Are these USS Kitty Hawk uniforms worth buying off eBay?

Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
OUCH!!

:-)


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)




"Charlie Wolf" wrote in message
...
Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.)

On 28 Nov 2003 15:53:20 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

uume-

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ategory=36 06
8
BRBR

16 years in and still a PO1??

Wonder who he ****ed off....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
words are incompetent) I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
been the only competent one? See, they all sit around in the mess,
recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
Chief in their mess. OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
"sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
enlightened us all. Thanks

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:08:41 GMT, Dave in San Diego
wrote:

Michael Wise wrote in
:

In article ,
(UUMe) wrote:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...98881&category
=36068


Four idiot stripes and still an E-6. How many watches did you fall
asleep on?

--Mike


Begging your pardon, SIR...

A sixteen year corpsman in today's Navy is not unusual, as it wasn't when
I retired some years ago. Not everyone can make Chief, and in the current
competitive environment, it's not what you know, it's who gets the best
suck-up points. When the eval system becomes objective, and the brass who
write and approve them become competent, then maybe the promotion system
will work like it's supposed to.

Having said that, HM1 X could have been "entirely competent" at that
level, but still "lacking critical leadership skills mnecessary to
advance to Chief Petty Officer".

Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief.

Dave Bowles
AT1 USN Ret
quoted from my own evals

That coming from a retired Chief, Charlie Wolf. I guess retiring as a
Chief is pretty ambitious, probably never thought you would make E6
and everything after that was gravy right??? The jokes on you Pal, how
do you know that "Commander" isn't an LDO and was also a Chief, but
had a little more ambition? OBTW the division Chief you were referring
to is more of a stupid ass for letting the Commander write the E6's
eval!!!
was On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:13:57 -0800, "Larry"
wrote:

Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
OUCH!!

:-)


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired

20 years of Navy in my rear view mirror
and getting further away every day ;-)




"Charlie Wolf" wrote in message
.. .
Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.)

On 28 Nov 2003 15:53:20 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

uume-

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...ategory=36 06
8
BRBR

16 years in and still a PO1??

Wonder who he ****ed off....
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

cwolf- Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.) BRBR

c'mon Chief, that's a little harsh, don ya think??

I wrote lots 'o evals but always looked for a rough from the Div CPO or branch
PO1...But to massage these things to get the deserving selected was a skill tht
took years to hone..Some COs had, some didn't..
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

dave- Not all you folks make Captain; not all of us make Chief. BRBR

The epitomy of rank in the USN officer corps is O-5, where you can get your
first command and where you can retire at 20 years...and where you can
generally still fly. O-6 is not, not many guys I knew made O-6 before 20
years...
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

On 29 Nov 2003 15:13:41 GMT, (Pechs1) wrote:

cwolf- Undoubtedly had some stupid-ass Commander writing his evals instead of
his Division Chief...
Regards,
(CPO, Ret.) BRBR

c'mon Chief, that's a little harsh, don ya think??
Yea - a bit.... but ya walked right into it Cmdr.
Regards,



I wrote lots 'o evals but always looked for a rough from the Div CPO or branch
PO1...But to massage these things to get the deserving selected was a skill tht
took years to hone..Some COs had, some didn't..
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

user wrote in
:

Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
words are incompetent)

Nope, never said that. Many of my evals were modified by officers who
couldn't write, and refused to change them because they thought they were
legends in their own minds. There were also those who were wired into
believing that all the marks had to be within a bracket, say 3.4 to 3.8,
or 3.6 to 4.0, or even more extreme, only one mark apart - 3.6 or 3.8,
and nothing outside. I worked for more than one DO who thought you
absolutely couldn't give someone a 4.0 and a 3.2 on the same eval. (The
guy I did that for had a poster-grade uniform and a short-timers
attitude, and fully deserved both marks.) Those evals that were written
by Chiefs and sent thru the system as written usually came out pretty
well.

I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
been the only competent one?

Nope, never said that either. But I did give basic writing classes at a
couple of commands, as a first class.

See, they all sit around in the mess,
recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
Chief in their mess.

Agree 100%! That's why i didn't get there, but my wife did. I'm a better
technician, but she's a better leader. There were those whose
"friendliness" could do a lot for them, though.

OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
"sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
enlightened us all. Thanks

Well, the suck-up thing might have been a bit harsh, now that I've had an
opportunity to back off for a bit. "Aw ****s" seem to count a lot worse
now than they used to, and even one can be the kiss of death these days,
instead of being the learning opportunity it could be made into 20 yrs
ago. Getting beyond those "aw ****s" can be an area where that
friendliness I spoke of above could give an unfair advantage for some.

I retired in 1989, so my personal participation in the great eval game
ended then. I saw what happened in my wife's various divisions until
2000, when she retired. I got to see the system from an outsider's
viewpoint during those 11 years, and noticed a significant change between
my retirement and hers. Some changes were good, some not so good. I still
think the system is flawed despite all the changes I've seen in 30+
years, and will continue to hamper some folks who deserve promotion but
can't get it because they don't fit someone's mold.

I do accept that at least part of your response may have been tongue-in-
cheek, but I thought the original comment about the 16-year first class
was out of line and felt compelled to reply.

Dave in San Diego
--
-
"For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes
turned skyward;
For there you have been, and there you long to return."
Leonardo da Vinci

"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message
...
John Miller wrote:

Larry wrote:

I bet that's your auction there "UUMe" and your trying to get a little
traffic?

