Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > The Pipeline (Special Forces Training) > 180A

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-13-2004, 12:37   #1
Kyobanim
Moderator
 
Kyobanim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,045
Why Lieutenent to Warrant

Hope this is the right place to ask this.

Why did the Army change to a WO in the team and drop the 1st LT? And is there a certain level of WO, as in 1,2,3, or 4 to hold the 180A position?
__________________
"Are you listening or just waiting to talk?"


Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

"Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing."
Optimus Prime
Kyobanim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2004, 14:28   #2
Airbornelawyer
Moderator
 
Airbornelawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,869
Re: Why Lieutenent to Warrant

Quote:
Originally posted by Kyobanim
Hope this is the right place to ask this.

Why did the Army change to a WO in the team and drop the 1st LT? And is there a certain level of WO, as in 1,2,3, or 4 to hold the 180A position?
180A isn't a position. The position on the ODA is Assistant Detachment Commander. By reg, its normally a WO1/CW2 position, but there is no specified requirement.

Other positions for 180As include Company Operations Warrant Officer, Battalion Ops WO, Group Ops WO and Group Intel WO. These are normally CW3 and up.
Airbornelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2004, 18:39   #3
GreenSalsa
Quiet Professional
 
GreenSalsa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fort Bragg, NC
Posts: 497
The biggest reason they tell me is...

Continuity. The current assignment system we have moves CPTs and MSGs way too fast in my opinion. We are actually lucky to keep them for 24 months at the ODA level. The Army has decided to put Warrant Officers on the detachment to slow down leadership rollover. A 180A is not supposed to be eligible for promotion for CW3 if he doesn’t have 60 months on time as an ADC on an ODA. I am expected and encouraged to stay on the same detachment for 5-6 years to bring some sort of stability to the detachment. For the record, I am on my 3rd Detachment Commander and 3rd Team Sergeant (not to mention my 4th Company Commander) I have been on this detachment for only a little over 42 months. By keeping someone like me on a detachment we don’t “hurt” traditional officer careers by keeping them too long at one assignment. When I make CW3 I will be “asked” (read forced) to take an ODB or Battalion position, possibly a SWC assignment.
GreenSalsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2004, 19:36   #4
Kyobanim
Moderator
 
Kyobanim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,045
Thanks for the answers.

So does the WO stay on a team longer than anyone else? I would think the NCOs would stay longer on a team also for the same reason.
__________________
"Are you listening or just waiting to talk?"


Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

"Fate rarely calls upon us at a moment of our choosing."
Optimus Prime
Kyobanim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2004, 18:19   #5
GreenSalsa
Quiet Professional
 
GreenSalsa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fort Bragg, NC
Posts: 497
Generally speaking...

Warrant Officers stay on a detachment longer than the NCOs.
GreenSalsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 18:58   #6
scot055
Asset
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2
how long does some body have to stay a SF NCO to become a Warrant Officer and do that person have to go back though the Q-course?
scot055 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2007, 19:44   #7
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by scot055 View Post
how long does some body have to stay a SF NCO to become a Warrant Officer and do that person have to go back though the Q-course?
Scot:

Fill out your profile and learn use the Search button.

That is basic info that has already been covered repeatedly.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2017
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 02:00   #8
troy2k
Quiet Professional
 
troy2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: CO Springs
Posts: 65
Excellent Historical Document

http://www.usawoa.org/WOHERITAGE/Hist_SF_WO.pdf

Explains a lot, including the surprising officer who had a lot to do with the initial process.
__________________
“Creating effective intelligence is an inherent and essential responsibility of command. Intelligence failures are failures of command – [just] as operations failures are command failures.” Marine Corps Doctrine Publication 2 - Intelligence
troy2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 05:15   #9
Jack Moroney (RIP)
Quiet Professional
 
Jack Moroney (RIP)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by troy2k View Post
http://www.usawoa.org/WOHERITAGE/Hist_SF_WO.pdf

Explains a lot, including the surprising officer who had a lot to do with the initial process.

