I GOT A CALL FOR the NOAB" Threads

[Mattl86]

Be that as it may, you have no idea the stress you will face in the CF and having obtained a engineering degree is no indication of how successful you will be. I have seen enough people with high-tech degrees who couldnt tie their own shoes.......

Obviously I wasn't saying I'm ready for the stress of the CF, I don't really know what it is like until I face it.  All I said was that an engineering degree is as good a starting platform as any, because the person has shown a capability that a history major simply hasn't.  That does not mean I will succeed and a history major will fail, but it does mean the CFRC had more to go on when looking through my application.  It's the same as doing something well in Basic training.  Yes they don't completely know what you will be like when real bullets are flying, but the better you were in basic the more reason to think you will succeed in a live situation.

Are you basing that on your extensive CF experience ?

You disagree then that CF members need to be able to handle stress and that the job is demanding?  Cause that's all I said.  Seems to me a safe assumption, even though I have no experience yet.  They keep telling me that at every stage of the process, so I'm only repeating what I have been told.  If I came off as though I was speaking from experience I apologize.  I only was stating what I assumed we all would agree on.

Anyway, it's not really about missing the NOAB as some of the posts have implied.  All of us who missed the NOAB would have loved to be on it, and none of us wanted the phone interview.  My original point was addressing why I thought it made sense that preference was given to Engineering or Math degrees during the process.

 

[gcclarke]

Obviously I wasn't saying I'm ready for the stress of the CF, I don't really know what it is like until I face it.  All I said was that an engineering degree is as good a starting platform as any, because the person has shown a capability that a history major simply hasn't.  That does not mean I will succeed and a history major will fail, but it does mean the CFRC had more to go on when looking through my application.  It's the same as doing something well in Basic training.  Yes they don't completely know what you will be like when real bullets are flying, but the better you were in basic the more reason to think you will succeed in a live situation.

And the history major has shown capabilities that an engineering major simply has not. I'm thinking here particularly along the lines of written communication skills. And to be frank, at the end of the day, those are the types of skills that you will actually be using as an NTO on a day to day basis. Sure, engineering programs are difficult, but guess what, so are most other degrees. This "engineers rule the world" Bull honkey, in my humble opinion, does a disservice to engineering students who buy into it. Inflating their egos and having them think they're all that because they've gotten moderately decent at performing tasks that are far removed from what they will actually end up doing in the course of their future employment, while at the same time inculcating in them a distain for the types of skills that eventually will become vital for their future career progression.

This is especially the case for people who want to be engineers in the Navy. NTOs are sailors first, officers second, with engineer coming up in a distant third. You're not there to design new radars. You're there to manage the personnel who keep the stuff we have running, to provide technical advice to command, and to be able to keep calm and carry on in leading your department when things get busy (action stations, emergency stations, etc).

 

[aesop081]

You disagree then that CF members need to be able to handle stress and that the job is demanding? 

No. I just said that you are grossely unqualified to make an absolute stament like that. If you had said "I think that CF members have to be able......" i would have taken it differently.

 

[Mattl86]

No. I just said that you are grossely unqualified to make an absolute stament like that. If you had said "I think that CF members have to be able......" i would have taken it differently.

I didn't mean it as an absolute statement.  I'll take responsibility for any confusion in that regard.  I certainly don't want to come off as someone with all the answers before I even start my CF career.

And the history major has shown capabilities that an engineering major simply has not. I'm thinking here particularly along the lines of written communication skills. And to be frank, at the end of the day, those are the types of skills that you will actually be using as an NTO on a day to day basis. Sure, engineering programs are difficult, but guess what, so are most other degrees. This "engineers rule the world" Bull honkey, in my humble opinion, does a disservice to engineering students who buy into it. Inflating their egos and having them think they're all that because they've gotten moderately decent at performing tasks that are far removed from what they will actually end up doing in the course of their future employment, while at the same time inculcating in them a distain for the types of skills that eventually will become vital for their future career progression.

This is especially the case for people who want to be engineers in the Navy. NTOs are sailors first, officers second, with engineer coming up in a distant third. You're not there to design new radars. You're there to manage the personnel who keep the stuff we have running, to provide technical advice to command, and to be able to keep calm and carry on in leading your department when things get busy (action stations, emergency stations, etc).

We could debate this forever.  I would point out that the written communication skills needed as an officer might more closely relate to the professional report style of writing engineers are used to, but I'm not in a position to speak on this with any authority.

Anyway, it's obvious you don't have an engineering degree and it's equally obvious I do, so it's not suprising you and I disagree on it being more applicable to the NCS Engineering job than a history degree.

 

[George Wallace]

Anyway, it's obvious you don't have an engineering degree and it's equally obvious I do, so it's not suprising you and I disagree on it being more applicable to the NCS Engineering job than a history degree.

