Regrets on Entry Plans

[tumbling_dice]

Alright, hopefully I won't kick over a hornets nest with this thread.  I am currently in Grade 12 and from what I've read have the ability to be accepted to RMC, Civvie U and was have received acceptance to the University of Victoria.  I want to do Mechanical Engineering and will likely join as a MARS officer (although MSEO or Pilot are also possibilities).  Anyway, I wanted to know from people with experience if they have any regrets on their entry plan. For example, has any DEO or Civvie U ever wished they'd gone to RMC or ever had a point in their career where they were disadvantaged by not going to RMC or have any RMC students wished they'd gone to Civvie U for a more academic education, more fun, etc. (Not saying that RMC isn't fun or academic, I honestly don't know, if I did I wouldn't be asking).  Suffice to say I would like to know what in your mind, after your experience, is the best entry plan or does it really not matter at all. (On paper is doesn't matter but I'm looking for reality).  In order to try and focus this topic I'm going to only ask for personal accounts not second-hand knowledge and not opinions on how the entry plans could be changed (there are already numerous threads on that).

Note: I am not being lazy and hoping somebody will answer my questions so I don't have to do research, I've already read all 26 pages of the RMC thread. I'm also not asking someone to make a decision for me, I just want to ask experienced people about their experience.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Allright, I went ROTP, RMC, Mechanical Engineering, Pilot.  I'll try to give you my side of the story.

Anyway, I wanted to know from people with experience if they have any regrets on their entry plan.

Regrets?  No, definately not.  However, if I had to do it again, I would go CiviU for reasons I'll state later.  HOWEVER, my time at RMC was extremely valuable and I made really really good friends.  It sucked while I was there, but it's nice to be from there.

For example, has any DEO or Civvie U ever wished they'd gone to RMC or ever had a point in their career where they were disadvantaged by not going to RMC or have any RMC students wished they'd gone to Civvie U for a more academic education, more fun, etc.

I'll answer the academic and fun thing.  Academics at RMC are probably some of the best you can have.  Very small student to teacher ratio (we were a grand total of 50 in my Mech Eng year, 8 of which were French, 42 were English.  So, we were 8 in my class.  You have a question?  Knock on the teacher's door and ask away.  No going through the TA.  We have some of the best Prof Cadre IMHO.  I had my Aircraft Performance course given by a Flight Test Engineer (Lt Col) that went to Empire Flight Test School in UK and did some testings on the Hornets at AETE.  Can't get better than that, really.  As for fun, we took it as Work Hard, Play Hard.  Often, the Military Cadre would take the fun away, but we always found a way to have fun anyways. 

Now, do I think that going through RMC gives an advantage?  I don't think so.  In the end, that's how YOU perform that will affect your career.  I know some extremely sharp CivyU and I know some extremely lousy RMC guys.  The only advantage it gives you is when you go on course, you know most of the people already.

Suffice to say I would like to know what in your mind, after your experience, is the best entry plan or does it really not matter at all. (On paper is doesn't matter but I'm looking for reality). 

You know, it depends what you want.  Going through RMC sucked.  I won't lie to you.  However, it put things into perspective. I learned not to complain so much. When I went on my Basic Flying Training and the only 'drill' I had to do was standing at 'attention' before entering the instructor's lounge, I didn't think it was that bad.  Most CivyUs though it was outrageous.  It was a hard go, especially in Engineering.  It sucks you're not on your own schedule for 4 years, you can't really do your homeworks when you want, you do them when you have time.  You need to keep your room tidy and your squadron lines tidy.  You have more classes than a regular Engineering program.  It's more busy.  In retrospect, I learned a lot going through RMC, not only on the military level (actually, the military stuff we learned there that was actually usefull after grad was minimal), but in the personnal level.  I learned how to manage my time really well, I learned my limits (how little time can I spend studying and still do well?), learned to have more than 1 thing on the go and still manage to get through all.  I do not regret my choice, however if I had to do it again, I would go CivyU.

