• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The Military Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Very tough call, and I'm not sufficiently well-versed enough to make it.

On the side of Lannes, you have that he came from nothing, and was probably better at independent command than was Davout. Davout may have been better at the operational/tactical level. Aeurstadt was simply brilliant.

Almost word for word how I feel about it.

Lannes is certainly the more storied, romantic option - brought up from nothing, known for his courage and daring, fell in battle, and was perhaps the general closest to Napoleon himself on a personal level.

Davout was a brilliant tactician that defeated an army more than double the size of his. He was effective, but also remarkably cruel. In terms of ability, he was a strict, disciplined tactician that ran perhaps the tightest regiment of troops.

Also, @King Stannis for whatever reason I’m not notified when you tag me, only when you quote or react to my posts. Not sure why that is.
 
@King Stannis do you have any good recommended reading for the Napoleonic wars? It's a period of time I'm EXTREMELY unfamiliar with and I want to know more about.

I do, there is literally an endless number of books. Napoleon is the most written about man in the history of mankind.

I would start off with Andre Castelot's classic biography. And Chandler's Campaigns of Napoleon are still the standard for understanding the wars he fought and his tactics.

If you would like, you can venmo me shipping costs and I can save you $50 by loaning you my copies of the above.
 
You're absolutely right that the family time is one of the big issues. Accepting, generally, less pay and less time with family never plays well.


Rumors run rampant, but apparently the Navy wanted to offer $60k/year, but by the time it got approved, it was $35k.


Interesting about your sister. She TacAir? Haven't heard any of the guys around here have that problem, yet. I can imagine it though. The Marines were having guys do five year initial sea tours, which is pretty insane.


I'm sure the Navy is trying to have more new pilots. The jet training squadrons' Instructor Pilots are flying three times a day, plus weekends, to try to get quotas met.

But, that only fixes the issue 10 years down the road. No new pilot is going to replace guys with 1,500-2,000 hours, some of them TOPGUN grads (and that could be discussion of its own, but they're likewise leaving at alarming rates), who have 10+ years in the military. If the saying, chiefs are the backbone of the Navy, then the mid tier Aviator is the backbone to Naval Aviation. They're the ones teaching the newer aviators, while also being the best tactically.


Your last point is kind of intriguing. Right now, the service requirement is 8 years post winging, which generally takes around 2 years. Younger people generally don't think about the long term as much, so if they're willing to commit for around 10 years now, what is another, say, 2 years? I'm sure it becomes slightly more difficult to leave after 12 than 10 years (though I would have to look at hard data for years served for those leaving to see).

My sister flew 18s. But when does come back, she made major, I think she'll be desk-bound.

As I mentioned, Army had the same issues 10 years ago. Guys were getting their resignations rejected left and right. Guys in the IRR were brought back and given the choice of going active Reserve or being reactivated.

It was really shitty.
 
Your last point is kind of intriguing. Right now, the service requirement is 8 years post winging, which generally takes around 2 years. Younger people generally don't think about the long term as much, so if they're willing to commit for around 10 years now, what is another, say, 2 years? I'm sure it becomes slightly more difficult to leave after 12 than 10 years (though I would have to look at hard data for years served for those leaving to see).

Heh -- that's the point. And really...the monetary value of what they receive in terms of training is monstrous. Compared to all the other folks - combat arms in particular -- who if they leave don't have analogous civilian job opportunities. Seems like the military really isn't getting their money back out of the folks they train.

I didn't know it was 8 years after getting your wings, though. I assume that's just Air Force?

Back in my day, it was 5 1/2 or 5 for Navy/Marine Corps respectively. Just checked, and it's apparently 8/10 (total) for Navy, and 8 (total) for Marines. And for Marines, it's even less after getting their wings because they have 6 months of Basic School training for which there isn't anything analogous in other services. So for some, that may mean only 5.5 or so after getting their wings.
 
My sister flew 18s. But when does come back, she made major, I think she'll be desk-bound.

As I mentioned, Army had the same issues 10 years ago. Guys were getting their resignations rejected left and right. Guys in the IRR were brought back and given the choice of going active Reserve or being reactivated.

It was really shitty.

So glad it’s changed now. I’m obviously not a pilot, but I submitted my resignation to HRC three weeks ago and already received my approval. I don’t think I’ve ever had an admin turnaround that quick.
 
