![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote...
The "C" in CWO is for "Chief", not "Commissioned". True. Still, the CWO2 - CWO5 ranks are Commissioned. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I read the original thread earlier and had a laff, it just goes to
show how little everyone knows about CWO's and I hope it stays that way, it's kinda fun!!! I guess my commissioning decree that I have hanging on my "I love me" wall from the president of the United States and signed by the SECNAV is just a mirage, or a fake then? I think you better get your facts straight, here is some help coming from a (commisioned, there is no other kind) Chief Warrant Officer in The US Navy... In the Navy, you have to be at least a Chief (E7 or above) to even apply. On the very moment you are commisioned (you go straight to CW02, CWO3 if you are selected as an E9, there are no W.O's or even W01's in the navy, you are a Chief Warrant Officer from day one ). We have a permanant commission, not temporary. Most Line and Staff Officers and LDO's have only a temporary commission, until they are offered a permanant commission after being a LT for 2 years. So this is at about the 6 year mark for them, and they are considered USNR until they accept permanant commission and convert to USN. One other big difference for us is that our selections and promotions are only confirmed through the CNO. Other officer ranks are Senate confirmed. Hope this helps a little to clear up any confusuion. in theOn Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:17:23 GMT, "John R Weiss" wrote: "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote... The "C" in CWO is for "Chief", not "Commissioned". True. Still, the CWO2 - CWO5 ranks are Commissioned. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 19:45:40 GMT, fudog50 wrote:
I read the original thread earlier and had a laff, it just goes to show how little everyone knows about CWO's and I hope it stays that way, it's kinda fun!!! I guess my commissioning decree that I have hanging on my "I love me" wall from the president of the United States and signed by the SECNAV is just a mirage, or a fake then? I think you better get your facts straight, here is some help coming from a (commisioned, there is no other kind) Chief Warrant Officer in The US Navy... Well, I'm always willing to get my facts straight. But, can you cut me a bit of slack and acknowledge that what is current today has not always been the way it was? The terminology "Warrant Officer" refers to the fact that he/she holds the rank by (traditionally) the issuance of a "warrant"--a government document bestowing rank and authority to conduct certain actions. A "commission" for a military officer was presidential and with the authority of congress. A warrant did not require that level of authorization. Things have obviously changed and I willingly defer to more current knowledge. In the Navy, you have to be at least a Chief (E7 or above) to even apply. On the very moment you are commisioned (you go straight to CW02, CWO3 if you are selected as an E9, there are no W.O's or even W01's in the navy, you are a Chief Warrant Officer from day one ). We have a permanant commission, not temporary. Most Line and Staff Officers and LDO's have only a temporary commission, until they are offered a permanant commission after being a LT for 2 years. So this is at about the 6 year mark for them, and they are considered USNR until they accept permanant commission and convert to USN. Well, that's a bit garbled. But, you're on my ground here. Commissions for officers are not "temporary"--there is no expiration date. They are "regular" or "reserve", indicating the component to which your commission applies. The regular component is governed by grade limitation policies. One other big difference for us is that our selections and promotions are only confirmed through the CNO. Other officer ranks are Senate confirmed. Hope this helps a little to clear up any confusuion. That's the grade limitation issue. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I think it's a hoot that a navy *warrant* officer should be commissioned, given that the whole point of the "warrant" was to create an officer who wasn't commissioned. The British navy used to have warrant officers, and probably devised the system. Thus the OED: "an officer in certain armed services (formerly also in the Navy) who holds office by a warrant, ranking between a commissioned officer and an NCO." Are you sure that what's on your wall is a commission and not a warrant? Both are pieces of paper. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... I think it's a hoot that a navy *warrant* officer should be commissioned, given that the whole point of the "warrant" was to create an officer who wasn't commissioned. Do you find it a "hoot" that the Army also considers its senior warrnats to be commissioned? The British navy used to have warrant officers, and probably devised the system. Thus the OED: "an officer in certain armed services (formerly also in the Navy) who holds office by a warrant, ranking between a commissioned officer and an NCO." Are you sure that what's on your wall is a commission and not a warrant? Both are pieces of paper. Personally, it all makes sense to me. By considering some warrants as commissioned officers you increase their range of capabilities without any real negative effect (IIRC when this program began a few years back there was rumbling from some in the warranted community that it would result in dire consequences--none of which seem to have come to be). Why shouldn't a CWO be able to take a sworn statement from a troop as well as any other commissioned officer? Why shouldn't a CWO be able to command his A-Team (there is now a WO slot in every SF A-Team) or detachment with the full authority and privaledges of his commissioned counterparts? The WO's remain the same technical specilaists they always were--they now just enjoy a bit more authority in some areas. Brooks all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cub Driver wrote:
I think it's a hoot that a navy *warrant* officer should be commissioned, given that the whole point of the "warrant" was to create an officer who wasn't commissioned. The British navy used to have warrant officers, and probably devised the system. Thus the OED: "an officer in certain armed services (formerly also in the Navy) who holds office by a warrant, ranking between a commissioned officer and an NCO." Are you sure that what's on your wall is a commission and not a warrant? Both are pieces of paper. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com Glad you think it's a hoot. But the facts are that Chief Warrant Officers in the USN carry commissions. The differences are minor and mostly of interest to barracks/sea lawyers. Whether it's a warrant or a commission doesn't matter nearly as much as how well you lead... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cubby,
Yeah I'm sure. On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 06:36:36 -0500, Cub Driver wrote: I think it's a hoot that a navy *warrant* officer should be commissioned, given that the whole point of the "warrant" was to create an officer who wasn't commissioned. The British navy used to have warrant officers, and probably devised the system. Thus the OED: "an officer in certain armed services (formerly also in the Navy) who holds office by a warrant, ranking between a commissioned officer and an NCO." Are you sure that what's on your wall is a commission and not a warrant? Both are pieces of paper. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... I think it's a hoot that a navy *warrant* officer should be commissioned, given that the whole point of the "warrant" was to create an officer who wasn't commissioned. The British navy used to have warrant officers, and probably devised the system. Thus the OED: "an officer in certain armed services (formerly also in the Navy) who holds office by a warrant, ranking between a commissioned officer and an NCO." Are you sure that what's on your wall is a commission and not a warrant? Both are pieces of paper. The grades W-2 and up are commissioned in all services. US Code Title 10, Sec.571: (b) Appointments in the grade of regular warrant officer, W-1, shall be made by warrant by the Secretary concerned. Appointments in regular chief warrant officer grades shall be made by commission by the President. --Justin |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
"John R Weiss" wrote in message news:SsUNb.70673$nt4.95664@attbi_s51... There are "just" WOs and Commissioned Warrant Officers now. The WO1 rank is not a Commissioned Warrant Officer, but all CWO2 through CWO5 ranks are Commissioned Warrant Officers. Last I knew: The "C" in CWO is for "Chief", not "Commissioned". That's correct, no WO is commissioned whether WO, MWO, or CWO (of any grade). -- -Gord. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stealth homebuilt | C J Campbell | Home Built | 1 | September 15th 04 08:43 AM |
SURVEY on manuals - most important for builders, but never good?? | T-Online | Home Built | 0 | January 23rd 04 04:37 PM |
F-32 vs F-35 | The Raven | Military Aviation | 60 | January 17th 04 08:36 PM |
How long until current 'stealth' techniques are compromised? | muskau | Military Aviation | 38 | January 5th 04 04:27 AM |
Israeli Stealth??? | Kenneth Williams | Military Aviation | 92 | October 22nd 03 04:28 PM |