There were a bunch of us at the time bantering this around with "Scotty" and the pros and cons got very interesting one major one was that if we could keep LTs we could "grow" better Detachment CDRs, another being that if we could send the LT back to a conventional assignment in the combat arms he would come back better able to understand not only how mother army worked but how to function as that force multiplier when his team became the nucleus for a BN of indig.
__________________
Wenn einer von uns fallen sollt, der Andere steht für zwei.
Jack Moroney (RIP) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 06:33   #10
kgoerz
Quiet Professional
 
kgoerz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NC for now
Posts: 2,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenSalsa View Post
Warrant Officers stay on a detachment longer than the NCOs.
How so? I never saw this. There is the inevitable SWC Tour for NCO'S. But how many Warrants do time at BN and GRP.
Once they replaced Lt's with WO. Instead of getting a Team leader with a couple of years Team experience you got one with no experience. To me the WO program was one of the worst Team organization decisions ever made.
__________________
Sounds like a s#*t sandwhich, but I'll fight anyone, I'm in.
kgoerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 09:13   #11
SFS0AVN
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 190
In order to get promoted to the higher CWO grades, he must spend time at Bn, Gp and SFCOM.
__________________

"In a man-to-man fight, the winner is he who has one more round in his magazine."
Rommel
SFS0AVN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 09:41   #12
lksteve
Quiet Professional
 
lksteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 2,531
The missive from the WOA got my heart started.

Quote:
There were also a disproportionately large number of officers who had not
yet completed college, indicating challenging or limited future careers.
As one of those unfortunate souls, I have to argue the contrary...my career prospects were so limited that the Army sent me to graduate school in my 19th year of service...I was not that exceptional among SF NCOs who attended OCS...a bunch of us wound up with fully-funded graduate degrees...when I decided to retire, SF Branch had indicated an interest to sending me to post-graduate training well after I was retirement eligible...maybe they thought if they kept me in school, I could be kept out of trouble...

Before the 48 graduate program was detached from JFKIMA, quite a few former SF NCOs attended...once again, the names escape me...

Granted, this happened after SF had stood up as a branch, but I recall several men of the earlier era that had gone down this path...(I can see faces, but names escape me right now, Colonel Howard being one of them, but he was in a category all his own.)

Quote:
There were disproportionately few
Military Academy graduates.
Really? When I think back to my time in SF as an NCO, I'd say they were well represented on A-teams...not many came back as field grade officers, however. And anyway, so what? How many USMA graduates server in AG assignments...? How many wind up commanding HHC, USAG and Band? That comment is ludicrous and irrelevant in my opinion.

In addressing the shortages of qualified officers in SF, the biggest sticking points were the opportunities for advancement posed by more than one assignment in SF...one tour was okay, but two tended to be viewed by Big Army as problematic...In my opinion, one thing that held back motivated SF NCOs from going to OCS before the advent of the SFWO was the unlikely possiblity of being able to continue serving in SF after commissioning. Richard and I were able to manage after commissioning (Richard went right to 7th SFGA after OCS, I did a one year indenture in the 509th before going to Toelz). Of the other three or four (including one former team mate), none of them made it to SF after commissioning (although two of them went to flight school).

Quote:
The Center indicated little interest in the subject, posed no obstructions, and provided little
support beyond use of the unoccupied office.
I find this comment somewhat curious, as well. In 1981, Colonel Maracek, along with several 48 types from JFK (PSYOP, CA, Attache types, not SF) came to BT with a canine-equestrian presentation regarding the future of SF officer career management activities, things in the works. And, of course the 48 guy threw in his opinion about how uneducated, uncultured, former SF NCOs were really dragging the 48 career field threw the mud and that something needed to be done about that. (The battalion XO kept his arm across my back as that BS was being propogated, but Paul E, the MFF team leader, another one of the unclean, spoke for me)...anyway, Colonel M. showed us that in a few years time, their would be three SF "divisions" (SWC, SF Command and an SO Support Command) and that the creation of three MG level commands would make life so much better and allow some of us to make SF our primary means of earning a living. The specialty designation for officers was going to be 11X, or at least that was what was put forward then (yes, I remember it like it was yesterday)...that would allow the longhairs in the 48 field to be untainted by the infidels like Paul and me...

I should have read this thread before I had my coffee...I'm awake now...
__________________
""A man must know his destiny. if he does not recognize it, then he is lost. By this I mean, once, twice, or at the very most, three times, fate will reach out and tap a man on the shoulder. if he has the imagination, he will turn around and fate will point out to him what fork in the road he should take, if he has the guts, he will take it.""- GEN George S. Patton
lksteve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 10:24   #13
GreenSalsa
Quiet Professional
 
GreenSalsa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fort Bragg, NC
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgoerz View Post
How so? I never saw this. There is the inevitable SWC Tour for NCO'S. But how many Warrants do time at BN and GRP.
Today (at least when I finished the course in 2000), we were expected to do 5-7 years as a Assistant Detachment Commander or Detachment Commander. During my 5 + years (same detachment) I saw, 4 Team Sergeants and 4 Detachment Commanders (not including the 9 months I was in Command) "cycle" through.

