Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
USAF Drugging Pilots
- Thread starter surplus1
- Start date
- Watchers 8
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
First, I didn't invent the story. I'm simply reporting what I saw on ABC's 20/20. I have no way to verify or deny it's accuracy.
Second, I have no axe to grind with the pilots that took these drugs. Additionally I am not accusing the pilots who made the "friendly fire" error of anything. It was a mistake and mistakes happen in wars. They did not intentionally kill our Candian friends. It's enough of a tragedy for them and as far as I'm concerned, they don't need the additional burden of thinking that, except for the drugs, it might never have happened.
When the UAL pilot returns to work, if ever, I don't want my family to be passengers on his aircraft with the thought that he may be high on drugs. Drugs that he learned to take courtesy of our government.
What I do not understand is why the USAir Force finds it necessary to drug our combat pilots. Since I was not born in the drug generation, I don't subscribe to the drug culture. I've seen too many young lives ruined by the use of so-called "recreational drugs". War is he!! enough without the government making addicts of our military heroes. They already volunteer to risk their lives for my freedom. I don't want them destroyed by our own government. If that doesn't sit well with you, it's too **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED***d bad.
If there is any "blame" here, it is not with the pilots that take the drugs. According to the story, this is official policy of the United States Air Force. In my opinion, I think that's a bad policy. Further endangering the lives and future of our pilots, should they survive military conflict, is not what I think our government should be doing. I really don't care how they attempt to "justify" it.
According to the story, the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force banned the practice. The current one has reinstated it. The Air Force defends it. I disagree.
I was a military pilot myself at one time. Luckily for me, I did not fly combat. However, I had no knowledge at the time of any policy that required me to take narcotics to fly, no one ever offered me any and I never took any. If we could do without it then, we can do without it now.
I can only imagine the stress of real combat flying. Nevertheless, I don't subscribe to the concept of drugging our military personell for the convenience of the generals, the government or any other reason. They already give their all and in my view, that's too much to ask and certainly too much to require.
Would you be happy if tomorrow some hot shot scientist decided we should drug the President so that he could handle the stress of his office, while his finger is on the nuclear trigger? I hope not.
JMO.
Second, I have no axe to grind with the pilots that took these drugs. Additionally I am not accusing the pilots who made the "friendly fire" error of anything. It was a mistake and mistakes happen in wars. They did not intentionally kill our Candian friends. It's enough of a tragedy for them and as far as I'm concerned, they don't need the additional burden of thinking that, except for the drugs, it might never have happened.
When the UAL pilot returns to work, if ever, I don't want my family to be passengers on his aircraft with the thought that he may be high on drugs. Drugs that he learned to take courtesy of our government.
What I do not understand is why the USAir Force finds it necessary to drug our combat pilots. Since I was not born in the drug generation, I don't subscribe to the drug culture. I've seen too many young lives ruined by the use of so-called "recreational drugs". War is he!! enough without the government making addicts of our military heroes. They already volunteer to risk their lives for my freedom. I don't want them destroyed by our own government. If that doesn't sit well with you, it's too **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED***d bad.
If there is any "blame" here, it is not with the pilots that take the drugs. According to the story, this is official policy of the United States Air Force. In my opinion, I think that's a bad policy. Further endangering the lives and future of our pilots, should they survive military conflict, is not what I think our government should be doing. I really don't care how they attempt to "justify" it.
According to the story, the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force banned the practice. The current one has reinstated it. The Air Force defends it. I disagree.
I was a military pilot myself at one time. Luckily for me, I did not fly combat. However, I had no knowledge at the time of any policy that required me to take narcotics to fly, no one ever offered me any and I never took any. If we could do without it then, we can do without it now.
I can only imagine the stress of real combat flying. Nevertheless, I don't subscribe to the concept of drugging our military personell for the convenience of the generals, the government or any other reason. They already give their all and in my view, that's too much to ask and certainly too much to require.
Would you be happy if tomorrow some hot shot scientist decided we should drug the President so that he could handle the stress of his office, while his finger is on the nuclear trigger? I hope not.
JMO.
Country Wild
Retiring Soon
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2002
- Posts
- 78
Here is the link http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/index.html
Another Perspective....
Gang--
As a former military aviator I absolutely defend the right of the military to perscribe "go" pills (amphetimines) for mission requirements. Let me explain my rationale.
BTW, I am not going to defend or crucify the guys who took out the Canadian vehicle; I do not know enough of the Rules of Engagement, the threat, or the overall risk level of the mission to comment intelligently on that. The fact that they (the crew) are up on charges will, in my mind, bring out the pertinent facts on this issue.
