Navy Nukes overmanned?

[bigadam5]

So I leave for boot camp in May. After doing my research on the nuke field in the navy, and talking to recruiters I had one question. Is the nuke field in the navy currently overmanned?

[crusemm]

from the Navy Personnel Command website:
http://www.npc.navy.mil/NR/rdonlyres/EF874E40-3C46-431C-952E-F2CF9A32FDF2/0/NAV08263.txt
highlights:
B.  CREO CATEGORY:  CREO CATEGORIES LISTED REPRESENT COMBINED MALE
AND FEMALE MANNING LEVELS.  CREO CATEGORIES ARE PROVIDED BY PAY GRADE
(E1-4/E5/E6).
        (1) "CREO 1" = UNDERMANNED
        (2) "CREO 2" = MANNED AT DESIRED LEVELS
        (3) "CREO 3" = OVERMANNED
                   CREO
                CATEGORY           NOTES
RATING         E1-4/E5/E6         (PARA 6)

EM(SS-N)          1/1/1              3
EM(SW-N)          1/1/1
ET(SS-N)          1/1/1              3
ET(SW-N)          1/1/1
MM(SS-N)          1/1/1              3
MM(SW-N)          1/1/1
5.  CRITICAL SKILLS LIST
    A.  USN CRITICAL SKILLS NAVY ENLISTED CLASSIFICATIONS (NECS):
3353   3354   3355   3356    3359 3363   3364   3365   3366
also this link might be helpful:
http://www.npc.navy.mil/NR/rdonlyres/E5D7B316-A39A-40D1-AD01-6F0DF0475F86/47313/SubEnlistedCareerPath.pdf
as compared to this one:
http://www.npc.navy.mil/NR/rdonlyres/0EE7F547-F4E9-43F3-B260-4D4DD393E7C2/0/MMOTHcareerpath.doc

In the 20+  years that I have been in the Navies nuclear power program, we have never, and I mean never been OVERmanned.  Chronically, consistently, and sometimes criminally UNDERmanned, yes, but not overmanned.  What you are seeing now, with lowering SRB's and enlistment bonuses is a reflection of the economy and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and what that does to OVERALL Navy manning, of which the nuclear community is only a tiny part.  It becomes really hard for the services to say, OK we need to cut our budgets, get rid of 1000 sailors, drop two obsolete ships, but this really tiny special group needs a lot more money.  Does not generally happen.  So, for now, and for the way forseeable future, the Navy will need lots and lots of young nucyalar cannon fodder (that would be you) to feed in to the pipeline filters pumps.
Thanks in advance for your service, welcome to Nukeworker, hope this helps
Peace-Matt

[JsonD13]

You would think that it is possible to cut more in some areas while increasing money to other areas.  It's called budgeting.  However, since big Navy doesn't tend to listen to the lower ranking personnel that are usually complaining the most about it, and the mission is being accomplished, there is no reason to give more money (hence the logic to lower bonuses in this economy).

If I were a smart man (and in the position to do so), I would increase the bonuses for nukes at this very time, in this economy.  It would raise the quantity and quality of qualified applicants at the same time.


Jason

[Fermi2]

You would think that it is possible to cut more in some areas while increasing money to other areas.  It's called budgeting.  However, since big Navy doesn't tend to listen to the lower ranking personnel that are usually complaining the most about it, and the mission is being accomplished, there is no reason to give more money (hence the logic to lower bonuses in this economy).

If I were a smart man (and in the position to do so), I would increase the bonuses for nukes at this very time, in this economy.  It would raise the quantity and quality of qualified applicants at the same time.


Jason

No it wouldn't, the bonuses have gone up 20 fold since I left the Navy and the quality of Navy Nukes has gone down far more than that.

Mike

[HydroDave63]

Restoring the draft to keep the system warm for 100,000 draftees/year would reduce the need for bonuses, increase readiness and manning wouldn't be a problem

[JsonD13]

Mike I would think that is more of a product of the training pipeline rather than the entrance process but I am sure there is someone on here who is more knowledgeable than me on the subject.

At least it would help manning levels with the college grads and dropouts that cant get jobs, and give them something more attractive than what is there now.

Maybe a strong advertising program would help too, I dont see too many Navy commercials on the TV anymore.  I suppose if they advertised that there was a job that would give them great training and set them up for a life of making plenty of cash, it probably would help.  Heck, there's plenty of people who would give them real life examples of how good they have it compared to before they got in.

New slogan for Navy Nukes could be, Accelerate your life, and your paycheck! And in the fine print, (6 year delay could apply).

Jason

[Fermi2]

It's a product of BOTH and do you honestly believe the Navy is going to turn away people who meet the academic requirements? And once in actually flunk someone out? If so you're naive and I have a bridge or two I'd love to sell you. It won't work, they've already tried it and it's a failure.

[JsonD13]

I saw it happen only once in the two years I was a SPU (and I tried more than once), and one guy in my power school class failed out.

But yep, on the whole I'll agree with ya Mike. 

I still like my slogan though.

Jason

[crusemm]

It's a product of BOTH and do you honestly believe the Navy is going to turn away people who meet the academic requirements? And once in actually flunk someone out? If so you're naive and I have a bridge or two I'd love to sell you. It won't work, they've already tried it and it's a failure.

I agree, the pipeline has become a pump, i.e. pass them at all costs, and if they can't pass it must be the instructors/program at fault for not adequately teaching them, not the sailors fault for failing to adequately learn.  I remember when (cue picture of old shaky man with cane and white hair) the program used to pride themselves on having a 50% attrition rate, beginning to end.  It used to be point of pride (at least it seemed to us students) with some instructors on exceeding that goal.  But, I digress from the original topic, and I still stand by my earlier post that the nuclear program is undermanned and will stay that way.  There are too many issues with work conditions and quality of life, and the caliber of personnel needed is such that they will always realize (sooner or later) that they can put their talents to better use somewhere else for it to be any other way.

[Fermi2]

I wasn't taking issue with your post. You hit it dead on, as you usually tend to do. My issue was with someone else's proposed misguided solution. The bonus solution never is a real solution. If the infrastructure is rotten putting a nice pretty coat of paint on won't change the date of it's eventual collapse.

[JsonD13]

I agree that the bonus is not a real solution, however, it is what gets them in the door (I know it got my broke, in debt butt in).  All I was trying to state in my original post in this thread was that this is not the time to be reducing bonuses, it is the time for aggressive recruiting (where all you really have is advertising and bonuses, right?).  I was in no way trying to say that money would fix the program, but can help with initial accessions.

I was just disagreeing with the thought that since the Navy is cutting back and cutting personnel, that it is a valid reasoning for cutting a bonus to one of the severly undermanned ratings the Navy has. 

I'd be curious to know what the SEAL bonus is doing as well, since most of them are usually CREO 1 (or at least was while I was in).

