Page 3 of 4

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:31 pm
by COMEVIL
Sum1 wrote:
COMEVIL wrote:
yoshi wrote:"Rear Adm. (lower half) Timothy J. White will be assigned as commander, Cyber, National Mission Force (CNMF), Fort Meade, Maryland. White is currently serving as director for intelligence, J2, U.S. Pacific Command, Camp H. M. Smith, Hawaii."

Can't figure out who he's replacing.


More, BIG, moves coming soon.


Somewhat cryptic and foreboding. Well played.


Honestly did not mean it to be, and I don't really have any special insight. But...look at how long certain folks have been in certain jobs, and how quickly they turned RDML White around.

Expect changes at OPNAV N2/N6 and FCC/C10F minimum. The rest will trickle down...

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:11 pm
by LIVINGIW
It seems to me that Commander of the Cyber National Mission Force in today's world is a great stepping stone to other things down the road...

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:24 pm
by Sum1
LIVINGIW wrote:It seems to me that Commander of the Cyber National Mission Force in today's world is a great stepping stone to other things down the road...


If I were a betting man, I'd put a few dollars on that.

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:52 am
by Schlag
Surprised not to see this already on the forum or in Station Hypo, but just in case, figured this was a good place to put it:

http://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releas ... ouncements

Flag Officer Announcements
Press Operations

Release No: NR-205-16
June 07, 2016

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced today that the president has made the following nominations:

Navy Rear Adm. Michael M. Gilday for appointment to the rank of vice admiral, and for assignment as commander, Fleet Cyber Command; and commander, Tenth Fleet, Fort Meade, Maryland. Gilday is currently serving as director, operations, J-3, U.S. Cyber Command, Fort Meade, Maryland.


Primary source of this is always the defense.gov website but I also find that SailorBob provides excellent I&W on any Flag movement.

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 3:37 pm
by yoshi
there is some mention of this on station hypo, primarily in the comments under some of the articles. that forum is organized by the calendar, as opposed to topic/theme. so, it requires remembering the discussion/topic and then searching back through the posts to find it.

as for the topic itself - the rumors were circulating for some time so don't think too many are surprised. Heard good things about him, obviously ADM Rogers likes him, as does the rest of the Navy brass. FCC/C10F will be fine, even if he doesn't have an advanced STEM degree :-).

More importantly, I think this is a positive move for the Navy and the 1810 community. We've been conflating FCC/C10F with our 1810/CT community for the past several years. Choosing to identify as a single organization is unhealthy; we're STILL affected by the shuttering of NSGA and its been a dozen years. Gaining a clear picture of the difference between FCC/C10F and the 1810/CT community will be healthy and productive for both parties. I am hopeful and confident the 1810/CT community, now that leadership is not synonymous with FCC/C10F, will wield a broader Navy-wide perspective in meeting cyber, SIGINT, and EW needs across all the numbered fleets. This could generate a wider and more comprehensive reach for our community, and foster lasting strategic growth/development of cyber, SIGINT, EW in those areas where we are underrepresented, but desperately needed. We'll always be closely linked with FCC/C10F. However, it's better to avoid having the 1810/CT community (or any community) controlled by it (or any organization, unless that is what the organization is designed to do; perhaps the TYCOM). There are inherent problems with having a community (administrative in nature) slew to a numbered fleet (operational in nature), or another organization which necessarily has a narrower, more defined focus than a community should maintain.

VADM Tighe has done a great job a FCC/C10F. I think she will be in an even better position for the Navy's 1810/CT community once at OPNAV. One of the biggest differences will be the types of questions her bosses will be asking her from their broader Navy perspective (relative to the single view of US CYBERCOM). Sometimes satisfying the operational COCOM requirements of today can compete with and detract from the broader, more lasting solutions. We will likely have a much better picture of what things will be like for cyber, SIGINT, EW and also the IWC in short order. This could go a long way toward better discerning the community's current and future identity, utilization, and direction.

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 1:55 pm
by jay
Hopefully right place to ask this...

By the numbers, IWC has 19 Flag officers (186X), 9 of which come from an 1810 background where as 3 come from 1820. Can anyone explain why there is such a disparity? It seems that the 1810's national focus seems to favor them over a more intra-Navy focus from 1820s. Maybe I am way off...

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:28 pm
by HH-60H
jay wrote:Hopefully right place to ask this...

By the numbers, IWC has 19 Flag officers (186X), 9 of which come from an 1810 background where as 3 come from 1820. Can anyone explain why there is such a disparity? It seems that the 1810's national focus seems to favor them over a more intra-Navy focus from 1820s. Maybe I am way off...


I don't have an answer, but you're leaving out an important ratio in your analysis. What's the ratio of 1810 to 1820 in general?

Besides, how do you get that 1810's have a national focus and 1820s don't?

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 2:51 pm
by Arkad
jay wrote:Hopefully right place to ask this...

By the numbers, IWC has 19 Flag officers (186X), 9 of which come from an 1810 background where as 3 come from 1820. Can anyone explain why there is such a disparity? It seems that the 1810's national focus seems to favor them over a more intra-Navy focus from 1820s. Maybe I am way off...


What amazes me about the number of Flags we have is how few Flag Billets we have. Please note that up until this next Flag Board, each of our IWC designators competed within their own designator. Next year we make two and all IWC designators will be a singular competitive category. One will be the Oceanographer of the Navy and one will be the Commander of the IWDC.

Here's my count of AC Flags (might be off)...

Prior 1800s
1) Galludet
2) Brown

Prior 1810s
1) Rogers
2) Tighe
3) Filipowski
4) White
5) Parode
6) Keck

Prior 1820s
1) Norton
2) Barrett
3) Creighton

Prior 1830s
1) Sharpe
2) Kohler
3) Loveless
4) Heimbinger
5) Copley
6) Whitworth
7) Aeschbach

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 9:05 pm
by O-4's hate me
Arkad wrote: Next year we make two and all IWC designators will be a singular competitive category. One will be the Oceanographer of the Navy and one will be the Commander of the IWDC.

I had an interesting discussion with our Flag METOC the other day. How far are we going to take this single competitive category? Are we going to potentially put a non-METOC officer as the Oceanographer of the Navy?

Re: IW/IDC Flag Moves

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2016 10:47 pm
by Arkad
O-4's hate me wrote: I had an interesting discussion with our Flag METOC the other day. How far are we going to take this single competitive category? Are we going to potentially put a non-METOC officer as the Oceanographer of the Navy?


I imagine the precept will be written in such a way that will ensure one 1800 and one 1810/1820 is selected.