I know it's probably hard with my answer to make your mind, but in the end, it's what you want to take out of it. 

Cheers

 

[tumbling_dice]

Thanks a lot Max, and your English is excellent by the way, hopefully after SLT by French will be comparable.  Anyone else, feel free to put into you two cents.

 

[Strike]

I'll echo Max's comments.  The biggest thing you get from RMC is time management skills.  This can come in especially useful when you get to your phase training which can be compared to drinking from a fire hose.  The student to teacher ratio is second to none and, especially on the engineering side, you will find that your thesis will likely have very practical applications which may very well be carried out over several years by different classes.  Mine was in fact used on a national level in the clean-up of the DEW line sites.

Sure, there are more freedoms at civvie U.  But if you've spent 4 yrs making your bed every morning, carrying out parades, doing military training, AND being ready for inspections, these are all a fewer things that you have to worry about learning when you get to your phase training.  It will allow you the time to actually focus on your studying.

 

[Marshall]

I am planning to attend RMC for 09-10 too. I briefly considered a Civilian Uni. but I am now hoping to go into Military Strategies as my degree in RMC. Something that will benefit me more then say a history or English degree since I wish to make the military a career and not just a way to get free education (no offense to anyone doing that method.)

So i'd just say figure out what you wanna take and figure out from people and the universities your interested in which offers the best course and experience for it.

 

[Lumber]

I am planning to attend RMC for 09-10 too. I briefly considered a Civilian Uni. but I am now hoping to go into Military Strategies as my degree in RMC. Something that will benefit me more then say a history or English degree since I wish to make the military a career and not just a way to get free education (no offense to anyone doing that method.)

So i'd just say figure out what you wanna take and figure out from people and the universities your interested in which offers the best course and experience for it.

Military Strategies = MSS = Military and Strategic Studies = 1/2 history Course that all the history majors take + 1/2 politics courses that all the politics majors take.

There's really nothing special to it.

http://www.rmc.ca/academic/registrar/programme/p006_dmilstrat2obj_e.html

IMO, go into a program that you will actually enjoy. If this is MSS, knock yourself out!  If you aren't going into an engineering trade, the degrees won't greatly affect your military career, so it would suck to get stuck in a degree program you hate. I might be biased, but I'd say a business degree, or even a psyche degree (god did I just say that?) would have the greatest actual impact on your career. But that's just my uninformed opinion.

Cheers.

 

[Strike]

...which offers the best course and experience for it.

That's really the deciding factor isn't it?  You may be planning on spending your whole life in the military, but you always have to plan for the worst case scenario.  What if you pooch a career course or get an injury that results in your having to leave the forces?  Which degree will better serve you in the work force?

Now, remember that your grades at RMC would likely be nowhere near as high as at a civilian university because of all the extra curricular stuff you had to do.  Most businesses now require a Masters or better to get started with them.  When you apply to do your Masters degree will the admissions at another institution understand the workings of RMC and the reasons why your grades are lower than Joe Civvie from Civvie U?  Or will you be lucky and be dealing with someone who's an RMC grad themselves?

Things to ponder while making your choice.

 

[chris_log]

I'll toss my opinion in;

I'm currently in fourth year at civvie-u. Would I have preferred to have gone to RMC? There are times when I consider how much easier it is for one to stay in peak physical shape there (none of the RMC types I know are anywhere near out of shape), the valuable connections you make there as opposed to being in the far flung reaches of civilian university and the various opportunities afforded to RMC kids (i.e. do the Sandhurst competition, the various bands, the many trips you can go on, ease of access to sports and such) that are unavailable or harder to get at a civilian school. At the end of the day, am I happy with my choice? Yeah. If I could turn back time, however, would I have gone to RMC? Maybe. The quality of education isn't as good as some civilian schools (don't let anyone's knickers get in a bunch with that comment) but the overall 'package' is a one of a kind deal (amd IMHO, education is but a small part of what university...and especially ROTP, should be all about).

