<according to=“” regulations,=“” were=“” equivalent=“” just=“” above=“” the=“” highest=“” grade=“” of=“” warrant=“” officer=“” 9which=“” obsolete=“” in=“” usaf=“” by=“” that=“” time)=“” and=“” below=“” 2lt. =“” we=“” had=“” no=“” authority=“” use=“” rank,=“” but=“” it=“” is=“” where=“” fell=“” food=“” chain.=“”>I would be curious to see that regulation.
As I understood it, the US Navy midshipmen were never in a position that would give them authority over enlisted personnel, period.
The guidance I remember is that in a line of succession question at sea, midshipmen, chaplains and supply officers were respected passengers who held no command authority over even the lowliest E1. This was the classic “life boat” question where we would take a random selection of people in the service (or other services) and stuff them all in the proverbial lifeboat, then demand to know who had “command at sea” in the lifeboat. Chaplains, supply officers and midshipmen all fell into the category of not eligible for command at sea while all enlisted personnel are eligible for command at sea.
Mind, “respected passenger” can carry an awful lot of weight. I would hate to be the newly minted PO3 (E4) with a chaplain Admiral as a “passenger”. Actually the ADM would probably be pretty easy, it is the young energetic types that get confused about rank, resposiblity and leadership.</according>