Things that are on the NAPT...

[Takai]

OBE

[HydroDave63]

I've looked around for quite awhile, ever since I wanted to become a nuke a few months ago, for some hard evidence of what was on the tests. From what I've uncovered this is what I've found out so far...


Basically, it's mathematics, chemistry and physics. Basic physics (acceleration, gravity, forces, 3 laws of Newton, etc). Chemistry (balancing equations, knowing the difference between acid and base i.e. the pH difference, adding atomic masses of different elements together, knowing the periodic table, knowing what the little numbers mean next to an element letter, etc). Mathematics (basically knowing how to add, subtract, multiply and divide mono-, bi-, and polynomials, etc).

So basically:

1. Know the difference between an acid and a base
2. know how to balance chemical equations
3. Be familiar with multiplication and division of polynomials.


It's truly amazing that out of all these nukes floatin around the net only a small handful post anything worth while. Telling someone to study physics, precalc, and algebra 2 is almost as rediculous as studying the dictionary for a spelling test at school.

Actually, your post pretty much proved their advice. And your lack of respect. So what is your point?

[Takai]

Look carefully man, didn't prove their advice in the way you are seeing it as. Yeah sure, they were on the money saying the areas to study but not the sections within those areas. I mean you tell me to study physics...what type of physics should I study? I mean...from what I've picked up there is close to 100+ physics equations to know. Ya get what I mean bro?

[Estis]

Slow night, H'Dave was already here.

Most "C" students can spell the words ridiculous and which properly.

Nukes floating around the net have already been there and done that, whatever you think you know is far short of the truth.

I never advise deppers to study prior to nuke school, then again, nuke school was not hard for me.

Others do advise a study regimen, but then, deppers with idle time on their hands have been known to get themselves all crossed up and barred from the nuke program before they even start, and frankly, I do not care if they suffer this fate. Some of the nukes out here do care, and they know that a studious depper is much less likely to epic fail before he (she) ever hits boot camp.

The reason there is no hard evidence on the net might be because putting hard evidence of a qualification exam on the net would compromise the integrity of the exam.

Anyone commiting to put that hard evidence on the net would also be compromising the integrity of the exam.

You cannot post hard evidence of what you remember the day you actually take said exam out here on the net.

That is a hard and fast integrity violation.

We (qualified nukes) do not post such detailed, hard evidence right after we take exams; not POSS, MASS, NRRPT, ABHP, NEU, RO, SRO, XYZABC, etc.

But then, as you are nowhere near qualified to be a nuke, either by demonstrated ability or demonstrated integrity, what you have already demonstrated is that you cannot yet instinctively fathom what is compromising an exam and showing your ass, and what is not.

That might be a problem,....

It may or may not be correctable,...

PS - Good Luck,...

(sic)

Marssim, I am a bit confused. I don't really understand what about the OP's post made it a "hard and fast" violation. Was it that it was too specific? Or was it too comprehensive? Or was it a combination of its specificity and comprehensiveness that was an issue?

I'm confused, because from my past experiences in standardized tests and school exams, it was relatively common for students to know/discuss the types of problems that could be expected on a test. While we would never share exact test questions, different classes of problems expected on the test (such as the OP's example) would be used to help focus our studies. Is there a different expectation for tests in the nuke world? If there is, how would you have written the OP's post so that it would still convey information, yet not cross the "hard and fast" violation line? I'm curious about how you would have written the post, because I'm trying to get a gauge on what you consider "acceptable" information sharing in the nuke world...

[MacGyver]

...

If I have access to the details of these tests prior to sitting for them, I have an unfair advantage against persons sitting for the test "cold", the test and it's designed outcome have been compromised.

The designed outcome of many of these tests is to demonstrate that the successful candidate can operate and manipulate the different nuclear disciplines in a manner which assures (to the best of the regulated industries ability) the safety of the general public.

To "cheat" the exam is to "cheat" the general public of the safe operation it deserves from all of us.

That, IMO, is an integrity problem, you are welcome to draw your own, different conclusions.

..

Knock it off would ya' ... I'm getting all misty eyed!   










