More fun stuff about Cobol

More fun stuff about Cobol

[Dale Worley]

dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady) writes:
> Hopper was indeed promoted to Commodore.  I believe the Navy recently
> got rid of the rank of Commodore again, returning to the strange
> practice of several years ago that lumps O-7s (= Brig Gen in the other
> services) and O-8s (= Major Gen) together as Rear Admirals, lower and
> upper half.

Someone explained to me that for a while the Navy didn't have O-7s at
all, which caused problems because the big jump from O-6 to O-8 was hard
to make.  So they re-instituted Commodores, but that sounded wimpyer
than Brig. Gen.  They finally make O-7s a form of Admiral, so the set
of ranks labelled Admiral would be the same as the set labelled
General.

Dale
-- 
Dale Worley    Cullinet Software      ARPA: cullvax!drw@eddie.mit.edu
UUCP: ...!seismo!harvard!mit-eddie!cullvax!drw
Apollo was the doorway to the stars - next time we should open it.
Disclaimer: Don't sue me, sue my company - they have more money.

Admiral Hopper

[Dan Tilque;1893;92-789;LP=A;60HC]

>D Gary Grady writes:
>> Hopper was indeed promoted to Commodore. 

At retirement, it's common (in fact, policy) for the military to
give officers an extra promotion.  So it's quite likely that
Hopper retired as an O-8 Rear Admiral, Upper Half.  However, she
may have needed approval by a Congressional Committee to get the
promotion (I'm not sure if retirement promotions need the approval
or not.)

As far as I can tell, retirement promotions are mainly to give the
retiree more retirement pay.  Your tax dollars at work, ladies and
gentlemen.


Dale Worley writes:
>Someone explained to me that for a while the Navy didn't have O-7s at
>all, which caused problems because the big jump from O-6 to O-8 was hard
>to make.  So they re-instituted Commodores, but that sounded wimpyer
>than Brig. Gen.  They finally make O-7s a form of Admiral, so the set
>of ranks labelled Admiral would be the same as the set labelled
>General.


There was also a certain amount of resentment from the other services
that Navy Captains jumped over the O-7 rank.

Now what this has to do with computers, I don't know.  (Except that
Commodores are pretty wimpy computers.)


---
Dan Tilque
dant@tekla.tek.com  or dant@tekla.UUCP

Re: Admiral Hopper

[Max A. Woodbury]

Several years ago when Capt. Hopper was the oldest woman in the Navy,
there was considerable pressure to promote her, but the Navy brass didn't
want to make her an active duty admiral.   There was special legislation
introduced in Congress to reactivate the rank of Commodore for Capt. Hopper.

This was done so that on retirement, she would become the first woman
admiral.  She has been fairly instent on accuracy, and was known to
correct someone who introduced her as Admiral Hopper by interjecting
a loud "Rear Admiral" into the proceedings.

I have known her for many years as a result of my fathers long time association
with her, and she has always been a stickler for detail t

Re: Admiral Hopper

[jholbach]

in article <2317@zeus.TEK.COM>, dant@tekla.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque;1893;92-789;LP=A;60HC) says:
> Xref: wright comp.lang.ada:462 comp.lang.c:3123 comp.lang.misc:518
> 
> 
> At retirement, it's common (in fact, policy) for the military to
		      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> give officers an extra promotion.  So it's quite likely that
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

		This is arrant nonsense! 

> Hopper retired as an O-8 Rear Admiral, Upper Half.  However, she
> may have needed approval by a Congressional Committee to get the
> promotion (I'm not sure if retirement promotions need the approval
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

		Not surprising, since there is no such thing.

> 
> As far as I can tell, retirement promotions are mainly to give the
> retiree more retirement pay.  Your tax dollars at work, ladies and
> gentlemen.

	Could you give an example of one these beasts since you're
so convinced they exist?

> 
> Now what this has to do with computers, I don't know.  
>					  
	Neither do I, but it sure is fun.....



