Naval Aviations "One" Problem...

[AllAmerican75]

In all seriousness, I don't entirely understand what limits us compared to civilian companies with respect to computer access ashore. Does it need to be 1:1? Absolutely not. Does it need to be better than it is? Absolutely. I know I am going to get the "oh you helo guys are so silly" eye roll, but seeing front offices bitch about JOs sitting around doing nothing when in reality, they are just waiting for a computer to open up is ridiculous.

This is a cost-management and inability to design networks properly issue. Laptops and the like are expensive and we're saddled with legacy IT systems. The move to Flank Speed and Nautilus VDI is a start and there's more coming (I can't talk about it here). NMCI, both it's design and contract, have proved very difficult to fix when they work "well enough" and don't impact operations in a "meaningful way." Believe me, I've heard over and over the complaints about how slow IT is, how limited assets and resources are, and how difficult it is to do tech refreshes. I've even experienced it on both the user and acquisitions side.

Solid agreement here. NMCI has been hot garbage since it was rolled out. Now that there's a whole different system afloat, IT support is even worse. I don't know if it's gotten better in the past 4 years, but I doubt it. Conceptually, it seems as though the past 15+ years have seen an increase in the number of "efficiencies" and "lean practices" that lean heavily on the member, and take time and energy away from the mission. It's the "death by 1,000 cuts" that some guys talk about. When everything is getting just a tiny bit harder every year, in aggregate, it becomes unsustainable. Meanwhile every individual bureaucrat says "We're not asking that much more, it only takes 5-10 minutes of your time.", which makes the problem difficult to characterize and describe beyond "administrative creep" that can always be blamed on others, certainly not YOUR program, which is IMPORTANT, by God...

I can't help with bureaucracy but I can tell you coming from NAVWAR and working on the Shore IT side, that we are actively trying to fix NMCI but are constantly under budget constraints (both actual amount and cashflow). The continuing resolutions, constant cannibalization for other programs, and DISA requirements placed upon us make things very difficult. There are a lot of good people at PEO Digital trying to solve the problem but our cybersecurity and network design restrictions (NIPR, SIPR, etc) are antiquated and don't allow for modern network design. We are starting to see that with Flank Speed and Nautilus VDI but the transition is very slow.

The fact the Navy has not unfucked its IT mess over 20 years after the introduction of NMCI speaks volumes to me. I've often thought if senior leadership had to deal with the same issues as their sailors it would be fixed, and fast. But they've got aides and staff along with priority support to help them, so they don't and it is still a mess decades later.

As for the reserves, the fact Kelly Beamsley's site is still being updated and used well over 5 years after he retired is just plain...sad.

Senior Leadership does actually. The fixes at the level of something like NMCI are not fast or easy and we are hampered by being behind the power curve as far as design, talent, and technology are concerned. Fixing NMCI is not much different from a bureaucratic or programmatic standpoint than fixing programs like LCS, JSF, and DDG 1000.

 

[sevenhelmet]

Continuing Resolutions... good point. Eliminating the Pentagon's ability to plan and POM funds has really hamstrung any real solutions.

 

[DanMa1156]

This is a cost-management and inability to design networks properly issue. Laptops and the like are expensive and we're saddled with legacy IT systems. The move to Flank Speed and Nautilus VDI is a start and there's more coming (I can't talk about it here). NMCI, both it's design and contract, have proved very difficult to fix when they work "well enough" and don't impact operations in a "meaningful way." Believe me, I've heard over and over the complaints about how slow IT is, how limited assets and resources are, and how difficult it is to do tech refreshes. I've even experienced it on both the user and acquisitions side.

Ultimately these are choices being made and the Navy is reaping what it sowed. They aren't going to change base locations significantly anytime soon, admin creep I genuinely think the previous and current CNO want to reduce but I question how successful they will or even can be on it, but this is a solvable issue that we know other civilian counterparts do not struggle with; it's a choice of priorities. I get it, but if it is in fact a reason why people are leaving, then I say again: the Navy is reaping what it sowed.