So after 3 and a bit years of ROTP and other 'military stuff' I'm going to eat some humble pie here and say that...IMHO, the CF should end the civvie-u option for ROTP (except for students going for medical, legal etc degrees) and expand RMC (or re-open Royal Roads and expand CMR) and ALL ROTP candidates go through there. Having almost completed my degree I can say that, while it was nice to get the degree....what I've learned applies hardly at all to the military. But what you do at RMC (fitness, team sports, bands, mil skills, Sandhurst, a military styled education etc) is far more applicable. Now, there are plenty of things that aren't so good about RMC (any honest RMC grad, staff or Kingston police officer will tell you that) BUT....I would suggest that you tick the box for RMC.

Of course, if you want to ask me if I regret my choice of going ROTP then I can say without a moment's hesitation....YES!!!! I had other plans and applied to ROTP as an afterthought and ended up getting accepted. My original plan was to switch MOC's when I was in the 'Mo, go to college...do a tour and then transfer to the reg's as an MP (policing has always been my main interest). Am I happy being an ROTP log officer? Yes, it's a good job (logistics is a fascinating field of work in the military) and a great opportunity. But is it what I really wanted? Not really (although the PSO says that while I have a next to nil chance of VOT'ing to MPO, if I want I can be sent to the CFMPA as an MP...all I need to do is give them the go ahead and I'll be switched).

What should you take away from my post? Make darn sure you know what you want and do it no matter what. I'm happy either way, but my ideal path is not what I took. 

 

[Marshall]

Military Strategies = MSS = Military and Strategic Studies = 1/2 history Course that all the history majors take + 1/2 politics courses that all the politics majors take.

There's really nothing special to it.

http://www.rmc.ca/academic/registrar/programme/p006_dmilstrat2obj_e.html

IMO, go into a program that you will actually enjoy. If this is MSS, knock yourself out!  If you aren't going into an engineering trade, the degrees won't greatly affect your military career, so it would suck to get stuck in a degree program you hate. I might be biased, but I'd say a business degree, or even a psyche degree (god did I just say that?) would have the greatest actual impact on your career. But that's just my uninformed opinion.

Cheers.

Oh yes I know and thanks for the info. I do think I will enjoy MSS, the whole army history and such courses like Peacemaking, Mil. Psych + Combat, International Conflict, Relations seem quite interesting to me and I am sure it would be beneficial to someone hoping to be an (hopefully achieved) Officer throughout their career in the CF.

That's really the deciding factor isn't it?  You may be planning on spending your whole life in the military, but you always have to plan for the worst case scenario.  What if you pooch a career course or get an injury that results in your having to leave the forces?  Which degree will better serve you in the work force?

Now, remember that your grades at RMC would likely be nowhere near as high as at a civilian university because of all the extra curricular stuff you had to do.  Most businesses now require a Masters or better to get started with them.  When you apply to do your Masters degree will the admissions at another institution understand the workings of RMC and the reasons why your grades are lower than Joe Civvie from Civvie U?  Or will you be lucky and be dealing with someone who's an RMC grad themselves?

Things to ponder while making your choice.

Ive considered the Injury scenario, as I am trying to go Armour Officer. I'll just hope luck is on my side. If it ends up that I need to find another job down the road, at least ill be content knowing I had a unique 4 years of (free + salary) education at RMC and a lot of meaningful lessons to go with it.

And when you mean "pooch a career course" do you mean do terrible at one of the training/qualification courses for your intended military job? :/

 

[Drag]

And when you mean "pooch a career course" do you mean do terrible at one of the training/qualification courses for your intended military job? :/

You can fail a career course and get transfered to a different trade or released from the military as a result.

 

[Marshall]

You can fail a career course and get transfered to a different trade or released from the military as a result.

Ok thats what I figured pooch meant lol. Thanks.

 

[tumbling_dice]

How much time does doing in ROTP save you in terms of training? SInce ROTPs do training during the summer, they must have less phase training to do than DEOs. How significant is this amount?

 

[George Wallace]

How much time does doing in ROTP save you in terms of training? SInce ROTPs do training during the summer, they must have less phase training to do than DEOs. How significant is this amount?

