Tailhook?

[A4sForever]

Medical problems and flight surgeons (??):

The only problem I ever had with a Navy Flight Surgeon was on my first annual flight physical @ NAS Dallas while yankin' and bankin' for God and Country in the Adversaries ... and I had the "luck" to draw their first female Flight Surgeon.

Groovy.

But being confident and and generally pro-woman, I entered my annual with a clear conscience and overall good health and closed the door to the exam room.

She ... the Doc .... being "new" and somewhat nervous with her new responsibilities (especially on the hernia portion of the exam) proceeded to get down onto her knees and while looking straight down the barrel at Johnny-One-Eye, she proceeded to regurgitate the memorized medical phrases she had painfully learned in Med School, namely to turn, cough, etc., etc. ... and all the while, staring fate in the "eye" ....

At the conclusion of her "performance" and while she was still "on her knees" ... I asked:

"Why don't we do lunch at the Club when this physical is over ... "??

I kid you not ...

She didn't like my mirth. I graded her down for sense of humor ...

 

[Steve Wilkins]

I dunno Steve Wilkins..I agree with Bunk..
There is a huge difference between NOT FVcking yourself and Not Fvcking your buddy.

Not disclosing some BS ailment from 20 years ago is less about integrity and more about going through beauracratic ASS PAIN. ie not Fvking yourself.

See the difference? Probably not...to SWO's it is a black and brown world.

I don't dispute the that there is a huge difference b/t fucking your buddy and NOT fucking yourself...and I'm not even debating it. What I'm disputing is the method used in 'NOT fucking yourself'. So long as you do it in an honest and ethical manner, then great....knock yourself out, have a blast 'not fucking yourself'. But when you deliberately mislead the doc or fail to answer the questions on the form completely and truthfully, then you've crossed the line. It really is that simple. It is mind boggling how this is even up for discussion among a group of Naval Officers.

We get it, being aviators as well

Gimme a break with that holier than thou nonsense. Do you really think aviators are the only ones that have a vested interest in ensuring a positive outcome of their physicals?

If it's serious enough to get NPQ'ed, then you're only hurting yourself

So let's say you have a family history of heart disease and have had a heart attack within the last year, but you fail to disclose that. Do you not see how something like that could end up effecting many more people than just that one person? There are numerous possible scenarios where that could affect many people, possibly with a tragic outcome.

If they are going to change my answers to "no" for me then what is the point of the form. Moreover, the questions are along the line of "have you ever in your life had condition x?" Answering honestly, like with my bee sting issue as a kid, can end your career even if there is nothing wrong with you anymore. What the questions probably mean is "do you have a chronic problem with condition x", and that's how I answer them now. The impression I get is that you would say this is dishonest or compromising my integrity, but my experience hasn't given me the impression that 100% full disclosure is what they are looking for on those forms.

If you disclose the condition and the doc doesn't think it's an issue worthy of any further exploration and subsequently overrides it, then you've done your job. No further discussion on the matter required. The questions mean what they say. They're pretty clear and straight forward. Yes, I would say you are being dishonest by putting your own spin on the questions and answering them to suit your interests. In fact, you allude to that yourself. You said yourself that answering honestly could end your career. To me, you're implying that to ensure you don't end your career, you will simply answer them dishonestly from now on...at least the questions that may prove problematic for you anyhow.

 

[insanebikerboy]

Are you sure it was the mirth she didn't like?

It was probably the girth she didn't like.....




Or lack thereof!!!!!!

 

[kmac]

To me, you're implying that to ensure you don't end your career, you will simply answer them dishonestly from now on...at least the questions that may prove problematic for you anyhow.

Which is a good reason we go to SERE school and learn how not to answer the questions asked.

