My friend is signing on and wants to sign on in one of the combat support arms and is worried that he will have a disadvantage when it comes to job advancement.
Is it true that people in combat support (signals, arti, combat engineer) loses an edge compared to people in combat arms (infantry, commando, guards and armour)? That is such a general belief.. but izzit true?
in terms of the advancement in career, definitely lose out..
Originally posted by baikachuchu:Take a look at the current COA,CDF and the former CDF.What vocation badges do they wear?I believe it’s Guards,Armour and Infantry respectively,correct me if I’m wrong.What does that say about career prospects?Of course,it dosen’t hurt to be a SAFOS,just don’t be a farmer.
it is not everybody that can be a general/scholar. a large organization needs people of all levels wad. if everybody scholar then how? cannot say - farmer grad means not good. it is a fact that of cuz a SAFOS has better prospects than a farmer grad, but it doesnt mean a farmer grad has no prospects. a farmer grad most probably wun be general...but that doesn't mean he can't excel and go far. its really how you perceive things.
each and everyone has his/her own place in the world. if you can't be safos, doesn't mean you shldn't sign on.
ps: i tot arti is under combat too? got such thing as combat support ah? i tot combat is combat. got 3 arms right? combat, engineering, logistics. so i think combat means combat. i'm not too sure. i'm more into rsaf. haha!
Originally posted by del_co:
it is not everybody that can be a general/scholar. a large organization needs people of all levels wad. if everybody scholar then how? cannot say - farmer grad means not good. it is a fact that of cuz a SAFOS has better prospects than a farmer grad, but it doesnt mean a farmer grad has no prospects. a farmer grad most probably wun be general...but that doesn't mean he can't excel and go far. its really how you perceive things.
each and everyone has his/her own place in the world. if you can't be safos, doesn't mean you shldn't sign on.
ps: i tot arti is under combat too? got such thing as combat support ah? i tot combat is combat. got 3 arms right? combat, engineering, logistics. so i think combat means combat. i'm not too sure. i'm more into rsaf. haha!
Arty is service support.. they wear blue beret.. no such thing combat support... unless you're talking about some support vocation in combat units..
Originally posted by del_co:
it is not everybody that can be a general/scholar. a large organization needs people of all levels wad. if everybody scholar then how? cannot say - farmer grad means not good. it is a fact that of cuz a SAFOS has better prospects than a farmer grad, but it doesnt mean a farmer grad has no prospects. a farmer grad most probably wun be general...but that doesn't mean he can't excel and go far. its really how you perceive things.
each and everyone has his/her own place in the world. if you can't be safos, doesn't mean you shldn't sign on.
ps: i tot arti is under combat too? got such thing as combat support ah? i tot combat is combat. got 3 arms right? combat, engineering, logistics. so i think combat means combat. i'm not too sure. i'm more into rsaf. haha!
I applaud you for willing to look at the "good" side of things but let's be realistic,no one wants to sign up knowning that he will be an underdog compared to another.Want the best career prospects?Be a SAFOS.If a person is contended with uncertain and limited prospects,so be it.
There are ranking exercises for the regulars and it involves a few "predeterminded factors".Plenty will hit the ceiling at MAJ or LTC.I have seen a real life 40 year old MAJ with a 35 year old LTC as his direct superior,want to make a guess as to which is the farmer,which is the scholar?
3 type of vocations in the Army:Combat,Technical and Service.
All combat support(Signal,Arty,Engineer) formation are combat vocations,they receive combat pay too.They are not direct front line troops but they serve in a combatant role nonetheless.Logistics is under combat service support.
Originally posted by baikachuchu:Take a look at the current COA,CDF and the former CDF.What vocation badges do they wear?I believe it’s Guards,Armour and Infantry respectively,correct me if I’m wrong.What does that say about career prospects?Of course,it dosen’t hurt to be a SAFOS,just don’t be a farmer.
This thread I started was for the benefit of those who were not eligible or were rejected for the SAFOS scholarship and may like to know whether combat support is disadvantaged or not.
Actually non-SAFOS is already farmer liao. So I don't know what you mean by your last sentence.