I left the Navy for a reason as well, and NO amount of money would have kept me in. 

Maybe I just overstepped my bounds in thinking that for increasing the number of applicants (which more money should do), you would increase the number of qualified individuals (a proportion of applicants), and also increase (not by the same proportion) the number of quality individuals.

Jason

[Fermi2]

So if you wanted people to paint your house and you a 100 dollar bonus to every painter who met the qualifications do you really think you're house would look worth a darn in the end?

[JsonD13]

Good analogy.  No, I dont think my house would necessarily look good (thank the lord for vinyl siding).  But this depends on many factors, including my intial standards, as well as any training I might send them through prior to actually painting my house.  They might even practice painting under the guidance of a master painter on a practice house and perform to a specific standard prior to painting my house.  But the training program would have to adhere to strict standards and have excellent supervisory oversight in order to ensure that the job would be completed with some predictability.  Also, standard of living would have to be adequate by middle class standards to ensure there would be enough painters to paint my neighbors house after I'm done.

But if I had a good program to weed out the truly qualified from the applicants (which the Navy does not have at the moment), I would find a really good set of painters for my $100 per person that I paid extra.  If I had some past performance to measure this off of, I might be able to say that the extra $100 made a difference since I was able to provide X many qualified painters, even though I had to decline XXX many applicants and fail out XX candidates throughout the training.

Part of the training process is to weed out the ones who will not perform predictably from those who will.  Since the Navy incurs a cost to bring these candidates in, maybe the reason why they really went to the mindset that if they are initially qualified that it is the instructor's fault when someone is recommended to fail, is to ensure that they minimize the financial loss they incur when someone fails.

This may not be the best analogy, but it may apply.  If you imagine SRO training, and the process that goes into hiring, training, and qualifying through the SRO pipeline.  I believe some time back that it was said that a good percentage (especially those instants straight from the Navy) fail out of the program.  So why would a company incur costs to fly someone out to interview, pay a good chunk of money (I believe my company paid over $1000 for me just to interview in person) to do so, just to have them fail out of the position they were qualified to train for a year or so later?  Did the company get much of anything useful out of them while they were training?  I believe that this is a part of the process that our companies expect and plan for because they have stringent standards that must be followed.

The same thought process used to exist for the Navy, the mindset was changed to not allow for failure.  It should be brought back along with higher bonuses.

I could be totally wrong on this, just trying to show my thought process.

Jason

[spekkio]

I don't think raising bonuses would achieve the results you seek regarding more interest and better quality.

People enlist in the military for many reasons, but very few enlist in the military for the money, let alone volunteer for submarine duty.

The conditions that turn people off from subs, and thus being nukes, are long periods of time underwater, cramped quarters, spartan living conditions, inability to contact ones family.

The conditions that cause Sailors to turn down reenlistment (based on a survey in the mid 90s) are being treated like meat by the command, feeling like they don't have an impact on the organization, not having enough responsibility/not feeling trusted, extended periods of time away from wife/children, extremely long working hours...there are a couple more I forget off the top of my head before you start to hit money.

Big Navy is slowly starting to get it, but they aren't quite there yet. In the end, though, there's not much you can do about the fact that submariners must go to sea in a 300x35' tube that smells funky for months on end, that there's really no recourse against shitty leadership, and that you can't fit enough people on board to significantly reduce working hours.

[Fermi2]

The trouble is, the Navy Nuclear Program training, and operationally doesn't have good standards, it doesn't even have average ones. Those standards it does have, it rarely adheres to. I don't buy your analogy for SRO Training. I've said dozens of times I do NOT agree with hiring SRO's directly out of the Navy. They simply for the most part do not have what it takes. The major difference between us and the Navy, outside our training programs are to the Nth degree harder, is we actually drop people from the program and those who make it through usually end up being dang fine operators.

Mike

[spekkio]

I don't know how things work in the civilian world, but theoretically you wouldn't need very bright people to operate Naval plants at all.

The nuclear Navy has a procedure that specifically details what to do for almost every feesible circumstance... "Turn this" "Turn this, aye" "Turning this" "Turning this, aye" "This is turned" "This is turned aye." If it doesn't specifically detail the procedure, then you need to ask someone with 10-20+ years of experience (eg, the edmc, eng, or the captain) what to do. It really doesn't take a genious to read a procedure, do it, repeat. Most of the incident reports arise from people failing to live up to this strict adherence, like when a qualified PVO operator suddeny decides radcon isn't important when removing a primary valve cap.

The smarts come in when it comes to having a theoretical understanding of the entire plant and how it operates, which is a standard that was implemented by Rickover with the founding of nuclear power. It's that theoretical knowledge that can help get a job in civvy land after the Navy or get an advanced degree, but knowing how to derive the reactor kinetics equations really doesn't help people operate the plant.

So I'm curious how you think that raising the standards of theoretical knowledge in the training pipeline is going to do to prevent operators from choosing to disregard procedures? I mean, you're talking about taking the brightest of the bright people, putting them through rigorous training, and then telling them that after all that they can't do a darn thing unless they read it out of a book first while being supervised by at least two people, no matter how many times they've done it before.

There's also the fact that the Navy doesn't take its pool of enlisted Sailors from college graduates. It has to operate on the lowest common denominator, which is a 17 year old high school graduate who probably has very little work experience and comes from a public education system that is way behind the power curve compared to our industrialized counterparts. If you wish to raise the standards that high, you're talking about attracting college graduates...and while the bonuses are nice, a college graduate with a technical degree can get out of college and earn an average salary of over $55k a year as a starting salary...without working 80 hour weeks. I'm sure the Navy would love to have the standard this high for all its Sailors, but with the nuclear Navy being under-manned currently, who's going to operate the plants?

[Fermi2]

The standards of knowing theory establish the work habits and basic fundamentals for operating. You just hit the problem. Since they aren't held to any sort of standing in their early phases they end up with no integrity and no operating ethic.

[spekkio]

I don't think that one necessarily has to do with the other, though. I don't think operators who violate procedures are necessarily too stupid for the program, nor do I think that (in most cases) they misunderstood what they were supposed to do. In some cases, such as the PVO incident, the operator understood that there was a 99.999% chance that no contamination would be found, which, paired with a desire to get out of work early, led him to skip a step he deemed unimportant because he understood the plant.

As for integrity, I don't think that dead horse can be beaten anymore than it's already being done, but people still decide to take shortcuts. Perhaps it's the understanding of the plant that leads operators to be frustrated at how cumbersome the requirements can be to get anything done, thus prolonging already long work days? This frustrating then leads to the temptation to cut corners.

[Fermi2]

BS, it's indicative of the slow erosion of standards of excellent nuclear Operation that the Navy has suffered over the last 15 years or so.

