Shots Across The Bow

I was honorably discharged from the U.S. Air Force in Dec. 1969. I had little, to no respect for the "rich dodgers" in the "guard". I still don't; it was a tasteless, tacky, totally unsurprising media gesture, aimed at the same bunch who think a "tax cut" will generate more jobs. Very sad...very sad indeed!

Rich, I might agree with some of your assertions, but this is where the rubber meets the road on this; he was still attached to the Fighter Squadron, they were still considered his "home command" because they did his Fitness Reports and the one here is from 1 May 72 to 30 April 73 (unless the AF system of personnel accounting is radically different from the NAV's, or was). He was still in the squadron, he should have still been in a flight status (which is I would imagine why he got orders 'removing' him), when he should have been paying back for his training.

I will agree that you'd have to really, really piss off your CO to get even a Mast for something like this, but remember that officers are supposed to be held to a higher standard. No one and I repeat No One should have to tell a 1st Lt aviator that he needs to get his ass to the Doc. What's his excuse?

---
Is that you in the crackerjacks? What was your rate? I too am an East Tennessean (sort of, moved there in 1970, left for college in '73, still have some family in the area), went to HS near Bristol, haven't been back for decades.
----
Having been a non-lawyer squadron legal officer during one squadron tour, and the CO of a reserve unit where I had to take a couple of guys to mast for rocking the gange, I know all too well the vagaries of military justice, especially the disparity of Officer v. Enlisted treatment.

An enlisted guy might get mast, where an 0 might get hack, but the enlisted guy's page 13 would disappear (by regs) at reenlistment, the 0 would likely get a comment on his next FITREP that would follow him (or her) around for an entire career, and any Page 13 entries were permanent (if made).

Generally, if an 0 were to do something so heinous as to warrant charges, mast would not be an option, it was right to the ART 32 and a Court (if warranted). I only know two officers that went to Admirals Mast, and it wasn't pretty. One requested a court and they eventually dropped the charges, but he soon got out anyhow and went to fly for an international airline in Asia. The other guy got fined and a letter of reprimand. Career Over.
----
Fair winds and following seas.

Jo

Rich,
The orders you point to also reaffirm that even though he might have been in AL with doing something, as far as the Guard was concerned he was still in Texas, being TAD (or whatever) to AL would not absolve him of the rules on physicals. The unit that the "orders" letter refers to is the squadron in Texas, which is consistent with his Fitness Report, ergo he should have maintained his physical and been ready to fly (after an aircraft re-qual/warm-up, or whatever the AF does). I don't see the inconsistency here with the physical/flight status/unit thing.

Later

A couple of people "in the know" have spoken.

If you needed the military to shame him as well as basic facts - are you convinced, yet?

This is important to me only for the fact that I hate watching arrogance - unearned or not - go unpunished.

no andrew, not convinced, as I too am "in the know," and the facts do not warrant a court martial.

Jo, yep, that's me, or rather, a younger, more idealistic version of me, fresh out of boot camp. I was in for almost 9 years as a reactor operator, got out as an ET1.

AS for whether he should have maintained flight status or not, the eval states clearly that his buties placed him in a non flight status. Just because his home command was a squadron doesn't mean he had to maintain flight quals.

I ran into similar situations as a nuke. Nukes on extended training would lose proficiency while at training, and have to requal on their return. However, even though they were off the ship, they stayed on the watch list until their proficiency expired, at which point they would be disqualified, and go through requals on their return.

No negligence involved, just paperwork.

I'm sure there are other cases of pilots assigned to squadrons who aren't on flight status, for a variety of reasons.

Basically, if the guard placed him in a non flying status, as indicated by the eval from his home command, then it's neither surprising or deriliction that he didn't get his flight physical, particularly in view of the fact that he applied for discharge in Sept. of 73. Not only wasn't he in a flight billet, he wasn't going back to a flight billet.

I find is sad that for every charge there is a simple benign explanation. Yet, for all the evidence to the contrary, the Bush-haters will not allow it shake their faith.

They are not in this to debate the facts, they are here to keep their message alive. It their "Vince Foster was murdered by the Clinton's" schtick.

Hey sparkey,

Yep, I've said it a couple of times already. The dems are making the same mistake the reps made during the Clinton years. Jump on every little thing, make a huge conspiracy theory, scream to the high heavens in righteous indignation, posture for the press, and have a wonderful time doing it. The downside is that if you find a real problem, the press and public are so conditioned to your and arm-waving rants that they really don't pay attention.

The document cited above is not a reprimand. It is merely confirming a change in orders to non-flight status. Pilots are removed from flight status all the time for various legitimate reasons. They usually get reinstated as circumstances change. "Failure to accomplish annual medical examination" is an explanation, not and indictment. He very likely passed on the exam with the knowledge and consent of his CO.

What a bunch of bunk. Missing a pre-flight physical (unless it has to do with a combat situation) is hardly a court martial offense Further something that happened 30 years, or so, ago, has absolutely nothing to do with his competence as the President. I mean, it's not like being disbarred while being President, or committing perjury while being President, or getting blow jobs in the Oval Office while talking to a Senator about the business of the country. Give me a break - if you don't like George the Younger because of the job he is doing - that's one thing - and that's fine with me if that's how you feel, but if you try to rationalize his unfitness for office because he missed a physical exam (if he did) is something quite different. Let's face it, he never said he tried the illegal cigarette, but didn't inhale. If you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you, and, quite frankly, that also has nothing to do with Mr. Clinton's competence as President.

In addition there is another factor that can be missed. You have to have a qualified Flight Surgeon to get a flight physical. Your average doctor is not qualified. Working in the active duty side it's fairly easy to get a flight physical. Working as a Reservist or as a Guard member, it's harder.

If you're assigned to a unit that's not close to an active duty air base with full time Flight Surgeons then you have to make arrangements to get one often times on your own time if you miss the one or two weekends of the year that a Flight Surgeon schedules to show up at your center.

Good point, fred. That hadn't even occurred to me.