Wow!  Quite an  obvious example of how to make friends and keep them.  :

What is it about your having an Engineering Degree that makes you so superior and knowledgeable of written skills necessary in the military profession?

 

[Nostix]

Anyway, it's obvious you don't have an engineering degree

Oh wow, your foot is lodged really, really far in your mouth on this one.

 

[Container]

I remember when I was in the reserves we had this one "engineering officer" who had an engineers degree. We couldnt figure out what to do with him because he kept failing BMQ. You'd catch him wandering around without a headress because he "failed BMQ" and wasn't allowed to have one.

Which we explained was wrong but he couldnt be made to understand. Finally, we made him wear a piece of red tape on an epaulet so that you could spot him from a distance and know not to waste your breath. I doubt he ever passed- and I doubt he is still in.

I worked with some great officers with all types of degrees eventually through the CF. And NCM's of all breeds with degrees as well. It wasnt the type of degree they had that defined the quality of officer they were.

And by your posts I get a feeling of what kind of officer you will be as well. Hopefully the CO of whatever unit you wind up in makes you wear red tape for the benefit of the rest of us.

 

[aesop081]

Anyway, it's obvious you don't have an engineering degree

Ouch !! Thats got to hurt......

On the superiority of an engineering degree, i have this to say :

 

[George Wallace]

I remember when I was in the reserves we had this one "engineering officer" who had an engineers degree. We couldnt figure out what to do with him because he kept failing BMQ. You'd catch him wandering around without a headress because he "failed BMQ" and wasn't allowed to have one.

Which we explained was wrong but he couldnt be made to understand. Finally, we made him wear a piece of red tape on an epaulet so that you could spot him from a distance and know not to waste your breath. I doubt he ever passed- and I doubt he is still in.

I worked with some great officers with all types of degrees eventually through the CF. And NCM's of all breeds with degrees as well. It wasnt the type of degree they had that defined the quality of officer they were.

And by your posts I get a feeling of what kind of officer you will be as well. Hopefully the CO of whatever unit you wind up in makes you wear red tape for the benefit of the rest of us.

Why does that old comment that "the men would follow him, not for his leadership skills, but out of curiosity" come to mind.

 

[Chang]

Anyway, it's obvious you don't have an engineering degree and it's equally obvious I do, so it's not suprising you and I disagree on it being more applicable to the NCS Engineering job than a history degree.

You should check before making such a statement. If I recall, gcclarke is a naval combat systems engineering officer with an engineering degree.... he might end up as one of your instructors in the future

 

[kartik]

OMG!!! This post has gone way too out of the basic thought of engineers.

We cannot deny the fact that most engineers earn more in civilian society than CF. Hence my comment "CF is in love with engineers" It is obvious that many engineers would not want to apply if they are looking at money factor. The engineers who do apply look at adventure aspect first and hence we need to make sure we take right people to NOAB.

I accept your argument Matt that you eventually got what you wanted but as Seadog mentioned you missed what you can expect from Navy and what Navy can give you at the end of the day. The only way is going to NOAB. Guys, engineers after 4 years of study do loose reality touch but they still make good leaders. So lets not generalize the red tape thing to all engineers. The only thing that has to be thought about through this post is how to make the system work better. Of course not change it. Especially for NTO, NOAB should take candidates in the most likely to likely range. The reason once again is that most like candidates miss NOAB to candidates who appear likely but are not sure what they want out of CF or Navy. I understand that it is discriminatory to screen candidates out based on age but come on guys understand the fact that a younger candidate if nurtured properly is likely to survive than an older guy coz he has more number of years to put in. It is basic cost analysis. Think this from economics point. We are no more in the WWII era of patriotism etc.. For me and I am sure for many CF is another way of life and career as looked parallel to civilian and I have met manay officers who think on same lines.

- K

 

[George Wallace]

OMG!!! This post has gone way too out of the basic thought of engineers.

We cannot deny the fact that most engineers earn more in civilian society than CF. Hence my comment "CF is in love with engineers" It is obvious that many engineers would not want to apply if they are looking at money factor. The engineers who do apply look at adventure aspect first and hence we need to make sure we take right people to NOAB.

I accept your argument Matt that you eventually got what you wanted but as Seadog mentioned you missed what you can expect from Navy and what Navy can give you at the end of the day. The only way is going to NOAB. Guys, engineers after 4 years of study do loose reality touch but they still make good leaders. So lets not generalize the red tape thing to all engineers. The only thing that has to be thought about through this post is how to make the system work better. Of course not change it. Especially for NTO, NOAB should take candidates in the most likely to likely range. The reason once again is that most like candidates miss NOAB to candidates who appear likely but are not sure what they want out of CF or Navy. I understand that it is discriminatory to screen candidates out based on age but come on guys understand the fact that a younger candidate if nurtured properly is likely to survive than an older guy coz he has more number of years to put in. It is basic cost analysis. Think this from economics point. We are no more in the WWII era of patriotism etc.. For me and I am sure for many CF is another way of life and career as looked parallel to civilian and I have met manay officers who think on same lines.

