COMTENTHFLEET

[das]

The FLTCYBERCOM/COMTENTHFLT official web site is now live:

http://www.fcc.navy.mil

And if you're on NIPR or have Intelink-U access, check out the expanded Intellipedia article:

http://www.intelink.gov/wiki/FLTCYBERCOM

See also the official seals of FLTCYBERCOM and COMTENTHFLT, attached.

[webmaster]

Here's a link to a very complementary article on the establishment of the Navy's cyber commands http://cybersecurityreport.nextgov.c...er_command.php

[das]

Originally Posted by webmaster

Here's a link to a very complementary article on the establishment of the Navy's cyber commands http://cybersecurityreport.nextgov.c...er_command.php

Telling is CNO saying cybersecurity "is more important to the Navy right now than nuclear."

Now that's a statement.

[Sleeper]

Originally Posted by das

Telling is CNO saying cybersecurity "is more important to the Navy right now than nuclear."

Now that's a statement.

So when will we get 12-18 months of new accession training like the nucs? A few weeks in Corry plus CBTs clearly isn't cutting it.

[HH-60H]

Originally Posted by Sleeper

So when will we get 12-18 months of new accession training like the nucs? A few weeks in Corry plus CBTs clearly isn't cutting it.

You're confusing issues... Nuke power does not equal nuclear weapons

[arvizo]

Originally Posted by HH-60H

You're confusing issues... Nuke power does not equal nuclear weapons

Regardless, we still deserve 12-18 months of tailored training if we're expected to be proficient in CNO.

[Sum1]

We're not expected to be... we're expected to manage the enlisted people who are.

[Sleeper]

Originally Posted by Sum1

We're not expected to be... we're expected to manage the enlisted people who are.

I disagree. First of all, we're supposed to be leaders, not managers. You can't lead if you don't know where you're going. Otherwise, we're just administrative personnel who write evals, make pretty PowerPoint slides, and sign leave chits all day. It's a cop-out to say that, "We're leaving the button-pushing to the blueshirts."

Furthermore, for broad CNO proficiency we're talking about a level of knowledge equivalent to at least a BS, if not an MS. Our retention would drop like a rock once sailors start comparing E-5 pay to what they could get on the outside with this training.

The Navy doesn't have a good handle on how to solve this problem. Commissioned officers are traditionally expected to climb the ladder toward "generalism" rather than increasing specific proficiency. Maybe part of the answer is CNO-specialized Warrant Officers? I certainly don't think we can continue to leave the expertise entirely in the hands of civilians, who tell the military drones what buttons to push (see above point on leadership). At minimum, our officer corps needs sufficient knowledge and experience to develop and carry out CNO doctrine, strategy, and tactics.

[Sum1]

You can argue the leaders vs managers thing all you want, but the bottom line is we're not here to sit in front of a computer for 12 hours a day and do CNO. We're here to enable others to do that. Does that require some kind of understanding of what your guys are doing? Yes. Does that require 12 months of very specialized training that only a select few will get to use? No.

[arvizo]

Originally Posted by Sum1

We're not expected to be... we're expected to manage the enlisted people who are.

The Detailer's brief lists CNO as one of the specializations, so apparently someone is expected to be proficient in CNO. If Officers only needed to manage people, why are there so many designators? And I'm not counting the Jags and dentists. Hopefully IWOs are bringing something to the table besides personnel management. If not, we're going to find ourselves an endangered species.

The good news is that our community is supporting CNODP, which should work well to get those select few IWOs the skills needed for certain jobs.