which is tougher? sispec or ocs?
-
SISPEC = Suffer In Silence Plus Extra Confinement
OCS = Only Clowns Survive
Myth: Most Specs have more field experience than Officers.
Fact: Specs and officers have the same field experience. It's SAF not the US army. Sergeants are as green as Officers. But Sergeants tend to interact with the guys more often thus the guys tends to listen to the Sergeants. But not always, especially toward the end of NS term (ORD mood).
Myth: Junior Officers gives better command and control
Fact: Officer tends to have better C&C becoz of the rank and nothing else. Some specs(especially the PS) have better C&C over the guys than the junior officers and vice versa.
Myth: Spec are the sandwich of the platoon. doing all the shit job for officers and getting all the blaming.
Fact: All junior commanders, spec or officers, are the sandwich. The guys are usually the one doing all the shit job. The REAL mastermind are the CSMs and OCs of the company. OC hands instructions to junior officers and to the specs and to the guys. -
LOL! I guess you're implying that one should stay right at the bottom of the chain of command, or right at the top. Staying in the middle would only be too stressful. =)
-
You don't need a spec to play around with offciers who think the world of themselves ^_^. Men can do it as well or maybe even better especially during Alert Red seasons. One thing to be noted though, Unit sergents tend to be more integrated with their men while BMT sergents are just as bad as some green horn who pass out of OCS and think the world of himself...Could be due to the experience of the men that they are during which results in the difference in attitude.
While I was a spec, we had 2 different officers(one came after the prev ORDed). We made the first guys life heaven, the other one hell. And thats simply because they treated their specs(us) differently...rank indeed. -
Originally posted by Rudin:
Most officers who land in BMTC are the cannot make it type. Only a handful who have done well choose to go there.
[B] ...as some green horn who pass out of OCS and think the world of himself...B]
So it's really unlikely that most officers who go there think so highly of themselves.
Of course there are the exceptions. -
I'm in BMTC as a recruit now. Basically I dun tink my sergeants r really bad. All r quite gd, maybe this is for my company. Officers all quite slack, waiting for ORD only. But both officers and sergeants claimed that sispec is tougher.
------------------
Thomas Edison definition of genius :
"1% inspiration, 99% perspiration"
************************************
The Eagle
He clasps the crag with hooked hands:
Close to the sun in lonely lands,
Ringed with the azure world, he stands.
The wrinkled sea beneath him crawls;
He watches from his mountain walls,
And like a thunderbolt he falls.
************************************ -
How u rate tougher is on an individual's point of view.
Having been to both, i have to say there is one distinction that stands out like white hair:
OCS has emphasis on theory and fitness.
SISPEC chooses to concentrate more on field training and practical tactics.
I suppose this has something to do wif the need for officers to be fitter than their men. -
I would say each has their merits as they are train for different responsibilities.
With SISPEC being more hands-on while OCS being more emphasis on planning and stuffs, looking at things on a much broader perspective.
Whether which is better for you, you just have to tell yourself what you want from NS. It's just that easy..and if you want to sign up for life..think what you want from the organisation cos there's so much back-stabbing going around all over the place. You have to see to believe, pal...start learning! -
I would say each has their merits as they are train for different responsibilities.
With SISPEC being more hands-on while OCS being more emphasis on planning and stuffs, looking at things on a much broader perspective.
Whether which is better for you, you just have to tell yourself what you want from NS. It's just that easy..and if you want to sign up for life..think what you want from the organisation cos there's so much back-stabbing going around all over the place. You have to see to believe, pal...start learning! -
since when can choose where to go?Originally posted by controversay:Most officers who land in BMTC are the cannot make it type. Only a handful who have done well choose to go there.
So it's really unlikely that most officers who go there think so highly of themselves.
Of course there are the exceptions.
you kilat or not they throw u anywhere they choose.
if an officer has an attitude problem, he will think very highly of himself regardless where he go.
if an officer is kilat, even they throw him bmtc he will still be better than unit PC.
whether an officer or spec is kilat or not is not measured by the job he is meant to do, but by how well he does that job.
------------------
RockerZ! -
Wrong. Each passing out officer is asked to select what vocation he wants upon ACPC i.e command, instructional or admin. Subsequent choices will then become available when they open up availability of units, schools and OCS instructor courses itself. Of course that doesn't always mean u'll get wat u want but the options are there and up for grabs.Originally posted by Ducati996:since when can choose where to go?
you kilat or not they throw u anywhere they choose.
if an officer has an attitude problem, he will think very highly of himself regardless where he go.[/QUOTE]
Too true. That is quite obvious.
if an officer is kilat, even they throw him bmtc he will still be better than unit PC.[/QUOTE]
I think u mean gilat. Yes of course gd officers who end up in BMTC will shine. That goes without saying.
whether an officer or spec is kilat or not is not measured by the job he is meant to do, but by how well he does that job.[/QUOTE]
Adn also how his peers rate his capability in handling it. -
Gilat officers or specs are also fine, as long as they do the job well and is well liked by the men.
