NUPOC; Instructor, Officer, or Neither?

[mykat]

Hello NukeWorker forum

At this time I am a college junior, majoring in physics. I've been giving serious consideration to the nuclear power industry because of the expected growth that everyone has been promising me.

It seems to me that the NUPOC program I may be applying for offers further job security in an unsure economy. I've qualified for instructor as well as submarine/surface. I have some exposure to military life (I grew up going to school on a military base in South Korea) and I imagine I'd be rather comfortable living as a serviceman.

To be frank, I am interested in making as much money as I can after college. If I plan on entering the nuclear industry to do so, should I
A) Become an instructor,
B) Become a surface/sub officer or,
C) Skip the NAVY, go straight into nuclear power?

Any thoughts are greatly appreciated. This is a major life decision for me, I'm trying to get as many opinions as I can. I took a tour of a Dominion plant yesterday near New London, and our guide explained that coming from the Navy essentially puts you on a fast track to SRO and six figures.

Is there a major difference in marketability between instructors and operators, post service?

Thanks again for any replies.

[HydroDave63]

http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php?topic=2368.0

[co60slr]

At this time I am a college junior, majoring in physics. I've been giving serious consideration to the nuclear power industry because of the expected growth that everyone has been promising me.

It seems to me that the NUPOC program I may be applying for offers further job security in an unsure economy. I've qualified for instructor as well as submarine/surface.

To be frank, I am interested in making as much money as I can after college. If I plan on entering the nuclear industry to do so, should I
A) Become an instructor,
B) Become a surface/sub officer or,
C) Skip the NAVY, go straight into nuclear power?

...coming from the Navy essentially puts you on a fast track to SRO and six figures.

Is there a major difference in marketability between instructors and operators, post service?

This question is a very common one and you'll get the whole spectrum of replies if you follow your thread long enough.  However, I'll try to give you "food for thought" based on your posting.

Why Physics?  While there are no absolutes in what people do after getting a certain degree, you'll obviously have a "technical 4 year degree" where some employers aren't interested the specialty.  Others, (e.g., DOE Labs) will expect you (as a Physicist) to get a PhD before you're taken seriously as a professional.  Others in the commercial world are looking specifically for degreed and professional Engineers.

Navy.  I normally reserve this "opinion" (based on 20+ years in the NNPP) but I've had a few cups of coffee already this morning.  At boot camp, there was a sign on my rating assignment officers desk that went something like:  Army stays on land, Air Force flies, you...have joined the Navy and the Navy goes out to sea.  You'll read ad nauseum about the horror stories of going to sea...and yes, it can suck to be blunt (especially at Christmas time when you're at sea).  However, the Navy does a pretty good job of taking "kids" (term used lightly), knocking them out of Mom's arms and their self-contained comfort zone, and finishing the job that mainstream society is lacking in 2010:  it helps you finish growing up.  I don't know you at all, but that is what it did for me.

Navy OOD vs Navy Instructor.  We need good teachers.  First grade, commercial initial licensing instructors, commercial requal instructors, NNPP NPS instructors, Prototype Staff Pick-ups, etc, etc.  Are you asking if you should be a "career instructor"?  While all are very worthwhile, very noble aspirations, they're essentially support functions.  How does that compare to you, as a future Nuclear Officer having completed EOOW quals with a few years of experience, standing OOD on the bridge of a submarine...responsible for a $2B machine (and its crew) as you're directing the actions on a maneuvering watch coming back into port after a long deployment?   Which do you think pays more dividends...direct and indirect over the course of a career? 

It comes down to personal desire.  If you have a family, don't want to go to sea, love teaching (and don't mind the commensurate salary that is attached), then be an Instructor.  You're needed.  Just don't expect large promotions from an Instructor Billet.  In the Navy, sea time = experience, which is needed and expected more as you promote.  If the thought of Sea Duty is a nightmare to you, AND...you have a energetic drive for Nuclear Power, then jump to Commercial (but don't expect to make 6 figures straight out of college...unless you're following in Bill Gates' unorthodox footsteps).

