Posted by Jerome Davis in Question regarding the requirements to serve as Fcomm or AFcomm
Posted by Commodore Cale Reilly (STF Surgeon General) in Question regarding the requirements to serve as Fcomm or AFcomm
Purely based on conversations with a couple of people and observation over the last little while I have a question regarding the current requirements for FComm and AFComm appointments.
Currently it is a requirement that the Fcomm and Afcomm be either current or ex COs or XOs of a ship In the fleet in question. Now that has been the case for a number of years. Yet with the mergers of fleets and movement of ships over the past few years it’s seems like that rule is no longer fit for purpose as many people in the club today can effectively fill the requirements as a pervious XO or CO of a ship that has moved into a new fleet.
This has brought two separate thoughts to mind, one that is pertinent to this post and one that isn’t (do our fleet structures need a revamp).
The pertinent one is honestly do we need this requirement as it is worded at all now or should it change to simply be a current or ex XO or CO in the club as this is what we effectively have in practice or something else.
Literally one of the most antiquated rules still in place in this club and should have been scuttled years ago when we first started playing the shell game with the Fleets. The “Fleet Identity” excuse for limiting Command of a Fleet is nonsense and has zero foundations in any naval-structure based organization in the world… except ours. Absolutely pointless.
Agreed. Back in the day, there was a lot more fleet identity, and events were done as a fleet. But over the years, that has gone away. I believe it has become even less with the switch to our new system, as I don’t know about anyone else, but I hardly ever go to a fleet page, unless I accidentally click the wrong link.
© 1991-2021 STF. Terms of Service