[crusemm]

My personal opinion is that BZ's A (lowering standards) has led to spekkio's B (frustration leads to cutting corners).  Have standards slipped, hell yes.  Is there about twenty times too much oversight hell yes.  The slipping standards lead to increased oversight which leads to frustration and a feeling of well, we're screwed anyway, lets just cut this corner so we can get out a little early, leads to getting caught, leads to increased oversight ad nauseum into death spiral.  I personally think that sometime in the late 80's, early 90's there was a shift away from personal accountability, find the problem and fix it, get on with business to find the scapegoat, add another layer of supervision, Write a more detailed procedure to address every little thing, and don't ask the operators to think anymore.  Until, here we are, death spiral.

[RDTroja]

That's a cultural problem manifested on the deckplates,....

Everybody thinks they're too smart for the program,....

Years and years of primary and secondary education programs telling little kiddies that just because they breathe they are worth something,..

    that intelligence and knowledge are intrinsic virtues as opposed to earned commodities,..

    that what went before you is not to be respected, learned and built upon, but is inherently
    flawed and unworthy of your pure, youthful intellect and virtue,..

    that the world would just coast along with nothing but green fields and fuzzy
    bunnies if the curmudgeons of society would just recognize the balance and harmony you
    bring to the planet simply by your own special existence,..

Navy nuke can be overmanned, at least from a budget perspective. The fix is easy enough, dump the senior guys into the civilian world and free up that money for lower cost junior personnel, how else do you explain the RIFS of the 1990's?!?!?!

(sic)

Bull's eye.

[Marlin]

I don't know how things work in the civilian world, but theoretically you wouldn't need very bright people to operate Naval plants at all.

The nuclear Navy has a procedure that specifically details what to do for almost every feesible circumstance... "Turn this" "Turn this, aye" "Turning this" "Turning this, aye" "This is turned" "This is turned aye." If it doesn't specifically detail the procedure, then you need to ask someone with 10-20+ years of experience (eg, the edmc, eng, or the captain) what to do. It really doesn't take a genious to read a procedure, do it, repeat. Most of the incident reports arise from people failing to live up to this strict adherence, like when a qualified PVO operator suddeny decides radcon isn't important when removing a primary valve cap.

Very sad... if we followed procedures blindly and something went wrong we would have been charged with "Malicious Compliance" or "neglect". Why did they bother with so much training if you only had to follow a "cook book"? You have a very pessimistic view of plant operation.

[spekkio]

It's nothing personal , and I appreciate that you articulated the current opinion. Hopefully you see the angst in the rebuttals here isn't the old "you'll never be as good as we once were", but rather "there were foulups in our day, we were lucky they didnt get us killed, the rules are there for a reason, and it's your @$$ at risk now so use the rules and procedures and operating experience to your benefit."

You're preaching to the choir. I'm aware that procedures and precautions are there for a reason. If the 0.01% took over and there was significant contamination found (after who knows how many man hours were wasted cleaning up the resulting large spill from his negligence), he could've endangered the entire crew.

My point is that the Navy's answer to mistakes like these is more supervision... which leads to a more cumbersome process to get work done and overall lower morale.

BS, it's indicative of the slow erosion of standards of excellent nuclear Operation that the Navy has suffered over the last 15 years or so.

We'll have to agree to disagree. You could require a 4.0 in nuke school, and I still guaruntee that operators will feel compelled to cut corners or sometimes *gasp* make mistakes like normal humans do.

Very sad... if we followed procedures blindly and something went wrong we would have been charged with "Malicious Compliance" or "neglect". Why did they bother with so much training if you only had to follow a "cook book"? You have a very pessimistic view of plant operation.

My tone might be pessimistic, but the nuclear Navy preaches and trains 100% verbatim procedural complience. There is no other way. The fact that they are giving operators the theoretical knowledge to understand why is a gift, but I don't think it's necessary to know it at a 4.0 level to be proficient at operating.

[Gamecock]

[Marlin]

My tone might be pessimistic, but the nuclear Navy preaches and trains 100% verbatime procedural complienciance. There is no other way. The fact that they are giving operators the theoretical knowledge to understand why is a gift, but I don't think it's necessary to know it at a 4.0 level to be proficient at operating.

Passing is 2.8 or 3.0 right? Understanding what happens in the plant when you turn a valve or flip a switch is probably important don't you think. If the standard was 4.0 the pump would be a filter wouldn't it? I think you are missing the big picture.

[Marlin]

Safety margin the horse may be faking it.   

[Harley Rider]

I don't buy your analogy for SRO Training. I've said dozens of times I do NOT agree with hiring SRO's directly out of the Navy. They simply for the most part do not have what it takes. The major difference between us and the Navy, outside our training programs are to the Nth degree harder, is we actually drop people from the program and those who make it through usually end up being dang fine operators.

Mike

I will let this one go, for the moment, however I'm still standing right next to all my fellow ISRO's who all made it! 7 (ex Navy instants) started and of the 7, all 7 have finished systems. Understand there is alot to do but by damn how about some support for us since so many in the industry (union) just want to see us all fail !!!! Aced my systems final today (my fellow ISRO (ex Navy) were 90 +) ,, not so much from the upgrades to SRO or the NEO to RO.  You tell me Mike do we all suck? Should I be applying to Micky D's?  I have always been impressed with your post,,,,however, you pissed me off tonight.

[JustinHEMI05]

I will let this one go, for the moment, however I'm still standing right next to all my fellow ISRO's who all made it! 7 (ex Navy instants) started and of the 7, all 7 have finished systems. Understand there is alot to do but by damn how about some support for us since so many in the industry (union) just want to see us all fail !!!! Aced my systems final today (my fellow ISRO (ex Navy) were 90 +) ,, not so much from the upgrades to SRO or the NEO to RO.  You tell me Mike do we all suck? Should I be applying to Micky D's?  I have always been impressed with your post,,,,however, you pissed me off tonight.

He didn't say we all suck. He said for the most part, they fail and statistically, he is correct. Congrats to you and your classmates, you beat the statistics.... so far. The simulator is where the men will be separated from the boys, not systems.

He also gave props to those of us that do make it through and again he was right, I am becoming a damn fine operator.

With the right attitude, the right training program and a little luck, yes a Navy nuke can make it. But, statistically, they don't do so well.

[DSO]

No it wouldn't, the bonuses have gone up 20 fold since I left the Navy and the quality of Navy Nukes has gone down far more than that.

Mike

so true!!

[DLGN25]

When my father left the Navy I asked him, "Why?" To which he replied that the Navy had changed for the worse.  When I left the Navy, one of the reasons is the Navy had changed. 

I was with an instructor who improperly removed a primary valve cap which resulted in spilled primary coolant at the sampling station.  He told me to not report it as the water was not radioactive enough to worry about.  He and I knew that was true because of our education, but it was wrong.