Finally, there are no personal guarantees for you in NUPOC, the Navy, Commercial, etc.  You're NOT guaranteed to be hired as an SRO just because you were in the NNPP.  If you give 150%, you can make anything work that you've described.  If you're looking for the "path of least resistance to a 6-figure income", then my opinion is that you'll be disappointed.   What worked for me is picked the hardest job the other people didn't want, maybe in locations that weren't always desired and I gave it my all.  If you read a few of Brian Tracy's books on Goals, you'll find his secret to success is also stated by taking on responsibilities that you're not sure you're ready for, that make you a bit uneasy inside.  If you pick a goal that you KNOW you can do and think it'll be a "piece of cake", then how much growth are you going to get? 

Pick the answer that makes you a bit uneasy, and then kick it's butt.  THAT is the secret.

[mykat]

I suppose I should make a few clarifications. I'm not necessarily interested in the path of least resistance. I don't mind working harder than everyone else if in the end I come out more marketable, but time is an issue for me.

When I went on the "VIP" trip to Charleston (I really wish they didn't call it that) the instructors I spoke to made it seem as though NPS instructors were in the exact same elite category as sub officers, and lateral transfer or employment after the navy was a sure thing in practically any field. Thus, the impression I received, is that I could put in four years in Charleston, vs six on a sub, and be in just about the same point in my career, if I were to leave the navy. Is that too good to be true?

If the thought of Sea Duty is a nightmare to you, AND...you have a energetic drive for Nuclear Power, then jump to Commercial (but don't expect to make 6 figures straight out of college...unless you're following in Bill Gates' unorthodox footsteps).

I'm certainly not pretending that I'll jump straight from college to a huge salary with just a BS in physics. What I'm interested in, and as young and inexperienced as I am, my heart may be in the wrong place, is the total amount of money I'll make on all three paths after, say, ten years. From what I understand, going straight to nuclear power after college will start me off 10000-20000 higher than what I'd be making in the navy for the first four+ years, but it appears that if I took a couple of years of relatively low pay in the navy, and then left for the industry, after say 6-10 years on this path I'd be making much more.

I'm sorry if I come across as misinformed. I'm here to learn.

Why Physics?  While there are no absolutes in what people do after getting a certain degree, you'll obviously have a "technical 4 year degree" where some employers aren't interested the specialty.  Others, (e.g., DOE Labs) will expect you (as a Physicist) to get a PhD before you're taken seriously as a professional.  Others in the commercial world are looking specifically for degreed and professional Engineers.

When I came first  to college, I wasn't sure as to exactly what I wanted to do. I hated the idea of immediately settling in one course without at least sampling my other options. While I am interested in physics, it also represents to me a wide range of opportunity. My impression is that the physics background makes you somewhat flexible in terms of where you may be hired. While it certainly disqualifies me from many specific engineering jobs, I could still end up working with electrical engineers, aerospace engineers, etc., albeit with a little more training.

I imagine the truth is that I still don't know what the hell I want to do with my life, I really haven't any idea as to what kind of a job I would enjoy. I know people say that money doesn't buy happiness, but financial security and a budget for big toys looks like it'll certainly help in the event that I end up doing something I'm not completely satisfied with.

[mykat]

Also, I'd like to add:

I expect I'd do rather well in the military. I'm very good with taking orders, and when it comes to impressing the people above me, I don't mind sacrificing a lot personal comfort and working hard.

My biggest issue is commitment. My nightmare is figuring out a month in that, for whatever reason, I hate what I'm doing and I'm stuck doing it for another 4-6 years.

[co60slr]

When I went on the "VIP" trip to Charleston (I really wish they didn't call it that) the instructors I spoke to made it seem as though NPS instructors were in the exact same elite category as sub officers, and lateral transfer or employment after the navy was a sure thing in practically any field. Thus, the impression I received, is that I could put in four years in Charleston, vs six on a sub, and be in just about the same point in my career, if I were to leave the navy. Is that too good to be true?

From what I understand, going straight to nuclear power after college will start me off 10000-20000 higher than what I'd be making in the navy for the first four+ years, but it appears that if I took a couple of years of relatively low pay in the navy, and then left for the industry, after say 6-10 years on this path I'd be making much more.

