deaddebate
-
Posts
443 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by deaddebate
-
-
Huh, just some gee whiz info.
-
From the few briefings I've received from Legal/JAG, it's my understanding that you can't get more money than you seek in civil cases, so they name an outrageous number in the initial suit to be the ceiling, including the possibility of discovering additional causes for damages in the procedures of the suit. They realistically expect to get only a fraction if they win.I do not understand. Why so much money for this? What damage was done in the argument that cost so much? It seems excessive but I cannot say I really understand how this works. Is that just some arbitrary amount you request in hopes you settle somewhere above a goal amount?
-
1
-
-
If you had PRK and your pre-surgery refractive error exceeded +3.00 diopters, then a waiver for any USAF flying class cannot be recommended. There is no flight doc discretion involved.
The waiver authority can choose to waive whatever they want, but it is very unlikely if a waiver is not recommended at the IFC I physical.
This.
I tried to compare with other waivers submitted but the data was difficult to tease apart without individually reading them all independently. From the waiver guide reference already discussed and the few waivers I did review, waiver likelihood is very poor.
Looks like I better join the Navy
Probably a good idea. Good luck.
Started appt monday morning and was back on the plane Tuesday night. In and out. Thanks.
I'd be interested to see what your total time frame will be compared to my guesstimate, from when you were first notified of the need to refer to ACS to new 1042 in hand.
-
That's again in line with what I wrote about the medication.
The regulation is slightly open to individual FS interpretation, but if you qual for the saline Rx criteria, you would qual with Med standard.E11 - A verified history of allergic, nonallergic, or vasomotor rhinitis, after age 12, unless symptoms are mild and can be controlled by a single approved medication.
[...]
E17 - Chronic or recurrent sinusitis and/or surgery to treat chronic sinusitis
-
My post suggestion will differ greatly from the other content on this forum, because of my position, experience, and motive. I serve my country in ways molded by my experiences, and from witnessing when things go bad. I normally wouldn't post from the document below, but I know this information could save a number of applicants and career flyers, however I cannot advocate subterfuge or dishonesty. I hope you recognize the logic in why I am sharing and recommending the following.
From the approved OTC med list for aircrew, current as of Jan 2014:
Saline, nasal [...] DNIF is not required for occasional OTC use to provide relief from nasal mucosa dryness due to self-limiting conditions. Not for chronic use without approval of the Flight Surgeon.
This list updates very infrequently, and I would expect this policy on this specific condition and medication won't change for several years. You must tell your Flight Surgeon ALL medications/treatments you use, which would include this. DO NOT hide information from your Flight Surgeon/PCM. If your condition advances to requiring regular use for symptom management, or if it is itself a side-effect/symptom of another medical condition, you must also disclose that.
All that said, this is probably your only option for OTC nasal/ENT/Allergy treatment that could allow you to totally avoid a waiver if you are controlled with occasional use.
If you aren't successful with that limited use, there are other medications you could potentially use but would probably require a waiver. Those medications for which a waiver is probable/likely include Fexofenadine/Allegra, Loratadine/Claritin, and a number of others.
YOU WILL NEED EVALUATION AND A PRESCRIPTION FROM YOUR FLIGHT SURGEON TO USE THESE MEDICATIONS WHILE ON FLYING STATUS. DO NOT TAKE ANY ACTION OR CHANGE YOUR TREATMENT WITHOUT CONSULTING YOUR HEALTHCARE PROVIDER.
-
http://www.afjag.af.mil/docket
And a little more perspectiveU.S. v. Lieutenant Colonel M HARSSEMA
Type of Court-Martial: General Court-Martial
Location: Andrews AFB, Maryland
Projected Trial Start Date: 11-May-2015 Estimated Trial End Date: 18-May-2015
Offense(s) Charged:
Article 112a, Distribution of Schedule IV or V drugs
Article 128, Assault - aggravated inflicting grievous bodily harm
Article 133, Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman
Article 134, Fraternization
Also779 MDOS - Anesthesiologist
U.S. v. Lieutenant Colonel M ANDERSON
Type of Court-Martial: General Court-Martial
Location: Kadena AB, Japan
Projected Trial Start Date: 08-Jun-2015 Estimated Trial End Date: 13-Jun-2015
Offense(s) Charged:
Article 92, Fail to obey lawful order
Article 92, Sexual assault causing bodily harm
Article 92, Adultery
-
"Army Strong" is the same as saying "Hulk Smash" because it's all about putting bodies on the battlefield, but there's not thought. Good anecdote.
-
You always needed an accession waiver. Your waiver for flying duty from the Air Force likely included the accession clearance, however that waiver is processed at MEPS in concert with multiple offices. Again, I think this is just a big disconnect at some clerical level.
I wish I had more information for you, but I focus on the application of medical standards within the AF, which you've already done. These deeper administrative processes at MEPS and recruiting are a bit beyond my expertise, and a recruiter would have more answers, especially regarding the time frame. There aren't any recruiters (so far as I know) here on BO.net, so I might recommend you ask your question on afforums.com or PM one of the several recruiters there.
-
I'm not totally understanding everything you're saying, because your terminology is a little mixed up (and I'm not a recruiter) but I believe somebody at MEPS is confused. Continue to work with your recruiter, make sure you get a disposition from the CMO (Chief Medical Officer), not merely the local doc.
At a guess, I believe you should've brought a copy of the waiver approval with you to MEPS and attached it to your 2807 to force the doc to review it. This isn't your fault, but something you will learn (if you haven't already) is you often need to know other people's jobs as well or better than they do to get what you need.
-
http://harvardlawreview.org/2015/02/trading-the-megaphone-for-the-gavel-in-title-ix-enforcement-2/
The full article is a fantastic investigation of transforming from radical, third-wave feminism to governing and reform.Many feminists have argued that [a woman's] subjective belief not only should but must suffice to establish a threat of force. [...] Is that what the legal system should be doing in a complex society marked by immense cultural diversity?
[...] lets expose ourselves to the harder cases, where a person [...] willingly consumed drugs and/or alcohol, and who gave their assent to sexual activity (in the sense that they signaled willingness or desire), but who did not consent (that is, they did not actually subjectively give a free consent to engage in sexual activity), or who were confused about whether to consent or not but who went along (that is, assented without making a decision either way) because they feared social conflict or social awkwardness [...] It includes women who assented and consented competently after consuming alcohol or drugs and who, on becoming sober the next day or months, or even years, later sincerely reject that idea that they could have consented. [...] Compound all of that with [known memory loss from] heavy drug and alcohol use [...] what if [her memory] is selective; what if [her memory] is self-serving; what if [her memory] is motivated by unconscious racial bias or by a felt need to disavow shame, avert a crise de conscience, or pacify an angry parent, spouse, or partner?
[...] I think its merely irresponsible to dismiss this difficult range of cases by saying that women students are being slipped date-rape drugs in numbers so high that [...] they can be administratively assimilated to the date-rape-drug cases
No: young women are willingly drinking heavily and using powerful drugs. So are young men. It is an immense public health problem.
This raises a final layer of difficulty [...] in case after case, both the complainant and the respondent were voluntarily ingesting mind-altering substances. [...] [Note] the steep asymmetry between the consequences of drinking and drug use for the complainant and for the respondent [...] it has no mitigating effect on his conduct. And now let us say that two Harvard students one male, one female have sex after drinking, using drugs, or both, that each of them feels intense remorse and moral horror about it afterward, and that they both rush the next morning to the Title IX Office with complaints. Lets say they drop their complaints on the receptionists desk simultaneously. Which of them gets the benefit of the per se imputation of unwelcomeness, and which of them carries the heavy handicap of no mitigation? The woman and not the man? Both of them? Neither?
I think this mental experiment reveals that a bias in favor of complainants and against respondents is embedded [...] it entails a commitment to the idea that women should not and do not bear any responsibility for the bad things that happen to them when they are voluntarily drunk, stoned, or both. This commitment cuts women off in theory and in application from assuming agency about their own lives. Since when was that a feminist idea?[
-
1
-
-
"I'm a doctor, not a milkmaid!"I don't know as much about this diagnosis (I'm a general surgeon, not orthopedics)
You got most everyone else beat, though. Thanks for posting.
