On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 19:11:56 -0600, William Hughes
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:55:33 -0500, in rec.aviation.military.naval Penta
wrote:

Thoughts, all? How WOULD one work on unit pride/unit
identification/unit cohesion in the modern environment?

Not real well. Too much turnover in personnel. Way back when it was possible to
stay with the same ship or unit for several years. Nowadays, I think the average
time on station is two years.

All,

William Hughes's reply brought a number of thoughts to mind, from
the inane to the complex.

Eventually, however, I settled on something.

As an exercise for the group, let me lay out multiple scenarios.

1. The US Navy, or a fictional copy thereof, is (on a whim, basically)
scrapping everything. RAMN contributors have been directed to produce
a replacement. Cover all issues, from uniforms to living conditions to
regulations, including every aspect of personnel policies and general
"cultural" stuff, as well as force structure and equipment buys.
However, limits a Pay changes must keep in mind Congress. Cultural
stuff: Do keep in mind the general society.

2. The navy of a major NATO ally or an important regional country* is
doing the same thing. Describe the projected local security situation,
also, and keep it in mind. In this case, nothing is off-limits.

3. A small country is looking at the same thing. Examples: Panama,
Philippines. No limits, just describe and remember the projected
security situation

*Definition: flippable. Basically, say who you're using, then run with
it.

Thoughts:

1. To organize this and allow for filters, let's try to agree on a
common subject header? [RAMNEX 1: topic, RAMNEX 2: topic, and so
forth?]

2. Sources are, as always, a good idea.

3. Does anybody have free, non-ad-filled webspace we could compile and
host this on? It'd be a cool thing to keep around, but I dunno how to
get access to my school's webserver.

John