When I came first  to college, I wasn't sure as to exactly what I wanted to do. I hated the idea of immediately settling in one course without at least sampling my other options. While I am interested in physics, it also represents to me a wide range of opportunity. My impression is that the physics background makes you somewhat flexible in terms of where you may be hired. While it certainly disqualifies me from many specific engineering jobs, I could still end up working with electrical engineers, aerospace engineers, etc., albeit with a little more training.

I imagine the truth is that I still don't know what the hell I want to do with my life, I really haven't any idea as to what kind of a job I would enjoy. I know people say that money doesn't buy happiness, but financial security and a budget for big toys looks like it'll certainly help in the event that I end up doing something I'm not completely satisfied with.

There are Forum members that have done a "tour" as an Instructor, which is viewed positively who can offer more specific advice.  My intent was to illustrate that in general, in the Navy, participating in its primary mission (at sea) is what should be anticipated for a successful Naval career...not just being a "career instructor".   

I'm not so sure about the Officer vs Commercial Engineering salary comparison.  There are so many hidden tangible and intangible benefits to military service, both short-term and long-term that a detailed comparison (and what a commercial utility will actually hire you on as) is key.  Use this: http://militarypay.defense.gov/mpcalcs/Calculators/RMC.aspx and a cost of living calculator (geographical correction) such as this: http://www.bestplaces.net/COL/ in a MS Excel spreadsheet to really compare your "take home pay".  Other items like the military federal tax advantage, some states don't have state income tax, etc, etc.  I found this to be very difficult during my recent transition...don't just look at salary alone!  I'm not a recruiter for either side, but I do know many of the questions one should ask in aiding the decision process.

Physics degree is fine.  Graduate work will put "icing on the cake" for something technical you find interesting down the road.  Presumably, you've mastered advanced calculus and could jump into many different engineering fields with a solid foundation to succeed.

You don't know what to do?  Welcome to the club.  Personally, I love Nuclear Power and give it my all.  I certainly did NOT join the Navy with a plan to do 20+ years.  Even now, I don't know where I'll end up, but as long as I'm having fun and continue to progress, succeed and grow then I know I'm on the right track.  If not, I know when to jump tracks.  <grin>

[mykat]

I appreciate the advice. Can I ask how old you are and how long you've been in the navy?

[Gamecock]

I've done officer tours on SSBN, CVN, and I did a sea-returnee instructor tour at NNPTC.  I can answer your questions if you want in the forum or via PM.

For the record, Direct input Officer is not the path you want if you want to be marketable.  Just my opinion.

Cheers,
GC

[mykat]

Does that go for lateral transfers as well?

Also, the 8 or so instructors I spoke to, were they outright lying, or were they just as misinformed as I am?

[co60slr]

I appreciate the advice. Can I ask how old you are and how long you've been in the navy?

I don't post my resume here.  My postings are "stand alone", so gather your data, conduct your research, and when you lay your head on the pillow at night, make your decision.  Even if I did, I'm only one person with one opinion.  If I can illustrate a differing opinion, give you additional questions to ponder (with answers not required here in open forum), and maybe provide an additional viewpoint to help YOU make YOUR decision, then all is well.  I think that is why many of us volunteer our time here.

The NNPP is not based on resumes or titles.   It's based on fact where if an O-10 sets you up with a scenario and you answer based on what you think you should say, or what you HAVE to say, then you're in trouble.  Take from Nukeworker (et al.) what you will..."trust, but validate".   Meanwhile, if you'd like a little NNPP philosophy, start here:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

Regardless, GC said it best and in fewer words than I did...

Co60

[DDMurray]

I don't post my resume here.  My postings are "stand alone", so gather your data, conduct your research, and when you lay your head on the pillow at night, make your decision.  Even if I did, I'm only one person with one opinion.  If I can illustrate a differing opinion, give you additional questions to ponder (with answers not required here in open forum), and maybe provide an additional viewpoint to help YOU make YOUR decision, then all is well.  I think that is why many of us volunteer our time here.

The NNPP is not based on resumes or titles.   It's based on fact where if an O-10 sets you up with a scenario and you answer based on what you think you should say, or what you HAVE to say, then you're in trouble.  Take from Nukeworker (et al.) what you will..."trust, but validate".   Meanwhile, if you'd like a little NNPP philosophy, start here:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

Regardless, GC said it best and in fewer words than I did...