 

[DanMa1156]

Conceptually, it seems as though the past 15+ years have seen an increase in the number of "efficiencies" and "lean practices" that lean heavily on the member, and take time and energy away from the mission. It's the "death by 1,000 cuts" that some guys talk about. When everything is getting just a tiny bit harder every year, in aggregate, it becomes unsustainable. Meanwhile every individual bureaucrat says "We're not asking that much more, it only takes 5-10 minutes of your time.", which makes the problem difficult to characterize and describe beyond "administrative creep" that can always be blamed on others, certainly not YOUR program, which is IMPORTANT, by God...

You nailed it. I am so sick of how unit level PS's have become almost exclusively a conduit for inserting problems into Salesforce where some GS or Contractor who doesn't understand my PS's request takes a year to review and then decline what I'm trying to accomplish. Not only that, but more and more administrative burdens are being put on the member on IT systems that don't work properly: RED/DA, Opting in for the 12 year BRS Bonus (I am confident there are servicemembers who have no idea they are eligible for this and are losing out on serious $$), travel claims on N2P, etc.

CNP a year or so ago said one of his priorities was to allow unit-level PS's to take back some of their actual work through the CPPA courses (noting the consolidated PSDs/TSCs have not given the Navy the assumed efficiency gains they thought they would... shocker). However, even the PSs I had in my last squadron that had the highest CPPA qual were still prevented from completing most transactions which was incredibly frustrating. My experience with MNCC thus far has also been a mixture of "close out the case without an adequate response," or "ask your PS and close out the case."

Add on how now there are GMTs I can't skip through and can't open a new tab without them pausing (don't worry, another browser can be opened as long as you have a second monitor) that quiz me on arcane laws about Travel Card Use, Gift Receiving Ethics, etc. as opposed to the "here's what you need to know to stay in compliance," the silly amount of Safety Programs we have, it just adds up to so many burdens on one's time. It is literally death by 1000 cuts.

 

[Brett327]

This is true for the entire military industrial complex. I wonder when servicing the interest on the national debt, a number that now exceeds our ENTIRE defense budget will be addressed . . . .

This philosophy seems at odds with resourcing DoD to the right level to perform status quo tasking, to say nothing about a conflict with China.

 

[gparks1989]

A JO from my fleet tour had a theory about retention, and it basically boiled down to three things (for Pilots specifically, from the single seat VFA perspective):

1) Poor compensation relative to the civilian sector
2) Poor duty locations
3) Lack of resources (NIPR laptops, personnel in terms of collateral duties, training devices both for simulators and live flight, etc)

His argument was if you fix one of these problems then you will greatly improve retention. But when you force people to accept all three, coupled with the high ops-tempo of VFA squadrons when you’re home or away, it’s too much to ask for unless you are 100% sold on the Navy as a career.

This hits a lot of the high points. One of the most injurious things the Navy ever did was invest in Lemoore. That place is an absolute shit-hole and the carrier break doesn't make it any better. The impact on family life is huge, too. Granted this is coming from someone who was never stationed there, but my brief sojourn left a big impact.

I think the golden path plays a big role. I was never one who bemoaned the fact that you had to leave the cockpit. I actually think that's good and flying does get boring after a while. But more flexibility to pick and choose duty stations/jobs would hugely improve QOL. It would also aid with spouse employment/career which is a big thing for a lot of people (myself included). This is a pretty monumental change and involves a pretty big magic wand, but it's also an issue the Navy should try to address.

You get to taste more freedom and flexibility in the reserves and its a hard drug to quit. I would have been happy to stay on active duty if I had more of that, but I had zero faith that the Navy wasn't going to try to fuck me and send me somewhere I didn't want to go with zero consideration for my wife/family life or my career ambitions; I was pretty lucky during my ten years and got more or less what I wanted, but the clock was running out. It's the military, and I get the sacrifices that entails. But the military is also an employer in a competitive labor market.

 

[taxi1]

So, move every Lemoore squadron to San Diego.

Cheaper to move the party to Lemoore.

