ocstwentyone
ENS, SC, USN
Pretty funny. I credit you on that one.
-
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
Planned elimination of Cryptologist - 161x
- Thread starter The Chief
- Start date
- Status
bbell
Registered User
Several people have stated that Intel and Crypto will merge into one URL designator in the future. I noticed on the Navy Personnel web site that they changed Cryptology to Information Warfare, but I have not found any definitive evidence stating the merger. I am very interested in this topic because I applied for both and wonder if it will really matter which one I am selected by.
zaab has seen through philosophical debate to the reality of it. Most of you weren't around when women could not serve in any combat warfare designator. Back then women could be designated and spend a career as a 1105/1100 (that is non warfare qualified surface URL) or in the staff corps or as resrtriced line only. Those that were nonwarfare qualifed URLs, thousands of them, never saw command of a ship or squadron. They were URLs but no one considered them qualified to command a ship, squadron, wing, CARGRU or other operational unit. Of course it didn't have to do with their gender (that is obvious today). It was their lack of operational experience. So it will be with the new Intel/Crypie/IW URL community. No wings, dolphin or SWO pin, no operational command, URL or not.
"Operators" drop bombs, kill people and make things blow up... End of argument there.
But we need our supporting RL communities to do our jobs (making things blow up) correctly. Without them, it wouldn't happen.
r/
G
But we need our supporting RL communities to do our jobs (making things blow up) correctly. Without them, it wouldn't happen.
r/
G
This article gives even more perspective on the changes the Navy is making to it's Intel community. It would seem that the Navy is simply getting ahead of the game as they would likely be told by congress to change the way we are doing business now. The Army seems to have already started moving in a similar direction.
___________________
Washington Post
March 24, 2005
Pg. 17
Pentagon To Upgrade Intelligence Structure
Officials Want Analysts on Front Lines
By Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer
The Defense Department is seeking to remodel and upgrade its intelligence structure and operations, based on experience in Afghanistan and Iraq and current and expected systems for collecting technical and human intelligence.
The changes are being promoted while the intelligence community is awaiting the confirmation of John D. Negroponte as the director of national intelligence, who under a new statute is to become the president's chief intelligence adviser, with budgetary control over some of the Pentagon's intelligence-collection agencies.
Among the first steps the Pentagon is planning is upgrading intelligence from being a staff function at headquarters to having analysts and human intelligence collectors on the front lines, particularly in the war on terrorism.
"We need close and real-time intelligence support for what we are doing," a Defense Department senior official said yesterday in describing an outline for the restructuring that he said would be part of the Pentagon's fiscal 2007 budget.
Even now, some technical collection capabilities enable Predator unmanned aircraft in Iraq to deliver real-time imagery of potential enemy targets yards or miles away to analysts working with small ground units. Those analysts can at the same time download from satellites background data from Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and CIA files to give context to the imagery and help plan the units' moves.
The remodeling is "viewing DoD [Department of Defense] intelligence as an operational capability that is integral to joint warfare," said Lt. Col. Chris Conway, a Pentagon spokesman.
The Pentagon has already begun to overhaul and increase its human intelligence, or humint, activities "to address shortfalls," Conway said. One step was to create "tactical humint teams," with 160 operating in Iraq. They comprise fully uniformed soldiers who knock on doors to interview families and conduct some interrogations.
Less well-known, and due for expansion, is the Pentagon's clandestine collection of intelligence in foreign countries where operations may eventually take place. Such so-called battlefield preparation activities, where covert operators scour potential landing spots and target areas, took place before the Iraq invasion and have taken place in other countries, according to intelligence sources.
The Army, which carries most of the burden in Iraq, not only is going to shift more personnel into intelligence but also make it a better career path, the Defense Department senior official said. "Professionalization and sustainment of the intelligence workforce" is one of the goals of the new program, Conway said.
At a higher level, the Pentagon is looking at pulling together the heads of its eight intelligence agencies and putting them under one military commander, possibly a general rank officer. These include not only the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force intelligence arms but also the DIA; the National Security Agency, which performs analysis of electronic intercepts; the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which does imagery analysis; and the National Reconnaissance Office, which builds and operates satellites.
The proposed action comes at a time when Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) have introduced a bill to create a unified intelligence command inside the Pentagon under a four-star officer.
Chambliss described the plan as creating "one point of contact for military intelligence for the new DNI and . . . a more efficient, responsive and simpler military intelligence structure."
The Pentagon planning calls for integrating some of the separate intelligence functions used by different services under one officer, perhaps wearing two hats.
__________
___________________
Washington Post
March 24, 2005
Pg. 17
Pentagon To Upgrade Intelligence Structure
Officials Want Analysts on Front Lines
By Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer
The Defense Department is seeking to remodel and upgrade its intelligence structure and operations, based on experience in Afghanistan and Iraq and current and expected systems for collecting technical and human intelligence.
The changes are being promoted while the intelligence community is awaiting the confirmation of John D. Negroponte as the director of national intelligence, who under a new statute is to become the president's chief intelligence adviser, with budgetary control over some of the Pentagon's intelligence-collection agencies.
Among the first steps the Pentagon is planning is upgrading intelligence from being a staff function at headquarters to having analysts and human intelligence collectors on the front lines, particularly in the war on terrorism.
"We need close and real-time intelligence support for what we are doing," a Defense Department senior official said yesterday in describing an outline for the restructuring that he said would be part of the Pentagon's fiscal 2007 budget.
Even now, some technical collection capabilities enable Predator unmanned aircraft in Iraq to deliver real-time imagery of potential enemy targets yards or miles away to analysts working with small ground units. Those analysts can at the same time download from satellites background data from Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and CIA files to give context to the imagery and help plan the units' moves.
The remodeling is "viewing DoD [Department of Defense] intelligence as an operational capability that is integral to joint warfare," said Lt. Col. Chris Conway, a Pentagon spokesman.
The Pentagon has already begun to overhaul and increase its human intelligence, or humint, activities "to address shortfalls," Conway said. One step was to create "tactical humint teams," with 160 operating in Iraq. They comprise fully uniformed soldiers who knock on doors to interview families and conduct some interrogations.
Less well-known, and due for expansion, is the Pentagon's clandestine collection of intelligence in foreign countries where operations may eventually take place. Such so-called battlefield preparation activities, where covert operators scour potential landing spots and target areas, took place before the Iraq invasion and have taken place in other countries, according to intelligence sources.
The Army, which carries most of the burden in Iraq, not only is going to shift more personnel into intelligence but also make it a better career path, the Defense Department senior official said. "Professionalization and sustainment of the intelligence workforce" is one of the goals of the new program, Conway said.
At a higher level, the Pentagon is looking at pulling together the heads of its eight intelligence agencies and putting them under one military commander, possibly a general rank officer. These include not only the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force intelligence arms but also the DIA; the National Security Agency, which performs analysis of electronic intercepts; the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which does imagery analysis; and the National Reconnaissance Office, which builds and operates satellites.
The proposed action comes at a time when Sens. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) have introduced a bill to create a unified intelligence command inside the Pentagon under a four-star officer.
Chambliss described the plan as creating "one point of contact for military intelligence for the new DNI and . . . a more efficient, responsive and simpler military intelligence structure."
The Pentagon planning calls for integrating some of the separate intelligence functions used by different services under one officer, perhaps wearing two hats.
__________
wink said:
I think you are indeed correct. The URL is but one of the many many issues. I believe the Navy has been preparing for some time, has made several important changes and will move swiftly once certain exogenous actions evolve.
Of course the Navy is not going to take some 1610 Electronic Warfare Expert and give them command of any War Fighting Unit, without requisite training, experience and evaluation. On the flip side, we are not going to take a 1610 and make them a Naval Attache, immediately, at least.
Throught laterals, I personally know 1610's that were former NFO's. I know 1610's that wear SubWarfare Pins. There has been lateral movement between 1610 and 1630, over the years.
Change is hard. Fear of the unknown ...
Random_Guy
Mr. Nelson
All I know is that if we go unrestricted, I want a pin! And I don't want to be on the bridge, so I'll let the SWOs suffer that fate.... 
astrov99
NOT a flyboy
Cyrpto officer (161X) already PCS afloat. When PCS's afloat, they can qualify in the exact same watchstations as a SWO. Depending on the circumstances, they can qualfiy for a warfare pin.
True, there are "support" types within the NSG, but there are people on the absolute front lines: the very pointy end of the spear. I know, I've done it.
Now do I think that Cyrpto/Intel should be URL? Not neccessarily. The only people who should be considered for command are officers with significant operational experience. Just like the CO of a ship: multiple afloat tours, sustained superior performance, and proven leadership.
I think what the fear is is that some shore weenie is going to be put in command of a ship/battle group. Valid fear, but unlikely. People from the crypto community chosen for a command-at-sea URL position would be people with significant experience and a deep undestanding of Navy war systems. In my opinion, these individuals are equally fit to command.
True, there are "support" types within the NSG, but there are people on the absolute front lines: the very pointy end of the spear. I know, I've done it.
Now do I think that Cyrpto/Intel should be URL? Not neccessarily. The only people who should be considered for command are officers with significant operational experience. Just like the CO of a ship: multiple afloat tours, sustained superior performance, and proven leadership.
I think what the fear is is that some shore weenie is going to be put in command of a ship/battle group. Valid fear, but unlikely. People from the crypto community chosen for a command-at-sea URL position would be people with significant experience and a deep undestanding of Navy war systems. In my opinion, these individuals are equally fit to command.
bbell
Registered User
astrov99,
I'm a prior ET2 and I'm sending in my application for Crypto/Intel this week. I have a question for you. I know that enlisted CT's can serve in TCS, but are there similar positions for Crypto Officers? Since you have been on the pointy end of the spear I was hoping you could shed some light on this for me. I went through part of BUD/S before I got out and still have a great interest in SPECWAR.
Thanks!
I'm a prior ET2 and I'm sending in my application for Crypto/Intel this week. I have a question for you. I know that enlisted CT's can serve in TCS, but are there similar positions for Crypto Officers? Since you have been on the pointy end of the spear I was hoping you could shed some light on this for me. I went through part of BUD/S before I got out and still have a great interest in SPECWAR.
Thanks!
astrov99
NOT a flyboy
All of the people who I've known who have done TCS have been enlisted. I don't know exactly what role a 161X officer would add to TCS, as the enlisted folk have required skill sets that they need. This isn't to say it doesn't happen, but in my experiences I have not seen officers deploying in that capacity.
- Status