Then there was the dual plant scram and fill, and the scram caused by electrician trying to megger an on-line generator, or the time potoble water chemicals were put into the primary loop, and then the engine room fire caused by improper main engine filter change.

And it goes on.

The work hours underway and in port, always three section or worse.

Oh, then there were the repeated requests for RO volunteers from the surface fleet to the under manned submarine service.  No one stepped forward.

This was in 1967-1970 when there was a draft.

Nothing changes except the players.

(The one good thing is I did not have to wear the Donald Duck uniform.)

[IPREGEN]

The decline probably can also be tied to the non-Rickover era. When I was on the Billie B aka CGN-25 he was aboard for sea trials out of our Bremerton refit. Everybody acted like they had a cattle prod stuck in the dark side. Oh how I miss the days when the word put out to was to lay low and don't be seen.

[spekkio]

The decline probably can also be tied to the non-Rickover era. When I was on the Billie B aka CGN-25 he was aboard for sea trials out of our Bremerton refit. Everybody acted like they had a cattle prod stuck in the dark side. Oh how I miss the days when the word put out to was to lay low and don't be seen.

Maybe, maybe not. Are all civvy plants run by grumpy old men who loves to make everyone under his command miserable? Do your civvy bosses have the attitude that 100% of your time should be devoted to nuclear power? Granted, Rickover had high standards, but he also created many policies that made people unnecessarily miserable, and many of those policies can still be seen today.

Also, no one's answered the major question: With these new heightened standards, who is going to man today's submarines and CVN reactor departments? The Navy can't find enough qualified people as it is, and that trend isn't going to turn around until Big Navy takes a long hard look at how it does business and how its Sailors are treated. The USMC tries to give Marines a week off before deployment to get their odds and ends in order...the Navy makes Sailors work 100+ hours. You want to raise bonuses? The defense budget is stretched as it is, so good luck convincing Congress to dump more money into a submarine program that already has questionable utility in the post cold war era.

[Marlin]

Maybe, maybe not. Are all civvy plants run by grumpy old men who loves to make everyone under his command miserable? Do your civvy bosses have the attitude that 100% of your time should be devoted to nuclear power? Granted, Rickover had high standards, but he also created many policies that made people unnecessarily miserable, and many of those policies can still be seen today.

Also, no one's answered the major question: With these new heightened standards, who is going to man today's submarines and CVN reactor departments? The Navy can't find enough qualified people as it is, and that trend isn't going to turn around until Big Navy takes a long hard look at how it does business and how their Sailors are treated. You want to raise bonuses? The defense budget is stretched as it is, so good luck convincing Congress to dump more money into a submarine program that already has questionable utility in the post cold war era.

   Standards that we grumpy old men had to endure were in part due to a very real threat of washout/failure. That was when the recruiting was low in all areas of the Navy and it was easy to staff from Nuke pipeline failures. Having to staff a smaller Navy with little wiggle room to do other than recruit for existing billets makes that impractical. People are not one size fits all, those that stayed in my day did so from fear of failure in the commercial world (wish they had gotten out) and lifers ( I think the current word is diggit ). Even the diggits have families and it is hard to justify to your young bride why you are not doing the best for the little diggits. Bonuses, pro pay, housing allowances, and pay differentials for high cost of living make it possible for a career in the Navy to be a possibility. I do agree that increases in pay is unlikely and has been the last thing to increase in military budgets. As to the utility of the submarine force there is a greater call for missions now than when I was in and there are fewer submarines to perform them. The number of countries that have submarines and the number of "enemy" submarines is much greater today even if you ignore Russia. The mission of the submarine may have changed but its utility has increased with the change to SSGNs, mixed mission patforms (addition of vertical launch tubes and special forces accommodations), and litoral designs of the Virginia class fast attacks.

[adrianI]

No it wouldn't, the bonuses have gone up 20 fold since I left the Navy and the quality of Navy Nukes has gone down far more than that.

Mike

How can you say that if you haven't been in the navy for 15+ years?

[stephpatton]

hahahahahahahaha.   sigh. overmanned.  sorry I couldn't stop laughing.  They ARE bringing more of us in.  NOT overmanning, however, since a lot of senior enlisted are not re-enlisting.  They, (the Navy) have lowered standards to the point a 2.5 is a passing grade.  Oh God, don't get me started. We had a student in my class who failed 2 out of 3 subjects, and was given the opportunity to take comp!   If he would have passed, he would have been allowed to continue through the pipeline! Honestly, what are they (the Navy) thinking.  People can only understand a little over HALF of the information and still be pushed along.  Sometimes, when I read the posts of those of you who have been here at NNPTC in the past, I am really jealous.  You knew that the sailors who were there next to you at graduation were competent.  I do not and never will consider 2.5 competent by any means.  Navy knows best, but my common sense tells me lowering standards at NNPTC for students cannot be good for maintaining standards in the fleet. 

[Gamecock]

hahahahahahahaha.   sigh. overmanned.  sorry I couldn't stop laughing.  They ARE bringing more of us in.  NOT overmanning, however, since a lot of senior enlisted are not re-enlisting.  They, (the Navy) have lowered standards to the point a 2.5 is a passing grade.  Oh God, don't get me started. We had a student in my class who failed 2 out of 3 subjects, and was given the opportunity to take comp!   If he would have passed, he would have been allowed to continue through the pipeline! Honestly, what are they (the Navy) thinking.  People can only understand a little over HALF of the information and still be pushed along.  Sometimes, when I read the posts of those of you who have been here at NNPTC in the past, I am really jealous.  You knew that the sailors who were there next to you at graduation were competent.  I do not and never will consider 2.5 competent by any means.  Navy knows best, but my common sense tells me lowering standards at NNPTC for students cannot be good for maintaining standards in the fleet. 

2.5 and survive has been the mantra since I came in back in 1990.  So, in that regard, the standard has not been lowered.

You will have to learn at a 2.8 level once you get to the fleet.

[co60slr]

Sometimes, when I read the posts of those of you who have been here at NNPTC in the past, I am really jealous.  You knew that the sailors who were there next to you at graduation were competent.  I do not and never will consider 2.5 competent by any means.  Navy knows best, but my common sense tells me lowering standards at NNPTC for students cannot be good for maintaining standards in the fleet. 

Graduation from NPS does not mean "compentent to stand watch"....by ANY means.  It means you've learned enough of the basics to move on to the next phase.  (Hence, you're not a nuke yet until you leave Prototype).  I've worked with 3.50 GPA grads that made it and I had to watch them like a hawk on watch.  Likewise, a 2.50 GPA in ONE SUBJECT doesn't mean someone can't pass the comp, go on to Prototype and get that area reinforced, qualify, go to a sub and qualify, and be a great sailor.   There is also the (remote) possibility that you get to your Sub/Ship, FAIL to quality, and have the golden NEC removed.   That's the great part about being a nuke...there's always a million ways to fail from day one until retirement.