I tried it recently, with a routine that focused on weight loss/flexibility. That shit is no joke--it's a workout but with low impact. The biggest downside is it takes much longer. 20 minutes of normal calisthenics becomes an hour of yoga.Everyone I know who does yoga swears by it. I think it's for real. I keep promising myself I will start one day.
-
words
I think you actually have three questions:
How do I get better?
Can I keep flying?
Can I stay in the Air Force?
I'll ask JediDoc or JCJ to advise on the actual treatment options and care. Your other concerns of whether the Air Force will "keep" you is probably over-blown, and I hope I can put you at ease. Starting at the beginning, recognize that retention and continued flying are separate standards.
So, to focus of retention first, realize there is no such thing a multi-year PT test waiver (profile/DLC/AF 469/AF 422). All PT exemptions have a maximum of 365 days (the regulation says they can be extended to 455 days, but the ASIMS program doesn't actually support that very easily, so nobody does it).
You may hear stories about folks that are retained on ALC with "permanent waivers," but that is not the actual coding. The "waiver" must be re-evaluated every year, and renewed with whatever recommendations are appropriate at that time, as the condition improves or worsens. And this is a real possibility for you--if your knee concerns are significant enough to prevent deployment for a year continuously, you will likely undergo IRILO (aka MEB) consideration. Now, MEB's are not as big and scary as people think they are, and there is a small gray area where the PT test requirements are slightly higher than the deployment and AFSC requirements, so conceivably you could get annual "waivers" without ever actually getting an IRILO, but that is statistically uncommon.
Regarding your continue flying, it also depends on how your FS interprets the injury and your ability to perform your duties, then contrasting that with the AF Medical Standards Directory (MSD) and the waiver guide. Realistically, musculoskeletal (MSK) waivers are pretty darn common and usually easy to process.
Finally, none of these questions will get definite answers now. You should continue to focus on your recovery in the immediate future. Waivers and IRILO isn't really pushed until after 9 months or so of fitness limitations in most cases.
-
Huh? I'm not sure I understand this bullet.
Apparently there is some restriction for Reserve pilots from being IP's in the UPT pipeline. I don't fully understand it--I'm a nonner so maybe I'm not communicating it correctly. I just hadn't heard the idea before, so I wrote it down. You can listen to it yourself and interpret it back to dumb-dumb English for me (and everybody else) if you care badly enough.
-
Also, UNTIL multiple years of research conclude the opposite of what we know to be true (throw enough money at a problem and you will fix it), we will continue to fix our issues with money. It's easy, it's proven, and it doesn't fail.
He's absolutely right. The legend John Boyd regularly said that we should rely on existing answers and policies to answer new problems because those existing answers have a proven record of working. Boyd strongly advocated not changing policy simply because the uncertainty of a given situation can probably be easily understood and measurable, while the costs of changing the approach or tactics greatly upsets an organizational structure. Essentially, forcing our solutions on problems has worked for decades, and if at first the solution isn't readily reached, we should simply "double-down" on those same efforts. As many of you know, Boyd's real genius in these revolutionary "non-revolution" ideas within air combat sprung from his recognition and understanding of physics, namely the "Heisenberg Certainty and Determinancy Principle," now an oft-cited aspect of air-oriented warfare.
-
stop feeding the troll.
-
http://www.afa.org/airwarfare/airwarfaresymposium/recordings
SECAF James speech is mostly nothing new (mainly a repeat of the FY16 budget proposal, which is discussed in another thread). The three things I want to highlight are:
- AF may have cut slightly too many folks for FMP 2014--anticipating a tiny increase of total force (AD/NG/RV) by 6.6K in certain career fields to 492K, which would be a mere 1.3%.
- RV pilots should be allowed to be IP's for AD UPT students (assuming they meet whatever the requirements are for that position).