I can see how on paper you have a point of how naval officers should be the same, and that there shouldn't be differences between aviators and non-aviators. What is on paper doesn't seem to translate into real life practices and the differences between the cultures. I can't compare aviators with SWOs... I haven't dealt with enough SWOs to do that. I can say though that I've never seen cheating on exams as part of a normal cultural enterprise until I joined naval aviation. "If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin' " seems to be the common ethos here. Right or wrong, that's just the way it is... and it's not cheating on exams (for the sake of my example) to get yourself ahead of the others. Rather, it's a corporate approach to how things get done in naval aviation.

I'm not the type to lie (and not have a lingering guilt) and so I imagine that I share some of the feelings/attitudes you have. I can't even stand white lies. However, one has to be able to distinguish the difference between the good guys (squadronmates) and the bad guys (anyone that prevents you or your squadronmates from flying). I'm with you in that taking the high road is never wrong. The flip side is to let it slide when others' lack of integrity only affects themselves.

 

[Catmando]

Medical problems and flight surgeons (??):

....."Why don't we do lunch at the Club when this physical is over ... "??

I kid you not ...

She didn't like my mirth. ....

[TINS]
I used to be a guinea pig for some centrifuge tests. These required a flight physical prior to the ride. A newly assigned female Flight Surgeon was observing my physical being given by my normal Flight Surgeon, "Doc." We were engaged in conversation as she was seated in front of me, watching, while "Doc" checked my ears and lungs, etc. Then, "Doc" said, "drop 'em."

I waited for the new female Flight Surgeon to get up and leave … but she didn't leave. "Doc" repeated his request, I complied, and "Doc" continued his 'cough-cough' checks etc. while she watched. Although our conversation had abruptly stopped, she must have liked what she saw . . . she asked me out the following week!

 

[robav8r]

If you disclose the condition and the doc doesn't think it's an issue worthy of any further exploration and subsequently overrides it, then you've done your job. No further discussion on the matter required. The questions mean what they say. They're pretty clear and straight forward. Yes, I would say you are being dishonest by putting your own spin on the questions and answering them to suit your interests. In fact, you allude to that yourself. You said yourself that answering honestly could end your career. To me, you're implying that to ensure you don't end your career, you will simply answer them dishonestly from now on...at least the questions that may prove problematic for you anyhow.

Steve - copy all wrt the integrity side of your argument. However, I have seen, as I'm sure others have as well, a flight surgeon go "high and right" over an issue that really only impacted the individual in his or her childhood and has absolutely no bearing in their adult lives. Hay Fever ? Allergies ?? Sinus Problems ??? I have seen flight surgeons end flying careers over these ailments, I have also seen good, competent doctors help the individual work through these conditions and keep them in the air - what they are supposed to be concerned with primarily. The best flight surgeons I have seen were the ones who treated me like an adult and respected my opinion of whether or not I could handle a certain physiological condition in flight.

 

[FMRAM]

[TINS]
I used to be a guinea pig for some centrifuge tests. These required a flight physical prior to the ride. A newly assigned female Flight Surgeon was observing my physical being given by my normal Flight Surgeon, "Doc." We were engaged in conversation as she was seated in front of me, watching, while "Doc" checked my ears and lungs, etc. Then, "Doc" said, "drop 'em."

I waited for the new female Flight Surgeon to get up and leave … but she didn't leave. "Doc" repeated his request, I complied, and "Doc" continued his 'cough-cough' checks etc. while she watched. Although our conversation had abruptly stopped, she must have liked what she saw . . . she asked me out the following week!

Wow, sounds like that female Flight Surgeon was a shining example of professionalism!

 

[kmac]

Wow, sounds like that female Flight Surgeon was a shining example of professionalism!

You're just jealous that doesn't happen to you. Hell, I'm jealous!

 

[bunk22]

Gimme a break with that holier than thou nonsense. Do you really think aviators are the only ones that have a vested interest in ensuring a positive outcome of their physicals?

For the topic of this thread, absolutely. If it has to do with something else, who cares.

