results. It's due next week."
4/06/2013 6:14 PM
I am concerned about RADM Breckenridge being N97. He was not a good CO on the MEMPHIS, as illustrated by a very poor tactical performance in an exercise a few weeks before their 2003 deployment to CENTCOM. He also recently testified before Congress about the importance of maintaining a quantitatively strong submarine fleet, but that was only a few weeks after he recommended the MIAMI be decommissioned. I really hope this guy does not advance any further. If we ever get into another big naval war, he is likely a disaster waiting to happen.
9/16/2013 5:31 AM
Bruner is the best man I have ever served with. The utmost integrity and honor.
Perry on the other hand, is the ultimate dirtbag.
No scruples whatsoever. He and his son (who is a naval officer) play in a band together loving up the ladies and his indiscretions know no end.
3/28/2014 7:53 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home