The term farmer was coined in the early 1970s, almost 4 decades ago when the SAFOS was born and they were clever guys sent to top UK universities. All non SAFOS were referred to as farmers and thats the correct definition even today. Non SAFOS- ATA, LSA are all farmers. Doesn't matter whether you have degree or not. Local grads, please take changkul and start digging. You think there is a big difference between a poly dip and a NTU degree in SAF or anywhere else for that matter? LOL
I know so many poly guys who are smarter than local graduates. People from crappy JCs who make it to crappy NTU and NUS courses are NOT superior to poly guys and are NOT SAFOS material. Many people in Poly go there with better O level grades than people in crappy JCs like SRJC, YJC, JJC, etc.
Local grads can take changkul and dig as well.
So for a farmer who is interested to sign on whether its for money or other reason, does signing on with COMBAT SUPPORT or COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT (logistics) really lose out?
We can discuss the pros and cons. I heard from some combat arms guys that the pro to signing on in Logistics is that the skills acquired there are more transferable in outside world. Is that true?
Originally posted by baikachuchu:Take a look at the current COA,CDF and the former CDF.What vocation badges do they wear?I believe it’s Guards,Armour and Infantry respectively,correct me if I’m wrong.What does that say about career prospects?
You are wrong. There are SAFOS in combat support arms who made CDF and BG. I know the COAs you are talking abt.
Notably, Ng Yat Chung is from Signals and made CDF. We also know that he was quite overweight. He's super smart lah.. won't say more.
Lee Hsien Loong was Artillery SAFOS and Lee Hsien Yang was Signals SAFOS. Both support arms.
baikachuchu, I agree with Del_co not everyone is cut out for SAFOS material. Everyone got different place in life and everyone has a limited calibre. I know a lot of women who tell me they know they can never go far and are content being executives all their lives, have no wish to get manager or director title.
In a huge organisation like SAF, you need the SAFOS to lead it and you also need the people who are cogs and wheels of the organisation for operational fitness. Do you think the whole of the SAF can survive with only 6-8 people a year, the no. of SAFOS a year?
What you're basically saying is that if you are not as good as the top 8 people of a given cohort, you will not deign to participate. So were YOU one of the top few A level people your year? if not, then what qualifies your arrogance after? LOL
You sound so arrogant, like if someone is not a SAFOS can forget abt joining SAF cos he should feel prideless that he is not as good.
Don't say SAF lah. This scenario can be transplanted to anywhere in the private sector.
If a good SAFOS's CEP is BG and
you think if one is not a SAFOS can go and die liao, then how confident are you
that YOU can hit a BG-equivalent in the private sector?? LOL LOL
BG is the rank of a number of SAF generals who transited to become politicians. You talk very big hor?
So you think if you are in private sector, you are Jackson Tai (DBS CEO) material?
Also, a farmer grad can hit LTC easily (with most of them retiring as LTC and some as COL); I even know poly grads who leave as LTC. Retire as MAJ only happens to 2 groups of people- condemned farmer grad who is lousier than shit (many of whom are women regulars, have basic NUS arts degree but all got chi bao deng si attitude) AND mediocre non-grads (no degree and no excellence to show for it). A good non-grad (poly, A level) can easily hit LTC.
To most people, retiring as LTC is not too shabby for their level of capability and the LTC combat pay is above and beyond what they can command outside in the private sector. It is a good deal for them.
So why so arrogant? You think everyone thinks they can be general? Can YOU be a general?
What I'd like to know is....
Why does your friend want to sign on in the army in the place?
Well mostly cos of the money. And partly cos he likes the army but he says he is not fit enough for the combat arms and believes that combat support arm is less siong. That is generally true, as those who have done NS can testify.
But he is worried that being in combat support will disadvantage advancement.
Also, when he wears the no.4 uniform, he seems to get many women attracted to him.
Originally posted by cuddles:in terms of the advancement in career, definitely lose out..
What I'm curious abt and it seems everyone agrees that combat support arms sure lose out, how come there are still ppl who are in combat support arms? they dun mind losing out meh?
Originally posted by del_co:
ps: i tot arti is under combat too? got such thing as combat support ah? i tot combat is combat. got 3 arms right? combat, engineering, logistics. so i think combat means combat. i'm not too sure. i'm more into rsaf. haha!
Artillery, Signals and Combat Engineer are Combat Support. They are part of Combat but do Combat Support Work. Frontline won't be them. Infantry, Commando, Armour and Guards are on the frontline. When do you ever see Signals and Arti on the frontline chiong sua? Arti shoot from far far away from big powerful guns, not on frontline. Combat support arms also get combat pay but don't have to chiong sua.