On the topic of "go pills," most of you professional aviators know what it is like to fly an 8 hour, multiple leg, 15.9 hour day. You know how tiring it is to do so, and you are right--everyone is absolutely fatigued at the end of that day.
Now, if you want to apply this same sense of fatigue to the folks out there flying fighter or bomber aircraft, take that same fatigue factor and multiply it by three. This comparison is not an exaggeration.
I've experienced both sides of the fence here, having flown over 1800 hours in the F-15C and about 900 in the Airbus 320. Military fighters promote an amazing amount of fatigue, generated from multiple sources that aren't present in civilian flying. First comes the gear: you wear the normal flight suit, a g-suit, a Combat Edge vest (like a thin vest, only with inflatable bladders like a G-suit), a survival vest with a lot of gear including a pistol, a harness with horse-collar life preserver (this may be removed for certain flying over Afganistan, but probably not), and potentially an anti-exposure suit (if the water to be flown over is cold enough). Don't forget the helmet and very possibly night vision goggle equipment, which suck the water right out of you. All told, the gear alone adds about 40 pounds to your normal weight, and does not do much for keeping yourself cool despite air conditioning. You sweat like a pig except in the coldest of winter days, and sometimes even then.
Now add on the flight stresses--pulling 4 Gz during a two ship tactical turn is the norm, and most military guys/gals are very used to it. But, at the end of the day, those Gz, and any higher ones you pull due to defensive action, culminate in a fairly high overall physical demand. The cockpits of the F-15 series (and I bet the F-16/18 as well, don't presurize as well as commercial aircraft--it is common to have a cabin altitude of 13000 during a mission orbiting over bad guy land. Finally, it's all hand flying for 95% of the time; your mind is always working, not on the flying part, but on the ground and radio environment.
One last stress is important; knowing that you have the power to kill with your decisions. It is no small point.
One other issue--sensory overload. The modern fighter cockpit is home to the most advanced systems on earth. Unfortunately, the human brain must still receive and prioritize the input. What's there to prioritize? Three radio receivers, two transmitters, the radar warning receiver (like a fuzz buster, only with graphic displays and multiple sounds indicating different threats), the radar, the multipurpose displays (indicating everything from weapons status to a Gods-eye picture of the battlespace), and the normal sounds the aircraft makes (altitude alerts, G-limit warnings, Bitchin' Betty (the computerized voice that advises of fuel status, fires, over-Gz, etc), plus the HUD and maintaining visual formation---gee, there is a lot of input that we in the commercial sector do not have to deal with.
In short, the fatigue factors are numerous on these long missions and must be countered somehow. Throw in a rotating and anti-circadian rythym schedule, and you have a recipe for an accident.
(more to follow...)
Gang--
As a former military aviator I absolutely defend the right of the military to perscribe "go" pills (amphetimines) for mission requirements. Let me explain my rationale.
BTW, I am not going to defend or crucify the guys who took out the Canadian vehicle; I do not know enough of the Rules of Engagement, the threat, or the overall risk level of the mission to comment intelligently on that. The fact that they (the crew) are up on charges will, in my mind, bring out the pertinent facts on this issue.
On the topic of "go pills," most of you professional aviators know what it is like to fly an 8 hour, multiple leg, 15.9 hour day. You know how tiring it is to do so, and you are right--everyone is absolutely fatigued at the end of that day.
Now, if you want to apply this same sense of fatigue to the folks out there flying fighter or bomber aircraft, take that same fatigue factor and multiply it by three. This comparison is not an exaggeration.
I've experienced both sides of the fence here, having flown over 1800 hours in the F-15C and about 900 in the Airbus 320. Military fighters promote an amazing amount of fatigue, generated from multiple sources that aren't present in civilian flying. First comes the gear: you wear the normal flight suit, a g-suit, a Combat Edge vest (like a thin vest, only with inflatable bladders like a G-suit), a survival vest with a lot of gear including a pistol, a harness with horse-collar life preserver (this may be removed for certain flying over Afganistan, but probably not), and potentially an anti-exposure suit (if the water to be flown over is cold enough). Don't forget the helmet and very possibly night vision goggle equipment, which suck the water right out of you. All told, the gear alone adds about 40 pounds to your normal weight, and does not do much for keeping yourself cool despite air conditioning. You sweat like a pig except in the coldest of winter days, and sometimes even then.