So glad it’s changed now. I’m obviously not a pilot, but I submitted my resignation to HRC three weeks ago and already received my approval. I don’t think I’ve ever had an admin turnaround that quick.

Wow. Our turnaround, was six months, and that was when they started letting people go.

Jeez, has it really been that long? I feel like it was only yesterday we were working on your OCS strategy.
 
Heh -- that's the point. And really...the monetary value of what they receive in terms of training is monstrous. Compared to all the other folks - combat arms in particular -- who if they leave don't have analogous civilian job opportunities. Seems like the military really isn't getting their money back out of the folks they train.

I didn't know it was 8 years after getting your wings, though. I assume that's just Air Force?

Back in my day, it was 5 1/2 or 5 for Navy/Marine Corps respectively. Just checked, and it's apparently 8/10 (total) for Navy, and 8 (total) for Marines. And for Marines, it's even less after getting their wings because they have 6 months of Basic School training for which there isn't anything analogous in other services. So for some, that may mean only 5.5 or so after getting their wings.
I don't know what Air force is.. I was referencing Navy. Navy used to have different ones depending on platform. Think it used to be 5 or 6 for helos and 8 for Jets, but have bumped it up to 8 across the board.

I do think your idea could help for the future. I guess right now they'll just keep pulling helo pilots to fly growlers..
 
Almost word for word how I feel about it.

Lannes is certainly the more storied, romantic option - brought up from nothing, known for his courage and daring, fell in battle, and was perhaps the general closest to Napoleon himself on a personal level.

Davout was a brilliant tactician that defeated an army more than double the size of his. He was effective, but also remarkably cruel. In terms of ability, he was a strict, disciplined tactician that ran perhaps the tightest regiment of troops.

Also, @King Stannis for whatever reason I’m not notified when you tag me, only when you quote or react to my posts. Not sure why that is.

Huh, I wonder why that is. I get a notification every time you tag me.

Yeah, Davout was not well loved. Most of his fellow marshals disliked him and he had a legendary feud with Marshal Bernadotte over the events that happened on the day of Jena and Auerstadt. They were going to duel but Napoleon wouldn't let them.

Indeed, one the eve of the Invasion of Russia, Napoleon sought to strengthen his Northern flank by invading Swedish Pomerania. But to rub it in a bit to Sweden's new Crown Prince, Marshal Bernadotte, now Charles John, he tasked Davout to lead the invasion, and D-Day was on Bernadotte's birthday.

Needless to say it achieved its aim of irritating Bernadotte, and much to Napoleon's extreme detriment as it turned out.
 
Wow. Our turnaround, was six months, and that was when they started letting people go.

Jeez, has it really been that long? I feel like it was only yesterday we were working on your OCS strategy.

Yup, you blink and before you know it the last 9+ years of your life have gone by.

It’s been a hell of a run, but now it’s time to do something equally as nerve-wracking - preparing for life after the Army.
 
You Won't Pass the Army's New Fitness Test

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/you-wont-pass-armys-new-fitness-test-57077

Jarhead biases aside, count me skeptical. The title of the article is:

You Won't Pass the Army's New Fitness Test

And they claim that it is:

Tough. Really tough.

So they know it is "tough, really tough",: and that "we" won't pass it...but then

The Army has not yet decided what the standards will be that soldiers have to meet on each of the test’s six events, or whether soldiers will take alternative tests if they fail any or all of the events....

Yeah -- that makes zero fucking sense.

:confused:

And then you read a bit further down and find....

By October 2020, all soldiers will be required to take and pass the Army’s new gender- and age-neutral Combat Fitness Test

So either they're going to be failing a shitload of 45 year old broads, or a whole bunch of 21 year old guys are going to be taking an easy as hell fitness test. Obviously, there's the rare 45 year old woman who will be able to perform better than a handful of 21 year old guys. But as a general rule, there simply isn't a way to make it challenging for the majority if it is age/gender neutral.

@King Stannis
 
You Won't Pass the Army's New Fitness Test

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/you-wont-pass-armys-new-fitness-test-57077

Jarhead biases aside, count me skeptical. The title of the article is:



And they claim that it is:



So they know it is "tough, really tough",: and that "we" won't pass it...but then



Yeah -- that makes zero fucking sense.