Only 4 arms chiong sua and they are combat arms - INF, CDO, ARM, and GRD.
Engineering and Logistics are Combat SERVICE Support. They totally do not participate in Combat but offer service support in order for combat to happen.
baikachuchu is correct on the classifications.
Originally posted by cuddles:
Arty is service support.. they wear blue beret.. no such thing combat support... unless you're talking about some support vocation in combat units..
Err hello artillery is combat support. NOT combat service support. Combat Service Support is only logistic and engineering (who do not partake in any combat activities).
Combat support arms like arti, signals, combat engineer wear blue beret and also take part in combat but NOT on the frontline and do not chiong sua.
Dark Blue beret is the color of all the combat support arms. Support arms are like generalists and all wear dark blue beret.
Khaki= Guards
Red = Commandoes
Green= Infantry
Black = Armour
Originally posted by cookiecookie:Well mostly cos of the money. And partly cos he likes the army but he says he is not fit enough for the combat arms and believes that combat support arm is less siong. That is generally true, as those who have done NS can testify.
But he is worried that being in combat support will disadvantage advancement.
Also, when he wears the no.4 uniform, he seems to get many women attracted to him.
So the main reason is money?
Then advise him NOT to sign on. Really.
Money should be a sub-sub-sub-reason for signing on in the army. If it's the main reason, or the only reason, then he's making a big, big mistake.
Originally posted by cookiecookie:baikachuchu, I agree with Del_co not everyone is cut out for SAFOS material. Everyone got different place in life and everyone has a limited calibre. I know a lot of women who tell me they know they can never go far and are content being executives all their lives, have no wish to get manager or director title.
In a huge organisation like SAF, you need the SAFOS to lead it and you also need the people who are cogs and wheels of the organisation for operational fitness. Do you think the whole of the SAF can survive with only 6-8 people a year, the no. of SAFOS a year?
What you're basically saying is that if you are not as good as the top 8 people of a given cohort, you will not deign to participate. So were YOU one of the top few A level people your year? if not, then what qualifies your arrogance after? LOL
You sound so arrogant, like if someone is not a SAFOS can forget abt joining SAF cos he should feel prideless that he is not as good.
Don't say SAF lah. This scenario can be transplanted to anywhere in the private sector.
If a good SAFOS's CEP is BG and you think if one is not a SAFOS can go and die liao, then how confident are you that YOU can hit a BG-equivalent in the private sector?? LOL LOL
BG is the rank of a number of SAF generals who transited to become politicians. You talk very big hor?
So you think if you are in private sector, you are Jackson Tai (DBS CEO) material?
Also, a farmer grad can hit LTC easily (with most of them retiring as LTC and some as COL); I even know poly grads who leave as LTC. To most people, retiring as LTC is not too shabby for their level of capability and the LTC combat pay is above and beyond what they can command outside in the private sector. It is a good deal for them.
So why so arrogant? You think everyone thinks they can be general? Can YOU be a general?
Mr Ng was from arty based on wikipedia so yes,there was at least 1 CDF that was from combat support.As of others,I'm not aware of it.Perhaps you can put forth some.
I do not know why you must put forth your argument by including attacks against me but I shall not do that against you,out of courtesy.I'm not A level,in fact not even poly dip,just a private dip.Nothing qualifies my arrogance because it cannot be qualified when I'm not trying to be arrogant in the first place.It is just my point of view,just like you stated yours.I was an infantry manpack signaller but I broke a few bones in my leg during my training,and was subsequently downgraded to a limping cpl clerk after my operation.No,I can never be a general nor do I aspire to be one.If you see a person on the street walking like as if he got something up his ass,that will most probably be me.
All I had said earlier on was based on the assumption that your friend wanted the BEST career option available if he decides to sign on.If he just wanted a normal career entry path,then I apologize to you and him.If you read carefully,I did say that most would end hitting the ceiling at MAJ or LTC.As for BGs transitioning to politics....how many new BGs have transited recently or even the past decade?
Which part of "Want the best career prospects?Be a SAFOS.If a person is contended with uncertain and limited prospects,so be it." says that I tell them not to sign on if they are not SAFOS and go die?People who want to sign on without SAFOS can do so too but they must be prepared to be at a disadvantage compared to a SAFOS.That much I think you can agree with right?
No,there is no guarantee in the private sector.But at least there is a much wider career prospects and opportunities in the private sector.I doubt the army will be sending its own staff to the United Arab Emirates to upgrade themselves with knowledge of the developing economic opportunities there any time soon.
