which is better duty in the Navy for an enlisted Nuke, Sub or Carrier?

[dadofnuke]

which is better duty in the Navy for an enlisted Nuke, Sub or Carrier?

[Fermi2]

The submariners will say subs, the target sailors will say targets.

It depends on what your son likes and what his interests are.

There are PLENTY of threads about this in the various sections here.

Mike

[M1Ark]

Quality of life sucks on surface ships.

Ex-Surface Nuke.

[XGDubNuke]

Sir, I got off a carrier 9 months ago and the quality of life was pretty good.  From what I hear from friends on subs, the friendships are stronger but you work alot harder and longer.

[micachu]

It really is a tough call since Quality of Life is such a command specific thing.  Your local chain of command does indeed dictate quality of life.  Optempo is WAY higher for subs than carriers, somewhere above 60% typically.  I spent almost 5 years onboard Enterprise.  I saw it go from friggin awesome from 2000-2001, to nothing short of pure hell from 2002-2005.  Yes, carriers have more space for storage and typically won't have the 10+ hour days and a better duty rotation than a sub.  But the sub community is much more like a family than carriers.  I was lucky enough to spend my last 18 months at NRMD-Norfolk and got to know some sub guys very well.  They are most definitely a different breed.

[hamsamich]

Quality of life at any command IS all about the leadership.  But, the makeup of a sub (small amount of personel, tight quarters, type of operations) will promote a type of friendship/bond that seems to be a cut above anything I've experienced before.  No matter how bad it got, we were always in it together (mostly us blueshirts and a couple heart-smart kakis).  I was on fast attack subs and on a tender (surface).  If you are a $hitbag you will be spotted way sooner on the average on a submarine.  If you like to blend in way better than you like to stick out, try surface.  Life on board a sub was harder yet extraordianry, life on a tender was easier but blah.

[Clerisy]

If he doesn't mind the boot camp stuff and is looking for more opportunities to learn then go surface, if he wants to work with people that have to get along and all want to work together than go subs.

One of the major reasons I'm looking at the Navy is the chance to earn a degree without actually being on a campus. (conventional classrooms are starting to drive me crazy.  No Child Left Behind, move only as fast as the slowest kid, ect.) 

Am I to assume from your post then, that I'll have more time to further my education on a carrier as opposed to a sub?

[Navy2B]

(conventional classrooms are starting to drive me crazy.  No Child Left Behind, move only as fast as the slowest kid, ect.) 

Am I to assume from your post then, that I'll have more time to further my education on a carrier as opposed to a sub?

I am no authority, so consider my statement hearsay, but I have heard some large surface vessels (carriers) sometimes go so far as to bring Professors on board to teach courses, in addition to online courses potentially available. Libraries should be more widely available too, but I have no personal experience, only rumour.

One major caveat: You actually have to have spare time to take advantage of these potentials. If you're important, you probably won't.

As to conventional classrooms... While I cannot speak for the quality of non-technical degrees, I spent three years attending Penn State University's campuses working towards a Chemical Engineering degree. For various technical courses (Calculus I, II, Chemistry, Physics, , but mainly calculus)there is a sieve effect. Around 1/2 drop the course within the first few weeks, then 1/2 of those remaining drop as the course progresses. Granted, some science courses may use a sliding scale when it comes to grading to affix to a bell curve, but if the professor, students, and course was worth anything, usually there'd be a few high scorers. Also at Penn State University, Math courses had no sliding curve for grading. Flukes not withstanding, you passed or failed on your own merit, and no one else's when all the math questions were answerable*.

Trying to achieve that degree was one of the most grueling experiences of my life, but every moment of effort put in had marked pay-off. Students that didn't, left.

*I do not say all problems have a solution, for you are primarily graded for correct work towards an answer, and sometimes that answer is there is no solution--with your work showing that.

[fridayfred3p]

I have heard that on targets, since the work rotation is better split in a division that you aren't using all the training you got in prototype and on a sub you need to know everything about your rate to do well.  Can anyone confirm this?

[Roll Tide]

  Then the Powdered Milk aka Plastic Cow comes out of hiding......yuck!)

The UHT (Ultra High Temp) processed milk was much better (as long as it was very cold). Of course, it was dubbed EFPH (Effective Full Power Hours) milk shortly after introduction.

[rlbinc]

I was a Cruiser sailor (USS LONG BEACH) then served on Aircraft Carriers.
In my 3,107 days experience, I developed the following opinion...

1. Surface ships seemed to hit better ports. Half the submarines were boomers and all they saw was Guam or Holy Loch. Compared to the Cruiser, Aircraft Carriers tend to overpopulate every port they hit. Since there are no more Cruisers - the Carrier bad deal remains.

2. Submarines seem to hit things more than surface ships, and when they do - the people fly around the people tank at tremendous velocities earmarked by the proverbial "sudden stop at the end".

3. Two submarines are on Eternal Patrol. Be it a bad weld on the USS THRESHER or a hot running torpedo or Soviet torpedo - or whatever sank the USS SCORPION. Carriers are hard to sink - even the USS YORKTOWN of WW2 fame was a tough customer. USS FORRESTAL (source of Senator John McCain's complexion) burnt to a crisp, listed quite a bit, but stayed afloat.

4. We all got to wear OLD NAVY before it was fashionable.


 

[Wirebiter]

One of the major reasons I'm looking at the Navy is the chance to earn a degree without actually being on a campus. (conventional classrooms are starting to drive me crazy.  No Child Left Behind, move only as fast as the slowest kid, ect.) 

Am I to assume from your post then, that I'll have more time to further my education on a carrier as opposed to a sub?

Speaking solely from submarine experiance, there are opportunities to attend college while on a sub.  The Navy has a few non-traditional college programs that can be persued while out to sea.  These are mostly self paced and for lower level credits.  You will have more opportunities if you are attached to a Trident sub than if you get orders to a Fast attack.  Just about all Naval bases today have some sort of satallite campus and/or partnerships with local/regional colleges and Universities.  Most even offer classes right on base.
Additioanlly, many colleges and trade schools are molding degrees and certifications to take maximum credits from the in-rate training that enlisted service members recieve.  This seems to be the "new thing" in maximizing navy experiances.

Obtaining a degree within a six year nuke enlistment can be done from just about any command, but it will require a lot of your precious free time.  I saw a few single guys pull it off, but never a family man with kids.  There just wasn't enough time left after work for these guys to devote towards their educationa and still be there for their family.  The majority of degrees I saw came from guys while on their first (and only) shore duty.  They got started after a few years on their first boat, and then finished up during the three year shore duty that followed.

[LaFeet]

Soooooo

 Dadio Of nuke... what was his choice?

I volunteered for (and got subs) but actually wanted surface.  Had good and bad times on subs, and was fortunate enought to visit a number of ports outside the local realm.  even got to do some stuff that I still smile about....  either way... good luck to your kid