Considering going Nuke. Have some concerns.

[A Proper Tea Leaf]

Hello everyone,

I'll be graduating high school in less than two weeks. Military is the only way I'll ever get a higher education. I was going to join the Air Force, but their recruiting is in the toilet, so I talked with a friend of mine who is going into the Navy. The other evening I went and talked to some local Navy recruiters. Due to my ASVAB score (an 85, which isn't really impressive to me), they said I should try for Nuke if and when I enlist. I have some questions and concerns about this.

I'm looking to gain a lot of technical experience, in electronics especially. I'm well aware of the value of the Navy Nuke program, and am mainly interested the Electrician's Mate discipline. The problem is, I'm not really sure about my math ability. I never took anything above Algebra II in high school. I failed Chemistry because I quit working about a month into the class. In pretty much every math class I've ever had, I daydreamed instead of paying attention. Do I really have a chance of making it as a Nuke? I mean, I'm not even sure I could pass that qualifying exam (apparently it includes Physics and Chemistry?)

They also kept mentioning Electronics Technician (ET) to me. How do the capabilities of an ET compare to that of an EM? Whose expertise are more valuable in the civilian world?

What happens if I can't make it in Nuke School? I can't find a straight answer regarding this either.

[crusemm]

Hello everyone,

I'll be graduating high school in less than two weeks. Military is the only way I'll ever get a higher education. I was going to join the Air Force, but their recruiting is in the toilet, so I talked with a friend of mine who is going into the Navy. The other evening I went and talked to some local Navy recruiters. Due to my ASVAB score (an 85, which isn't really impressive to me), they said I should try for Nuke if and when I enlist. I have some questions and concerns about this.

1)I'm looking to gain a lot of technical experience, in electronics especially. I'm well aware of the value of the Navy Nuke program, and am mainly interested the 2)Electrician's Mate discipline. The problem is, I'm not really sure about my math ability. 3)I never took anything above Algebra II in high school. I failed Chemistry because I quit working about a month into the class. In pretty much every math class I've ever had, 4)I daydreamed instead of paying attention. Do I really have a chance of making it as a Nuke? I mean, 5) I'm not even sure I could pass that qualifying exam (apparently it includes Physics and Chemistry?)

6) They also kept mentioning Electronics Technician (ET) to me. How do the capabilities of an ET compare to that of an EM? Whose expertise are more valuable in the civilian world?

7) What happens if I can't make it in Nuke School? I can't find a straight answer regarding this either.

Oh, where to begin....
First, look here: http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php/topic,16169.0.html

Next, to attempt to answer your specific questions
1) You most likely will not gain a lot of technical expertise.  Most of the technology the navy uses is 1960's type stuff.  Most of the boats are updating their tech to 1980's though, so at least it's 20 years newer (though 30 years out of date)
2) First off you don't get to pick your rate.  You can ask, but you get what the Navy gives you.  Second, Electricians deal with breakers, controllers, lightbulbs, some probes, and generator sets (sort of).  They also wind up fixing every electrical thing on the ship from the Captains electric razor, to the mechanic's drill.
3) If you can do basic algebra, the Navy will teach you the rest, no worries on that.
4) THIS will be a real problem.  You cannot daydream and still pass the school.  It will take almost all of your time and intellectual effort.  If you are unable to concentrate, you will not pass.
5) See 3) above.  The exam will have only the most limited amount of stuff.  If you are really worried, go get a physics or chemistry for dummies book from your local B&N or library and study.  It ain't that hard.
6) See the link above, it covers all of this in depth.
7) If you fail out, you get a couple of options.  Usually you go to a ship as a conventional EM, MM, or ET.  Or you may get the chance to try to be something else (CT maybe).

Hope this helps and answers your questions.

Have a Day
-Matt (soon to be MMC/SS (RET))

[Fast Neutron]

Next, to attempt to answer your specific questions
1) You most likely will not gain a lot of technical expertise.  Most of the technology the navy uses is 1960's type stuff.  Most of the boats are updating their tech to 1980's though, so at least it's 20 years newer (though 30 years out of date)

I don't understand your definition of technical experience.  Frankly, the older the technology the more technical experience there is to gain.  That stuff breaks more often and is more fixable, much as an old mustang fixer-upper is to a new hybrid (which is off limits to its mechanic owner because the new stuff precludes manual fixes).  Thus, the old stuff allows for more literal technical work.  It's all based on electricity and circuit laws no matter how advanced. 

For instance, someone on a fast attack submarine generally is more technically capable from experience than someone from a boomer.  Those boats are older, have smaller crews and thus require each person to do more work per person than a boomer.  Again, this enhances one's technical ability, you are not relying on a microprocessor as much as one would on modern equipment so you have to know how to fix it, and it's designed so that when it breaks you can fix it.  It's not impossible.  This skill and knowledge of what's going on inside the device is technical experience.  You can take that experience and apply it to other things not necessarily related to naval reactors, and that's technical experience.

Concerning you rate, many people volunteer to be mechanics and ETs.  If you want EM you can certainly get it.  Most people get the rate they want.  And the navy forces one to unlearn mathematics and relearn it their way, so you will be fine.  Daydreaming will be beaten out of you metaphorically as boot camp and upon any minor failure at A-school.  There really are not sloppy instructors in the pipeline from what I can tell so far, and I'm there now.  They don't let a single mistake go on homework or in class.  Its just not allowed.  You will study on their schedule.  You will do it so that you can eventually get out of the building. They can fix that stuff.

EMs get filthy during work, generally ETs do not.  But you are all workers.  From what I can tell, despite reactor control experience ETs are not more able workers at reactor controls in a civilian plant due to the differences in huge civilian plants and naval propulsion plants.  If you wanted experience as a hands-on guy but some operational experience (computer control watching guy) EM is a fine rate.  They hang out with ETs on certain watches.

Oh, and buy the way, 70's stuff is just about the most advanced nuclear stuff around because that's when America stopped building reactors.  Chernobyl was one of the newest, most computer controlled reactors in the world, finished in the 80s.  Pretty much if something isn't broke they don't fix it in this industry.  I'm not saying they don't innovate but it has not been a priority given the combination of political, economic, and technical problems the industry faced over its evolving history.  Think of if your control screen blue-screened because it was running Dos 2.0 or Windows 3.1.  No.

Plus, given that naval reactors have probably changed more than stationary reactors and there are more of them, navy reactors are probably somewhat more modern in some ways.  In any event, plant experience on board a navy ship should be at least on par with civilian plant technology, all else equal.  They are different, so it's not completely the same, but you get what I'm saying.

[crusemm]

Fast Neutron, I do not know about civilian reactors as I have not started working in one yet  , but I do know a little about Technology.  The technology used in the Navy is, by and large, ancient.  Almost no PLC's which almost every industry worldwide uses.  Almost no CAD/CAM design (maybe the Virginia class used it and it worked, I don't know about that one, but the Seawolf class was an abysmal failure).  Almost no automation of any kind.  I understand what you are saying about being able to fix the stuff that breaks, and I understand the reasoning behind it.  But the fact is that almost nobody else in the world works like that.  If you compare Navy "technology" to almost any equivelent modern industrial application, the Navy loses almost every time.  I'm not saying if that is a good thing or a bad thing, it just is.  If you want "advanced technical training", the Navy ain't it.  If you want "Basic electrical and electronic fundamental foundation"  then the Navy can provide that.  So can NEETS modules, which are freely available.  Look, I've been doing the Navy thing a long long time.  There are parts of the Nav that I love, and parts I hate.  One of the thing I always hated was how stuck in the past our technology was, and how much we had to pay both financially and in man-hours for being stuck in the past.  For a cabinet that could very easily be replaced with a pair of modern laptops, the Navy spends $100,000 or more.  And then pays contractor's $100,000's more ro fix it, because it uses useless proprietary software.  I mean Jeez, we only introduced EPROMS to our ships 5-10 years ago, and the ones in my mini van are way more advanced than what we use on ship's. 

Sorry, didn't mean to get off on a rant, but I know what I'm talking about.  I've done this Navy thing for a long time.  If your still in school, best of luck to you, but you don't know sh*t about the fleet.

Good Luck, God speed, and may your dive:rise ratio = 1

[A Proper Tea Leaf]

I really appreciate your replies, they are very informative.

Your answers have raised more questions, however.

Isn't it necessary to complete all two years of Nuke School to become an EM? I thought it was a speciality you could get into after you graduated. If not, that's great news...hpefully it's available.

How easy is it to go to college with Tuition Assistance while enlisted? I see the Navy has other college programs, but how often do they really give it to you? Also, the recruiter seemed to imply that the Navy put his civilian wife through college. Does the Navy really do that, or is he, like I'm thinking, shooting me a line of ****?

I've heard mixed replies to this next question; How long can you be on a ship? I've heard anywhere from six months to four years.

[Gamecock]

Also, the recruiter seemed to imply that the Navy put his civilian wife through college. Does the Navy really do that, or is he, like I'm thinking, shooting me a line of ****?

You can transfer your GI Bill benefits to your wife.  There is also a spouse education assistance program (Military Spouse Career Advancement Accounts (MyCAA)) which was recently shut down to new enrollments, but will likely be restarted in the future.

http://cs.mhf.dod.mil/content/dav/mhf/QOL-Library/Project%20Documents/MilitaryHOMEFRONT/MyCAA/SpouseFAQs.pdf

So, the answer to your question is yes, the navy "Can" pay for your spouses education.