In addition there was not a single NCO that stayed the entire time I was there--add that to the 7 + years I served as an SF Medic (all served at the team level, except for 14 months as a battalion medic) I easily logged over 11-12 years on a detachment.

Furthermore, senior NCO positions are now managed just like officer positions (18-24 months) and then they are rotated out--the only exception are Warrant Officers. We are encouraged and expected to stay longer on the detachment.

All WO positions at BN and GP are CW3/4/5 billets, and should be manned accordingly. The same holds true for SWC and elsewhere--there are exceptions based off of injury or family situations.
__________________
"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who didn't"
GreenSalsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2008, 18:54   #14
one-zero
Quiet Professional
 
one-zero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenSalsa View Post
...Furthermore, senior NCO positions are now managed just like officer positions (18-24 months) and then they are rotated out--the only exception are Warrant Officers...
RGR - I made E8 list in secondary and was notified I was approved for WOC in the same time period. CSM made a call to me in Panama asking what I wanted to do so they could unscrew it with perscom.
Hmmm, 9 more years team time I ended up with as a WO versus a likely 2-3 years max as a SNCO then off to Bn S3, 1sgt, etc. after that ...well everyone has their reasons and you can't stay on a team forever, but for me leaving team level (whether ODA or 'other') allowed me to make the decision to retire - But by going WO it allowed me to max team time out as well as give back to newer guys coming into the system, both fellow NCOs and Officers. No ticket punching and a great opportunity to look back on service as both an SF NCO serving on a team as well as an SFWO commanding one...the only good deal left after Tm Sgts and Det Cdrs were getting pushed up after 24 months. Heck my first Det CDR had 4 yrs team time and there were Tm sgts with several years in position as well. Lots of experience maintained that way, but it just ceased to be a viable option and WO was supposed to provide continuity...as with all best laid plans we know it doesn't always work out that way.

Best regards,
1-0
__________________
The secrecy of my job prevents me from knowing just what it is that I do.
one-zero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 20:16   #15
JFW
Asset
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ft. Bragg, NC, enroute to FT. Lewis, WA to be the 1st GP Ops WO
Posts: 5
WO Progression

Gents,

1. Let me see if I can expand a bit more on the WO Program with my experience. I joined the Army in 81. Went to SF School in 1984. Did team time in 7th/1st GP and SWC, then went into the WO Program as an E-7 with three SF Mos's and more than six years of team time.

2. As a WO, stayed on the same ODA for 4 years straight and then went to the B-Tm. Then it was off to JRTC for two yrs.

3. Then back to a B-Tm after JRTC as a CW3 and then after a year of that, back down to a freefall team for 2 more yrs.

4. Made the CW4 list and then it was up to BN. After that, I did a Joint tour at JIATF and then to 1st SWTG(A).

5. Now back to a GP to one of the two CW5s (Grp Ops WO).

So, what I am saying is that a WO1-CW3 can stay on a team for a long time and can do a B-Tm tour once or even twice. Typically the Bn WO is a CW4. There are a few Joint assignemnets out there and also a handful of slots at SWC and the other Commands (CW3-CW5). Now we can have two CW5s at the Group level....one in the S-3 shop as the Grp Ops WO and then the Command Chief Warrant Officer of the Group. Or you can stay in one Grp for the whole time as a WO.....but I am not sure if that would be a good thing......

I have been in for 27yrs and can now stay in for 40 yrs of WO Service or age 62(I am 44 now so I guess it will be the 40 yrs of WO service if I decide to stay)......so, from my point of view, the WO program is a success and will be around for a long time. Heck, I have even seen a CW5 work at the company level while in the sandbox for awhile.......so you definetly get the bang for a buck when it comes to a WO verses a Lt (an O)....just some words for thought.....be safe out there and always take care of your SOF Brothers.......
__________________
JFW
JFW is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ROTC to Warrant? RyanRC187 180A 16 06-09-2009 18:46



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:25.



Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies