• 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

Training Warfighters - Messing with Pro-Boards

Gitr

New Member
Apparently, there is a new policy regarding the pro-board at the end of your plebe year. For those who remember this special event, it was essentially any question that the upperclass wanted to ask that had to do with pro-knowledge.

Now, the academy has published a 30 page review manual for the plebes which acts as the only source of questions permissible during the board. The questions are broad and cover 9 topics (where the other semester and a half of pro-knowledge went, I'm unaware).

Just thought you all might like to know.
 

HH-60H

Manager
pilot
Contributor
Apparently, there is a new policy regarding the pro-board at the end of your plebe year. For those who remember this special event, it was essentially any question that the upperclass wanted to ask that had to do with pro-knowledge.

Now, the academy has published a 30 page review manual for the plebes which acts as the only source of questions permissible during the board. The questions are broad and cover 9 topics (where the other semester and a half of pro-knowledge went, I'm unaware).

Just thought you all might like to know.
Ok.....uh.....thanks
 

a_m

Still learning how much I don't know.
None
That brings back only one memory, really. A Turkish upperclass asked me about Link 16 (which was nowhere in the book).


Nothing as funny as the plebe who said that the E-2 hunts for subs by flying upside down and dipping the dish in the water.
 

Mumbles

Registered User
pilot
Contributor
I thought that it was the P-3 that hunted subs by flying real low and slow @ a high AOA and dragging that magnet tail thing in the water to draw the metal submarines to it.
(actual quote heard at an airshow)
 

DanMa1156

Is it baseball season yet?
pilot
Contributor
Nothing as funny as the plebe who said that the E-2 hunts for subs by flying upside down and dipping the dish in the water.

HAHAHA! We've heard about that so many times, starting at the end of plebe summer with that pro test when we had a girl label a DDG as a 688(I)... seriously.
 
So, instead of being asked any question, there's a 30-page manual from which the questions can be asked? That sounds pretty simple.

I don't think anyone ever feels bad for plebes. Part of the process :D
 

DanMa1156

Is it baseball season yet?
pilot
Contributor
So, instead of being asked any question, there's a 30-page manual from which the questions can be asked? That sounds pretty simple.

I don't think anyone ever feels bad for plebes. Part of the process :D

I think what ticked off people is that it is an actual lowering of standards. In the past, some upperclass "gouged" plebes to give them a broad line of possible questions, whereas now, it's just only this book, and instead of needing an 80 (was it 85 last year? I can't remember) to pass, you only need a 75.
 
I think what ticked off people is that it is an actual lowering of standards. In the past, some upperclass "gouged" plebes to give them a broad line of possible questions, whereas now, it's just only this book, and instead of needing an 80 (was it 85 last year? I can't remember) to pass, you only need a 75.
I don't buy the lowering standards argument. If anything, this is providing some kind of standardization for a process that lacks it. Before, any jackass could ask whatever question made his/her heart content. I remember hearing about questions regarding how one would properly employ the weapons on a specific ship in a given situation. Now, there's a bank of questions. Simple.

Either way, we've already spent too much time on a subject that is wholly irrelevant.
 

insanebikerboy

Internet killed the television star
pilot
None
Contributor
I don't buy the lowering standards argument. If anything, this is providing some kind of standardization for a process that lacks it. Before, any jackass could ask whatever question made his/her heart content. I remember hearing about questions regarding how one would properly employ the weapons on a specific ship in a given situation. Now, there's a bank of questions. Simple.


And, that was the point of pro-boards. You had two semesters worth of books on pro-knowledge, any question was fair game. That included the use of the weapons on a ship in a scenario, as that was a fair question on the pro-quizes each week.

I can specifically remember being asked on mine how I would employ a DDG and a 60B to fight a OTH submarine threat, with emphasis on what each platform could provide to actually fight the sub.

I can see the point behind a book of standardized questions, but at the same time that's essentially what the two semesters books were for.
 

TheBubba

I Can Has Leadership!
None
I don't buy the lowering standards argument. If anything, this is providing some kind of standardization for a process that lacks it. Before, any jackass could ask whatever question made his/her heart content. I remember hearing about questions regarding how one would properly employ the weapons on a specific ship in a given situation. Now, there's a bank of questions. Simple.

Either way, we've already spent too much time on a subject that is wholly irrelevant.

Having been a company training officer at USNA:

1. There was standardization. You needed an 80 or 85 to pass. Also, all required plebe knowledge was game. Questions could come from daily knowledge, pro-books, Reef Points, Jane's... and issued pro knowledge pub in a plebe's library. The plebes knew that well ahead of time.

2. Plebes were (at least mine were) REQUIRED to inform the upperclass that they were sitting on the board. It was than up to the upper class to give as little or as much gouge as he saw fit.

3. As far as how one would employ weapons on a ship, yes it is an open ended question. I actually asked that question. That question isn't meant to be a right/wrong answer. What most of us were looking for is that the plebe understood what the weapons and platforms missions/purposes were and understood which weapons were associated with which ship. I didn't care if a plebe would launch a Hornet before a S-3 or visa-versa, just as long he could justify it and understood the basics of what each jet could bring to the fight.

Here are the two questions I asked on all of my boards. The third question was based on what the plebe was thinking about for service selection.

What advantages do the Burke class DDGs have over the Spruance class DDs?

Your airwing has been tasked to strike a nuclear facility. What order to you launch the aircraft and why?

The first question is to make sure they understand differences in capabilities of US weapons systems and platforms. Has right/wrong answer.
The second is to see how they will apply the basic knowledge that they got from the pro-book and other pubs. Basically, take the info you have, make a plan, and justify it. Just don't bull shit me.

The third was to see if they had any knowledge of the community they wanted to be a part of.

And yes, if what the OP posted is the whole story, then to me, it represents a lowering of the standard.
 

hscs

Registered User
pilot
USNA has produced warfighters without boards -- at least for 150 years...my thoughts -- who gives a shi-t
 
Top