 

[AllAmerican75]

Ultimately these are choices being made and the Navy is reaping what it sowed. They aren't going to change base locations significantly anytime soon, admin creep I genuinely think the previous and current CNO want to reduce but I question how successful they will or even can be on it, but this is a solvable issue that we know other civilian counterparts do not struggle with; it's a choice of priorities. I get it, but if it is in fact a reason why people are leaving, then I say again: the Navy is reaping what it sowed.

This is incorrect with regard to NMCI. Our processes are so byzantine and inefficient that our civilians and contractors are impacted to the point that we actually lose talent (they quit or never accept the job) simply due to how difficult getting the job and the resources to do it are. My last tour I worked at the warfare center responsible for oversight on NCMI and it took MONTHS to get a laptop and account, tech refreshes were non-existent for years, and we routinely ran into problems that could not be fixed without getting a new machine because the NMCI contractors weren't allowed to fix them. And yes, civilians deal with admin creep and GMTs just like us. They hate it and all of the bullshit that goes along with working for the government causes many to seek out greener pastures in private industry. Believe me, we have the same exact problems for our civilians and we end up wasting talent and opportunities because of it.

 

[sevenhelmet]

This is incorrect with regard to NMCI. Our processes are so byzantine and inefficient that our civilians and contractors are impacted to the point that we actually lose talent (they quit or never accept the job) simply due to how difficult getting the job and the resources to do it are. My last tour I worked at the warfare center responsible for oversight on NCMI and it took MONTHS to get a laptop and account, tech refreshes were non-existent for years, and we routinely ran into problems that could not be fixed without getting a new machine because the NMCI contractors weren't allowed to fix them. And yes, civilians deal with admin creep and GMTs just like us. They hate it and all of the bullshit that goes along with working for the government causes many to seek out greener pastures in private industry. Believe me, we have the same exact problems for our civilians and we end up wasting talent and opportunities because of it.

Weird how we survive in industry without all the extra admin. I don't know how we do it!


There needs to be a FITREP bullet for "reduced administrative workload" or "eliminated process X". Government is great at adding process- its their solution to everything. We generally suck at trimming out the deadwood and overgrowth that results from bureaucrats working in a vacuum, e.g. "But my process only requires 5-10 minutes of your time, and a form 61.58.1309-XCD to be filled out correctly. It's easy!"

 

[AllAmerican75]

Weird how we survive in industry without all the extra admin. I don't know how we do it!


There needs to be a FITREP bullet for "reduced administrative workload" or "eliminated process X". Government is great at adding process- its their solution to everything. We generally suck at trimming out the deadwood and overgrowth that results from bureaucrats working in a vacuum, e.g. "But my process only requires 5-10 minutes of your time, and a form 61.58.1309-XCD to be filled out correctly. It's easy!"

It also provides those bureaucrats with an opportunity to not take responsibility for things. We often times let the process become more important than the end product. The amount of people I would piss off on a regular basis was high because the civilians couldn't really do anything to me as uniformed military so I was able to walk in and override the processes many times. I remember one time I was able to get our sustainment team members authorization to move stuff from SIPR-to-NIPR approved because after the cybersecurity team telling me and the sustainment lead no via phone and email multiple times, I walked into their office in uniform and suddenly their response was "Absolutely, we'll get right on that, commander." It frustrates me to no end.

 

[DanMa1156]

This is incorrect with regard to NMCI. Our processes are so byzantine and inefficient that our civilians and contractors are impacted to the point that we actually lose talent (they quit or never accept the job) simply due to how difficult getting the job and the resources to do it are. My last tour I worked at the warfare center responsible for oversight on NCMI and it took MONTHS to get a laptop and account, tech refreshes were non-existent for years, and we routinely ran into problems that could not be fixed without getting a new machine because the NMCI contractors weren't allowed to fix them. And yes, civilians deal with admin creep and GMTs just like us. They hate it and all of the bullshit that goes along with working for the government causes many to seek out greener pastures in private industry. Believe me, we have the same exact problems for our civilians and we end up wasting talent and opportunities because of it.

I didn't mean to suggest government civilians. I am talking about actual corporations.

