GearMonkey

I've run into a bit of trouble processing ICM/AFGM/GWOT-Es and hoped some of the wiser folks out there might be able to help me out. For the last two years I've been submitting people for these medals as they reach the magic 60 non-consecutive days in or over country required by the regulations. Because we (C-17s) don't stay in country we've been counting dates for each medal as we visit either Iraq or Afghanistan. We, of course, don't count the same date twice but if we go to Iraq during one CDD/FDP and to Afghanistan on the next CDD/FDP we've been giving credit for both. I figured this was totally legit; we're fighting a two front war and eventually amassing 60 days in each theater to earn the medal. Last week I turned in a new batch of AF104s and the MPF folks told me that this methodology was bogus. I called AMC awards & decorations and was told that we could only earn points for one of the three medals during each "service period" and that their definition of a service period was departure from home station until return to home station. I asked for an official reference to this definition but all they could give me was the ICM/AFGM release memo which mentions service period but does not specify what exactly it is. This limitation is bad enough when it screws you out of one or two service days on a short trip that transits both countries but when they apply it to a four month deployment everyone loses credit for more than half of their time out there. Like many other regulations, the ICM/AFGM stuff seems to be written from a long-term ground deployment perspective. The fact that people fly in and out of both countries on a daily/weekly/monthly basis from home station, on 10 day SRTs, and/or on deployments doesn't fit their cookie-cutter "service period" definition. I could understand if CENTAF came up with this retarded idea but it seems AMC is equally guilty of not understanding how we fight this war. Each day is a new service period for crews who fly both theaters and never know where they will be the next day. As a squadron A&D guy I've seen how long it takes to get 60 days for any of these medals. The idea that we're automatically screwed out of 66% of our qualified service dates blows my mind. I've been flying for 2 years now and have between 50 and 60 days (away from home, fighting the war, in-country) for each campaign and for the GWOT-E. Now apparently 100+ of those days don't count for anything. It gets worse for other guys who still don’t have enough credits despite five or more years flying to both these countries. This seems like a very poor way to recognize the hard work and sacrifice of flyers who are fighting the war but not deployed in-country. My view is that the 30 consecutive or 60 non-consecutive days requirement is enough of a restriction already and that the whole “service period” is a moot point. If someone spends part or all of 60 days in either Iraq or Afghanistan they’ve clearly participated in the campaign and should be recognized for it. I’ve done far more for the Iraq/Afghanistan medals I don’t have than I ever did for the National Defense Service Medal that I do have. A few questions for those who may be in the know: 1. Who at AMC decides what a "service period" is and why don't they understand how C-17s fight these wars? 2. What do your squadrons/bases/MAJCOMs count towards your 60 days for a campaign medal? 3. Are there any loopholes or creative ways to process AF104s to recognize people for their actual campaign participation rather their artificially low “AMC-approved” service time? I appreciate any feedback you have.

My eyes have been opened to a whole new bizzaro-AS700 world. Codename, depending on your Det it may be great or it may suck. The bottom line is that a crappy extra year of ROTC is far better than flunking out of school or ruining your other four years by cramming too many classes into too little time.

That sucks Wannabe. . . Det 165 seems to have gone way downhill since I wandered the halls of D.M. Smith. Back in my day they recognized that it was hard enough to get out of Tech without any extra ROTC bullshit. I think we had one AS700 LeadLab all year and it consisted of the Colonel briefing us on whether it was smarter to use our built-up leave or sell it back at the end of a career (if you get out early use it, if you get out late sell it back). Is your current bird a product of the ops world? On an unrelated note. . . You guys need to request a C-17 show-and-tell and an orientation flight from Charleston one of these days. My bros did one at Virginia Tech last year and I'm itching for an excuse to go buzzing around the ATL.

Being a super-senior is awesome! You still get paid and you have virtually no responsibilities around the Detachment. I give it three thumbs up. If you take this route make sure that the admin folks get your projected graduation date updated in ALL your files. I changed to the five year program sophomore year. When I did the Det updated their paperwork but AFROTC HQ never made the change. This resulted in me missing my categorization board (same thing happened to two of my bros). Apparently when HQ gets a categorization package a year late, by their records, they throw it away instead of checking with the Det to see if there is an error with their projected grad date. We eventually got it worked out but it could have been very ugly.

