What do you think is the nuke school passing percentage and why?

[Styrofoam]

What do you think is the nuke school passing percentage and why?

[MacGyver]

What do you think is the nuke school passing percentage and why?

50 / 50

You either pass or you don't!   







Seriously, in my day it was less than 10%, ymwv.

[jshinevar]

ummm... it's got to be pretty high now... I think the two largest things to keep you from making it through these days are alcohol and being fat.  hahahahaha.

[Estis]

ummm... it's got to be pretty high now... I think the two largest things to keep you from making it through these days are alcohol and being fat.  hahahahaha.

So it's still a pump, not a filter then? I know forum posts in previous years constantly bemoaned the "pump over filter" mentality of nuke school, but I was getting the impression from more recent posts that NNPP has been tightening things up a bit...

[Preciousblue1965]

All I can say is based on my experience, circa 2003-2006 is this:

Average 25-30 students per class, with a new class starting every 2 months, which means 6 classes every year for 3 years.

Thus approx. 540 students in 3 years and I only saw two fail out of prototype due to academics in the total of 3 years.

Assuming that is about par for each crew(5 crews), that gives about 2700 students per prototype times 4 prototypes gives us a failure rate of 40 per 18800 students over a three year period.  So you do the math for the percentage.

Note:  This is a very rough estimate, does not account for Power School failures, class size adjustments due to maintenance shutdowns, and other factors that I can't recall right now.  Of course I could be wrong.

[co60slr]

So it's still a pump, not a filter then? I know forum posts in previous years constantly bemoaned the "pump over filter" mentality of nuke school, but I was getting the impression from more recent posts that NNPP has been tightening things up a bit...

Yes, the purpose of the NNPP training pipeline is to put qualified operators in the Fleet.   (I'm certain that there are operators currently underway that hope to have a Nuclear Detailer that is able to send a new operator to relieve them someday).  Since a pump, by definition is a device that adds energy to a system, then yes, for once and for all, it's a pump.

In my experience, some of the people making the "I'm here to screen students out of MY Program" declarations should not ever have been operators themselves.  Luckily, many of them were later not promoted to E-7 or O-4, as the case warranted.   Again, Darwin always wins...just not always in the timeline you desire.

So, as a NPS or Prototype Instructor, your ADM has sent you a nuclear operations candidate.  It's your job to "add energy" and get him ready for the Fleet.   By doing so for even the slower of training candidates, you're developing your own skills as a future manager and leader, who can't always just "filter" (i.e., fire) everyone you don't like. 

Regardless, I have NEVER heard of someone getting "pumped" all the way to the Fleet and then transferred off their ship/boat in 12 months after being unable to get qualified.   It seems that even the most passionate "pump versus filter" debaters do like to get relieved in the end.

[Preciousblue1965]

Regardless, I have NEVER heard of someone getting "pumped" all the way to the Fleet and then transferred off their ship/boat in 12 months after being unable to get qualified.   It seems that even the most passionate "pump versus filter" debaters do like to get relieved in the end.

While I won't say I saw a person get canned after 12 months, I do know first hand of the following story:

A newly arrived EM3 arrives on USS Ustafish(CVN ##) and is sent to qualify BNEQ(Basic Nuclear Engineering Qualification) a.k.a all the systems.  He is also given the basic Log Recorder Phone Talker qual card.  After several months, said EM3 has still not qualified either of those and is coming up on his "drop dead date" for his quals.  He fails to qualify BNEQ and his basic watch station.  The RO interviews said EM3 to find out what the problem is.  After the interview was over, this EM3 was given a Shaft Alley Patrol qual card and told that that was the ONLY watch  that he would ever qualify on the ship(SAP being the first watch we give to undesignated boot camp types assigned to RX dept). 

Come to find out, one of his former instructors from Proto transfered onto the ship a few months later and informed us that they tried everything to get the kid dropped due to academics, but to no avail.  So there is some precedents there for bad operators getting to the fleet and then getting the can.

[Gamecock]

Come to find out, one of his former instructors from Proto transfered onto the ship a few months later and informed us that they tried everything to get the kid dropped due to academics, but to no avail.  

