Intelligence: Military/GCHQ comparison
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Or they wont tell you what you need to know until after you find out you needed to know it.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,855
Received 156 Likes
on
72 Posts
This one? >>>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._badge_6cm.jpg
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,855
Received 156 Likes
on
72 Posts
There have been several mentions of 'types' in reference to intelligence personnel. What, exactly, is the definition of a 'type'?
Some are analytical, some are good with words. Others have a perceptive trait. Some are thoughtful, and well-read.
IME, there are few extroverts in the Int world, although they certainly exist.
IME, there are few extroverts in the Int world, although they certainly exist
Going back to the OP, from my occasional dabbling in the Dark Arts in the past, it's not too dissimilar from aircrew; there are certain core competencies which everybody needs, but those core competencies are then tweaked from platform type to type e.g. FJ vs RW. It's the same on the Int front; there are certain skills and aptitudes that are common to any IntO. Within those skill sets and certain individuals will be more suited to the more theoretical and investigative approach found in places like GCHQ where as the military side and its 'applied' focus definitely requires a more rounded individual with the ability to relate to others, communicate and read between lines. If you can't get the reporting across to the commanders and decision makers then it's pretty much pointless. A lot of the extroverted Int types I've met over the years all seem to have a common thread of some sort of front line service in their background e.g. SH, SF, FP etc. Whether they were extroverts because of their experiences or they were funneled into those areas because they were more extroverted I couldn't say; you'd hope it was the latter and individuals were posted on the basis of where they would do well.
Where individuals on the spectrum might have success is in the way their brains process the world around them, potentially giving a unique insight into tricky problems. Generalising a little, but some of the other personal characteristics found alongside those unique processing abilities such as the inability to communicate effectively will be a real show stopper in the military world where all Int staffs are 'customer facing' and must sell themselves and their product effectively. As MRAF noted, things like dyslexia shouldn't be an issue but dyscalculia most definitely would be as it may lead to mistakes when understanding and briefing threat systems
RN
Bletchley Park was set up by Admiral Sir Hugh Sinclair (using his own money) and Commander Alastair Denniston, both of the Royal Navy. Visionary chaps! Churchill at the outset issued an instruction "leave no stone unturned in finding the people you need". During a visit later in the war, referring to the people working there he commented "I had no idea that you would take me quite so literally".
And let's not forget that the decrypt of the Zimmerman Telegram (a startling piece of work in World War One) was the work of Rm 40, Admiralty, also a blend of military and civilian staff.
Comms of all sorts were a big threat to naval operations, so it's not surprising the Navy took an early interest. There's a long tradition of sneakiness in the Grey Funnel line, dating back several hundred years when the Articles of War bred generations of commanders with a penchant for deviousness and drive (in lieu of adequate ships, manning and stores).
RAF
That deviousness showed up in other branches too. In WWII on Malta there was a primitive air defence radar that allowed the few fighters, fuel, and men that clung on there to have a far bigger impact than could ever be believed.
The Germans knew this, and so built a large jammer on Sicily. When they turned it on it jammed the Malta radar cold. However, keeping a calm head the RAF personnel running the radar simply left the now useless radar running.
Perplexed by this apparent failure of their jammer the Germans gave up after three days, turned it off and never tried again for the remainder of the war. A tremendous piece of bluff with an incalculable impact.
After the war RV Jones of the Air Scientific Intelligence Branch who'd been involved in this bluff interrogated the German commander behind the jammer. This poor guy actually asked what was so special about the Maltese radar that made it invulnerable to jamming. Imagine how he felt when Jones said, "Well old chap, nothing!". There's being led up the garden path, but really that was something else entirely.
USN
Casting one's eye further afield, the USN hasn't exactly been shy to engage in sneakiness either. They did a few operations tapping undersea cables in the Sea of Okhotsk under the very noses of the Soviets. Ok, so not the same type of intellect required as cracking someone else's codes, but still needed a ton of ambition and out-of-the-box thinking to carry it out. There's an excellent book Blind Man's Bluff which has a good write up about it.
Bletchley Park was set up by Admiral Sir Hugh Sinclair (using his own money) and Commander Alastair Denniston, both of the Royal Navy. Visionary chaps! Churchill at the outset issued an instruction "leave no stone unturned in finding the people you need". During a visit later in the war, referring to the people working there he commented "I had no idea that you would take me quite so literally".
And let's not forget that the decrypt of the Zimmerman Telegram (a startling piece of work in World War One) was the work of Rm 40, Admiralty, also a blend of military and civilian staff.