Great attitude dude! Let me know if/when you want to pursue an ETP. I've got mine and the one I modeled it after (both were accepted) for you to use as reference. CEs do some cool shit. I've known a bunch and they all enjoy it. There are downs but tons of ups! You'll actually get to put all that ROTC leadership shit into practice in the CE world. Plus, it beats a real job. . . Don't get too excited about the location until it is official. I got a place that wasn't even on the list of six available locations. It was freaking sweet but it wasn't on the list. GM.

Sorry to hear your latest news MissouNav. I agree that USAF takes a very short-sighted view in cases like these. They are spoiled with a such an enormous number of applicants that they choose to ignore anything slightly out of the norm. It doesn't help that the links between high eye pressure and glaucoma are still not totally understood (i.e. people with high pressure never getting glaucoma and people with normal pressure getting it). Like the old 20/20 eyesight requirement this is simply a tool for narrowing the field. I went back and read your previous posts and am a bit confused as to when you got the 24/26 pressures you mentioned and if they were puff or contact measurements. If they were contact measurements you've got an uphill battle ahead of you. If they were puff and were not verified with contact then you've got a pretty good argument for an ETP. If I were you I'd get as many contact pressure checks as possible in the next few weeks/months. If you are close to Whiteman I'd drop in occasionally and sweet talk the opthalmology techs into checking your pressures. It is pretty quick and if they are between appointments you can probably talk them into it. It doesn't cost them anything and if you are nice about it they shouldn't have any problem helping you out. I did this in Atlanta at a nearby Army base and it worked great. This is a good way to go about getting data because nothing goes into the computer or your medical record unless you want it to. As I mentioned before you should sit up completely straight (I was 2 mmHg higher when slouching forward and down to put my chin on the test machine instead of having them set it to fit my natural sitting height) when doing the test. Also, take vitamin C. It is probably a plecebo but supposedly it helps lower your eye pressures. I'm no doctor but I think that being nervous about getting disqualified accounts for a lot of the high pressure cases they find. It is great that your CC is going to bat for you but I doubt he'll be able to do much. My O-6 tried to help me out but didn't get very far. He was a dumbass but even if he wasn't I think the system is stacked against the "lowly" ROTC Colonel. Hope for the best but start planning for the worst. If things work out great, if not I can help you with the ETP process. I did several years as an engineer while I massaged the system. Eventually I got an ETP from the Vice CSAF and the rest is history. Set yourself up with a good interim assignment and hopefully you'll be at UPT some day soon. In the end just remember that the Air Force isn't only about the flying. Most folks from this site will disagree with that statement and any time you tell anyone you're in the Air Force they'll ask what you fly but the majority of folks out there aren't in the cockpit. There are as almost as many MG officers in the Air Force as their are pilots. Be positive and do your best wherever you end up and you'll be taken care of. It sounds like bullshit (and I thought it was) but it really is true. I didn't want to be an engineer but I enjoyed every moment of it. I worked with great folks and it was a constant challenge. I even miss that life sometimes when I'm out on the road and don't know where I'll be next or when I'll be sent there. Everything has its ups and downs. You may not believe me but I've had plenty of days where I was so fed up with the bullshit I deal with as a pilot I wish I was back at my 9-5, every other Friday off, AFMC job. Finally, baseops.net is a great resource. I wish I'd have known about it when I was fighting the system trying to get into UPT. There is a ton of info here to help you and those in similiar situations. Good luck.

From my experience the AF doesn't buy the thick corneas explanation. The best thing you can do for yourself is get a bunch more test values that are within standards. Also, get contact measurements which are more accurate than the "puff" test. To help yourself out make sure that you are sitting up perfectly straight (this can be tough for tall folks) when the doc pokes you in the eye [fighter queers insert "sts" here]. You can also toke up on vitamin C beforehand to help produce lower readings. The reg requires two high readings recorded by contact tonometry to give you the OHT (ocular hypertension) scarlet letter. Technically this isn't waiverable for non-aviators but stranger things have happened. Depending on your situation a waiver could be easy, difficult, or impossible. If you get them some good pressures, show through all the other tests that glaucoma isn't an issue, and overwhelm them with your persistence you'll probably be in business.