Now add on the flight stresses--pulling 4 Gz during a two ship tactical turn is the norm, and most military guys/gals are very used to it. But, at the end of the day, those Gz, and any higher ones you pull due to defensive action, culminate in a fairly high overall physical demand. The cockpits of the F-15 series (and I bet the F-16/18 as well, don't presurize as well as commercial aircraft--it is common to have a cabin altitude of 13000 during a mission orbiting over bad guy land. Finally, it's all hand flying for 95% of the time; your mind is always working, not on the flying part, but on the ground and radio environment.
One last stress is important; knowing that you have the power to kill with your decisions. It is no small point.
One other issue--sensory overload. The modern fighter cockpit is home to the most advanced systems on earth. Unfortunately, the human brain must still receive and prioritize the input. What's there to prioritize? Three radio receivers, two transmitters, the radar warning receiver (like a fuzz buster, only with graphic displays and multiple sounds indicating different threats), the radar, the multipurpose displays (indicating everything from weapons status to a Gods-eye picture of the battlespace), and the normal sounds the aircraft makes (altitude alerts, G-limit warnings, Bitchin' Betty (the computerized voice that advises of fuel status, fires, over-Gz, etc), plus the HUD and maintaining visual formation---gee, there is a lot of input that we in the commercial sector do not have to deal with.
In short, the fatigue factors are numerous on these long missions and must be countered somehow. Throw in a rotating and anti-circadian rythym schedule, and you have a recipe for an accident.
(more to follow...)
Another Perspective....Continued
So, now that I've defined part of the fatigue factors that play, how do we justify the drug issue?
Simple--without these drugs, people will die. People highly trained, who volunteered to stand and defend your rights and the defense of our country, will become thousands of tiny bits because they were too tired to fly safely .
Here's a simple and true example. My buddy Squid, a former F-14 driver who defected to the Air Force longing for long, stable runways, deployed with me in 1993 to Aviano Air Base, Italy during the beginning of Operation Deny Flight, the denial of Bosinian airspace to Serb and Bosnian fighters that were bombing the Muslim populace.
We were not initially given "go" pills due to the then-AF Chief of Staff's decision concerning drugs. While we did have access to "no-go" pills (ambien) for sleep during the day, we were placed on a rotating schedule such that our sleep cycles were not the same from day to day. We'd fly a mission from 9pm to 1pm one night, then 3am to 8 am the next night, and so forth.
By the time we were in the second week, everyone was dog tired. Squid flew a midnight-4am shift, and on the way home from his mission he grew totally, irretrievably, fatigued.
I'm talking about episodes of nodding off several times; too tired to even make a coherent radio call fatigue, he tried going full cold on the air conditioning, talking to his wingman, even turning up the lights. Nothing helped.
Just crossing over the Italian coast line, he considered jettisoning his canopy--a rather serious affair--to stay awake. He did not do so, but managed to limp back to Aviano for a successful landing, fully aware of his limitations.
By the time I went back to Iraq in 97, go pills had once again been authorized but were not used except during extraordinary circumstances. I used them during an ocean crossing in 98 when, at hour 7 of the hand-flown flight (in a single seat jet, flying formation most of the way with our tanker in the weather), I was too tired to think straight. Did the pills work? Yep. I was just "up" enough to safely recover the jet. Did I get paranoia? Nope. I'm like this all of the time.
Did the go pill use make anyone dependent on them, druggies in short? I have no knowledge of that, even though I saw many folks use them during our time over Iraq. Was this drug given as a convience to a General? He!! no...we asked for them because the missions required it. And our flight surgeons had to issue/track these drugs--they weren't free for the taking. They were perscribed for each person.
To Surplus1, I understand your reluctance to accept the use of drugs by our military aviators. Trust me, however. No one takes this drug this at the whim of a superior, and no one becomes a drug crazed aviator, ready to kill at some capricious infraction of the rules. There is NOT a drug culture in the Air Force or Navy. Frankly, I'm surprised you would even think that a possibility.
And while I can't vouch for others, I have no knowledge of anyone in the military becoming a drug addict due to go pills.
I have, however, flown in combat. And I needed go pills--however infrequently--to get the job done. I want my bro's, out there doing the job today, to get home safely. If that means taking go and no-go pills when required, then they ought to have them.
So, now that I've defined part of the fatigue factors that play, how do we justify the drug issue?
Simple--without these drugs, people will die. People highly trained, who volunteered to stand and defend your rights and the defense of our country, will become thousands of tiny bits because they were too tired to fly safely .