I had an instructor at NPS who looked at our anchor man (2.51) at graduation and said, "You can come work for me anytime.  You're the hardest working person in the class".   I didn't understand what he meant (and felt offended) until we all got to the Fleet.

NPS standards do NOT define standards in the Fleet.  YOU define standards, as do your shipmates, your Chiefs, your Officers, your CO.  This also I didn't understand...and it took me a long time to understand this fully.  Again, I've seen some very smart people do very dumb things (and vice versa).  I never sat in a "problem meeting" and had someone's GPA analyzed as to why they didn't use adequate "human performance tools".  In fact, some of the really smart people (or so THEY think) need to be watched extra close...they tend to think they're smarter than the collective Navy Enterprise.

Some day when you're a Chief, take that 2.51 sailor and make him/her a 3.0 sailor.  There's no leadership challenge in taking a 3.8 sailor "under your wing" and helping him/her maintain that.  This seems to be a facet of leadership lacking these days and I'll leave that causal analysis to other threads here.

[stephpatton]

I guess that all makes sense.  I guess I also realize that the guy seemed to make no attempt at passing, which made me feel no remorse and group him and anyone else 2.5 as not fit to be in the program.  Just makes me mad to see people not care/try.

[co60slr]

I guess that all makes sense.  I guess I also realize that the guy seemed to make no attempt at passing, which made me feel no remorse and group him and anyone else 2.5 as not fit to be in the program.  Just makes me mad to see people not care/try.

My post was in reference to someone giving 110%, using all resources (e.g., fellow students, instructors, study hours), and still getting 2.50.   I'll take him.  Someone who doesn't care, and through luck gets 2.50?   Darwin will win...eventually.

How about someone that gets 3.80 without much effort but doesn't want to be there either?   How does THAT person make you feel?

Someone failing out will affect someone's watch rotation...somewhere.   Whether the system (or any training program...military, collegate, elementary eduction) is a "pump" or a "filter" is a matter of perspective and leadership decision.   Filter them all out?  Who's going to relieve you?   Help the 2.49 sailor be a 2.80 sailor?   Win-win.

[still_in]

I guess that all makes sense.  I guess I also realize that the guy seemed to make no attempt at passing, which made me feel no remorse and group him and anyone else 2.5 as not fit to be in the program.  Just makes me mad to see people not care/try.

I have seen a prior enlisted TEOOW fail a test going through the third deck of NNTPC. 2.5 in power school does not dictate ability to operate.
My best friend, separate prior enlisted TEOOW, got a 2.0 on a test on the O-deck and I guarantee he is a better MM or ET or EM than you are.  Experience means a lot, more than you know right now, grades are not trivial but they do not indicate operational ability. If you can't operate you ain't S..T!

[Vorschau]

 

hahahahahahahaha.   sigh. overmanned.  sorry I couldn't stop laughing.  They ARE bringing more of us in.  NOT overmanning, however, since a lot of senior enlisted are not re-enlisting.  They, (the Navy) have lowered standards to the point a 2.5 is a passing grade.  Oh God, don't get me started. We had a student in my class who failed 2 out of 3 subjects, and was given the opportunity to take comp!   If he would have passed, he would have been allowed to continue through the pipeline! Honestly, what are they (the Navy) thinking.  People can only understand a little over HALF of the information and still be pushed along.  Sometimes, when I read the posts of those of you who have been here at NNPTC in the past, I am really jealous.  You knew that the sailors who were there next to you at graduation were competent.  I do not and never will consider 2.5 competent by any means.  Navy knows best, but my common sense tells me lowering standards at NNPTC for students cannot be good for maintaining standards in the fleet. 

My class director in E-NPS and a MMCM(SW) who proctored my last test who is a class director as well both had to get waivers to come back here because of their power school performance. The master chief had about a 2.51 in power school with a couple course failures.

In my friend's section him and one other person failed the previous exam because they struggled with math. I used to help him from time to time as much as I could. Their SLPO had them stay behind when we had a mandatory drinking and driving seminar last Friday and tutored them himself in his office. My friend in no way took it as an insult and is on the right path. What everyone is saying about grades is true from what I can see, and leadership is absolutely a large defining factor on the success (or failure) of people in this pipeline.

Yes, I think that some people shouldn't be here at times, everyone gets frustrated at times. But I still think the pump is getting the job done so far, and the people who didn't want to try and were bombing the 2.5 stay alive have already parted ways, and will continue to.

And as for the overmanned, NNPTC is now being flooded with people to the point where they are placing bunk-beds in the power school suites and making the people coming in share those tiny rooms with one closet, and the old two bed rooms that used to be for the new people will soon be a coveted asset O_O. I still have yet to get my own room. Seeing a sea of indoc's waiting by the basketball courts so that a huge truck loaded with seabags could unload was mind-boggling. Walking to the Rickover one morning I saw roughly 10 sections mustered around the circle, thinking it was a power school class mustering but in fact it was all of the new A-school classes. They have been doubling up classes which is something new to me, we didn't do that when I came in less than a year ago. The CO is putting in for budgeting for a new barracks here. We'll see if in years to come they might have better manning, but statistically it doesn't seem so from what I've read.

[adrianI]

My class director in E-NPS and a MMCM(SW) who proctored my last test who is a class director as well both had to get waivers to come back here because of their power school performance. The master chief had about a 2.51 in power school with a couple course failures.

In my friend's section him and one other person failed the previous exam because they struggled with math. I used to help him from time to time as much as I could. Their SLPO had them stay behind when we had a mandatory drinking and driving seminar last Friday and tutored them himself in his office. My friend in no way took it as an insult and is on the right path. What everyone is saying about grades is true from what I can see, and leadership is absolutely a large defining factor on the success (or failure) of people in this pipeline.

Yes, I think that some people shouldn't be here at times, everyone gets frustrated at times. But I still think the pump is getting the job done so far, and the people who didn't want to try and were bombing the 2.5 stay alive have already parted ways, and will continue to.

And as for the overmanned, NNPTC is now being flooded with people to the point where they are placing bunk-beds in the power school suites and making the people coming in share those tiny rooms with one closet, and the old two bed rooms that used to be for the new people will soon be a coveted asset O_O. I still have yet to get my own room. Seeing a sea of indoc's waiting by the basketball courts so that a huge truck loaded with seabags could unload was mind-boggling. Walking to the Rickover one morning I saw roughly 10 sections mustered around the circle, thinking it was a power school class mustering but in fact it was all of the new A-school classes. They have been doubling up classes which is something new to me, we didn't do that when I came in less than a year ago. The CO is putting in for budgeting for a new barracks here. We'll see if in years to come they might have better manning, but statistically it doesn't seem so from what I've read.

