<p>The rules change … when there are periods of “glut” - they are more likely to be dumped. </p>
<p>When there are shortages - then there are opportunities to enter another pipeline and succeed.</p>
<p>If the Navy were successful in making the case to increase the number of ships - then a big growth would be required. But if the Navy starts shrinking again (and adding to the problem would be new ships replacing old ships that have smaller crew compliment) fewer officers and crew required.</p>
<p>The Navy has also been trying to reduce billets than can be turned over to civilians (either Civil Service or contracted out …). It becomes a balancing act because if the sea/shore rotation is too stressful on family life - then retention problems get bad.</p>
<p>It goes in waves … in 1973 - 1974, there was downsizing that resulted in military members being allowed to get out. It happened again in 1993 - 1995 time frame; the military was allowing immediate retirement with at least 15 years instead of 20 years.</p>
<p>As to the word “failing out” - in the direct case I cited - it was someone who had a cumulative score of 87%, but the “passing” was raised from 80% to 94%. Failing - technically YES - but I would be hard put to suggest that he “failed”. And there are tough pipeline training courses that are very hard, but there are also some who decide that that community isn’t a good fit for them. When I went to Nuc School - of those that left, a number of drop-outs were due to failing because the academics were too tough, but a few deliberately did what ever it took to get out, because they didn’t want to be Nukes. (They had been “drafted” from their commissioning program.)</p>