A Chief warrant officer, who can have 15 years of experience, is lower in the chain of command than a lieutenant who can have as little as 2 years of experience.
This doesn't make any sense.
A Chief warrant officer, who can have 15 years of experience, is lower in the chain of command than a lieutenant who can have as little as 2 years of experience.
Try reading a book and not being a retard.
It's a retarded holdover of elitism and needs to fucking go.
It both does and doesn't. You want two different career tracks.
>current system
>enlisted ranks retain experience, officer track eventually fucks off to become a politician desk jockey as their responsibility becomes more and more managerial
>a purely meritocratic system
>the very best NCO's get promoted to officers and quickly vanish away into the bowels of some office building
Enlisted = tactical level
Officers = operational and strategic level (lts and captains are ojt for operational level)
Warrants = technical skills
>
>It's a retarded holdover of elitis
Accurate.
That and end-of-career majors.
I break it down five ways:
>enlisted
=direct installation of the fuck you.
>NCO corps
=coordination of the collective local application of fuck you
>warrant officer
=ensures there are appropriate levels of the fuck:you ratio.
>officer corps
=plans out the application of fuck you
>general officer
=is intimately aware of the workings of fuck you, and coordinates the application of fuck you at the highest levels
the result is the DoD has delivered a get fucked.
I knew a USAF Colonel who was purely technical (PhD grad in a highly technical field in charge of a rocket testing range for the USAF)
Most of what he dealt with was technical and lightly administrative since the base he was stationed on had it's own commander with their own chain of command, though because his chain of command went through a 3 star general half the country away, he sometimes got to order around the base commander (a 1 or 2 star depending on the time frame) due to the odd chain of command he was in and his responsibilities being in charge of all rocket tests on base.
When enlisted say "technical" they mean the meme definition of memorizing some SOPs and then falling apart when a situation outside of those SOPs falls apart.
Not actual research and development as that remains a commissioned officer and civilian job.
>elitism
they literally have different jobs
>OH EHM GEE WHY DOES THIS ENGINEER GET TO TELL MACHINISTS WHAT THEY WANT DONE?!!!!
because the guy with the plan is the engineer, not the machinist. now drill this half meter long one millimeter wide hole through tool steel, bitch.
That's well and good, but doesn't describe the chain of command in the military at all.
it answers OP's question.
No, it kind of does.
Officers are the ones that figure out what needs to be done.
NCOs figure out how to do it.
Enlisted are the ones to actually do it.
Warrant Officers are the ones that do things that you can’t trust to the enlisted.
You're the retard who promotes people based on years of experience then wonder why the guy with no people/management skills falls on his face
>Retards who don't know what they're doing deserve better pay and privilege because they were already rich
This man got told to salute the WO2 at the motor pool lmao.
>t. Union member
And experienced nurses should be the ones writing prescriptions and giving diagnoses
good analogy
Have you not been paying attention to the massive growth of mid-level practitioners like NPs and CRNAs? Pretty good parallel to warrant officers: didn't go to medical school, they just have (at least a little) clinical experience and additional education to do some of what doctors do, especially stuff doctors don't have the time to do with 40 patients like start central lines at 2am and intubate people.
He went from enlisted to kind of an officer. A WO or CWO still respects a salute and sir/ma'am but just know, deep down in their black hearts from all the coffee they drink, they care more about the enlisted and every officer worth their salt with respect them too
Giving a CWO responsibilities for bossing people around takes away time from their responsibilities for doing whatever technical shit got them the CWO rank in the first place.
When I was a Lt I was the whipping boy of a CWO3
Dude's a genius and we game a lot on Steam off-duty
CWOs are honestly pretty based. Takes some real balls and nerve to stick around that long as enlisted. Respect goes out to them, and I will honor them over any O-ranked gay out there.
the pay and respect structure is an elitist holdover but the structure itself makes sense
From what I heard, WO pilots dont deal with as much bullshit, is that true?
That’s the neat part.
Bullshit doesn’t reach forty thousand feet. Even when fired from a cannon
>no lance colonel
>no gunnery private
>no general first class
>no master major
>no brigadier corporal
>no lieutenant sergeant
>no private major
>no lieutenant captain
>no sergeant lieutenant
>no master private
wtf kinda rank structure is this shit, soldier?
Master Private Major is the coolest guy in the barracks at BCT.
Master Major makes as much sense as Major General.
I've been trying to think of a game where extremely branching ranks that reflect both organizational hierarchy and lateral specialization could be used to make sense of all the random joke ranks me and the other boots used to call each other. Best I can come up with is a unit management sim, where you give people jobs and they move up in rank as they gain experience. Not sure what the overarching goal would be, maybe you're a HQ officer keeping things organized during a fictional Napoleonic War.
It would help to know the historical origin of all these words, so I can categorize them.
you just described rates in the Navy. I never did figure out how they kept track of everything though
I doubt a modern master major could even quote the fights historical, and there's no way he would have information vegetable, animal, and mineral.
Didn't ranks come from Napoleon?
Why no Captain General? Why is the Lieutenant General higher ranked than a Major General?
>Why is the Lieutenant General higher ranked than a Major General?
Oh, this one I know.