I was in the Navy for ten years and there was never a shortage of "old timers" who said how much smarter everyone use to be and how much more you use to have to know. Now that I am in civilian nuclear power I have heard the same story. I just don't believe it. The fact is that today both in civilian nuclear power and in the Navy there are far less accidents than there use to be. An "old timer" at my plant said there use to be a scram every three months or so. That doesn't sound like great operators to me. This same old timer also was the only one to freak out during a JPM which required RCIC to be isolated. Rather than following the procedure and only shutting the required valves, he just flipped every switch on the panel till the were all green, and never once even referenced the procedure. I guess my post is a little all over the place but the point I'm trying to make is that people are so quick to say how much smarter operators use to be and I just don't think the facts back that up

[adrianI]

Ok. Maybe "smarter" was a bad choice of words. I in no way meant to imply that I think I am smarter than those who came before me or anyone for that matter. When I look at all the systems in our plant and think that somebody had to invent all these things and that it all actually works together everyday I am humbled. I do not think I could do it. I just don't agree when I hear people say that "back in the day" everything was better, harder, etc.

Adrian

[adrianI]

Marssim:Great point. Also, what I didn't say was that the old timer I'm talking about is one of the most knowledgeable guys at my plant.

[JustinHEMI05]

I like to look at it like this.

20 years ago operators had to have more street smarts.

Now, an operator has to learn a lot more information to get a license than they did 20 years ago, but that is because of the industry shift away from street smarts so everything being proceduralized, if that is a word.

Adrian, we have also heard "old times" tell us stories of 8 months long ILT classes, and that there is no way they could go through an 18 month long class of today. But back then, they had to operate the plant based on a deep level of integrated plant knowledge. Today, we operate based on a deep level of procedural knowledge. Yes, there is a technical aspect we still have to have, but I would wager that it is no longer on the same level as an "old timers."

Old school and new school are connected, however. Everything we have to learn from the procedures in this 18 month long class today, is built, like Marssim said, on the experiences of the "old timers."

So is one generation of operators smarter than the other? No, I don't think so, at least not in the literal sense. I think its just a different kind of smart.

[adrianI]

+1 Justin, I agree 100% with what you said. Well put.

[Gamecock]

So is one generation of operators smarter than the other? No, I don't think so, at least not in the literal sense. I think its just a different kind of smart.

One thing I realize every day in my current job is just how "unsmart" I actually am.  I've got nothing but respect and admiration for all the "old timers" that I come in contact with.

[BK3]

Take it for what it is worth, but during INDOC we were told that Nukes are currently undermanned at the moment, and they are supposed to be increasing the number of nukes coming into the school next year. The Master Chief also said that once the Enterprise is decommisioned it should help out the situation.

[trollarc]

I was just wondering. Do people at civilian plants still have to have some level os integrated plant knowledge or is it brute force memorization of procedures? I assume some logic has to intervene somewhere as they cant make a procedure for everything right?

[War Eagle]

I was just wondering. Do people at civilian plants still have to have some level os integrated plant knowledge or is it brute force memorization of procedures? I assume some logic has to intervene somewhere as they cant make a procedure for everything right?

You have to have a better integrated knowledge level AND there are more procedures.  Commercial nukes are much more complicated than Navy plants.  Not better in my opinion, just more complicated.

[JustinHEMI05]

I was just wondering. Do people at civilian plants still have to have some level os integrated plant knowledge or is it brute force memorization of procedures? I assume some logic has to intervene somewhere as they cant make a procedure for everything right?

I agree with War Eagles sentiments. There can, in fact, be a procedure for everything.  At least, the industry is trying very hard! 20 years ago, operators maneuvered the plant based simply on integrated plant knowledge. Well, in some cases, that led to monthly unplanned scrams, reactivity control errors and NRC ordered shut downs. The industry is now very focuses on procedural compliance and configuration control.*

Operators still must have a high level of integrated plant knowledge however, because as War Eagle alluded to, these big ol nukes are infinitely more complicated than a Navy plant. There are some occasions, at least at my 2 BWRs, where you simply do not have the time to consult procedures. Yes, the CRS has the TRIPs (transient response procedures) to guide him through a scenario, but each step has deep meaning that he and the other operators have to understand in order to implement the strategy effectively. Commercial plants are much less forgiving than Navy plants, and that is simply a matter of their respective uses. Like it has been said many times, Navy plants are Ferrari's and commercial plants are freight trains and thus, their designs are dictated by the needs.

*These statements are based solely on my current plant's history and in no way imply that every plant experienced the same sore of troubles. YMMV.

[VincentVega]

hahahahahahahaha.   sigh. overmanned.  sorry I couldn't stop laughing.  They ARE bringing more of us in.  NOT overmanning, however, since a lot of senior enlisted are not re-enlisting.  They, (the Navy) have lowered standards to the point a 2.5 is a passing grade.  Oh God, don't get me started. We had a student in my class who failed 2 out of 3 subjects, and was given the opportunity to taknot everyonee comp!   If he would have passed, he would have been allowed to continue through the pipeline! Honestly, what are they (the Navy) thinking.  People can only understand a little over HALF of the information and still be pushed along.  Sometimes, when I read the posts of those of you who have been here at NNPTC in the past, I am really jealous.  You knew that the sailors who were there next to you at graduation were competent.  I do not and never will consider 2.5 competent by any means.  Navy knows best, but my common sense tells me lowering standards at NNPTC for students cannot be good for maintaining standards in the fleet. 

Listen...maybe everyone isn't as smart as you.  I am currently an instructor at NNPTC and it always makes me laugh when I hear guys like you call these kids stupid just because they are barely passing.  By no means am I a hugger, but the vast majority of these kids are going to make good nukes.  There will always be problems with the weeding out process, but with the way things are right now we need all the bodies we can get in the fleet.  If we can teach these kids 2.5 knowledge and send them on their way, then it is up to the leadership of whatever command they end up at to ensure that they are really transformed into useful, knowledgeable nukes.  And if there are Chiefs out there that don't want to do that, then I would say that they are more useless than that 2.5 student. 
I barely made it through this pipeline myself...and (not to be cocky or anything) I have always been one of those "go to guys" in every Engineering Dept that I have been a part of. 
Don't judge these guys too much on how they are doing now.  Not everyone is as smart as you are and the light doesn't always come on at the same time for everyone.  Teach them as much as you can and then look forward to the opportunity that you have in the future to really teach these guys how to be good nukes.
And by the way...if the minimum was 3.20 knowledge to make it to the fleet, there would always be someone out there that would say that is still too low...so you tell me...where should we draw the line?  Trust me...there are plenty of 2.5 guys out there that are terrific operators...and there are even more 3.5 guys out there that are completely useless.