So let's say you have a family history of heart disease and have had a heart attack within the last year, but you fail to disclose that. Do you not see how something like that could end up effecting many more people than just that one person? There are numerous possible scenarios where that could affect many people, possibly with a tragic outcome.

What if your right nut explodes in flight because you didn't tell the doc you had a history painful exploding balls at altitidue problems :sleep_125 Dude, you're reaching here. BTW, pilots have had heart attacks in the cockpit. It happens. A bad med problem will be found. What an avaitor can do is make sure when that selection time comes, you take what's coming to you so as not to screw over another. Simple as that. So simple that only an aviator could understand it.

 

[FrankTheTank]

What if you right nut explodes in flight

Probably from the Asbestos or maybe that Anthrax shot... I think it is time to file a claim with the VA..

 

[SDNalgene]

If you disclose the condition and the doc doesn't think it's an issue worthy of any further exploration and subsequently overrides it, then you've done your job. No further discussion on the matter required. The questions mean what they say. They're pretty clear and straight forward. Yes, I would say you are being dishonest by putting your own spin on the questions and answering them to suit your interests. In fact, you allude to that yourself. You said yourself that answering honestly could end your career. To me, you're implying that to ensure you don't end your career, you will simply answer them dishonestly from now on...at least the questions that may prove problematic for you anyhow.

Not disclosing some BS ailment from 20 years ago is less about integrity and more about going through beauracratic ASS PAIN. ie not Fvking yourself.

Steve, I understand your point. However, on subsequent physicals do you think I should go through the "bureaucratic ASS PAIN", as Retread so eloquently put it, of getting the bee sting thing dealt with again? The question asked if I ever did have a problem with it, ever. By the way, the flight doc who did my pre com physical simply did not put any reference to the condition in my officer medical record after he tested me. On paper the condition died with my nrotc medical record which means there is no record of me getting cleared. If I read the question literally and give 100% full disclosure, I get to go through that process again. That means I go med down, sit around waiting to get it cleared up, and watch as my new and limited flight skills atrophy and die. But hey, I was honest, right? Same thing with the bronchitis thing. If it wasn't worth mentioning according to the doc 3 months after I had it why would I mention it again 3 years later?

I understand that you see this as a strict black and white, but as Retread said, it's more about avoiding the headache of paperwork. I just hope my nuts don't spontaneously explode at altitude because I failed to disclose something; that would just plain suck.

 

[A4sForever]

Are you sure it was the mirth she didn't like?

It was probably the girth she didn't like..... Or lack thereof!!!!!!

And yet, we both wanted a cigarette after the physical .....

 

[gdd05]

Hey guys, I just classed up in Meridian and guess what.....the "Tailhook" thing fell by the wayside until Septemberish. Until then you still go "Jets". Now on to the bad news. RUMOR has it that there will be a 2 month long E2/C2 draft and NO jet slots to make up for this. See your flight surgeon/break minor bones as appropriate to time it right. PS- They are calling it a 55 week time to winging right now. -Joe Dirt

Far as I know, people are still selecting tailhook right now. Is the E2/C2 community undermanned? Why a draft? I would be pissed if I had the chance to select tailhook and got sucked up in a E2/C2 draft. Anymore word on this subject?

 

[bunk22]

Far as I know, people are still selecting tailhook right now. Is the E2/C2 community undermanned? Why a draft? I would be pissed if I had the chance to select tailhook and got sucked up in a E2/C2 draft. Anymore word on this subject?

Now why would you be pissed off? Do you know anything about that aircraft or community?

 

[MasterBates]

E2C2 is not a bad deal. The problem is they are even fewer and farther between than Jet guys in the Primary VTs, so very few new studs know shit about it, besides the E2 looks like the C2 and E3's illegitamate love child.. And what the hell does a C2 do anyways (I had NO CLUE when I was in Primary)

Right now, I don't think there is a single E2 or C2 IP in VT27 or VT28. Timbo needs to hurry the fvck up and get here.