- Major interest in building domestic space-launching capabilities, especially to reduce dependency on Russian platforms. Former-CSAF Larry Welch continues his review of the certification process for launch vehicle contractors.
-
http://www.afa.org/airwarfare/airwarfaresymposium/recordings
Highlights of the "MAJCOM Priorities" panel:
Gen Welsh discusses reaching reduced DOD targets of General Officers, namely the reduction of most MAJCOM CV positions from 3- to 2-stars, but other positions as well. Apparently these changes began in Congress two years ago. I wasn't aware of this, but it obviously makes sense as the Air Force shrunk.
Everybody agrees that the COCOM's and NATO groups love the AF ISR capabilities. They all want more, and the AF sometimes struggles to meet the continually increasing demand for it.
Lt Gen Wilson (AFGSC) talks about the modernization and "re-engine" of the B-52. As said before in other forums, the hope is to extend the service of the platform for about 25 more years. If that holds true, the estimated life of an average B-52 would be around 80 years.
-
http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/15-07%20-%202-4-15.pdf
Highlights of now SECDEF Carter’s nomination hearing in the SASC:
If you didn’t already know, he swore the oath of his office yesterday and has fully replaced former-SECDEF Hagel.Senator Gillibrand: Another concern that I have is in terms of the issue of how we can create opportunities for women in combat. One of the issues that I have looked at is how are each of the services being able to open those positions, opening all positions to women in combat. Because, as you know, in order to become promoted within the military, oftentimes combat missions are required and having certain roles that require combat is required for promotion. Are you committed to allowing women to serve in all positions and to gender neutral standards for each of the services?
Mr. Carter: I am certainly committed to gender neutral standards. What I do know is this, that the services are examining whether there are any positions in the military that should not be open to women. I strongly incline toward opening them all to women, but I am also respectful of the circumstances and of professional military judgment in this regard. I have not been involved in those studies. If I am confirmed, I would want to confer with our own leaders in the Department of Defense, with you and others who have thought carefully about that problem, and try to come to a view.
[...]
Senator Shaheen: You wrote an article last year for Foreign Affairs, entitled "Running the Pentagon Right: How to Get the Troops What They Need," and you talked about [...] the length of those wars was underestimated, and there was little incentive to pursue acquisitions tailored to the specific fights. Can you talk about how, as Secretary of Defense, you would avoid repeating those mistakes of the past two wars?
Mr. Carter: [...] The experience that I had all too often in trying to support Iraq and Afghanistan as the acquisition executive was that when the troops said they needed something, the response of the bureaucracy was -- tended to be, "Oh, we have one of those. We are making one of those. We have one in progress. It will be finished in 10 years."
And I mean, incredibly, that is, in essence, the response that would come back from the bureaucracy. We all recognize immediately that that is nonsensical because they needed that equipment, counter-IED equipment, vehicles. They needed it now, not 10 and 15 years from now. And our acquisition system got in the habit [...] during the Cold War of doing things very slowly. [...] we always had plenty of time. There was the Soviet Union. It was the Cold War. It would go on for a long time. And we would have programs that extended over 10 and 15 years. You can't do that when you are in the middle of a war, and people are dying and success depends upon your acting more quickly. So I obviously feel passionately about that. I think anybody who observed that bureaucratic tendency would have the same attitude I did, and we have got to turn faster as a military. [...] If we are going to continue to be the best military in the world, we can't [...] make steps in 15-year increments. We have to turn faster than that.
[...]
Senator Graham: Do you think that a cyber Pearl Harbor is a potential threat we face?
Mr. Carter: Absolutely.
Senator Graham: And we are not ready for it?
Mr. Carter: I agree with that also.
[...]
