This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
nhave been zero. (There is still some sa8ging fear expressed about just how bm°othly the command ran without us,
1 il °nly serves to reinforce what top
, anagers are paid for: “planning,” not doing.’')
cin the military are faced with ttplex challenges: more money and ateriel to manage, more to do, fewer I °Ple, bigger risks, more information, s awareness. No one person, staff, or military component has all the answers or even the best way of finding them. It only makes sense—money, time, and effort-saving sense—to use our own trained and competent professional consultants to help us overcome these challenges. The alternatives are either to hire similar (or inferior) expertise at a very high cost from outside the services or grow at a slower, unacceptable pace. If your local OE center can help you make a dynamic, positive change in your organization, can you afford to pass up this opportunity just because you believe in the OE myth instead of reality?
The commanding officers of OE centers around the world are eager to brief commanders on the new direction and methods of this important program. Put them in their place.
Nobody asked me either, but
y Captain S. J. Minturn, U. S. Marine Corps
affeine: Vise or Vice?
Many of us have experienced some
havty r°cky mornings- The reason may ^ e been the consumption of too p^ch alcohol the night before. I sus- han ’ however, that in many cases these S°ver-like symptoms are caused as •W1 by the body’s desire for caffeine, role 6 coffee mess Plays a prominent Prid ln °Ur sea service tradition. We ley6 0Urse*ves on our messes and are (awithout our coffee. Many young Mv °^tent‘mes n°t so young) people t|,e6 ®arned their seniors’ regard for Utility to manage effectively their V coffee messes. Yet coffee, our quitUre s most favored beverage, is de ® capable of causing a physical Pendency among its loyal users. periat s right, I did say physical de- ertcy. Though this may seem to be a strong statement, the danger is real.
Most of us start the morning with a good, hot, steaming cup of coffee. It has become a ritual of our culture. Throughout the workday we consume this “brew,” giving it to our guests and accepting it when we ourselves are visitors. Ultimately, we get used to this custom and feel something awry if the coffee ritual is not observed. This becomes the root of psychological dependence when the body comes to rely on the caffeine stimulant in coffee and rebels if it is not available in sufficient quantity to satisfy what is now a craving for this addictive substance.
The symptoms of caffeine reliance and the “morning after” are remarkably similar: irritability, dizziness, and headaches. We sometimes incorrectly place all the blame for the bad state in which we find ourselves in the morning on the festivities of the night before. I contend that because we normally sleep later the morning after, we deprive our bodies of its accustomed ration of caffeine.
Should you want to test my premise, do without caffeine until 1000. If several aspirin are required, it is obvious what is really needed. Or perhaps instruct your coffee mess petty officers or noncommissioned officers to use decaffeinated coffee for a day. If the amount of coffee consumed increases and the use of aspirin rises, it is reasonably safe to conclude that the members of your mess have become dependent upon caffeine.
In the high-threat environment in which we operate, our people must not be under the influence of any substance. So let’s close the non-decaffeinated coffee messes.
Nobody asked me either, but
By T •
^'eutenant Commander T. M. Oliver, U. S. Naval Reserve
M/ith
the proliferation of the many
OOD Underway Ribbon
^doPc " -------------- --------------- "‘“"x
^.‘•medals, ribbons, and other dis-
off) lsMng devices awarded to naval Ci* an exceptionally special spe- £vey aas been callously overlooked.
Navs'nce the first ship of the U. S.
§e ^ *be pier on her maiden voy- cers’ JUr>ior (and a horde of senior) offi- have thirsted after that short letter
which graces the service records of a distinguished line of seagoing officers.
As a young ensign, fresh from the cold winds of a Newport winter, my desires were simple. Aside from pretty girls, nothing excited me more than the expectation of gaining qualification as an officer of the deck (OOD), underway on my first ship. Good luck, hounding the senior watch officer, and a heavy deployment schedule helped me secure that letter on board a carrier, and all this before I put on my junior grade’s second stripe. I was justifiably proud knowing that Sixth Fleet was not crowded with ensign OODs, especially on board carriers. I was also proud and honestly a little apprehensive being left in charge on the bridge, invested with the captain s confidence (or some small portion of it).