If you go to a unit, you can see whether the respect is with the WOs or the officers. It'll definitely show...... -
first of all, i know cadets are given choice between command, staff and instructional, but that is only a preferance check and not a choice given to them. just becoz the cadet chose command does not necessarily mean he will be a unit pc, much consideration is given to his performance, security clearance, etc, etc. i would say this so-called choice given to the cadets does not bear enuff weightage to determine his posting, only minor consideration.Originally posted by controversay:Adn also how his peers rate his capability in handling it.
secondly, no i do not mean gilat, i mean kilat. this slang word comes from the malay word kilat, literally meaning 'shiny'. its also a brand of shoe/boot polish which will make army boots especially no. 1 dress boots very very shiny. soldiers first used the word from that polish brand name to describe boots which were very shiny since in the old days soldiers had to really really shine the boots. subsequently it became a slang word to describe outstanding performance. the reason why you think its 'gilat' and not 'kilat' is becoz non-malay speaking soldiers today pronounce it wif a 'g' sound as opposed to the correct 'k' sound. -
in case u didn't read my post carefully, i'll quote it belowOriginally posted by Ducati996:first of all, i know cadets are given choice between command, staff and instructional, but that is only a preferance check and not a choice given to them. just becoz the cadet chose command does not necessarily mean he will be a unit pc, much consideration is given to his performance, security clearance, etc, etc. i would say this so-called choice given to the cadets does not bear enuff weightage to determine his posting, only minor consideration.
secondly, no i do not mean gilat, i mean kilat. this slang word comes from the malay word kilat, literally meaning 'shiny'. its also a brand of shoe/boot polish which will make army boots especially no. 1 dress boots very very shiny. soldiers first used the word from that polish brand name to describe boots which were very shiny since in the old days soldiers had to really really shine the boots. subsequently it became a slang word to describe outstanding performance. the reason why you think its 'gilat' and not 'kilat' is becoz non-malay speaking soldiers today pronounce it wif a 'g' sound as opposed to the correct 'k' sound.
i never said there was certainty, but the choices ARE offered. Some get their choices, some dun. That's a fact of life.
Of course that doesn't always mean u'll get wat u want but the options are there and up for grabs.
i'm just correcting ur belowmentioned:
coz if u really are "kilat" (as u have corrected me regarding the spelling), chances are u will get ur choice (due to obvious reasons like SOM winner etc)
you kilat or not they throw u anywhere they choose. -
err...billybong and controversay same person izzit?Originally posted by BillyBong:coz if u really are "kilat" (as u have corrected me regarding the spelling), chances are u will get ur choice (due to obvious reasons like SOM winner etc)
anyway yes i agree if you damn kilat especially SOM likely you can choose. but consider onli top 10% get SOM, you mean the rest 90% are lower class? also consider, in the words of my instructor, SOM means you were an outstanding cadet, whether you will be an outstanding officer remains to be seen.
basically wat i disagreeing wif is not about the cadets' posting, its your or controversay's or watever's line that mention most BMT officers are the cannot make it type. i think its realli unfair to stereotype them that way. i prefer to look at it this way: BMT has a total of 105 nsf officers (21 coys times 4 pc's and 1 2ic each coy). a unit has around 15? (i tokkin bout a battalion, i admit i not sure about the exact number, and in both i exclude staff/hq officers).
lets assume that a standard batch has 20% of officers which are 'not so good'. this will translate to the battalion having about 3 officers not so good, but BMT will have about 21. in sheer number alone of coz BMT will be more noticeable. but this is unfair way of seeing it.
in short i dont like ppl's stereotype view that BMT officers mostly cannot make it type.
------------------
RockerZ! -
nah we're not the same...my fren's idea of a practical joke (used my system to logon)Originally posted by Ducati996:err...billybong and controversay same person izzit?
anyway yes i agree if you damn kilat especially SOM likely you can choose. but consider onli top 10% get SOM, you mean the rest 90% are lower class? also consider, in the words of my instructor, SOM means you were an outstanding cadet, whether you will be an outstanding officer remains to be seen.
basically wat i disagreeing wif is not about the cadets' posting, its your or controversay's or watever's line that mention most BMT officers are the cannot make it type. i think its realli unfair to stereotype them that way. i prefer to look at it this way: BMT has a total of 105 nsf officers (21 coys times 4 pc's and 1 2ic each coy). a unit has around 15? (i tokkin bout a battalion, i admit i not sure about the exact number, and in both i exclude staff/hq officers).
lets assume that a standard batch has 20% of officers which are 'not so good'. this will translate to the battalion having about 3 officers not so good, but BMT will have about 21. in sheer number alone of coz BMT will be more noticeable. but this is unfair way of seeing it.
in short i dont like ppl's stereotype view that BMT officers mostly cannot make it type.
Billy's the one who intro-ed me to sgforums FYI.
The BMT line was my mistake. True some choose and get to BMT by merit.