It’s because “Major General” was originally “Sergeant Major General”
a captain comes from "captain of the guard" which was the lowest subdivision and earlier the only kind of subdivision.
in the oldest formations it was
enlisted=>captain=>general officer
this changed because the sub units got bigger and more complex so they needed subordinate staff, hence a "left in tenant" or a man of the office lift in charge of the unit.
this was then applied to the general corps of the army, which is the distinction of a "general officer" and an officer. it is sometimes called "big army" and "little army." they then added columns as there needed to be a further sub division.
thus the leaders of the sub units were:
>Captain=>Colonel=>General officer
the sub-leaders were:
>lieutenant=> lieutenant of the colonel=> lieutenant of the general officer.
they later needed even more officers for all the office work and so they were just named a "major" to indicate their importance. this is my majors are normally XOs and not much else. there was a general major and colonel's major but the captains just had a second lieutenant.
some nations use "Vice/Vise" or "Co-[rank]" instead of Lieutenant.
the rank Sergent came from Sergent at arms who was a lead member of a knights retinue (literal servant).
they were staff's Sargent, who was an important Sargent who reported to the staff, (lit. staff carried by officers). there was a Sargent who was Major to the command (Sargent Major/Command Sargent Major) (a command is another term for a column or brigade). internal to the enlisted they sometimes needed a representative of the body of men, a corporal (lit. of the corps).
during the early days of warfare, sometimes you needed a specialist auxilary unit, who was smaller and interdependent of the main force, it could be a captain's guard, an auxiliary column, or a Brigade separate from the unit.
ergo the brigadier general, because he was in charge of a special unit of men who were fighting men, but need a separate and smaller command.
Naval ranks are explained by the workings of old ships.
the Admiral was "in charge of the sea"
the Rear Admiral was "in charge of the rear of the admiral" which was important because it could lead to being flanked at sea.
a captain was left in charge of a group of ships, but not the whole of a sea.
a Commander was left in command of a single ship of the navy.
they all had their lieutenants, some had juniors to the command
but sometimes they needed more officers to ensign (sign on) for the office staff.
there were petty officers (lesser to the contract), some where Chief, and then just the men at sea (seamen)
Very informative anon, tyvm
>hence a "left in tenant" or a man of the office lift in charge of the unit.
do not fucking tell me that the British pronunciation of "Leftenant" actually has some validity.
to be serious though, great post anon. I find this topic fascinating so thanks for sharing some great info.
I’m a grand marshal
>Phone posting reddit frog
>no gunnery private
we call them Gunners. Cav are Troopers. Only regular infantry are Privates.
>master private
I like this and I don't care how dumb it sounds. It should replace Specialist
What if a young lietenant told a CWO to do 100 pushups?
The lts captain comes by and tells the lt to do 200 pushups
It doens't make any sense, Patton who is probably the most famous US general ever. Never became a five star general.
Because he was subordinate to someone else.
Washington is less famous than Patton?
>became a five star general.
Because he was assassinated by communist garden gnomes. Since he would straight up say the holocaust and all these lies about the camps are not true. Most people died in 44 from malnutrition and diseases.
If they failed and were found out I can tell you the world would be a completely different place. He was public enemy #1 to the formation of the ZOG. Its funny how people forget he was assassinated.
>Since he would straight up say the holocaust and all these lies about the camps are not true.
lmao you are an intensely gayy retard. where did you hear this bullshit from i want to go to their website and harass them for being a alpha retard. Patton knew exactly what the camps were and what happens and not only did he not deny it, he wanted the press to come a document it for the rest of the world.
the worst thing you could say about him is he didnt like garden gnomes very much and hated his job when it was to deal with all the refugees after the war
Why so many ranks for Sergent? Couldn't they create another rank name or spread it out?
Technically a junior officer cadet can hold rank over Sgt Major of the Army. But in function that would not happen. Would be funny though.
because an officer is concerned with office work, and a warrant officer is concerned with what warrants his attention.
so there are basically two types of certifications and education systems.
in the informal educations system, which is often called trade-certification, you are claiming that your experience is valuable.
in the formal education system you are claiming that others with experience and the collective experience of humanity has been given to you.
the question you just asked is:
who do you trust more in the safe repair of your car. a certified mechanic with experience on your car or a mechanical engineer who designed and tested your car?
it exists so the enlisted can do all the work and the orificers can take all the credit
It’s just how we do the class system in our “meritocratic democracy”. Don’t overthink it.
it's about reinforcing class, OP. I'm only half joking.
>chief warrant officer, 15 years of experience
A low IQ grunt, will still be a low IQ grunt even with 15 years of experience.
Meanwhile lieutenants are expected to have some brains as they have a college degree.
That makes sense in probably 95%+ of cases, but there are the occasional art majors who become Lts without brains, likely why people like OP complain about this.
This means the man who became chief warrant officer was an idiot.
>15 years of experience
What does that amount to?
A SFC with 15 years of experience is just some enlisted asshole who sat around and existed for 15 years. The years mean nothing.
>moron
>can't play brass section
Someone get this man a DNA test, he may just be suffering from revitiligo!
For me, its the 30-something year old SSG who still reminisces about that one time he got one over on a 24 year old 1LT. His sole victory in life.
What if a comissioned officer calls a sergeant as "sarge".
Does the sergeant has to say: "yes sir!"
The sergeant will look at the officer funny and maybe call him a dork.
lieutenant? no hentai ration.
major? "ye-ees, sir."
general? "hai, oni-chan :)"
Of all things the fucking cheese wrapped in foil
If enlisted were smart enough to be officers they'd be officers. Complaining about elitism is just unemployed talk
What if the CWO guy is from a special force?
Does this fact increase his position in the hierarchy?