J. Holbach
Disclaimer: But I don't even *like* the Navy.
	

Re: Admiral Hopper

[Michael Mullins]

> in article <2317@zeus.TEK.COM>, dant@tekla.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque;1893;92-789;LP=A;60HC) says:
>> Xref: wright comp.lang.ada:462 comp.lang.c:3123 comp.lang.misc:518
> 
>> As far as I can tell, retirement promotions are mainly to give the
>> retiree more retirement pay.  Your tax dollars at work, ladies and
>> gentlemen.   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Not likely even if there is such a thing as "Retirment Promotion".
 
At least in the contry's armed forces, in order to collect retirement
pay at a given grade, the retiree(sp?) must have held that grade for
a minimum of 2 years prior to retirement.
-- 
John Michael Mullins
CENTEL Business Information Systems, Inc.
5515 Security Lane, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, (301) 984-3636
UUCP:   michael@macom1.UUCP 	or	decuac!macom1!michael

Re: Admiral Hopper

[bhj]

In article <2317@zeus.TEK.COM>, dant@tekla.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque;1893;92-789;LP=A;60HC) writes:
> >D Gary Grady writes:
> >> Hopper was indeed promoted to Commodore. 
> 
> At retirement, it's common (in fact, policy) for the military to
> give officers an extra promotion.  So it's quite likely that

Not true.  It is common policy for you to retire at the highest grade you held
when in the service.  For example, if you spend some time in a job whose 
paygrade was an 08, and then, due to the "needs of the service" were sent back
down to an 06 job, you could apply to retire as an 08.

Example:  Poindexter.  He wants to retire at the grade he held as advisor to
Ronnie Raygun.  That paygrade is HIGHER than his current paygrade.  He may
or may not get it...

(from an 10-year ex-Navy E6-almost-E7)

Burt Janz

Re: More fun stuff about Cobol

[jholbach]

in article <1502@cullvax.UUCP>, drw@cullvax.UUCP (Dale Worley) says:
> Xref: wright comp.lang.ada:443 comp.lang.c:3073 comp.lang.misc:513
> 
> dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady) writes:
>> Hopper was indeed promoted to Commodore.  I believe the Navy recently
>> got rid of the rank of Commodore again, returning to the strange
>> practice of several years ago that lumps O-7s (= Brig Gen in the other
>> services) and O-8s (= Major Gen) together as Rear Admirals, lower and
>> upper half.
> 
> Someone explained to me that for a while the Navy didn't have O-7s at
> all, which caused problems because the big jump from O-6 to O-8 was hard
> to make.  So they re-instituted Commodores, but that sounded wimpyer
> than Brig. Gen.  They finally make O-7s a form of Admiral, so the set
> of ranks labelled Admiral would be the same as the set labelled
> General.
>
	The first explanation was correct -- we've always had O-7s
and O-8s (which are both "pay-grades" and not "ranks"), it's just that
the O-7s were Rear Admiral (lower half) and the O-8s Rear Admiral (upper
half). When this was changed several years ago, the Navy hierarchy
couldn't make up its collective mind between the title Commodore (which
has some tradition behind it) and another suggested title Commodore Admiral
(which has the magic phrase Admiral in it). Commodore finally won out, 
but was immediately unpopular with the next batch of newly selected
O-7s who (if the articles in the Navy Times were correct) felt that the 
world did not accept that they were *real* admirals since their titles
did not reflect that. Since this was nearly as momentous a question as
whether sailors should receive a decoration merely for having gone to sea
(we do *now*), the issue was finally resolved by going back to the way
it was before. 
	Speaking of naval tradition, we seem to have started a new 
tradition -- change something for the sake of change and then several
years later, reinvent the wheel by going back to the way it was before.
Ever wonder why sailors look like sailors again? Bell bottoms are back --
who the heck wants to enlist in an organization that wears coats and ties
on the way to the Persian Gulf?

	"It's not just a job -- it's an adventure!"

Jim Holbach