I was a scout Plt. sgt. in the Cav. I worked with many officers from other branches. Armor officers are the best I have worked with. They are well rounded and generally squared away. Armor is a branch with very little room for lack of precision. This mandatory precision is noticeable throughout the ranks.

Take it from a scout. iIf you want to master land nav, lose gps gadgets and download a topographical map of your practice area. Learn to notice and rise and fall of the elevations you travel. Use a pace cord and master your pace count. These old school techniques are the foundations of the great scouts that led men into battle for centuries. If you take time to be observant while on the march, your location will jump out at you when you open the map.
If you learn the hard way, everything else is child's play.
Good luck!
SCOUTS OUT!!

BTW. Give me an AGGIE OFFICER over a ring knocker from the point any day. I,LL follow his ass into the bowels of hell!

Tango_Mike said:

---

Trinity Ag said:

---

APHIS AG said:

---

When I went to my Engineer Officers Basic, I was informed the EOBC was the second toughest OBC in the Army with Military Intelligence being number one. Now, that was over 30 years ago so I do not know if that has changed but I do know that MI is probably the number one branch for selectivity.

Now, if you are an outdoors individual that does not like mind games, MI is not for you.

---

MI is one of the more competitive branches, but it is also the largest branch -- accessing 390+ LTs per year (compered to ~330 for Infantry, 150 for Armor, and ~130 for Medical Service.)

Generally, in order of competitiveness:

Medical Service
Infantry
Aviation
Armor
MI
Engineers

The exact order varies from year to year

Cyber is very competitive, but also very small -- and requires interviews and qualifications that make it a special case.

---

Where did you get those numbers? IN and AR make >2000 LTs per year combined. MI is far from the largest branch. Think of where they're going - there are 60 IN/AR LTs in a maneuver battalion and 1 or 2 MI LTs.

MI is not the most selective, either. Combining ROTC and USMA, AV, MS, and EN (plus the special requirement branches like Finance and Cyber like you mentioned) all go out higher on the OML.

And I'm casting my vote with the "play the long game, don't do what you find interesting" as awful advice. Planning to do 12 years just to get a GS job and get retirement 40 years later is bonkers. Do something you find interesting. If you don't find it interesting, you aren't going to stay more than 4 years anyway.

---

You are correct on total year group size -- I was was not counting USMA or OCS. But what USMA does has no direct bearing on a ROTC Cadet's choices.

Since the Cadet in question is commissioning through ROTC, that is the selectivity that matters -- at least if you are considering the ROTC accessions process.

I never said MI was the most selective -- I said it was "among the more competitive". I would have to look at the exact numbers, but MI, EN, and AR all go out in the high 60s without an ADSO, and in the low 60s w/ADSO. MS, IN and AV are low 70s, and high 60s with ADSO. The exact numbers vary by year.

What that means in practical terms is that MS, IN, AV draw 55% of their ROTC LT allocation from the top ~25% of the Cadet Command OML.

I expect USMA results are similar.

That means those branches are competitive to get -- but are also very competitive once you are in, assuming you believe that USACC/USMA OMLs -- though imperfect -- have some correlation with officer quality.

nm