[Cycoticpenguin]

Listen...maybe everyone isn't as smart as you.  I am currently an instructor at NNPTC and it always makes me laugh when I hear guys like you call these kids stupid just because they are barely passing.  By no means am I a hugger, but the vast majority of these kids are going to make good nukes.  There will always be problems with the weeding out process, but with the way things are right now we need all the bodies we can get in the fleet.  If we can teach these kids 2.5 knowledge and send them on their way, then it is up to the leadership of whatever command they end up at to ensure that they are really transformed into useful, knowledgeable nukes.  And if there are Chiefs out there that don't want to do that, then I would say that they are more useless than that 2.5 student. 
I barely made it through this pipeline myself...and (not to be cocky or anything) I have always been one of those "go to guys" in every Engineering Dept that I have been a part of. 
Don't judge these guys too much on how they are doing now.  Not everyone is as smart as you are and the light doesn't always come on at the same time for everyone.  Teach them as much as you can and then look forward to the opportunity that you have in the future to really teach these guys how to be good nukes.
And by the way...if the minimum was 3.20 knowledge to make it to the fleet, there would always be someone out there that would say that is still too low...so you tell me...where should we draw the line?  Trust me...there are plenty of 2.5 guys out there that are terrific operators...and there are even more 3.5 guys out there that are completely useless.

Please dont make a habit out of bumping posts that are over a year old,  especially for your first post

Your GPA point is irrelevant. The way nukes are taught now, is not the same as how they were taught 15-20 years ago. Also, they lowered the GPA requirement to 2.5 instead of 2.8. If it was still 2.8, I know, at least in my class, quite a few would have been fed to the meat grinder.

The line is arbitrary. Pointless to discuss. The ability to operate and understand are two very different things.  I knew quite a few fantastic TG watches that could start that bad boy up in no time, but when it broke, they'd be in the corner with their tail in their legs.

Teach to your hearts content, YOU, sir, are molding the nuclear navy directly. What we send through is a direct result of your's and your fellow instructors doing. Take pride and comfort if you really feel what you are doing is adequate, Im not going to judge it.

[DDMurray]

Please dont make a habit out of bumping posts that are over a year old,  especially for your first post

Your GPA point is irrelevant. The way nukes are taught now, is not the same as how they were taught 15-20 years ago. Also, they lowered the GPA requirement to 2.5 instead of 2.8. If it was still 2.8, I know, at least in my class, quite a few would have been fed to the meat grinder.

The line is arbitrary. Pointless to discuss. The ability to operate and understand are two very different things.  I knew quite a few fantastic TG watches that could start that bad boy up in no time, but when it broke, they'd be in the corner with their tail in their legs.

Teach to your hearts content, YOU, sir, are molding the nuclear navy directly. What we send through is a direct result of your's and your fellow instructors doing. Take pride and comfort if you really feel what you are doing is adequate, Im not going to judge it.

ObiJuan- you are wise in the way of the nukes.  You seemed to have gained more knowledge in 6 years than the rest of us learned in a career.  When I was in class 8502, the minimum grade was 2.50.  I also knew plenty of guys who were book smart and public dumb (and vice versa).  I also know guys who were great operators and knowledge powerhouses that were crappy nukes because of their inability to work well with others. 

I acknowledge your omniscience, but please don't take a condescending tone with somebody who did something you didn't - stepped up to the plate to try and make a difference.

[Cycoticpenguin]

I acknowledge your omniscience, but please don't take a condescending tone with somebody who did something you didn't - stepped up to the plate to try and make a difference.

EXCUSE ME???

Oh you're a senior chief, forgot that makes you better then me. Get over yourself.

edit : please tell me where I had a "condescending" attitude... I was giving him praise if anything. I gave him crap for being a thread necromancer on his first post...

[Styrofoam]

heh. I started reading this thread thinking it was still 2010. I got to March, then I thought "Hey, it's not March yet."

[DDMurray]

edit : please tell me where I had a "condescending" attitude... I was giving him praise if anything. I gave him crap for being a thread necromancer on his first post...

Please dont make a habit out of bumping posts that are over a year old,  especially for your first post  

Why not?

Your GPA point is irrelevant. The way nukes are taught now, is not the same as how they were taught 15-20 years ago. Also, they lowered the GPA requirement to 2.5 instead of 2.8.

How do you know how they were taught 15-20 years ago?  You imply that you know that a 2.5 now is not nearly as tough to get now as it was in back in your day (6 years ago).

The line is arbitrary. Pointless to discuss. The ability to operate and understand are two very different things.  I knew quite a few fantastic TG watches that could start that bad boy up in no time, but when it broke, they'd be in the corner with their tail in their legs.

How many TG startups have you done or even seen (and I don't mean at NPTU)?  If I recall correctly you spent most of your time in the shipyard on medical hold.

Teach to your hearts content, YOU, sir, are molding the nuclear navy directly. What we send through is a direct result of your's and your fellow instructors doing. Take pride and comfort if you really feel what you are doing is adequate, Im not going to judge it.

If you read this and don't think it is condescending, then you are not nearly as wise as you portray yourself to be.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.” - Teddy Roosevelt

CycoticPenguin/CM: I am a retired MCPO, but that is irrelevant.  What is relevant is that you espouse yourself to be some sort of expert and you are not.  A review of your posts tells me that you are an expert on:

1. How to extend your time at RTC/NNPTC/NPTU via medical hold.
2. Pointing out the deficiencies of others because you hit roadblocks in your quest to go from E-3 to O-6.

[Cycoticpenguin]

Why not?How do you know how they were taught 15-20 years ago?  You imply that you know that a 2.5 now is not nearly as tough to get now as it was in back in your day (6 years ago).
How many TG startups have you done or even seen (and I don't mean at NPTU)?  If I recall correctly you spent most of your time in the shipyard on medical hold.
If you read this and don't think it is condescending, then you are not nearly as wise as you portray yourself to be.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.” - Teddy Roosevelt

CycoticPenguin/CM: I am a retired MCPO, but that is irrelevant.  What is relevant is that you espouse yourself to be some sort of expert and you are not.  A review of your posts tells me that you are an expert on:

1. How to extend your time at RTC/NNPTC/NPTU via medical hold.
2. Pointing out the deficiencies of others because you hit roadblocks in your quest to go from E-3 to O-6.

That rock you live under must be comfortable. My experience pales iin comparison to yours,  but two back to back deployments fully qualified. i have experienced my fair share of crap.You have some nerve to call me presumptuous.

Im not going to get into a pissing contest with you so consider anything further you say falling on deaf ears.

Edit : last time I checked shipyards last 6 months, not three years. And to answer your" why not" question, ever hear the phrase sayin something abouut a dead horse?

[DDMurray]

That rock you live under must be comfortable. My experience pales iin comparison to yours,  but two back to back deployments fully qualified. i have experienced my fair share of crap.You have some nerve to call me presumptuous.

Im not going to get into a pissing contest with you so consider anything further you say falling on deaf ears.

Edit : last time I checked shipyards last 6 months, not three years. And to answer your" why not" question, ever hear the phrase sayin something abouut a dead horse?