Just like you said,not everyone can reach the top level.I'm emphasizing the fact the it is even harder to do so if you are not SAFOS.
Originally posted by baikachuchu:Mr Ng was from arty based on wikipedia so yes,there was at least 1 CDF that was from combat support.As of others,I'm not aware of it.Perhaps you can put forth some.
Well then the person who contributed to Wiki for Ng Yat Chung is wrong. Anyone older than mid 20s or so will know that he is from Signals. Not Arti. Also, I pointed out that Lee HL and Lee HY are Arti and Signals respectively and both were BGs. BG Ravinder Singh was from also Signals and holds a very high appointment, one of the more high ranked Joint Chief.
Originally posted by baikachuchu:Mr Ng was from arty based on wikipedia so yes,there was at least 1 CDF that was from combat support.As of others,I'm not aware of it.Perhaps you can put forth some.
I do not know why you must put forth your argument by including attacks against me but I shall not do that against you,out of courtesy.I'm not A level,in fact not even poly dip,just a private dip.Nothing qualifies my arrogance because it cannot be qualified when I'm not trying to be arrogant in the first place.It is just my point of view,just like you stated yours.I was an infantry manpack signaller but I broke a few bones in my leg during my training,and was subsequently downgraded to a limping cpl clerk after my operation.No,I can never be a general nor do I aspire to be one.If you see a person on the street walking like as if he got something up his ass,that will most probably be me.
All I had said earlier on was based on the assumption that your friend wanted the BEST career option available if he decides to sign on.If he just wanted a normal career entry path,then I apologize to you and him.If you read carefully,I did say that most would end hitting the ceiling at MAJ or LTC.As for BGs transitioning to politics....how many new BGs have transited recently or even the past decade?
Which part of "Want the best career prospects?Be a SAFOS.If a person is contended with uncertain and limited prospects,so be it." says that I tell them not to sign on if they are not SAFOS and go die?People who want to sign on without SAFOS can do so too but they must be prepared to be at a disadvantage compared to a SAFOS.That much I think you can agree with right?
No,there is no guarantee in the private sector.But at least there is a much wider career prospects and opportunities in the private sector.I doubt the army will be sending its own staff to the United Arab Emirates to upgrade themselves with knowledge of the developing economic opportunities there any time soon.
Just like you said,not everyone can reach the top level.I'm emphasizing the fact the it is even harder to do so if you are not SAFOS.
You don't seem to get it. You sounded VERY arrogant by basically saying "Sign on only if you are SAFOS. if not dun sign on". That was what you said lor, you can't deny it now cos we quoted your words. Basically you are saying that unless can get SAFOS, one has no reason to sign on.
Now you're defending your elitist words by saying that you only meant that as good advice for ppl who want to reach the top? Which part of my and Del_Co's words do you not understand? We said not everyone has aspirations or believe that they are Gen material. Do you know the rank of a Gen and do you think it is very easily attainable?
FYI, whether there are Generals who went to be politicians recently, 1 yr ago, 5 yrs ago or 10 yrs ago is not material to this discussion. What I said was, BG is the average rank of ex SAFOS who went to politics. You think it is an easy feat? That was what I meant. How does WHEN it happened affect my statement?! If you want the LATEST person who did the transition for your own general knowledge, SURE. It's RADM Lui Tuck Yew, the former Navy Chief who's now Minister of State who made the transition 1 yr ago. SO WHAT? What is the diff between 1 yr or 10 yrs? Basically, General level rank is the most common rank of ex SAFOS in politics. You think very easy to be SAFOS ah?
We both have told you, there are many different kinds of ppl needed in a big organisation. It does not mean that if one can't get the SAFOS scholarship, he should not consider a career in the SAF. I said before, a farmer grad who does well can retire as a LTC or COL. That is not shabby to them and the pay is infinitely better than what they can get outside with the level of their calibre.
Of cos we know it is harder to reach the top for a farmer, but how many times must we impress upon you that not everyone has such super high expectations for themselves?! So if you can't be prime minister, please don't work in the civil service. And if you can't be Jackson Tai or Kwek Leng Beng, please don't join the private sector. That was how ridiculous you sounded and that was what we tried to tell you.
Saying that unless one is a SAFOS, one should not consider signing on with SAF is as naive as saying unless one can become Jackson Tai of banking, he should forget about working lah. Just break his legs and stay at home. Collect $ from gahmen.
