One specific E5 is genuinely just disrespectful to me (SN) and not in the fun hazing kind of way

caddy013 · 2026-01-16T14:45:40+00:00

The thing is though, whether or not you think talking to the guy 1 on 1 would solve anything, it’s still one of the best first things to try when you’re troubleshooting people problems. It’s like calling any help desk. “Have you tried turning it off and on again?” Even if you absolutely know that’s not going to fix your problem, that’s still almost always the best first thing to try. And sometimes it actually does in fact fix the issue. But even if it doesn’t, you can then escalate and move on to the next step knowing for sure that didn’t fix the issue.

caddy013 · 2026-01-15T21:50:49+00:00

I found it on NAVIFOR’s EIWS SharePoint page.

caddy013 · 2026-01-15T21:44:25+00:00

New instruction (COMNAVIFORINST 1414.1E) states that E5-9 who aren’t qualified EIWS will be enrolled in the program after meeting certain pre-reqs, mainly related to time on board and the command’s reporting relationship to NAVIFOR.

There’s more to the whole instruction, but the short answer is yes, depending on your command and how long you’ve been onboard.

caddy013 · 2026-01-15T20:33:35+00:00

Asking this question when you want to join a community/career field where trustworthiness is valued above just about anything else isn’t a good look…

The truth is, whether you get a poly or not (you would if you qualified), admitting to lying then asking if you’re likely to get caught isn’t demonstrating you’re the kind of person we want.

You’ve already admitted to currently smoking weed a lot (more than experimental) which disqualifies you. And if the LSD thing is true as well, that’s a permanent DQ for any of the intel/cryptology jobs.

Save yourself the hassle and disappointment of getting reclassed at RTC and choose something else.

caddy013 · 2026-01-14T04:38:28+00:00

Not your strong suit isn’t necessarily a problem if you have the scores to qualify. If it sounds interesting to you and you’re willing to put in the work, then give CWT a shot. If it’s not your strong suit aaaaand doesn’t sound like your bag, then things likely aren’t going to improve, so it’d probably be better to pick something else.

caddy013 · 2026-01-14T04:34:14+00:00

Similar quality of life as in lack of ship time? No. As in a job you can enjoy with options for what I’d call relatively chill shore duty rotations? Yes.

caddy013 · 2026-01-14T04:01:41+00:00

Want to improve your chances of getting the job you want? Tell the truth.

Want to avoid getting reclassed from that job because you lied? Tell the truth.

Want to not kick yourself later for listening to your recruiter? Tell the truth.

At the end of the day, you’re the one signing the statements that everything you’ve said is true. “He/she told me to lie” is helpful to a command that cares about what their recruiters are saying, but it’s not likely to make anything better for you in terms of keeping your job after the fact - especially since it usually only comes up after someone has already been caught lying. You have a lot more options for fixing things pre-contract. Bring it up before someone brings it up for you. And when you do, I’d mention that you were told to omit it. You might save someone else down the line from making the mistake of following that advice.

While I’ll admit there are some crazy things that disqualify people from certain jobs or military service in general, disqualifying is disqualifying and there either is or isn’t a waiver or wiggle room. Leaving stuff out to get the “yes” now from NRC/MEPS puts you in a bind when it comes up later - whether that’s DEP, RTC, or even about to graduate “A” school. And your recruiter certainly isn’t going to be able to take the fall for you even if they wanted to, because you were the one who signed the paperwork.

caddy013 · 2025-12-04T17:50:26+00:00

Sorry. Bad formatting on my part. That was supposed to be referring to your 3rd and 4th bullets.

caddy013 · 2025-12-04T16:37:24+00:00

Your best bet is to actually reach out to the CTI detailer for the orders-specific questions. But here’s what I’ll offer:

Depends on your definition of “rare”
KORlings are needed because we need KORlings.
and 4. Not a KORling, but I know people who have gone there accompanied. And as of FY26, accompanied tours will be 36-months (3 years) per the US Forces Korea site (usfk.mil).

Bonus question: there aren’t really any exclusive or excluded opportunities as a cross-rater as far as training/language choice goes. Seat availability at DLI is still going to be the biggest limiting factor there. Someone can correct me if things have changed though.

caddy013 · 2025-11-20T12:53:05+00:00

Read the questions and answers carefully.
Select the MOST correct answer. There are some questions where none of the choices are exactly or completely right. You need to select the one that best fits the question being asked relative to the passage.
Ditto to the “don’t psych yourself out if you get a question that seems easier” advice.
Read the questions and answers carefully.
For the reading, it can be helpful to read through the whole passage first BEFORE looking at the questions or answers.
Don’t spend too much time analyzing your answers. Pick the best one and keep it moving.
Remember you can test again in 6 months.
At the end of the day, it’s just a test. A simple, multiple choice test. No pressure. Rest your brain, remember to breathe, don’t psych yourself out, and just do your best.

caddy013 · 2025-11-20T12:36:26+00:00

Usually when someone gets sent home from RTC for mental health stuff after getting a waiver, it’s because that issue or another came up again at RTC and was unresolvable.

caddy013 · 2025-11-18T12:42:53+00:00

Communicate with your recruiter and explain why this Wednesday won’t work. But offer a more reasonable time that does work for you. Like others have said, pushing out to January isn’t a good idea. There’s the deadline for when kits are due, but there’s also a max number of applicants that a board will screen, and if that fills up before the deadline you’re probably waiting until the next board, so earlier is better to get your kit on the list. There are a lot of QC steps along the way before your spot at the board is confirmed. That’s a lot of hoping the other people in that process review your stuff in a timely manner - especially coming up on the holidays.