I was a reservist with no real expec-
Si
e<tings / December 1984
WE'RE FIGHTING FOR YOUR LIFE
American
Heart
Association
of
French Legion of Honor. Wearers
tation of a lifetime Navy career and no hope of command at sea, dolphins, or wings, so the letter and the duties which accompanied that first assignment represented an initiation into an honored fraternity, one of the few prizes which were as sweet in taste as they had been in anticipation. The sweetness became even more pronounced when I realized that there were mature aviator commanders who lusted after the same letter as a boost to their careers. An ensign with a commander assigned as his junior OOD or junior officer on watch is as proudly and self-assuredly arrogant as a tom turkey on Thanksgiving Eve.
In the ensuing two decades, much has changed. Dolphins, wings, and the command-at-sea stars have been joined by badges for surface warfare officers. Those heavy and a bit gaudy devices obviously signify completion of an extensive period of qualification and indoctrination. But perhaps the Navy would have been better served and might profit even now if it had a simpler and less ostentatious bauble like a small bright ribbon, low in precedence but high in the esteem and eyes of all those who similarly qualify, awarded to all underway OODs, past and future. This award would serve as a conjunctive honor jointly binding a large part of the fraternity of the sea: from minesweepers to reefers to carriers, from submariners to aviators and surface line officers, with an occasional nimble-wit- ted supply type thrown in.
Certainly, standards of qualification differ from ship type to ship type and from captain to captain. Destroyer officers have complained since the first carrier was launched that the transfer of the dumbest destroyer OOD to a carrier would raise the IQs of both watchstanding groups. It is true that an occasional aviator has called for speed brakes, while conning the approach to an oiler. The legends of the brief qualification periods necessary on board radar pickets are not without foundation. Their only common denominator rests in the designation and the thought that some captain was willing to affix his signature and go aft to his sea cabin, leaving his newly qualified OOv free to negotiate safe passage around icebergs, buoys, whales, destroyers, and trawlers.
If such an award is developed, it should consist of only a ribbon; there should be no medal to clutter full dresS or evening rig and no multiple award devices. The background of this ribb°n should be a bright blue green, the shade of the sea at its best. Stripes of foggy gray and the black of midnight offer optimum choices to set off the background shade, reminding OODs that all watches are not bright and clear. The award should be retroactive’ encompassing even those whose letter* are but yellowed crumblings in dark vaults. Civilian awardees might adopt tiny lapel rosette in the style of the
such a device then might be easily identified and welcomed in acey-deuC > games or liars’ dice matches in tiny dark bars around the country. .
Who knows? The popularity of a device might become so widesprea that cemetaries may sprout marble markers replete with chiseled replicaS of the ribbon and the simple epitaph- “He was an OOD, underway!”
The Collector’s Choice—
A handsome way to preserve and protect your copies of the Proceedings
Our durable Library Case, custom-designed for the Ptf' ceedings, allows you to organize your valuable back is' sues chronologically while protecting them from dus and wear. While conserving shelf space, this is a hand' some addition to the home or office library in blue simu' lated leather with a gold embossed spine. (Each case includes a gold transfer sheet so you can identify d>e volume and year.)
Proceedings Library Cases are available in two sizcs’ to accommodate both the current size and the pre-19' small size of the journal. The larger size measure* 11" x m" x 4" and the smaller 10" x 7" x 43/s", each holding 12 issues. When ordering below, pl®ase specify size.
$6.95 each.
To: Jesse Jones Box Corp., P.O. Box 5120, Dept. NI,
Philadelphia, Pa. 19141
Please send me_______ U. S. Naval Institute Proceedings LibrjO! f
Cases. Prices: $6.95 each; 3 for $20.00; 6 for $36.00. My checK t
money order) for $____ is enclosed. Add $2.50 per unit (p°sl °
and handling) for orders outside the United States.
[ ] Large size. [ ] Small Size.
96
Proceedings / Decefliker