[PhantomGremlin]

The CO and XO shouldn't be sleeping while their ship is crossing a busy sealane

Why aren't these people "the best of the best", to quote the trite line from Top Gun?

According to Wikipedia, the US Navy has 282 deployable combat vessels. It employs a total of 325,673 active duty personnel plus 270,265 civilian employees.

So out of those 600,000 people, they can't find a few thousand who are willing, able, and capable of commanding a destroyer? The US Naval Academy alone graduates 1000 people a year. Where do they all go? What do they all do?

Really? I'm serious. My understanding is that the absolutely most prestigious military assignments are in "command" positions. Those assignments are the key to climbing the promotion ladder.

This whole thing makes no sense to me.

[drblast]

The top grads of the academy get their pick of jobs and most of them pick aviation or nuclear surface/subs.

Surface warfare officer is not the most desireable job for most people.

And it sucks so bad most people have much better options and leave after the initial five year commitment.

[dmurray]

Why is that? Battleships are badass and you don't have to spend the whole time in a tiny metal box underwater. If you're joining the Navy, don't you want to be in command of a big ship in the open seas?

[jcranmer]

The US Navy doesn't own any battleships. After fleet carriers, the next level is going to be destroyers and missile cruisers.

According to Wikipedia, the US decommissioned its last battleship in 1992. Even then, the US Navy largely forswore battlehsips after WWII, and battleships were decommissioned and recommissioned twice during the Cold War. The last time two battleships ever fired at one another was the Battle of Surigao Strait 74 years ago.

[ethbro]

Not sure if it's true, but I heard that smaller than aircraft carrier surface vessels feature microwaved meals instead of a full mess (cost savings).

This was from a younger Navy guy and older Navy guy swapping stories. The older guy was horrified.

[ams6110]

This was a destroyer though. Pretty small compared to a battleship or a carrier. Not really a high prestige command.

[JohnBooty]

Battleships were phased out decades ago.

Really, the advent of military aviation made them more or less obsolete in WWII.

There were almost no ship-to-ship battles involving battleships in WWII; they were used almost exclusively to shell inland targets close to shorelines, but there are much more efficient ways to do that and those ways aren't limited to striking targets within gun range of the shoreline.

So it's pretty much carriers and destroyers as far as combat ships on the surface these days. (Not sure the term "destroyer" is used much these days, but the non-carrier surface combat ships are roughly comparable in size to what would have been called a destroyer in the old days)

And then of course you have the many amphibious assault ships, support ships, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_currently_active_Unite...

[wbl]

Top Gun vs Master and Commander.

[cschep]

Don't underestimate how effective a bureaucracy can be at making the best of the best.. completely mediocre.

[dba7dba]

From my readings of US Navy of WW2 and personal experience in modern day tech companies, I think it's not just the bureaucracy that's at fault. Rather, the organization (actually any organization) by default favors those who manage their superiors well for more/faster promotions. So a lot of times, the best of the best doesn't necessarily rise to the top, but rather those who are good at self promoting.

1. IN WW2, US Navy admirals learned painful lessons to trust captains who manage subordinates well, not the superiors.

When US was suddenly pulled into WW2, the submarines of US navy in WW2 did not achieve much at beginning. For months, US navy submarines failed to sink enemy ships. One big factor was faulty torpedoes. US navy had recently finished developing a new type of torpedo with a magnetic detonator. It was supposed to be a very effective weapon. But due to budget restrictions before WW2 (in the Great Depression), not enough testing was done. If I recall correctly, after spending the precious budget to develop a new type of weapon, not one complete torpedo with live warhead was actually fired in a realistic manner. But I digress.

The real reason US submarines did not achieve much initially at beginning of WW2 in the Pacific theater was the captains on the submarines. A captain in a WW2 submarine disproportionately influences how well or badly the submarine's crew performed. The captain's aggressiveness, skill, carelessness, excessive cautiousness, and etc all directly determined what the crew in the submarine achieved. When the US submarines in Pacific theater finally began to sink Japanese ships at a satisfactory level, it was discovered not a single (or very few) US Navy captain who had reached the rank before the war was still in command of a US submarine. They had failed to achieve results, and were replaced with proven captains who knew how to actually manage the crew below him on the submarine, not manage the higher officers in officers' club.