Cheers,
GC

[sovbob]

Important caveat about the GI Bill:
In order to transfer your GI Bill benefits either wholly or partially to your spouse, you must have served six (6) years in the armed forces and obligated yourself for at least four (4) more years.  In order to transfer your GI Bill benefits to your children, you must have served at least ten (10) years.

As far as becoming an EM:
Assuming you get picked to be an EM, you will go to NFAS (Nuclear Field 'A' School), in a mixed class of both EMs and ETs.  At the end of 'A' school, you will go into a specialized class.  Electrical Equipment for EMs and I&C (Instrumentation and Control) for ETs.  Upon completion of 'A' school, you will be assigned the rating of EM.

You continue through the training pipeline of NPS (Nuclear Power School) and Prototype and then get that magical NEC (Naval Enlistment Code) that says you're an NUKE-YOO-LAR EM.  If for some reason you complete 'A' school, but do not finish the training pipeline, you may be sent to the fleet as a non-nuclear EM (or re-trained as a new rating).

When people talk about "being on a ship", it can be confusing.  There is a difference between "being assigned to a sea command", "being underway" and "on deployment".

UNDERWAY:  You're actually out on the ocean, sailing around, running the reactor(s).  (Usually you're underway for a few weeks at a time)

ON DEPLOYMENT: You're away from your homeport, somewhere else in the world.  This can include both foreign ports, or being underway. (Deployments usually last about six months)

ASSIGNED TO A SEA COMMAND: This mean that you're attached to a seagoing command (i.e. A ship).  Commonly called a "sea tour", this time includes underway, deployments, time in homeport, time in shipyards, etc.  (A sea tour is typically 4-5 years)  Compare: Shore Tour.

There is one more thing, specific only to "Boomer" (SSBN) submarines.  It's called a "patrol" and it's 3 months of underway, without a port call.  The upside is that when you come back from a patrol, you turn the ship over to a different crew and spend 3 months in port.

[Fast Neutron]

Fast Neutron, I do not know about civilian reactors as I have not started working in one yet  , but I do know a little about Technology.  The technology used in the Navy is, by and large, ancient.  Almost no PLC's which almost every industry worldwide uses.  Almost no CAD/CAM design (maybe the Virginia class used it and it worked, I don't know about that one, but the Seawolf class was an abysmal failure).  Almost no automation of any kind.  I understand what you are saying about being able to fix the stuff that breaks, and I understand the reasoning behind it.  But the fact is that almost nobody else in the world works like that.  If you compare Navy "technology" to almost any equivelent modern industrial application, the Navy loses almost every time.  I'm not saying if that is a good thing or a bad thing, it just is.  If you want "advanced technical training", the Navy ain't it.  If you want "Basic electrical and electronic fundamental foundation"  then the Navy can provide that.  So can NEETS modules, which are freely available.  Look, I've been doing the Navy thing a long long time.  There are parts of the Nav that I love, and parts I hate.  One of the thing I always hated was how stuck in the past our technology was, and how much we had to pay both financially and in man-hours for being stuck in the past.  For a cabinet that could very easily be replaced with a pair of modern laptops, the Navy spends $100,000 or more.  And then pays contractor's $100,000's more ro fix it, because it uses useless proprietary software.  I mean Jeez, we only introduced EPROMS to our ships 5-10 years ago, and the ones in my mini van are way more advanced than what we use on ship's. 

Sorry, didn't mean to get off on a rant, but I know what I'm talking about.  I've done this Navy thing for a long time.  If your still in school, best of luck to you, but you don't know sh*t about the fleet.

Good Luck, God speed, and may your dive:rise ratio = 1

I appreciate the response.  I always thought people were underselling the navy, but I suppose there are some things legitimately backward about it.  So it is.

[ranger306ci]

Ok, here is my take on it. I knew I would never make it through college. Mainly because I am very technical minded and the thought of the "other" classes I would be forced to take........ and pay for...........just turned me off.
So, 9 days out of high school, I went to bootcamp, then through the pipeline. I became an MM, and ELT. I spent my 6 in, then went civilian. 2 weeks after discharge, I was back in class at Palisades NPP. Been here ever since. First as a plant operator, and then a reactor operator, which is what I am now. All told, I have 16 yrs nuclear operator experience.

I can tell you right now, the experience and training you get in the nuke navy is VERY helpful  in the outside world. Sure, the plants have little automation, and solid state circuitry is a novelty.
 But the fundamentals are no different. Physics, heat transfer/fluid flow, electrical/ electronic theory, reactor theory............. none of that changes.
 Once the Nuke Navy teaches you how to learn, you can train yourself almost anything, and the civilian recruiters know that.
I loved Navy reactors. They are  the most robust, flexible, fixable, piece of machinery I have ever worked on. If you ever run a civilian plant, you will realize  how finicky they can be. They are the same vintage machinery, but not the same quality.
 If it was not for the whole "navy" thing, I would have stayed in. The conventional navy drove me nuts. I hated coming out of the plant and having to deal with the mouthbreathers. What kind of idiot tries to flush his own pants down the toilet?
 I have NEVER regretted my decision to get the navy nuke training. It has served me well, and my life is good. I am hoping to stay at palisades until retirement. I am 36, so I have some time yet.  Life is good, and  I love my job. I owe it all to the nuke navy.