And by the way, not all SOMs are good. There's definitely better cadets out there who are underrated. Instructors dun really analyse everything, sometimes they just follow heresay. -
well i just give those SOM the benefit of the doubt, as in surely they did perform well while in ocs. after all, not easy to get the award so no need for the rest of us to be sour grapesOriginally posted by controversay:nah we're not the same...my fren's idea of a practical joke (used my system to logon) Billy's the one who intro-ed me to sgforums FYI.
The BMT line was my mistake. True some choose and get to BMT by merit.
And by the way, not all SOMs are good. There's definitely better cadets out there who are underrated. Instructors dun really analyse everything, sometimes they just follow heresay. forget the sword of merit i think get sword of participation happi liao
basically well i just disagree completely that bmt officers are cannot make it and i oso disagree that their job very lobo. yes they dont chiong like their unit counterparts but there are many aspects of their job which are tuff and which the unit pc's do not need to face. its not fair to compare the 2 and say one is better or one is lobo, they're different but equally important in the bigger scheme of things.
the unit pc's are already getting the credit due to them i think the bmt officers should be given some too.
------------------
RockerZ! -
Ducati996
one thing i realize is the reason why ppl say sispec is tougher is the difference in instructors methods. ocs instructors behave like model leaders as examples to cadets. they rarely use vulgarities(subject to which wing you from) and never ever physically touch cadets. sispec instructors, however, not to say their method wrong...well those haven go ns yet, use your imagination. anyway....
Look man... I dont know which batch you are from but it sounds VERY different to what I have experienced...I wont elaborate further.
Just to say this, sispec or ocs.. it doesnt matter. At the end of the day, we still get the odd pussies on either side...except on one side...that individual has more to answer for.
Call me a sicko but all those unconventional training methods worked...The closer we get to hell.. the better. And in our peaceful sunny island...we need every bit of hell we can get so that when time comes...it'll just be another day. -
so which batch you from? i think its not bout the batch, its bout the wing. and although the 'model instructor' thing may not be so, but i still think 'physical touching' in ocs is far less common than sispec.Originally posted by redjuly:Ducati996
Look man... I dont know which batch you are from but it sounds VERY different to what I have experienced...I wont elaborate further.
i didn't say it didn't work, i'm saying a different approach is required for different roles and types of leadership. i also agree training must be tough, as you say, hell, and i'm not complaining. tough training made me tougher. just that there are different types of hell.Originally posted by redjuly:Call me a sicko but all those unconventional training methods worked...The closer we get to hell.. the better. And in our peaceful sunny island...we need every bit of hell we can get so that when time comes...it'll just be another day.
------------------
RockerZ! -
Well i dun believe i mentioned BMT officers as lobo but yes it's somewhat an unfair comparison. However i would stress that the general mentality is that BMT officers enjoy a relatively easier life compared to unit personel; this belief is already rampant in OCS. Possible reasons include:Originally posted by Ducati996:well i just give those SOM the benefit of the doubt, as in surely they did perform well while in ocs. after all, not easy to get the award so no need for the rest of us to be sour grapes forget the sword of merit i think get sword of participation happi liao
basically well i just disagree completely that bmt officers are cannot make it and i oso disagree that their job very lobo. yes they dont chiong like their unit counterparts but there are many aspects of their job which are tuff and which the unit pc's do not need to face. its not fair to compare the 2 and say one is better or one is lobo, they're different but equally important in the bigger scheme of things.
the unit pc's are already getting the credit due to them i think the bmt officers should be given some too.
a. BMT training has a routine programme to follow which becomes monotonous after new batches replace the ones passing out .
b. They train with greater levels of safety as for most recruits, this is probably their first time in weapons handling. If there's been a training accident, the entire school "enjoys" a TSO safety week where training (in my opinion) is "downgraded" to little more than going through the motions.
c. They have fixed training schedules and a standard syllabus to follow - in short almost like an educational centre.
In a unit, the training regime is prepared with ATEC in mind. Progressive and realistic training is just another day in army boots. Getting injured is more then normal. Seriousness is emphasized by company comdrs and PCs. That means huge responsibilities for them as they answer not only for their safety but the training standards of the men in question.
Such a position is normally bestowed on a capable officer who has the potential to handle the difficulties and uncertainties involved, maybe an SOM if u will.
Perhaps its ideal to expect equal standards and committment in BMT officer's conducting training compared to those in unit life (thereby the officers in BMT shd be of equal standards to their counterparts in units)so that presumebly the good work started in BMT can be continued. However as we all know, this is not the case.
The result of this is that newly-posted personnel in units normally get a culture shock.
[This message has been edited by controversay (edited 24 May 2002).] -
Gilat officers or specs are also fine, as long as they do the job well and is well liked by the men.
If you go to a unit, you can see whether the respect is with the WOs or the officers. It'll definitely show......
who will de respect go to??? -
The Men !!!Originally posted by gUms:Gilat officers or specs are also fine, as long as they do the job well and is well liked by the men.
If you go to a unit, you can see whether the respect is with the WOs or the officers. It'll definitely show......
who will de respect go to???