• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

SWO to Intel

SH4D0W

Member
Hey guys/gals. I was wondering if anyone could comment on the odds of a lat transfer from SWO to Intel? I would think it would behoove you to get your SW qualification first and then speak with your CO about your future interests in a different field. Obviously, it depends on the needs of Intel at that time, but realistically, what would my odds be if I did at least 8 years of active service?
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
Hey guys/gals. I was wondering if anyone could comment on the odds of a lat transfer from SWO to Intel? I would think it would behoove you to get your SW qualification first and then speak with your CO about your future interests in a different field. Obviously, it depends on the needs of Intel at that time, but realistically, what would my odds be if I did at least 8 years of active service?
100%
.
.
.
by the needs of the Navy.

Depends on how many applicants there are to get out of SWO (generally...a lot), how many want to go to Intel (also...a lot), and how many spots are open for your year group (variable, and usually gets worse with age).
 

BackOrdered

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Hey guys/gals. I was wondering if anyone could comment on the odds of a lat transfer from SWO to Intel? I would think it would behoove you to get your SW qualification first and then speak with your CO about your future interests in a different field. Obviously, it depends on the needs of Intel at that time, but realistically, what would my odds be if I did at least 8 years of active service?
You are better off applying straight to Intel, but best of luck with that. At 8 years, you would have done maybe two DH rides as a senior SWO LT, I highly doubt a latxfer at that point would benefit you or the Navy. And it not only "behooves" you to get your SWO pin, it is a requirement.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
You are better off applying straight to Intel, but best of luck with that. At 8 years, you would have done maybe two DH rides as a senior SWO LT, I highly doubt a latxfer at that point would benefit you or the Navy. And it not only "behooves" you to get your SWO pin, it is a requirement.
Unless things have changed significantly I think that is the only main requirement. As for transferring at 8 years I have seen folks do it that late or even later, all that operational experience is invaluable for intel folks when they are trying to make sure their intel is relevant and in the right language for the current operational folks. Simply put, the folks with previous expereince outside intel often 'get it' a lot better than someone who has been intel all along. Not always the case but I have seen it more often than not.
 

BackOrdered

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Unless things have changed significantly I think that is the only main requirement. As for transferring at 8 years I have seen folks do it that late or even later, all that operational experience is invaluable for intel folks when they are trying to make sure their intel is relevant and in the right language for the current operational folks. Simply put, the folks with previous expereince outside intel often 'get it' a lot better than someone who has been intel all along. Not always the case but I have seen it more often than not.
Unfortunately, the recent messages regarding latxfer selects doesn't tell me what year group the SWO to Intel guys are in (unless I'm blind). But out of the dozen or so a year, how many would you say are guys with 8 years in? I don't deny that there is a need for older SWOs because the announcement message for the board lists how far out the board wants to look and from where (the November 2012 board listed YGs 11 to 06 for an intel latxfer hopeful from YGs 10+ for SWO and other designators).
 

SH4D0W

Member
Thanks for the fast feedback everyone!
Perhaps I worded my statement wrong, but what I meant was, I would look into a latxfer after my SW pin; so basically I would look into a possible xfer anywhere between 3 years in to x years in. I wrote 8 years simply because I can't logically see an Intel Board picking up a SWO to go Intel if he/she only wants to commit to their 4-year contract. I would think they would want someone willing to stay on for at least another 4 years so said individual would be worth their time.

--
Cheers,

Sh4d0w
 

BigRed389

Registered User
None
Unfortunately, the recent messages regarding latxfer selects doesn't tell me what year group the SWO to Intel guys are in (unless I'm blind). But out of the dozen or so a year, how many would you say are guys with 8 years in? I don't deny that there is a need for older SWOs because the announcement message for the board lists how far out the board wants to look and from where (the November 2012 board listed YGs 11 to 06 for an intel latxfer hopeful from YGs 10+ for SWO and other designators).
That late in the game, you could probably count the openings on one hand if they even exist...but the pool of applicants also shrinks.

On the other hand, the stakes of not getting picked up are much higher...getting sacrificed on DH FITREPs because you tried to lat xfer could be a showstopper if you don't get selected.

Also may not even be possible at that point...I'm pretty sure the last couple of IDC boards have specified no applicants that are in-zone for O-4 looks...


Thanks for the fast feedback everyone!
Perhaps I worded my statement wrong, but what I meant was, I would look into a latxfer after my SW pin; so basically I would look into a possible xfer anywhere between 3 years in to x years in. I wrote 8 years simply because I can't logically see an Intel Board picking up a SWO to go Intel if he/she only wants to commit to their 4-year contract. I would think they would want someone willing to stay on for at least another 4 years so said individual would be worth their time.

--
Cheers,

Sh4d0w

Good guess. Generally, you commit to 3 extra years to any community that picks you up from a latxfer.
 