Comms of all sorts were a big threat to naval operations, so it's not surprising the Navy took an early interest. There's a long tradition of sneakiness in the Grey Funnel line, dating back several hundred years when the Articles of War bred generations of commanders with a penchant for deviousness and drive (in lieu of adequate ships, manning and stores).
RAF
That deviousness showed up in other branches too. In WWII on Malta there was a primitive air defence radar that allowed the few fighters, fuel, and men that clung on there to have a far bigger impact than could ever be believed.
The Germans knew this, and so built a large jammer on Sicily. When they turned it on it jammed the Malta radar cold. However, keeping a calm head the RAF personnel running the radar simply left the now useless radar running.
Perplexed by this apparent failure of their jammer the Germans gave up after three days, turned it off and never tried again for the remainder of the war. A tremendous piece of bluff with an incalculable impact.
After the war RV Jones of the Air Scientific Intelligence Branch who'd been involved in this bluff interrogated the German commander behind the jammer. This poor guy actually asked what was so special about the Maltese radar that made it invulnerable to jamming. Imagine how he felt when Jones said, "Well old chap, nothing!". There's being led up the garden path, but really that was something else entirely.
USN
Casting one's eye further afield, the USN hasn't exactly been shy to engage in sneakiness either. They did a few operations tapping undersea cables in the Sea of Okhotsk under the very noses of the Soviets. Ok, so not the same type of intellect required as cracking someone else's codes, but still needed a ton of ambition and out-of-the-box thinking to carry it out. There's an excellent book Blind Man's Bluff which has a good write up about it.
A post-Cold War tale I once heard was the conversation between a Russian naval officer and his RN counterpart at some embassy party. The RN officer remarked that he liked having been stationed at Devonport, whereupon the Russian agreed "Yes, Devon is a very nice part of your country".
"How would you know that?", replied the RN chap, "Surely you weren't allowed down there?"
"Ah", replied the Russian, "But I was in submarines.....".
The most miserable bunch of sneaky-beaks I ever came across were the "I can neither confirm nor deny" USN people who worked at Brawdy in what we termed 'The Biscuit Factory' as it was commanded by a Cdr Jacobs. We weren't supposed to know what they did, but having punched off my tanks into St. Bride's Bay one day I said to one of them at lunch "Hope I didn't blow your eardrums off"..... She went red, mumbled something and left...
"How would you know that?", replied the RN chap, "Surely you weren't allowed down there?"
"Ah", replied the Russian, "But I was in submarines.....".
The most miserable bunch of sneaky-beaks I ever came across were the "I can neither confirm nor deny" USN people who worked at Brawdy in what we termed 'The Biscuit Factory' as it was commanded by a Cdr Jacobs. We weren't supposed to know what they did, but having punched off my tanks into St. Bride's Bay one day I said to one of them at lunch "Hope I didn't blow your eardrums off"..... She went red, mumbled something and left...
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Remember Int also includes interrogation.
On extroverts, the Colonel when I did the course at Ashford was extrovert. The RAF type who briefed us was too; told us he was a Harrier pilot.
I suspect introversion comes from discretion and need to know.
And remember that other 'type' the secret squirrel. Someone I know ☺ did a work experience visit to a secret air base in Lincolnshire. The SqnIntO bigged his job up, told some things then clammed up. Next a visit to the WOC and SIntO, an ex-AEO, who gave a much fuller in-depth brief while remaining the right side of the OSA.
The student then applied for Int but was recommended to accept Supply as Into slots, in comparison were so few. I think the secret squirrel was also an influence. That person is now a Sqn Ldr Loggie.
On extroverts, the Colonel when I did the course at Ashford was extrovert. The RAF type who briefed us was too; told us he was a Harrier pilot.
I suspect introversion comes from discretion and need to know.
And remember that other 'type' the secret squirrel. Someone I know ☺ did a work experience visit to a secret air base in Lincolnshire. The SqnIntO bigged his job up, told some things then clammed up. Next a visit to the WOC and SIntO, an ex-AEO, who gave a much fuller in-depth brief while remaining the right side of the OSA.
The student then applied for Int but was recommended to accept Supply as Into slots, in comparison were so few. I think the secret squirrel was also an influence. That person is now a Sqn Ldr Loggie.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: North of Watford, South of Watford Gap
Age: 68
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
It would appear from page 4 of https://www.raf.mod.uk/recruitment/m...lude-entry.pdf that autism is a bar to entry. Whether there is any leeway (the OP is apparently at the high-functioning end of the spectrum) is another question...