:confused:

And then you read a bit further down and find....



So either they're going to be failing a shitload of 45 year old broads, or a whole bunch of 21 year old guys are going to be taking an easy as hell fitness test. Obviously, there's the rare 45 year old woman who will be able to perform better than a handful of 21 year old guys. But as a general rule, there simply isn't a way to make it challenging for the majority if it is age/gender neutral.

@King Stannis

The new test is dumb. Six events? It will take all morning.

No one ever thinks of the company grades.
 
The new test is dumb. Six events? It will take all morning.

No one ever thinks of the company grades.

Yes - and it looks like it will be more difficult for soldiers to train for it.

Having gender neutral standards is ridiculous.
 
You Won't Pass the Army's New Fitness Test

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/you-wont-pass-armys-new-fitness-test-57077

Jarhead biases aside, count me skeptical. The title of the article is:



And they claim that it is:



So they know it is "tough, really tough",: and that "we" won't pass it...but then



Yeah -- that makes zero fucking sense.

:confused:

And then you read a bit further down and find....



So either they're going to be failing a shitload of 45 year old broads, or a whole bunch of 21 year old guys are going to be taking an easy as hell fitness test. Obviously, there's the rare 45 year old woman who will be able to perform better than a handful of 21 year old guys. But as a general rule, there simply isn't a way to make it challenging for the majority if it is age/gender neutral.

@King Stannis

The new test requires millions of dollars worth of equipment, has six events, and is going to take several hours to finish.

In other words, it’s a gigantic inconvenience to units with a high op tempo. Oh, and no alternate events? Guess they’re just going to go ahead and chapter the vast majority of their senior leadership, as many of the people that have been in ~20 years have permanent profiles.
 
The new test requires millions of dollars worth of equipment, has six events, and is going to take several hours to finish.

In other words, it’s a gigantic inconvenience to units with a high op tempo. Oh, and no alternate events? Guess they’re just going to go ahead and chapter the vast majority of their senior leadership, as many of the people that have been in ~20 years have permanent profiles.

Losing their best and brightest is a time-worn tradition for Army. It is the price they pay for having sergeant majors; who do nothing but invent stupid ways to waste time, money and personnel.

But, Army doesn't need leadership. The World is at peace, as we know, and disarming will have no repercussions.
 
Almost word for word how I feel about it.

Lannes is certainly the more storied, romantic option - brought up from nothing, known for his courage and daring, fell in battle, and was perhaps the general closest to Napoleon himself on a personal level.

Davout was a brilliant tactician that defeated an army more than double the size of his. He was effective, but also remarkably cruel. In terms of ability, he was a strict, disciplined tactician that ran perhaps the tightest regiment of troops.

Also, @King Stannis for whatever reason I’m not notified when you tag me, only when you quote or react to my posts. Not sure why that is.

You know what is interesting is how the reputations of the Marshalate has changed over the last 200 years.

The history has been shaped by romanticism and political agendas.

Contemporaneously, Napoleon thought Bernadotte, Lannes and Soult, maybe Massena, as the only marshals good enough to command wings of the army almost independently.

Indeed, before his brother had sons (one of which became Napoleon III), and before the birth of the King of Rome, Napoleon considered making Bernadotte, or Murat, his successor on the Imperial Throne if he were to die in battle. He greatly disliked the former but was acutely aware of the man's talents and popularity with the army and the French people.

However, modern Napoleonic Era fans cite Davout as his best tactician when Napoleon disagreed and was loathe to give him more than a corps command, and give Murat far more credit than he deserves. Conversely Bernadotte's reputation has been run through the wringer by Bonapartists, and the Bourbons during the Restoration, and Suchet has been all but forgotten.

Which is a shame considering Suchet was probably the only Marshal that could have prevailed in Spain, and was second only to Bernadotte and Berthier in administrative ability as military governors or ministers.

I recommend reading Suchet's biography. As well as Bernadotte's. Those are two guys that don't get enough credit in modern times.*




*Finding biographies on Bernadotte that aren't colored by politics and nationalism is difficult. The French have mixed feelings, the Prussians and Austrians loathed him while the British and Russians hailed him as a great captain. He is perhaps the most complex character of the era aside from Napoleon himself as well as its most successful Soldier in terms of being the last man standing in the end.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top