[co60slr]

70's stuff is just about the most advanced nuclear stuff around because that's when America stopped building reactors.  Chernobyl was one of the newest, most computer controlled reactors in the world, finished in the 80s.  Pretty much if something isn't broke they don't fix it in this industry.  I'm not saying they don't innovate but it has not been a priority given the combination of political, economic, and technical problems the industry faced over its evolving history.  Think of if your control screen blue-screened because it was running Dos 2.0 or Windows 3.1.  No.

Plus, given that naval reactors have probably changed more than stationary reactors and there are more of them, navy reactors are probably somewhat more modern in some ways.  In any event, plant experience on board a navy ship should be at least on par with civilian plant technology, all else equal.

I think in all cases, the need to upgrade your existing technology is based on a cost-benefit analysis.  For example, swapping an analog power meter out for a digital one may result in a "cooler looking" indication, but in the bigger picture what did it really do for the plant?  Maybe the older analog meter is no longer supported by a vendor who is now out of business.  Decreasing equipment reliability and increasing maintenance costs can drive to a newer component.

Both Navy and Commercial plants have Alteration programs to upgrade specific equipment and components.  For example, commercial plants have made upgrades to increase their licensed thermal output (e.g., feed flow monitoring equipment).  While I haven't worked in that industry...(yet)..Fuel manufacturers (e.g., USEC, GE) are most certainly using upgraded technology.  http://www.usec.com/gaseousdiffusion_ports_overview.htm
Also:  http://www.gepower.com/prod_serv/products/nuclear_energy/en/gle_main.htm

Once enriched, does anyone think they still assemble the fuel matrix in the same 'ole way? 

I would not look at your same old power range output meter and question your overall plant technology.  If you want to have a good midwatch discussion sometime, consider the overall Enterprise that you're working in.  Even within a design class...the 688 was NOT the same boat as the 770.  Additionally, not all commercial plants have the same licensed output.

In any event, any nuclear platform built 30 years ago has certainly gone through some technology upgrades, where appropriate.  However, in the end we're all working within a steam cycle destined to have a limited efficiency.  http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3683621.html

Co60

[JustinHEMI05]

There is still a computer at my plant that takes 5.25 inch floppies. Just sayin... 

[RDTroja]

There is still a computer at my plant that takes 5.25 inch floppies. Just sayin... 

Don't Touch It! It's running the control software for Emergency Core Cooling!

[JustinHEMI05]

Wouldn't surprise me in the least. 

[spekkio]

Isn't it necessary to complete all two years of Nuke School to become an EM? I thought it was a speciality you could get into after you graduated. If not, that's great news...hpefully it's available.

Yes, it is necessary to pass nuke school to be an EM (nuke). What people were saying is that you don't directly control whether you get EM, ET, or MM...you can request, but it's all needs of the Navy.

How easy is it to go to college with Tuition Assistance while enlisted? I see the Navy has other college programs, but how often do they really give it to you? Also, the recruiter seemed to imply that the Navy put his civilian wife through college. Does the Navy really do that, or is he, like I'm thinking, shooting me a line of ****?

Next to impossible on a fast attack if you're looking at attending an actual B&M university.

Other people have covered the 9/11 GI bill. You cannot use the GI bill for yourself AND your spouse, though.

[DLGN25]

If it is electronics training that you are interested in I would look into non-nuke ET, CT, IT, FT, AT, or ST and perhaps other ratings that provide much more hands on work experience in electronics and computer systems then you will find in the engine rooms, and the up side is that you will work in a less demanding work environment then a nuke.

[Golly Orby]

my ASVAB score (an 85, which isn't really impressive to me)

I thought I'd hit this, since I didn't see it mentioned earlier.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/l/blafqtscore.htm

The ASVAB is a go/no-go test, and the only multiple-guess test that matters when it comes to the nuclear pipeline.  The feeling of "I could have done better" is shared by all.  If you'll notice, your 85 is 14 points from a score of 99, but it's 60 points away from the maximum.

Though I can't find it written, it's been my understanding that the score is adjusted so that the overall score is a reflection of your percentile of the population of test-takers.  That is, you answered more correctly on that test than 85% of the potential Navy recruits.

[A Proper Tea Leaf]

I really appreciate all of these replies. I have Nuke down as one of the jobs I'm interested in (11 in total). I leave for MEPS at 2:00 tomorrow afternoon, and am really looking forward to seeing what jobs I'm offered.