Basically, before WW2, a US navy officer who was competent enough, projected image fit for a captain, AND managed his superiors well got the promotion. Well ok, previous statement is my own assumption. But the fact is when a shooting war began, it was discovered the officers who got command of a submarine prior to the beginning of WW2 couldn't find the enemy or shoot straight when it really mattered.

US navy finally began promoting officers who knew how to manage the crew below him well and had a killer instinct, not the ones with superior social skills. US navy brass learned that the enemy did not care how good a US Navy officer was at self marketing/promoting.

2. My own managers who moved onto bigger firms.

I've been in US tech scene (IT), about 15 years. Of the managers I had during that time, 2 managers (at separate firm/time) who were above me went on to work at globally well known tech/entertainment firms in tech VP roles. I mean really well known firms. Not Google or Facebook but older, established firms. Top of the heap. Because I worked in small companies with these managers, I got to observe them in close proximity.

What I remember the most of them 2 is how incessantly they visited/chatted/hung-out with the CEO. Sure a lot of it was work I'm sure, but I also know it was a lot of befriending, kissing up, using one's social skill. I as a staff member was given slices of their time, but nothing like the attention given to the CEO.

And sure enough, both firms were closed down. Of course a LOT of it was beyond their control. But it also shows they as managers couldn't find the right project to tackle or manage their subordinates effectively so the company could make $ to survive. Well, maybe or maybe not.

But I do know they spent a lot of time and energy befriending the higher-ups above them. And, I trust the hard lessons US Navy admirals in WW2 learned, that were paid for with lives. The lesson that you should avoid those who spend much energy at self promoting, as they don't actually deliver when it matters.

[whatshisface]

The trouble with that advice is that people on the receiving end of smooth talking don't think, "this guy is smooth talking me so I should promote him," instead they feel a mysterious attraction and then promote the guy for a reason they can't really explain but can come up with a justification for.

[dba7dba]

>>> they feel a mysterious attraction and then promote the guy for a reason they can't really explain but can come up with a justification for.

For a domain (tech industry) that is supposedly dominated by facts and numbers, there is a lot of promotion and hiring based on such mysterious feelings, not based on actual facts and numbers. Culture fit?

[gaius]

The US Naval Academy alone graduates 1000 people a year. Where do they all go? What do they all do?

In the Star Trek reboot Kirk goes straight from Academy sophomore to commanding a capital ship in a matter of days.

It is not like that. It takes many years. Only a small percentage of Academy graduates will ever get there. And many have no ambition to either, there are lots of other challenging and prestigious jobs in the Navy. You could be a fighter pilot or a SEAL platoon commander, neither of those career paths leads to commanding a destroyer.

[bkohlmann]

But being a fighter pilot (and now, very rarely, a helo pilot), is the only way to command an aircraft carrier. Which is a pretty cool command!

[TheCondor]

Are there any active members of the US Navy that remember our last real boat fight?

I think some really big fights and even a bit of an ass kicking has some rejuvenating powers for big military apparatus. The military likes to really teach from mistakes, they make lots of noise about what does and doesn’t work after a big fight, they change. I’m not saying the navy hasn’t seen action but they definitely have t seen WWII style battleship to battleship action in 70 years, we don’t even have battleships anymore...

[rectang]

Even the best of the best need to sleep.

[Dylan16807]

Which is why the post you replied to is suggesting "a few thousand" competent people in these slots for 282 ships.

The question isn't why one person is asleep, it's why there's nobody filling the role.

[watwut]

There is exactly one CO and one XO for ship.

[jessaustin]

If most of their subordinates are on a 12-on/12-off schedule, two people who don't do physical work can be on the bridge whenever necessary.

[Dylan16807]

That's why I said "the role" instead of specifically that job title.

Either they're slacking or there aren't enough, and you can fix either problem with 10 quality candidates per ship.

[watwut]

The role here is supposed to be that the big boss watches so that everyone behaves. Plus so that big boss takes blame. It is not like that person would be required for something active.

[sebcat]

Maybe the environment does not allow for good people, and/or for people to be good?

[Haga]

Office job never got somebody stuck in the middle of the ocean for a month