 

Obviously they didn't try everything.....

If the kid did not have the aptitude, then the staff did a disservice to the sailor by not aggressively pursuing disenrollment from the program.  He could have gone on to be a productive sailor in a non-nuclear rating.

[HydroDave63]

"Fleet needs more A-Gang!!"

[Preciousblue1965]

Obviously they didn't try everything.....

If the kid did not have the aptitude, then the staff did a disservice to the sailor by not aggressively pursuing disenrollment from the program.  He could have gone on to be a productive sailor in a non-nuclear rating.

I have to disagree, it takes an insane amount of effort to get a kid disenrolled from the program(at least it did 4 years ago).  We had kids fail their comp twice only to have the test "regraded" by a civilian and he magically gets a just passing grade.  Had students couldn't pass a final watch, until they put the student with an ELT SPU on a casualty watch in which the casualties never affected the watch station(all he had to do was log the event and take his hourly logs).  We had an entire chain of command recommend that a student be dropped, only to get it denied by the top Training Manager.  The two we did get dropped from the program basically failed on purpose by giving up completely(got no progress over two week period and joined square root club on a test and retest) and basically told the TM they wanted to fail out. 

So it isn't staff not aggressively pursuing disenrollment as it is civilians that are trying to keep numbers up and refusing to let a student get academically disenrolled(pretty easy to not care the quality of students when once they are gone you don't have to deal with them again).

[haverty]

90%.

Why?

easy ->



In all seriousness... there are guys here that are painfully stupid, and it takes us dragging them tooth and nail all the way through their qualifications. But as said before, when its 0615, and Im getting relieved... I dont really care who is relieving me. I would love to see some more discretion, but in the end, they have a system, and it works fine.

[co60slr]

In all seriousness... there are guys here that are painfully stupid, and it takes us dragging them tooth and nail all the way through their qualifications. But as said before, when its 0615, and Im getting relieved... I dont really care who is relieving me. I would love to see some more discretion, but in the end, they have a system, and it works fine.

Seriously?  You're going to post this after you ask for help with a General Discharge?   What would your "stupid shipmates" say about your on-watch panic attacks, NJP, and General Discharge?

I agree.  The system does work fine.

[DDMurray]

90%.

Why?

easy ->



In all seriousness... there are guys here that are painfully stupid, and it takes us dragging them tooth and nail all the way through their qualifications. But as said before, when its 0615, and Im getting relieved... I dont really care who is relieving me. I would love to see some more discretion, but in the end, they have a system, and it works fine.

In all seriousness if you'd let somebody relieve you at 0615 who wasn't fit to stand watch, you are likely in the wrong business.

[spekkio]

The problem isn't the standard at prototype; it's the lack of senior enlisted personnel in operational ships when everyone gets out after 6-8 years. The same guys who are struggling to make it through prototype are being mentored in the fleet by a guy who's only been on the boat for a couple years himself. Then when a major problem or maintenance evolution comes up no one in the division has seen/done it before, things get a little rough.

Nothing makes up for experience, and making it harder to pass through training on a plant that doesn't exist in the fleet isn't going to solve anything.

[Yaeger]

I'm sure everyone has had 'that guy' in their division where they're not trusted to do anything by themselves. All it does is create more work for the people that CAN pull their own weight.

I've always thought the pump is a necessary evil to meet the needs of increased operational requirements, more budget cuts, and more oversight. Oftentimes you don't need a outstanding worker, just a warm body to fill a spot on a watch-bill while the rest of the watch team picks up the slack.

[Preciousblue1965]

I'm sure everyone has had 'that guy' in their division where they're not trusted to do anything by themselves. All it does is create more work for the people that CAN pull their own weight.

I've always thought the pump is a necessary evil to meet the needs of increased operational requirements, more budget cuts, and more oversight. Oftentimes you don't need a outstanding worker, just a warm body to fill a spot on a watch-bill while the rest of the watch team picks up the slack.

Yes but if the Navy were to upgrade to the today's technology, they could easily chop down the necessary people by close to half using automation and computer controls.  So upgrade equipment, lessen the need for "warm bodies", allow for high attrition rate without sacrificing operational readiness of the fleet, reestablish standards commensurate with what would be expected for the nature of nuclear operations. 