Senator Cotton: I would like to discuss the transfer of five Taliban commanders at Guantanamo Bay for Private Bowe Bergdahl. Knowing what we now know about the attempted recidivism of one of those Taliban members, as well as the ongoing investigation into Bowe Bergdahl's conduct in Afghanistan, do you think that it was a correct decision to go forward with that transfer? [...] I opposed it then, and I would oppose it now. And we didn't leave Bowe Bergdahl behind. The thousands of soldiers who went after him trying to find him who faced enemy fire trying to locate him were not leaving him behind. You are right that they tell every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine that they won't leave us behind. But that doesn't mean they will trade five stone-cold Taliban killers for us. When this transfer happened, Congress was not notified as required by the law. Can you assure us that in the future, Congress will always receive advance notification, as required by law, for future releases of Guantanamo prisoners?
Mr. Carter: I can assure you we will always abide by the law. Absolutely, sir.
[...]
Senator Tillis: [...] a report I am expecting the Secretary of the Air Force to submit to Congress, saying that they are going to be pulling out the Air Force assets from Pope field. And you and I touched on this briefly when we met. And I think the result of that is going to be the Army requiring planes to be flown in to support training exercises there. And I am more worried about Pope field, going forward. It looks like the current course and speed, it could wither away, and I think it is an important strategic asset. So rather than ask you to take a position on this decision, I would like to get your commitment once you are confirmed to meet with me and others who have a concern with this [...]
Mr. Carter: Absolutely, you have that.
-
A straight FCII qualifies you to fly, waivers and all. Waivers are often mindful of your gaining position and if you are not likely to fly frequently or have some unique position with few mission demands, that can (and often is) included in the waiver phrasing (or you can try to include your own letter from the gaining CC). However, if you need that support to get the waiver approved, and the expectation is you were only approved because you will do only that single job, it is much more likely you will get a limited flying clearance, such as IIA (low-G aircraft only), IIB (non-ejection aircraft only), IIC (other, as specified in notes), or IIU (RPA only).
-
Just not sure how to categorize this but the "WTF" thread is the right place although I'd add a couple exclamation points to it.
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-to-make-breakfast-with-your-vagina
there’s a beauty in connecting your body to your food and exploring the power that your vagina has.
-
2
-
-
You can listen to Gen Welsh's "Air Force Update" (and the other speeches) at 2015 AFA Air Warfare Symposium at:http://www.airman.af.mil ):
Break apart that sentence. The PACE can really only affect the last third of their own vision, which is Developing Airmen. Recruiting and Retention are primarily dependent on individuals determining the value of their benefits and weighing them against their patriotism. Obviously Recruiters have some discretion in who they process and send to MEPS, and Commanders have authority to separate folks at the end of their terms. However that can only remove the bad, it doesn't keep the good. (see these threads for more discussion:The future of the United States Air Force rests on the degree to which we can continue to recruit, retain, and develop individuals committed to the profession of arms and USAF Core Values.
And
).
So PACE's own program for molding Airmen into the Profession of Arms / Warrior Ethos leadership mentality subconsciously acknowledges their limitations in benefits and then ignores it. This is the pinnacle of an Air Force that fails to understand its' Airmen. Thankfully, these ideas live in a small corner of AETC, and I hope they continue to only live there.
Everything I wrote above evaluates only one significant part of his speech, but it is not the majority. He also talks about modernization, current conflicts, budget challenges, technology development, total force restructuring. Essentially, it is what he said he wanted to talk about--the mission. It is a good speech with extreme relevance to todays' Air Force, but my takeaway was what I wrote.
CMSAF Cody also spoke, but it didn't have anything ground-breaking so I've got nothing to comment that hasn't already been said about the various programs. SECAF James spoke this morning but the recording hasn't been uploaded yet.
-
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=128173
He still has the formality of taking the oath of office for his position before actually becoming the SECDEF. Due to the holiday on Monday, I'd guess that ceremony will be on Tuesday the 17th.
-
If you haven't already heard, MFS dates should be mid-March.
-
I would if I weren't currently TDY. Recommend you ask your recruiter of s/he is willing to send an email to AFRC/RS to inquire about the list.Deaddebate, if able, would you please let someone know the units are trying to get a hold of someone at AFRC HQ to get some info on when the list will be disseminated?
WTF? (**NSFW**)
in Squadron Bar
Posted