For what it's worth, my dad works for a company that does both contracting for the government but also many other private companies. He knows and sees the pain of the stupid "fall protection" and other GMTs he has to do at the government contracted vendors - sometimes even the same company, same course, different site that don't count (i.e. Raytheon Massachusetts doesn't recognize the Raytheon Buffalo's courses) - but guess what? He has an issued laptop, an issued iphone (not a nice one, but a dedicated phone line), and the VPN somehow works 99.9% of the time. He also submits a travel claim that's no-nonsense and paid to his bank account 3 days after he submits it. When he travels, his company, like the Navy, requires him to take the cheapest flights, but it isn't hard for him to justify "landing at 11 PM sucks and then I have to drive home, so if you pony up $48 more I can get home at a reasonable time," and his company will spring for it.

How is it the Navy can't do literally anything I just put in italics? Before you tell me "OPSEC," I can confidently say my dad's work needs more OPSEC from China or competitors than 99% of what we deal with on the UNCLASS side - literally designs of chips that go into satellites, NVD's, Playstations, etc. Knowing we won't change it, the Navy shouldn't be surprised to learn they bleed talent the more and more they put training and administrative requirements on Sailors and away from Admin without improving those same Sailors' access to computers or a reliable network. Know what sucks? When Chief tells a division "liberty is secured until we all complete the GMT on the computer," and there's 2 computers for the shop. Of course people are leaving - and it's hard to quantify the death by 1,000 cuts - but this is one of those 1,000 that gets repeated fleet wide many times a year.

 

[DanMa1156]

Weird how we survive in industry without all the extra admin. I don't know how we do it!


There needs to be a FITREP bullet for "reduced administrative workload" or "eliminated process X". Government is great at adding process- its their solution to everything. We generally suck at trimming out the deadwood and overgrowth that results from bureaucrats working in a vacuum, e.g. "But my process only requires 5-10 minutes of your time, and a form 61.58.1309-XCD to be filled out correctly. It's easy!"

[/threadjack] One of my roommates at the Academy tried to become the Brigade Commander (the highest MIDN at the Academy) but wasn't selected and was instead assigned to become the Brigade Adjutant (basically the Senior Watch Officer). He made it his one goal into eliminating all unnecessary and stupid watches and was successful in doing so. Among the ones he eliminated, I specifically remember he got rid of a watch in the library designed to make sure at night people were coming to study in the library in the correct uniform (literally the issue was the correct undershirt...) and one at the gate on weekends to make sure people were coming back from liberty in the correct uniform or "proper liberty attire."

Literally went the opposite of every other Adjutant we had during my time there who had the attitude of "we can create a watch for that." Loved him for that.

 

[cfam]

What’s interesting to me is that there are other government organizations that have better systems in place and the Navy hasn’t bothered to learn from them. When I was TDY to an embassy it took less than a day to get my accounts set up and to get a work phone issued with the full mobile MS office suite on it, including access to my work email and teams. I also noticed way less forced updating and the systems ran much faster. We also got an additional workstation added to our office by IT within two days.

State somehow has most of the IT pain points figured out despite having way more locations spread out across the world. I know they’re much smaller than the Navy, but there are a lot of great ideas that the Navy could steal.

 

[taxi1]

There needs to be a FITREP bullet for "reduced administrative workload"

In my first fleet squadron, the previous training officer's bullet was "Develop comprehensive currency training syllabus and processes". My bullet was "Greatly streamlined administrative processes for currency training."

 

[Flash]

...He has an issued laptop, an issued iphone (not a nice one, but a dedicated phone line), and the VPN somehow works 99.9% of the time. He also submits a travel claim that's no-nonsense and paid to his bank account 3 days after he submits it. When he travels, his company, like the Navy, requires him to take the cheapest flights, but it isn't hard for him to justify "landing at 11 PM sucks and then I have to drive home, so if you pony up $48 more I can get home at a reasonable time," and his company will spring for it...

Combine the government contracting process with necessary oversight and accountability and you often get to a mess when trying to make a DoD-wide system like DTS. Repeated abuses by military folks, up to and including Fleet CMC's and even Combatant Commanders, and trying to ensure they are not repeated doesn't really help things.