 

[Yaeger]

Yes but if the Navy were to upgrade to the today's technology, they could easily chop down the necessary people by close to half using automation and computer controls.  So upgrade equipment, lessen the need for "warm bodies", allow for high attrition rate without sacrificing operational readiness of the fleet, reestablish standards commensurate with what would be expected for the nature of nuclear operations. 

True, but I don't think the Navy is ever going to spend significant resources when what they have is reliable, tested, and still effective. I used to serve aboard a 688 in E-div, they chopped out our workbench to make room for newer gear. I spent over 4 years sitting on the floor doing all of my training, maintenance, and other paperwork. I think the priority will always be maximum mission readiness with the lowest cost, regardless of newer/better technology, quality of life, and training out in CivPAC.

The same is true with the pipeline, why throw away a large investment by the Navy when the system is designed to continually protect him/her from serious mistakes?

I think there's a dartboard in some Admiral's office somewhere, where he can toss the dart and decide what's an acceptable risk/reward scenario.

[spekkio]

There are several challenges to updating the technology in the plant:

1) The old stuff is proven to work. The Nuclear Navy knows its advantages and shortcomings. Why change something when it's working already?

2) Newer technology is typically smaller and lighter than older technology. How are submarines going to compensate for the lost weight in order to dive? The answer might be a hull redesign, which requires an entirely new class of ship. Good luck getting Congress to sign off on that when the SSN force is having trouble pitching their mission when they can't appreciably contribute to the ground wars in any way that another platform can't.

3) Before anything hits the fleet, it goes through years of R&D before starting to be built. The Virginia's are just hitting the fleet now, and they're being built with 90's technology. That's why they have a photonics mast displayed on a low-res screen where your vision is actually worse than a traditional periscope. In 2010, you could put an iphone on a pole and get better resolution, but the Navy can't do that.

[HydroDave63]

There are several challenges to updating the technology in the plant:

1) The old stuff is proven to work. The Nuclear Navy knows its advantages and shortcomings. Why change something when it's working already?
True

2)  How are submarines going to compensate for the lost weight in order to dive?
Same way as it has always been done, as in flooding volume and those funny curved tank thingies in the ballast tanks. Just sayin'

3)   In 2010, you could put an iphone on a pole and get better resolution, but the Navy can't do that.
Ever seen the infrastructure and evolutions the yardbirds have to go through to deal with the older pre-electronic optics mast? Besides, I doubt the iPhone is rated to XXX feet of depth in salt water, rad-hardened electronics, etc. It's easy to criticize, but at least have a truly working alternative, please.

[DDMurray]

There are several challenges to updating the technology in the plant:

1) The old stuff is proven to work. The Nuclear Navy knows its advantages and shortcomings. Why change something when it's working already?

2) Newer technology is typically smaller and lighter than older technology. How are submarines going to compensate for the lost weight in order to dive? The answer might be a hull redesign, which requires an entirely new class of ship. Good luck getting Congress to sign off on that when the SSN force is having trouble pitching their mission when they can't appreciably contribute to the ground wars in any way that another platform can't.

3) Before anything hits the fleet, it goes through years of R&D before starting to be built. The Virginia's are just hitting the fleet now, and they're being built with 90's technology. That's why they have a photonics mast displayed on a low-res screen where your vision is actually worse than a traditional periscope. In 2010, you could put an iphone on a pole and get better resolution, but the Navy can't do that.

Have you ridden a 774 class?  To say their photonics are worse than periscopes is not true.  That's like saying the old tagout system was better than SOMS.

 The effects on buoyancy/list/trim is calculated for all modifications to submarines.  One of the problems with much of the newer equipment is the heat they produce and their reliability in harsh environments.

The nuclear navy has whole teams dedicated to improving their equipment.  The leap to the 774 class was pretty big- forward and aft.  That is a big risk to take.  Downplaying recent advances does not tell the whole story.  Now if we could just get modern technology to clean and paint, then we'd have something.