BackOrdered

Well-Known Member
Contributor
That late in the game, you could probably count the openings on one hand if they even exist...but the pool of applicants also shrinks.

On the other hand, the stakes of not getting picked up are much higher...getting sacrificed on DH FITREPs because you tried to lat xfer could be a showstopper if you don't get selected.

Also may not even be possible at that point...I'm pretty sure the last couple of IDC boards have specified no applicants that are in-zone for O-4 looks...





Good guess. Generally, you commit to 3 extra years to any community that picks you up from a latxfer.
That's what I thought.
 

BDDPDX30

New Member
If I lateral transfer to intel during my sea tour, do I have to start in intel on a sea billet? If so, will my sea time start over or does my time as a SWO count?
 

CWO_change

Active Member
If I lateral transfer to intel during my sea tour, do I have to start in intel on a sea billet? If so, will my sea time start over or does my time as a SWO count?
If Intel is anything like CW, your time as a SWO does not count for your expected sea/tactical time as an 1830, the reason being that you focus on two completely different things for each. In other words, successful completion of SWO sea duty tells the selection board (most important for promotion to O-4) nothing about sustained superior performance as a tactical CW (or Intel).

I'm sure there are exceptions, but every CW-SWO transfer (even including the SWO-CW options, which aren't true transfers) I've known who became CWs prior to selection to O4 were pushed to complete (and did complete) a tactical CW tour prior to selection to O-4. In my experience, such applicants generally did not PCS afloat (though that's certainly an option), but rather completed direct support tours, which also enabled them to serve as shore department heads via their fitreps.

There was some bad rumint going around for a while that SWO time counted toward your CW tactical obligation, but the detailers have recently squashed this and reiterated that the expectation is that CWs still obtain tactical time in a CW billet to be competitive for O-4.

Now, again, this applies to CW only, but I'd be shocked if things were different for Intel, even if only due to the fact that carving out an exception (and I'd wager that the same applies to CW) could threaten to leave a shortage of people needed to serve in tactical Intel billets.
 

snake020

Contributor
If Intel is anything like CW, your time as a SWO does not count for your expected sea/tactical time as an 1830, the reason being that you focus on two completely different things for each. In other words, successful completion of SWO sea duty tells the selection board (most important for promotion to O-4) nothing about sustained superior performance as a tactical CW (or Intel).
What's your source? The FY21 O-4 board precept indicates otherwise. Specific language:

CW: "All fully qualified CW lieutenant commanders must be qualified CW officers, have earned their Information Warfare Officer (IWO) warfare qualification, and have a successful track record in their previous community or in tactical CW officer assignments to indicate potential to succeed as a CW lieutenant commander."

IP: "For promotion eligibility purposes, some of these officers will not have completed the IP-specific community/operational leadership assignments prior to redesignation. As such, the board is encouraged to evaluate an officer's demonstrated sustained superior performance..."

Intel: "Some officers will have a mix of assignments in both the Intel Community and another Navy community prior to redesignation... both are equally valuable and board members are encouraged to examine an officer's entire record..."
 

CWO_change

Active Member
What's your source? The FY21 O-4 board precept indicates otherwise. Specific language:

CW: "All fully qualified CW lieutenant commanders must be qualified CW officers, have earned their Information Warfare Officer (IWO) warfare qualification, and have a successful track record in their previous community or in tactical CW officer assignments to indicate potential to succeed as a CW lieutenant commander."

IP: "For promotion eligibility purposes, some of these officers will not have completed the IP-specific community/operational leadership assignments prior to redesignation. As such, the board is encouraged to evaluate an officer's demonstrated sustained superior performance..."

Intel: "Some officers will have a mix of assignments in both the Intel Community and another Navy community prior to redesignation... both are equally valuable and board members are encouraged to examine an officer's entire record..."
For CW, this is coming directly from briefings with the community manager and detailers. Ask any CW who has attended these briefings and they will tell you that this is the direction being provided by the community manager and detailing team and is what is being briefed at the promotion boards in terms of what makes a best qualified candidate for selection to LCDR as a CW.

That blurb from the precept does not establish limits on what the community can choose to focus on. In any case, successful track record in your previous community is a given if you want to promote; lat transferring as an unqualified SWO (if they even let you under such circumstances) to CW as a LT (and the likely subpar FITREPs you received as a result) wouldn't set you up for success at the CW LCDR board. Still, like I wrote, I'm sure there are exceptions and the precept allows for wiggle room, but the guidance being given is that tactical experience as a CW is the expectation to be best qualified for promotion.

One CO at a recent briefing on MS Teams with the detailing team lamented the fact that one of his best performing LTs--a SWO lat transfer--was at a disadvantage due to when he lat transferred relative to when he'd be up for promotion and not being able to complete a CW tactical tour in that time (for tactical credit, it's all about that AQD).
 
Last edited:
Top