As a JO in HSL, I also thought that the community didn't care about tactics. They sincerely wanted to care, but they couldn't. Getting officers promoted is where the rubber hits the road, and trying to reform the community back into tactical relevance was not high enough on the priority list to get one promoted. So the community then tried to shift its values by exalting the SWTI/NSAWC billets above all else. But that's just another bureaucratic move which encourages a certain check in the box in order to reach the top. What good is being a SWTI at the center of tactical excellence if that center is short on true acumen? Now, why do they lack credibility? No one can help the fact that our community doesn't exactly have a red phone linked to the oval office. But you can still have a quality set of tactics based on sound theories that are practiced and refined as you BUM-DA-DA DUUUMMMMM (drum roll, please!)....are willing to truly learn, fail, and critique. But our tactics centers of excellence, our "universities" if you will, don't have that. They are grooming shops dedicated to the achievement of preset milestones with ZERO failures to look good on FITREPs. The guidance I received from higher ups on my missile shot had been, and I quote, "Don't f- this up." Just hit the target. What it ought to be is something along the lines of, "Use this precious resource as an opportunity to simulate a real-world strike so we can all learn more about what in our tactical procedures works and what doesn't. I don't care as much about whether or not you hit the target as I do about (a) a challenging scenario, (b) your most realistic best effort response to that scenario, and (c) an insightful after-action analysis." When we're willing to fail in training, share what we learned publicly, and promote the guys who can demonstrate bona fide progress which builds upon those insights, we'll be on the right track.