Co60

Enjoyed the link 5.27 years.

[JustinHEMI05]

Without reading all the other info on the NNPP, another "fast path" is the NLO-RO-SRO route which you would qualify for. We have many NLOs with physics and similar degrees. A utility would like to hire you as an NLO because it helps "spread the wealth" between ex Navy nukes and nuclear "outsiders." Plus, when they ask "do you want to get a license" and you say "yes," you are practically a shoe in. However, again, nothing is guaranteed. I am just saying that you could have an SRO license faster than going through the NNPP, but you would have to start at NLO, which is not beneath you and would pay more than the NNPP faster.

[co60slr]

Enjoyed the link 5.27 years.

It's rumored that having the quotes delivered by the original author in his presence were the best.   However, I'm too young to have been able to appreciate that experience.  ;-)

[mykat]

Without reading all the other info on the NNPP, another "fast path" is the NLO-RO-SRO route which you would qualify for. We have many NLOs with physics and similar degrees. A utility would like to hire you as an NLO because it helps "spread the wealth" between ex Navy nukes and nuclear "outsiders." Plus, when they ask "do you want to get a license" and you say "yes," you are practically a shoe in. However, again, nothing is guaranteed. I am just saying that you could have an SRO license faster than going through the NNPP, but you would have to start at NLO, which is not beneath you and would pay more than the NNPP faster.

This is exactly the opposing perspective I was expecting to see. They made the navy sound way too good in Charleston. Now I wonder how good my odds are for being hired out of college next year.

[co60slr]

This is exactly the opposing perspective I was expecting to see. They made the navy sound way too good in Charleston. Now I wonder how good my odds are for being hired out of college next year.

As far as recruiting goes...Commercial or Military, you might consider taking one of my favorite jokes with more than just a laugh:  http://www.ahajokes.com/hea26.html

I'll challenge anyone looking at potential future employer to research their turnover/attrition rate.  For example, the "Navy: Getting In" is full of energetic, smiley faces, while the "Navy: Getting Out" section is their reaction 5 years later.  You can also Google "junior officer resignation letters".  Review the various Nuclear Plant polls here in the Forum to see what people are saying about particular places.  In either event, find an organization with a high recruiting/retention bonus with a high attrition rate and you've found dysfunction.

Hired into NLO will depend first on your flexibility.  Utilities don't run continual NLO Classes, so are you willing to relocate to find your class that starts after graduation next year?   You might considering searching your favorite utilities today and see who has openings (i.e., pretend you're looking for a job today) and if you'd be willing to relocate to any of those locations.   Now, when you repeat that search in a year, you'll understand the decision-making process.   Or...you'll be waiting to join the Navy.

You want opposing arguments?  (Laughing)...you've come the right place, where Nukes give opposing arguments they don't really believe in just to get adverse reactions.  See GM:PolySci for daily examples and other threads about underway conversations that nukes have.

Co60

[JSATTER]

I was once in a situation you were in.  I'm graduating Clemson University this Friday with a mechanical engineering degree, but have been blessed with a job at a plant as a nuclear operator, and started April 5th.  I about joined the Navy to do something nuclear, but after talking to some of the guys that were hired with me that are from the Navy I glad I didn't join the Navy.

One thing that I thought was interesting was that when I went for my interview, the guy told me that with a 4 year degree would be making the same as someone that had years of naval experience.

I don't think you can go wrong with any of the choices, it just depends on your situation.  Are you ok with leaving your family?  Do you want to live the Navy life for that many years?  Do you want to go home and see your wife and kids everyday?  Do you want to have time to spend with your kids life?  What are you going to do once you get out of the Navy?  The Navy life may be your lifestyle.  Thats for you to determine. 

The money doesn't matter, as long as your enjoying your job, and are good at it, the money will come.  Yes I have an engineering degree and working as an operator, but getting paid engineering level pay.  Any job that doesn't require me to sit in a cubicle is a good one to me, as many engineers just sit in there cubicle all day long, that is not for me.  Being honest, keeping your nose clean, and doing people right will get you a long way in life.       

Another advantage about commercial power is that as an operator, you have pretty good job security, unless you screw something up.