{Very nicely said Marssim}

[Takai]

Strong survive and the weak parrish in this world, plain and simple. You go in hot, they go in cold. You did you homework, they didn't. I'm not speaking for everyone here and if it's not your thing to check up and stuff then it's not your thing and by all means forget you ever saw anything at all. But for those of us who like to do our homework, like to know, like to find out, like to be as prepared for things as humanly possible, finding things such as this thread and the much better and much more informative topic I posted earlier today are like finding pure gold. I respect your ideals, I love the honor and the integrity and just because I am different in terms of things doesn't mean I'm different than you in many ways. I put all those things into other places in my life, but finding out as much as possible about obsticles in my way of grandeure and success are not one of those places in my life.

[retread]

Strong survive and the weak parrish in this world, plain and simple. You go in hot, they go in cold. You did you homework, they didn't. I'm not speaking for everyone here and if it's not your thing to check up and stuff then it's not your thing and by all means forget you ever saw anything at all. But for those of us who like to do our homework, like to know, like to find out, like to be as prepared for things as humanly possible, finding things such as this thread and the much better and much more informative topic I posted earlier today are like finding pure gold. I respect your ideals, I love the honor and the integrity and just because I am different in terms of things doesn't mean I'm different than you in many ways. I put all those things into other places in my life, but finding out as much as possible about obsticles in my way of grandeure and success are not one of those places in my life.

Much better than your earlier posts!  Isn't it amazing when people you disrespect still try to be helpful?!

[Takai]

Yeah, sorry I came off as a scrub. =P Little butthurt bout it all. Got a 76 on the test. xD

[DarrenE]

From what I hear the NAPT is no more.

[sovbob]

From what I hear the NAPT is no more.

Where did you hear this?  I haven't heard any such thing.

A few years back they changed the name of the NFQT (Nuclear Field Qualification Test) to the more generic-sounding NAPT (Navy Advanced Programs Test) but didn't change any of the content, nor the fact that it was only administered for nuclear candidates.

[DarrenE]

I first read it in the forum titled "Nuke Alpha and Bravo"
Then I asked my recruiter while on the subject and she said she recalled hearing about it.

[Rock Chalk Jayhawk]

Firstly, the tests are no more. The same tests that were used for over a decade were compromised and had to be destroyed and rewritten.  Herein lies the integrity violation: whenever you are trying to get someone to divulge (in DIRECT violation if written instruction) information on a test that is CONTROLLED MATERIAL, you're trashing your integrity and the fool who helps you.  As a former nuc field coordinator, I would advise the OP that folks have lost their CAREERS for this, and you wouldn't be in my program...I'd sooner miss goal.

Now...to hop down from the soap box...

[Cycoticpenguin]

Firstly, the tests are no more. The same tests that were used for over a decade were compromised and had to be destroyed and rewritten.  Herein lies the integrity violation: whenever you are trying to get someone to divulge (in DIRECT violation if written instruction) information on a test that is CONTROLLED MATERIAL, you're trashing your integrity and the fool who helps you.  As a former nuc field coordinator, I would advise the OP that folks have lost their CAREERS for this, and you wouldn't be in my program...I'd sooner miss goal.

Now...to hop down from the soap box...

asking someone for advice on how and what to study for an important test is NOT an integrity violation...  This is not even close to gray area. If he's asking for direct questions off the exam thats different of course.

[NuclearWaste]

Just to say something:

I think the broad view of the topics given to study is reasonable.

     1. It's an aptitude test.
     2. It's confidential (giving specific topics would therefore compromise the agreement made at the beginning of the test.)

[zebaffe]

Look carefully man, didn't prove their advice in the way you are seeing it as. Yeah sure, they were on the money saying the areas to study but not the sections within those areas. I mean you tell me to study physics...what type of physics should I study? I mean...from what I've picked up there is close to 100+ physics equations to know. Ya get what I mean bro?

Almost all physics equations can be derived from pretty much 5 very basic equations... that is if you have common sense

I have found that some of the most "Intelligent" lack one very important ability. Critical thinking (common sense).

I take the NAPT this coming Monday. What I've found on this forum has been extremely helpful despite the arguing over what info is good or bad. Once again, with a little common sense, all of it is useful.

[Fermi2]

Uh critical thinking is not common sense. Common sense can only be applied to simple solutions, critical thinking goes way past that..