Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image | This Release | Search

       "Go' medications were used by 57% of TAO pilots and considered essential
to op.rations by 61% of those who `ised thern. There were no adverse side effecta
npcrted    Control of these medications was borderline In at least two locstionL ~fl
~~e ~je, a ~s5lon crew cD~andtr requested authority to dispense "Go" pills to
hi. crew in fli£ht. A sunirnary of this program is contained in Appendix C.
       Missed meals ~re a problem for aircrews either because dining halls were
n~~j:1n~~d~LrLn~ ~o~nd ti~s or pilots chose sleeping over eating in a ~0~dlng

       At the start of the war, many bases changed billeting ~rrangemefltS ~r
aLr~r*w to enhance s~~rity.  In a few cases this increased crowding or re~1t*d
in a location closer to the flight line and thus more noisy.  In some cas'5, Cr~~
were not separated     according to their flying schedule creating add~~tional
difficaities ~ those trying to sleep.
       Spatial disorientation was also a significant problem in the Ecatutoless
terrain of the Arabian desert. Two non~combat fighter losses were attrib~tOd to
this factor. There was a report of an A-10 pilot who radioed to his wingman that
he `LW him below.     In fact the wingman was above and the pilot was flying
~pstdo~owfl when he perceived himself        oriented. A summary of the Air
~ro* ~ishap e~n.enOe in the Persian G~~~~~slYcontained in Appendix 1).
       The paoe of the war was so rapid that many individuals did not have time to
deal with personal emotiofls such as loss of a squadron mate or the reality of
~fllng.  Squadron commanders did conduct memorial services. There wes soffie
~nc*rn that dealing with the" emotions may present problems later.
       ~ports of pyridostisrnnC side effects far exceeded that predicted by gro':Lfl~
testing st~dies.  Severe gas, bloating1 and diarrhea were reported.     AircrewS
e~~ssed some concern about lon~~term effects of the drug and a large
percentage in some locations opted not to take it because then asse*5~ the
~emica1 threat to be low.    One aIrcrew survey was conducted by an SME in
theater and the res'<s are presented In Appendix E.
       One wing s~&i~eyed their ~~~rew for reactions to the anthrax va~iii~ Of
i~ survOY*d, 156 (92%) reported some reaction. Local reactions were prirnar~iy
tenderness and redness.   Generalized reactions were reported by 36 (30*) and
incl~ded feverish feeling, generali~d myalgia, and headache.    Only 5  (3%) fslt
the reactions were seVer. enough to affect flying duties.
       ~rIight surgeons tended to liberalize reg~lations on medications and flying.
~ni~Uin, ~~otrifl, sudafed, and non.sedating ~~~~rnines were used after an
initial DNtP period.
       Use of the yellow High Contrast Visor was variable.    Some ~its had aot
seen the visor before arrival in theater, and were reluctant to `try something ne~
when p~paring for combat.    Greatest use (up to 40%) was by F~15 pilots flying
combat air patrol ~saions.   No problems were reported.       The amber laser eye
protective visor was used primarily by the F-4G crews. There were no laser~
injuries reported among Air Force personnel.

                        TaAINING          ISSUES

       SME1s 0~~rwheliningly agreed that exercise de loyrnents are the best
~aining ror wartime deployments.   TAO  Operational         adiness Exercises and
the Combat Casualty Course taken at Camp Bullis were also considered very
valuable.

Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image | This Release | Search