Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > U.S. Army Special Operations > Psyop/Civil Affairs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 31 January 2014, 21:35
th3r21ndr0p th3r21ndr0p is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4
Reserve -> Active PSYOP packet approved

Just got approved on the PSA program for Reserve -> Active PSYOP.

Prior 13F over on active.

Any recent intel on board/selection appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 1 February 2014, 00:21
Fire425 Fire425 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 57
Congrats and good luck.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 1 February 2014, 05:02
Psyop Shaw's Avatar
Psyop Shaw Psyop Shaw is offline
Cloud bursting...
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: CONUS
Posts: 380
Congratulations!

I had no idea they even had a RC to AC transfer process yet.

I think RC PSYOP should have to go through selection just like AC, especially since the MISOC will be taking over all 4 groups.
__________________
"The only place success comes before work is in the dicitionary." - Airborne
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 1 February 2014, 19:17
PSYWAR PSYWAR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4
Can you PM me or give me that contact info on how you got that? I've been trying to work that for months now. Was also a 13F one the active side.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 2 February 2014, 02:38
Psyop Shaw's Avatar
Psyop Shaw Psyop Shaw is offline
Cloud bursting...
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: CONUS
Posts: 380
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by PSYWAR View Post
Can you PM me or give me that contact info on how you got that? I've been trying to work that for months now. Was also a 13F one the active side.
PSYWAR please make sure you post a intro in the introduction section. See link below.

http://socnet.com/showthread.php?t=73033&page=484
__________________
"The only place success comes before work is in the dicitionary." - Airborne
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 2 February 2014, 10:19
th3r21ndr0p th3r21ndr0p is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4
PSYWAR inbox me your global.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 4 February 2014, 15:42
PSYWAR PSYWAR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4
Psyop Shaw I agree about selection but I think its the whole Q course also. Depending on your experience I think that might not be necessary. Either way if you want it, do what you gotta do. Just glad they are looking at D.C. to A.C. transfers.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 5 February 2014, 03:42
Psyop Shaw's Avatar
Psyop Shaw Psyop Shaw is offline
Cloud bursting...
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: CONUS
Posts: 380
I agree with you, we are all the same MOS and soon we will all be under the same command again.

It only makes sense to train RC to the AC standard, not only POAS but also the standards of individual units and what is expected of each PSYOPer.
__________________
"The only place success comes before work is in the dicitionary." - Airborne
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 6 February 2014, 01:15
PSYWAR PSYWAR is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4
Sadly that has not happenend since the divorce. With USARC's limitations on training standards, and the drop of individual PT standards have really killed the RC PSYOP CMF. The biggest barriers I see are one, getting the guys in RC to pass the MISOC/SOF PT standards, and two, getting everyone language and jump. This will kill the numbers for a long time if we hold the standard like we should. I think there needs to be a company/BN level weekend assessment for all soldiers intersted in joining the MOS on the RC side. This would not be hard to implement since we could use the model that guard SF groups use. From there, we build a reliable RC PSYOP force fully capible of taking up the slack of the AC mission.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 6 February 2014, 15:11
Psyop Shaw's Avatar
Psyop Shaw Psyop Shaw is offline
Cloud bursting...
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: CONUS
Posts: 380
I feel we would lose soldiers due to the PT standards, would it be dramatic? nah... after local recruiters learned the news about RC PSYOP falling back into USASOC they will start preaching schools and SOF, recruits will come.

RC PSYOP has never been (even under USASOC) held to the language or airborne standard. Obviously this would be a challenge and a long term goal... but what you could do is designate 1 Company to jump status per Battalion and 1 Battalion to jump status per Group (14 total Airborne COs). Then for the language each company should be required to submit a minimum of 2 soldiers per FY to complete a DLI course aimed towards their units AO. Those 2 soldiers would assist in training and coordination with DLI to ensure proper train up and language/culture immersion for pre deployment. That said, the new guys coming through the pipes should be required to attend DLI before returning to home station.

Slowly the RC CMF would be restored and by going through the pipeline just as AC it would destroy the giant wall preventing soldiers easy access to switch from RC to AC or AC to RC. At the end of the day its the same job, so why not fix the broken command. SF got it right, I am sure we could too.

Anyways, I honestly don't see numbers getting killed, if anything I see a revamped interview process. Before even being allowed to join the unit you would have a interview process and pre assessment. Throw in DLI, Hoo-ah schools, great signing bonuses, and deployments to locations all around the world and wam-bam-thank you man, get on that white bus over there! Fort Benning here you go!
__________________
"The only place success comes before work is in the dicitionary." - Airborne
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 6 February 2014, 17:19
ilots ilots is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: TX
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyop Shaw View Post
RC PSYOP has never been (even under USASOC) held to the language or airborne standard.
You sure speak with a lot of definitive statements for so little time in the community....

PSYOP's history is much longer than the last 5 years... but I would agree, it is tough to see the career field dilute.

Last edited by ilots; 6 February 2014 at 17:25.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 8 February 2014, 11:24
Psyop Shaw's Avatar
Psyop Shaw Psyop Shaw is offline
Cloud bursting...
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: CONUS
Posts: 380
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilots View Post
You sure speak with a lot of definitive statements for so little time in the community....

PSYOP's history is much longer than the last 5 years... but I would agree, it is tough to see the career field dilute.
I agree it does, and I have the up most respect for all PSYOPers before me.

I think the statements made were true, referring to the RC PSYOP as a whole. But yes, as we both know there are caveats... i.e. 345th TPC(A) held to the airborne standard...
__________________
"The only place success comes before work is in the dicitionary." - Airborne

Last edited by Psyop Shaw; 8 February 2014 at 11:45.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17 February 2014, 00:51
gabrielshorn gabrielshorn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 32
I spent 2 years as a mobilization instructor, got frankenstiened to another unit, and have made the switch to AD. This is what I can tell you every unit has their own issues with, "That soldier." I've dealt with RC 37F's that I felt are more competent then AD soldiers and vice versa. The thing is no matter were you go in the world, no matter how hard the selection process is, some one will make it through. The only thing you accomplish by lumping every one into the same place is losing strong team members because you are too jaded to include them.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
SOCNET