In case your deaf ears can still read:  You are right.  You have the right to your opinion.  I did not know that you did back to back deployments.  It was presumptuous of me to assume otherwise.  It was also uncalled for me to impugn your expertise.  For that I am truly sorry.  That being said, IMHO your comments to the instructor were still condescending and out of line.

[Cycoticpenguin]

In case your deaf ears can still read:  You are right.  You have the right to your opinion.  I did not know that you did back to back deployments.  It was presumptuous of me to assume otherwise.  It was also uncalled for me to impugn your expertise.  For that I am truly sorry.  That being said, IMHO you're comments to the instructor were still condescending and out of line.

I appreciate your response. I turned to this website for assistance with navy stuff, and it helped in most cases. I merely try to give my own perspective on things (95% of the time unwanted, but Im here ). Im not an "expert" and never will claim to be, but I do have enough experience (good and bad) to offer an opinion when the opportunity presents itself. My statement to the instructor wasnt intended to be condescending at all. I was saying he's directly interfacing with the "new" nuclear navy, and the product he provides (trained operators) will directly influence where the nuclear navy will go from today. Thats a huge responsibility!

[LaFeet]

WOW  what a great read..... nukes of old and nukes anew.....

 I was not (nor am I today) the smartest in my class.  Heck, I was more interested in the "all the beer & wine you could drink" nights at the local skating rinks (ahhh Orlando  I miss you).

 I did pass and I did comtinue on with my career.  Enough to bet I do not ever want to do another battery charge, long form precrit, D/P cell replacement, MG end bell removal, RISIC replacement or troubleshoot the Radioman's WLR ** again. Unlike most of you guys I was on more than one class of boat (two being one of a kind) so my experience may be a tad different than yours.  It was not uncommon for us to qualify different watch stations, in fact it was encouraged.  I think I was the first RO on the Narwhal to qualify BCE.

 As for the quality of todays students?  I can not answer that.  I have kids out there that I trained and I know they are trying to pass on what I learned back in the MagAmp days.  I can only hope that by "flooding the gates" we manage to get enough quality operators to safely man our fleet.

 With todays technology the operators may not be able to draw the Reactor Control Circuit but I damn well expect them to be able to draw the Discharge System or list all the vital loads (hell I cant forget it).

 All in all, to those that have served and to those now serving - thank you

[OldHP]

WOW  what a great read..... nukes of old and nukes anew.....

All in all, to those that have served and to those now serving - thank you!

I'll second that!   

[playswithairplanes]

You have to have a better integrated knowledge level AND there are more procedures.  Commercial nukes are much more complicated than Navy plants.  Not better in my opinion, just more complicated.

The plants are much more complex because they are 30+ years old. There hasn't been a new built plant in the USA in that time. If the new designs were to be built a lot of that old complexity would be engineered out. If you look at some of the German Siemens designs, they are slick. Just my 2 cents.

[Sun Dog]

The plants are much more complex because they are 30+ years old.
 

Certainly the Navy does not have any ships running on reactors that are 30+ years old!

USS Enterprise (CVN-65) commissioned 25 November 1961

USS Nimitz (CVN-68) commissioned 03 May 1975

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) commissioned 18 October 1977

[playswithairplanes]

Certainly the Navy does not have any ships running on reactors that are 30+ years old!

USS Enterprise (CVN-65) commissioned 25 November 1961

USS Nimitz (CVN-68) commissioned 03 May 1975

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) commissioned 18 October 1977

Yes. Even in the Navy side, things get less complex with time. Comparing A1W or S3G to the current plants being use. It wasn't my intent to say that these were in some way bad plant designs, or some how inferior. Simply pointing out that the newer 4th Gen and 5th Gen reactors that are being designed and used in Europe are much less complex. Take the Siemens Gas Cooled PBRs. Essentially eliminates the LOCA and loss of flow accident possibilities by design. Or compare an old style S3G to an S8G with NC flow capability. Different generations, different levels of complexity. That was my point. Not trying to start a fight.

[Cycoticpenguin]

The plants are much more complex because they are 30+ years old. There hasn't been a new built plant in the USA in that time. If the new designs were to be built a lot of that old complexity would be engineered out. If you look at some of the German Siemens designs, they are slick. Just my 2 cents.

My plant is far, far, far less complex then an A4W....

Of course, comparing a plant with size and weight restrictions, while maintaining appropriate output and bouncing abilities to be able to operate in a war scenario, while being able to resist impacts and still maintain integrity to a plant designed to make money isnt comparing apples to apples... while at the same time, the technology on my a4w experience is vastly superior to my "crappy" instrumentation here. 

[HydroDave63]

My plant is far, far, far less complex then an A4W....

Of course, comparing a plant with size and weight restrictions, while maintaining appropriate output and bouncing abilities to be able to operate in a war scenario, while being able to resist impacts and still maintain integrity to a plant designed to make money isnt comparing apples to apples... while at the same time, the technology on my a4w experience is vastly superior to my "crappy" instrumentation here. 

So just when DID you license on either one? Oh, I see....

[JustinHEMI05]

My plant is far, far, far less complex then an A4W....

Wrong.

[drayer54]

My plant is far, far, far less complex then an A4W....

Of course, comparing a plant with size and weight restrictions, while maintaining appropriate output and bouncing abilities to be able to operate in a war scenario, while being able to resist impacts and still maintain integrity to a plant designed to make money isnt comparing apples to apples... while at the same time, the technology on my a4w experience is vastly superior to my "crappy" instrumentation here. 

But does it have clever little drawings everywhere in the shape of a male cough: genitalia cough: ? Do the radiation signs have years of history and sadness etched on the back of it? Do you get to taste the sweet aroma of jet exhaust ? Does it have piping being held together by lagging and years and years of paint? I better stop before I get homesick....

[MacGyver]

My plant is far, far, far less complex then an A4W....

Of course, comparing a plant with size and weight restrictions, while maintaining appropriate output and bouncing abilities to be able to operate in a war scenario, while being able to resist impacts and still maintain integrity to a plant designed to make money isnt comparing apples to apples... while at the same time, the technology on my a4w experience is vastly superior to my "crappy" instrumentation here. 

[Cycoticpenguin]

But does it have clever little drawings everywhere in the shape of a male cough: genitalia cough: ? Do the radiation signs have years of history and sadness etched on the back of it? Do you get to taste the sweet aroma of jet exhaust ? Does it have piping being held together by lagging and years and years of paint? I better stop before I get homesick....

nah, you get fired for that crap

[drayer54]

nah, you get fired for that crap

I find that hard to believe..... 

[MacGyver]

[Cycoticpenguin]

I find that hard to believe..... 

Its not the navy man. You dont go to NJP for stuff. You go to jail and get fined by the NRC. No smilie faces here.  Yes theres some horseplay, but thats about where it stops.