It looked a little suspicious even before a quick check showed that the
eBay
seller and Usenet poster were both in Houston.

I didn't see any mention of the Kitty Hawk in a cursory check of the
link, so add to the suspicion list "How did UUMe know they were worn
by a Kitty Hawk sailor?"

Must have been real cursory: "Kitty Hawk" is in at least two places
in the eBay ad.

"victims of the rate". Just not enough billets to promote them all. All I
could tell them was "hang in there, keep up the great job and your time will
come".


Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
Disabled Combat Veteran
USN Retired


"Victims of rate", this is or was the case with AT's, I encountered this going
from E-3 to E-4, then again from E-4 to E-5. As a four year guy, I started out
life as an AR, graduated from A school as a ATAA, mean while the 6 year guys
were graduating as AT3's.
Then after doing my TIR, and finally making AT3, I once again encountered the
"victim of rate" the AT3's (rent-a-crows) were graduating from AFTA (advanced
first term avionics school) or AFTA-births as we called them, getting ready to
take AT2, while I was installing tracking gear on rotor blades, paralleling
generators, changing the "greenhouse" window after the Q/A chief stepped
through it, etc, etc.
But I really can't complain, I did my 4, and got out, and thanks to my
"nothing but a black box puller" "O" level career, spent the past 16 years
doing it on the civilian side for a much better pay and no sea duty.
So being a "victim of rate" work out great for me.
So I can see how in some rates it would not be uncommon for a hard charg'in,
4.0 sailor to retire an E-6.

J

BTW, as for those who say, the numbers are figured out before hand, and the
Navy takes only so many AFTA guys and regular guys its BS. I like many others
who make there required time to graduate, we were ask if we were to extend for
2 years, you can walk out of school as a E-4 instead of an E-2. Fortunitly for
me 1989 sounded like forever in 1983, I passed, many other did'nt.

Dave,

That last posting by you actually had some class! You know it's
different on both sides of the fence. Of course I've seen the changes
myself after 22 years active. Today's eval/fitrep system still needs
work but is helluva lot better than 10 years ago. I was in a NAMTRA as
an E6 with 38 other PO1's, all 4.0!!! The closest friend I have here
now is a retired E6, best AT you ever seen as a technician. He was the
library of knowledge for the EP3. But it wasn't just one persons mold
he didn't fit, it was the Navy's mold he didn't fit for making Chief.
I tried to point out that it just isn't an advancement in rank, the
rank of Chief is a whole new realm. Nowadays its all about the
"ranking". In aviation, (this is an aviation newsgroup), all the
commands I've been in let the Chiefs rank the E6 and below. Of course
it's the Skippers perogative to change that, but if he does, he has
some 'splainin to o to the Chiefs Mess.

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 04:27:03 GMT, Dave in San Diego
wrote:

user wrote in
:

Absolutely Right Dave, thanks for clarifying and expounding on that.
Not everyone can make Chief. We don't all possess those desired
leadership qualities we look for in advancing a sailor to Chief. Being
just technically competent won't get you selected. If you don't
possess those needed leadership skills, the only other way to make it
is to "suck up" as you stated and slip through the cracks, and wind up
as an E-7, kinda like the other services. You never did get the fact
that the "brass" that writes your evals are the Chiefs? (whom in your
words are incompetent)

Nope, never said that. Many of my evals were modified by officers who
couldn't write, and refused to change them because they thought they were
legends in their own minds. There were also those who were wired into
believing that all the marks had to be within a bracket, say 3.4 to 3.8,
or 3.6 to 4.0, or even more extreme, only one mark apart - 3.6 or 3.8,
and nothing outside. I worked for more than one DO who thought you
absolutely couldn't give someone a 4.0 and a 3.2 on the same eval. (The
guy I did that for had a poster-grade uniform and a short-timers
attitude, and fully deserved both marks.) Those evals that were written
by Chiefs and sent thru the system as written usually came out pretty
well.

I suppose if you woulda made it you would have
been the only competent one?

Nope, never said that either. But I did give basic writing classes at a
couple of commands, as a first class.

See, they all sit around in the mess,
recognize who has those needed leadership skills, then proceed to
groom and write the future leaders the good evals and rankings. They
don't want an E7 technician in thier mess that can't lead. They want a
Chief in their mess.

Agree 100%! That's why i didn't get there, but my wife did. I'm a better
technician, but she's a better leader. There were those whose
"friendliness" could do a lot for them, though.

OBTW all of us CWO's/LDO's (thousands) all
"sucked up" to promote from E1 to where we are now. Glad you
enlightened us all. Thanks

Well, the suck-up thing might have been a bit harsh, now that I've had an
opportunity to back off for a bit. "Aw ****s" seem to count a lot worse
now than they used to, and even one can be the kiss of death these days,
instead of being the learning opportunity it could be made into 20 yrs
ago. Getting beyond those "aw ****s" can be an area where that
friendliness I spoke of above could give an unfair advantage for some.

I retired in 1989, so my personal participation in the great eval game
ended then. I saw what happened in my wife's various divisions until
2000, when she retired. I got to see the system from an outsider's
viewpoint during those 11 years, and noticed a significant change between
my retirement and hers. Some changes were good, some not so good. I still
think the system is flawed despite all the changes I've seen in 30+
years, and will continue to hamper some folks who deserve promotion but
can't get it because they don't fit someone's mold.

I do accept that at least part of your response may have been tongue-in-
cheek, but I thought the original comment about the 16-year first class
was out of line and felt compelled to reply.

Dave in San Diego