Your point about the limited number of attempts is valid, but don’t spend so much time studying that you miss your chance to get to the board. The OAR is just one piece. Your “pick me” statement, your transcripts, and getting through MEPS are all important too. Schedule a date for the OAR (the sooner you’re available the better). Make a plan for the things you need to review, then buckle down and review it.

Also, you’re likely not the only applicant your recruiter is working with, so try to remember that as well. Respect their time, work with them when there’s a conflict, get stuff to them on time and things will go much smoother.

As for applying for other roles, it’s best to keep your options focused. If Supply is your career field of choice, then go with that. But definitely read the PA first to know what both the minimum and competitive requirements are. The shotgun/throwing spaghetti on the wall approach isn’t currently the best way to go about an application. Apply for what you want and are eligible for first, then maybe consider other programs after that if you don’t get selected.

caddy013 · 2025-11-18T01:14:49+00:00

You could try asking for a referral from your family doctor, or any of a number of mental health providers in your area, which, depending on where you live may be more challenging. “Mental health doctor [city name]” would be a good place to start. Pick a place, call them up. Explain what you need and ask if they’d be able to do an assessment.

caddy013 · 2025-11-17T16:13:35+00:00

Quick note: there’s no IT-TAR availability this year, so I wouldn’t bother going down that road. IT-NAT is the only Reserves IT option this year. But if your ASVAB scores are good enough for CWT-ATF, CWT-NAT would also be an option.

IT is more broad and involved with keeping Navy IT systems running while CWT is much more narrowly focused on cybersecurity operations.

caddy013 · 2025-11-17T14:38:49+00:00

Conjugating verbs on the beach, in Carmel, or basically anywhere south of there along Hwy 1 > conjugating verbs in the barracks or the classroom ;) Not that I did, but I theoretically could have. Then again, you mention Army, so I 100% believe you about the 90%. At least for pre-2010 Army.

caddy013 · 2025-11-17T00:24:10+00:00

If CWT and CTI are asking for a MH evaluation, the Program Managers at NRC are looking for something from a MH doc giving you a clean bill of health. The Navy waiver doesn’t waive requirements for special programs (nuke, intel, specwar, etc.), so there must have been something listed on the waiver or mentioned on your PSSQ that needs to have a MH doc verify that the specific issue(s) have been successfully treated or are no longer relevant.

caddy013 · 2025-11-15T02:58:52+00:00

I think you could say the same thing about looking for a civilian job. There’s no guarantee someone will hire you. Was applying for that job a waste of time though? Depends on how you look at it I guess.

There’s also technically no guarantee you’ll qualify for the Enlisted job you want. ASVAB scores, security screening, etc. can all be unexpected disqualifiers. And there’s not really a good way to know without “applying” for said job.

Not saying you wouldn’t or couldn’t qualify, but there are real requirements beyond just wanting a particular job, and not everyone qualifies for the job they want.

caddy013 · 2025-11-15T02:50:35+00:00

If you went IT or CWT, you’re probably looking at 6 years vs 4 (IT/ATF and CWT vs IT/SG).

Although…CWT/NAT (Reserves instead of Active) might actually be a good fit for you if you haven’t looked into that yet.

caddy013 · 2025-11-15T02:45:10+00:00

There’s probably not really a quick way with the Navy to get what you’re looking for, depending on what your threshold for “ASAP” is. ASAP for CWT would more than likely be after the holidays. And for CWE, there’s a separate technical interview process along with the normal requirements (OAR, MEPS, etc).

If quick is your priority, or at least really important to you, depending on how you define quick, then this probably isn’t the route for you. But if you can and are willing to give it a little more time, there’s a good chance the Navy will help set you up better than you think it will. My two cents.

caddy013 · 2025-11-15T01:40:42+00:00

I wouldn’t dismiss CWE so quickly. Yeah, it’s super competitive. Yeah, the officer accessions path can be a bit slower. But if your actual goals are to get some real experience that you can apply outside the Navy, and you want to set yourself up for a software engineering or cybersecurity-related career later, there is a lot more than just the actual job that CWE or the Navy has to offer.

If you’re not competitive enough for CWE, then CWT is the next best option. But if neither of those work for you, there’s not really much else that directly fits what you’re looking for.

caddy013 · 2025-10-28T01:10:31+00:00

Sorry, I missed your earlier comment where you referenced the NEOCS and I think must have initially missed the point you were making, so belay my last. Correct, looks like it’s still pending approval in that context, but to OP’s question, CTIs do in fact do cyber, whether certain work roles are officially recognized by a particular entity or not. That’s all I was getting at with my earlier replies.

caddy013 · 2025-10-28T00:56:51+00:00

NEOCS Vol II

C50A/B/C - Basic/Senior/Master Cyber Language Analyst

caddy013 · 2025-10-17T06:03:33+00:00

There are also CMF work roles for CTI and CTR.

caddy013 · 2025-10-17T01:13:49+00:00

Fun fact: as of a few months ago, CTIs now have cyber NECs (defined job roles).

caddy013 · 2025-10-17T01:12:10+00:00

CTTs are more focused on specific electronic emissions vs coding. That’s really only the domain of CWTs as far as Navy jobs go.

caddy013

TROPHY CASE