Just some advice.......Please read the various threads on the various Officer Plans, and you would know most of the answers without having to ask them over and over again.

ROTP does not save you any time, in fact it may take you longer.  All Officer Entry Plans require you to do Phase Training.  DEOs and ROTP will find themselves on the same courses during Phase Training.  Where ROTP may only do one Phase each summer, a DEO will likely do each Phase, one after another, throughout the 12 to 18 months that they are run.  A DEO may arrive in Jan of this year and do Phase I, followed by Phase II/CAP in the Summer and within two years be done all his Phase Training and posted to a Unit.  The ROTP candidate will have only done two Phases in the meantime.

 

[chris_log]

Just some advice.......Please read the various threads on the various Officer Plans, and you would know most of the answers without having to ask them over and over again.

ROTP does not save you any time, in fact it may take you longer.  All Officer Entry Plans require you to do Phase Training.  DEOs and ROTP will find themselves on the same courses during Phase Training.  Where ROTP may only do one Phase each summer, a DEO will likely do each Phase, one after another, throughout the 12 to 18 months that they are run.  A DEO may arrive in Jan of this year and do Phase I, followed by Phase II/CAP in the Summer and within two years be done all his Phase Training and posted to a Unit.  The ROTP candidate will have only done two Phases in the meantime.

And the ROTP guys do have the disadvantage of having courses 8 months apart which *should* be done back to back (like CAP and phase III and IV) or at least as close as possible, so as to keep all that knowledge stuck in their minds. After spending 8 months memorizing the constant flow of ivory tower pontificating and textbook rose-lensed theorizing one can easily forget their basic mil skills and satff have to spend the first bit of a course going over the basics, again and again.

 

[tumbling_dice]

I think I was misunderstood I meant how much ahead are you in your phase training if you ROTP as opposed to DEO (ex. ROTP you come out of university with BOTC and some phase training already done over the summer, DEO you come out of university with no training whatsoever).

 

[chris_log]

I think I was misunderstood I meant how much ahead are you in your phase training if you ROTP as opposed to DEO (ex. ROTP you come out of university with BOTC and some phase training already done over the summer, DEO you come out of university with no training whatsoever).

I think I see what you're getting at....yes, an ROTP officer will be fully qualified sooner then a DEO officer (generally).

For example, a infantry officer coming out of ROTP *should*, after graduation, only have phase IV left to do, while a DEO officer will have to go through IAP/BOTP through to Phase IV after graduation. 

 

[tumbling_dice]

Thanks, thats exactly what I was asking, does that make a big difference (I know it depends on trade) or is the ROTP usually just ahead by a few months?

 

[benny88]

Thanks, thats exactly what I was asking, does that make a big difference (I know it depends on trade) or is the ROTP usually just ahead by a few months?

Depends on the trade. Also depends on how long one has been in ROTP. Some start training before 1st year, some not until the summer before 4th year.

 

[brihard]

I think comparing DEO and ROTP might not quite be the right way to go about it here. While ROTP is intended to attract those in or considering university with a subsidized education, DEO seems to be targeted towards those who already have degrees and are simply making the decision to join the military a bit later in life than an undergraduate would. ROTP would be the kid coming out of grade 12, or the second year university student who's finally found a direction he wants to take, whereas DEO would be the mid-20s or older crowd who've done school, have tried something else and either not found it to their liking or suddenly have found a possible calling in the military.

 

[chris_log]

Thanks, thats exactly what I was asking, does that make a big difference (I know it depends on trade) or is the ROTP usually just ahead by a few months?

It doesn't matter. The only difference is that ROTP kids get a free education and the DEO guys didn't. You can have a DEO officer who went to school at 18, joined the military after graduation at 22 and finished his training and gets posted when he's 23-24. You could have an ROTP type who went to school when he was 30, and finishes training and get's posted at 34-35. I think this is what you're getting at, 'how soon can I get trained and posted'. No one is 'ahead'.