[Gamecock]

2) Newer technology is typically smaller and lighter than older technology. How are submarines going to compensate for the lost weight in order to dive? The answer might be a hull redesign, which requires an entirely new class of ship. Good luck getting Congress to sign off on that when the SSN force is having trouble pitching their mission when they can't appreciably contribute to the ground wars in any way that another platform can't.

Ask any dolphin wearing officer on your boat how we get the ship to dive.   The answer isn't a hull re-design.

[retired nuke]

Ask any dolphin wearing officer on your boat how we get the ship to dive.   The answer isn't a hull re-design.

Shouldn't take an officer - that system (at least the simple explanation) was part of my dolphins too.....   

[gim73]

Shouldn't take an officer - that system (at least the simple explanation) was part of my dolphins too.....   

Ask a nuke and he could tell you at LEAST a dozen ways to sink the boat, each more complicated than the next. 

As for the iPhone... I wouldn't bring that flimsy thing on the boat to save my life.  I've seen some of the old school phones survive falls into the bilge and immersed in lube oil, and come out still working.  An iPhone would be broken a hundred times over before a typical refit was done, and don't even get me started about the effects of all that paint...

Not everyone is cut out for the nuke pipeline, and A-gang needs love as well.  Seriously, even the bottom half of nuke dropouts are better off than a good portion of humanity.  They have already proven that they can score in the top percentiles of testing.  Chances are that EM3 slacksalot will ride out his six years, use his GI bill and easily coast through college.  He might get fired at his first job for being a P.O.S. but that could happen to anyone.  Making his life miserable doesn't help you or him in the long run.  It might be that you surface guys can do this often, because I've heard similar stories just like this where somebody gets blacklisted from qualifying and spends the rest of his navy time doing mindless tasks.  That just doesn't fly in the submarine force.  I've worked with guys that barely made it through the pipeline.  There is more than one simple path to take.  Some of them are good at maintenance.  Others think great on their feet and can save your ass in a casualty.  Don't be too quick to dismiss somebody as a shitbag just because they don't know how to work the qualification checkout process and/or speak in front of a board.

[spekkio]

Ask any dolphin wearing officer on your boat how we get the ship to dive.   The answer isn't a hull re-design.

I'm aware of how we get the ship to dive, thank you. But removing tons upon tons of weight in favor of smaller, more current technology requires compensation. You also have to account for the fact that this compensation needs to be evenly distributed throughout the ship...so if you take out huge rod control cabinets for something smaller, you need to also do something forward to make sure the ship trims properly. Sometimes you can just put another tank in the middle of the space for the hell of it, sometimes you can't. When you can't, you need a hull redesign.

As for the iPhone... I wouldn't bring that flimsy thing on the boat to save my life.  I've seen some of the old school phones survive falls into the bilge and immersed in lube oil, and come out still working.  An iPhone would be broken a hundred times over before a typical refit was done, and don't even get me started about the effects of all that paint...

The iphone comment was a figure of speech. Jeez.

Besides, I doubt the iPhone is rated to XXX feet of depth in salt water, rad-hardened electronics, etc. It's easy to criticize, but at least have a truly working alternative, please.

 We only employ optics near the surface, and it's relatively easy and cheap to make a material that's watertight for that depth.

Have you ridden a 774 class?  To say their photonics are worse than periscopes is not true.  That's like saying the old tagout system was better than SOMS.

I will admit that I haven't, but I also haven't heard a single good word about it from the officers who operate them regarding mission capability other than they like the fact that they don't have to dance with the one-eyed lady for hours on end. There are also a lot of extra limitations listed in the PEM about it that don't exist for the type 18, but perhaps there's some golden egg I don't know about.

[co60slr]

But removing tons upon tons of weight in favor of smaller, more current technology requires compensation. You also have to account for the fact that this compensation needs to be evenly distributed throughout the ship...so if you take out huge rod control cabinets for something smaller, you need to also do something forward to make sure the ship trims properly. Sometimes you can just put another tank in the middle of the space for the hell of it, sometimes you can't. When you can't, you need a hull redesign.

You're kidding here...right?

Ok, I'll bite.  What "hull design" do you think is done to redistribute weight when a few hundred pounds of cabinets are moved?