Originally posted by cookiecookie:Well then the person who contributed to Wiki for Ng Yat Chung is wrong. Anyone older than mid 20s or so will know that he is from Signals. Not Arti. Also, I pointed out that Lee HL and Lee HY are Arti and Signals respectively and both were BGs. BG Ravinder Singh was from also Signals and holds a very high appointment, one of the more high ranked Joint Chief.
Kaoz,all this while when I was doing manpack,I did not realize Mr Ng was signal vocation too.I damn cock leh.
Take a look at this picture of him,I think his vocation badge looks more like the arty one leh,signal one should be 2 crossed flags.
Originally posted by baikachuchu:
No,there is no guarantee in the private sector.But at least there is a much wider career prospects and opportunities in the private sector.I doubt the army will be sending its own staff to the United Arab Emirates to upgrade themselves with knowledge of the developing economic opportunities there any time soon.
Err, do you not know that SAF sends its officers to academies all over the world for training & upgrading all the time? These range from US naval college, Westpoint academy, Fort Benning, civilian degree programmes and for SAFOS, they go to overseas command and staff college? It is VERY common.
I know so many farmers who went overseas already for master's programmes in CV schools and military schools alike in France, US, UK, Australia. And they are not high fliers. In fact I'd say it is easier to get yourself sent overseas sponsored for such stints in the SAF than in the private sector, because the non high fliers I've seen sent overseas are not really the sharpest tool in the shed.
Originally posted by cookiecookie:
You don't seem to get it. You sounded VERY arrogant by basically saying "Sign on only if you are SAFOS. if not dun sign on". That was what you said lor, you can't deny it now cos we quoted your words. Basically you are saying that unless can get SAFOS, one has no reason to sign on.
Now you're defending your elitist words by saying that you only meant that as good advice for ppl who want to reach the top? Which part of my and Del_Co's words do you not understand? We said not everyone has aspirations or believe that they are Gen material. Do you know the rank of a Gen and do you think it is very easily attainable?
FYI, whether there are Generals who went to be politicians recently, 1 yr ago, 5 yrs ago or 10 yrs ago is not material to this discussion. What I said was, BG is the average rank of ex SAFOS who went to politics. You think it is an easy feat? That was what I meant. How does WHEN it happened affect my statement?! If you want the LATEST person who did the transition for your own general knowledge, SURE. It's RADM Lui Tuck Yew, the former Navy Chief who's now Minister of State who made the transition 1 yr ago. SO WHAT? What is the diff between 1 yr or 10 yrs? Basically, General level rank is the most common rank of ex SAFOS in politics. You think very easy to be SAFOS ah?
We both have told you, there are many different kinds of ppl needed in a big organisation. It does not mean that if one can't get the SAFOS scholarship, he should not consider a career in the SAF. I said before, a farmer grad who does well can retire as a LTC or COL. That is not shabby to them and the pay is infinitely better than what they can get outside with the level of their calibre.
Of cos we know it is harder to reach the top for a farmer, but how many times must we impress upon you that not everyone has such super high expectations for themselves?! So if you can't be prime minister, please don't work in the civil service. And if you can't be Jackson Tai or Kwek Leng Beng, please don't join the private sector. That was how ridiculous you sounded and that was what we tried to tell you.
Saying that unless one is a SAFOS, one should not consider signing on with SAF is as naive as saying unless one can become Jackson Tai of banking, he should forget about working lah. Just break his legs and stay at home. Collect $ from gahmen.
I do not want to turn your thread into an arguement.I digress.
Originally posted by cookiecookie:So for a farmer who is interested to sign on whether its for money or other reason, does signing on with COMBAT SUPPORT or COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT (logistics) really lose out?
We can discuss the pros and cons. I heard from some combat arms guys that the pro to signing on in Logistics is that the skills acquired there are more transferable in outside world. Is that true?
That is true to some extent.LogOs tend to go for plenty of resource management courses.One of the S4s that I knew went over to Keppel after becoming a S4 shortly.
izzit a high position he got in Keppel?
So i guess it is confirmed that combat support really lugi?
Archelli I am sorry for being harsh, becoz I do recall a number of ppl posting such statements all the time in forums, eg sign on only if you are a scholar or unless you're signing on as SAFOS, don't sign on. I apologize to you if I was overly harsh. I get your point. Hope you get mine also.