- K

???  Huh?  Is English your second language?

 

[kartik]

Yes I never learnt English. Still I am going to be an officer with Canadian Navy. Any problems?

 

[aesop081]

Any problems?

Nothing major, just work on you language skills. I had to read you post a few times so that it would start making sense.

 

[George Wallace]

Well.  I honestly found your post incomprehensible.  It was almost gibberish.  I do find it amusing that you think an Engineering Degree makes one a good leader.  I can categorically tell you right now that a 'framed piece of paper' on the wall does not a leader make, even if it is an Engineering Degree.  It only proves that one had the tenacity to stay in college or university for a long enough period of time to get that 'piece of paper'.  Nothing more.

 

[kartik]

Thank you for your advice CDN Aviator, will definitely make an effort to polish language skills.

George, with due respect, I am sure that framed piece of paper earns more money that any other piece of paper. average pay in Alberta - newly graduated engineer,registered as Engineer In Training with APEGGA - around $60,000.

I am sorry if my posts are not making sense but I still stick to my view about engineers that they do make good leaders. Agreed that NTO will never be Chief of Naval Staff, still you cannot put "red tape" on all engineers.

 

[George Wallace]

Nothing major, just work on you language skills. I had to read you post a few times so that it would start making sense.

As CDN Aviator says, work on your language skills.  Posting here will no doubt help to further develop those skills (if we get picky with you).  One trick is to stop before you hit post and read aloud what you are going to post.  If it sounds like the way that you would talk normally in conversation, then you are ninety per cent of the way there.  Spell Check helps, but the more you write and speak the better you will get.

We all have a lot to learn, and even then we sometimes run into things that just seem odd.  The other day I wrote "behaviour" in something that I was writing and it just didn't look right.  I used a couple of different Spell Check programs and I had indeed spelled it correctly, but it still did not look quite right.  It happens to all of us.  Practice helps.

I do think that you may have an opinion of that 'piece of paper' that may be a bit flawed.  There are people with similar pieces of paper who are making a living driving cabs, and you will find that NOT all of the people who may be accepted to this program, even with all of their Degrees and 'education', are going to be successful in becoming officers. 

 

[kartik]

Thank you and please don't get picky on me. Just think I am writing to improve my writing skills.

Possibly yes. I have spent 4 years in University and then going through the affiliation process with APEGGA which was another 2 years. Being a foreign graduate I had to compete( I mean it "compete) to get work that will earn me a living equivalent to Canadian graduate. I feel proud of that piece of paper.

Rest assured when I graduate from BMOQ, I will make sure that CF also feels proud of my engineering skills.

 

[George Wallace]

..... I feel proud of that piece of paper.

Everyone who has worked towards one or more of those 'pieces of paper' is proud of it (them). 

In the CF, you will earn many more.  All well worth being proud of.












That is why many of us have "I Love Me Walls".      ;D

 

[Mattl86]

You should check before making such a statement. If I recall, gcclarke is a naval combat systems engineering officer with an engineering degree.... he might end up as one of your instructors in the future

Well, that's embarrassing for me then.  I did not mean it was obvious he had a degree other than engineering because he was stupid or something, I just assumed that by the way he was speaking of an engineering degree he had a different degree he considered superior.  Again, I'm sorry for the confusion.

I've said a lot of things in this thread that were read differently than I meant them, so let me clarify my position:  I don't think engineers are smarter or better people.  I do think they are more prepared to enter an engineering job in the Navy than other people are.  And yes, I'm pretty defensive about this, because I worked hard for that degree and the thought that engineering jobs that I or others like me could apply for would be given to non engineers does bother me in principle.  It's about the same in any skilled trade or profession.  I'd hate to see medical jobs given to engineers (drastic example, but sort of conveys my feelings). 

As a matter of fact, I don't really consider myself the most qualified for this job, because my engineering discipline isn't as closely related to the job as it could be.  So in that sense, I'm not being unfair; I think engineers should get preference in the process, but I also know for sure other engineering degrees were given preference over mine, and as much as that might not have been what I wanted I have to see the logic in it.

Everyone who has worked towards one or more of those 'pieces of paper' is proud of it (them). 

In the CF, you will earn many more.  All well worth being proud of

Which is why I should have probably just kept my mouth shut.  There's bound to be people out there reading this forum with just about every degree available.  All proud of their own achievements.  Makes this a touchy subject.

To be honest, I didn't know before this topic the CF accepted NCS Eng's who had anything other than an engineering, math, or science degree, so I didn't expect to ruffle any feathers.  An oversight on my part.  Oh well.

EDIT: GW, I sent you a PM regarding this subject, partly to clarify things, partly because I'd rather this was my last post on the subject as I've helped move this off topic.