Here's a simple and true example. My buddy Squid, a former F-14 driver who defected to the Air Force longing for long, stable runways, deployed with me in 1993 to Aviano Air Base, Italy during the beginning of Operation Deny Flight, the denial of Bosinian airspace to Serb and Bosnian fighters that were bombing the Muslim populace.
We were not initially given "go" pills due to the then-AF Chief of Staff's decision concerning drugs. While we did have access to "no-go" pills (ambien) for sleep during the day, we were placed on a rotating schedule such that our sleep cycles were not the same from day to day. We'd fly a mission from 9pm to 1pm one night, then 3am to 8 am the next night, and so forth.
By the time we were in the second week, everyone was dog tired. Squid flew a midnight-4am shift, and on the way home from his mission he grew totally, irretrievably, fatigued.
I'm talking about episodes of nodding off several times; too tired to even make a coherent radio call fatigue, he tried going full cold on the air conditioning, talking to his wingman, even turning up the lights. Nothing helped.
Just crossing over the Italian coast line, he considered jettisoning his canopy--a rather serious affair--to stay awake. He did not do so, but managed to limp back to Aviano for a successful landing, fully aware of his limitations.
By the time I went back to Iraq in 97, go pills had once again been authorized but were not used except during extraordinary circumstances. I used them during an ocean crossing in 98 when, at hour 7 of the hand-flown flight (in a single seat jet, flying formation most of the way with our tanker in the weather), I was too tired to think straight. Did the pills work? Yep. I was just "up" enough to safely recover the jet. Did I get paranoia? Nope. I'm like this all of the time.
Did the go pill use make anyone dependent on them, druggies in short? I have no knowledge of that, even though I saw many folks use them during our time over Iraq. Was this drug given as a convience to a General? He!! no...we asked for them because the missions required it. And our flight surgeons had to issue/track these drugs--they weren't free for the taking. They were perscribed for each person.
To Surplus1, I understand your reluctance to accept the use of drugs by our military aviators. Trust me, however. No one takes this drug this at the whim of a superior, and no one becomes a drug crazed aviator, ready to kill at some capricious infraction of the rules. There is NOT a drug culture in the Air Force or Navy. Frankly, I'm surprised you would even think that a possibility.
And while I can't vouch for others, I have no knowledge of anyone in the military becoming a drug addict due to go pills.
I have, however, flown in combat. And I needed go pills--however infrequently--to get the job done. I want my bro's, out there doing the job today, to get home safely. If that means taking go and no-go pills when required, then they ought to have them.
Last edited:
FastCargo
Is that the tanker?
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2001
- Posts
- 240
Not just fighters...
Eagleflip,
You make some very good points...all of which I agree with. In addition, bomber guys, especially the B-2 guys, may be on station for 30+ hours. If y'all remember, during the Kosovo and Afganistan conflights, B-2s were 'reaching out and touching' the bad guys from Missouri and back! Imagine all the survival equipment Eagleflip mentioned (minus the Gs and Gsuits). Now imagine that 15 hours INTO your flight, after at least 2 air refuelings, NOW you start the hard part of your mission. Oh yeah, afterward, now you have to drone back, with 2 more air refuelings, and then try to land. Let's be realistic here folks...you are going to need something to help during the critical parts of the mission.
People seem to make it sound like they are forcing this stuff down guys throats like lab rats...trying to OD or get them addicted to the stuff. Typical media overblowning the actual situation. Yes, the USAF is probably proscribing the use of 'go' pills. But jeez people, think about it...what commander is going to want his folks permanently hyped or addicted. When I was flying the B-1, we received briefs on using 'go' pills, but issued specifically by the flt doc, for a specific mission, for a specific situation within the mission. VERY much controlled to prevent or at least minimize loss of combat effectiveness.
Out for now...gotta drink my caffiene and Nutrasweet laced Diet Coke....
FastCargo
Eagleflip,
You make some very good points...all of which I agree with. In addition, bomber guys, especially the B-2 guys, may be on station for 30+ hours. If y'all remember, during the Kosovo and Afganistan conflights, B-2s were 'reaching out and touching' the bad guys from Missouri and back! Imagine all the survival equipment Eagleflip mentioned (minus the Gs and Gsuits). Now imagine that 15 hours INTO your flight, after at least 2 air refuelings, NOW you start the hard part of your mission. Oh yeah, afterward, now you have to drone back, with 2 more air refuelings, and then try to land. Let's be realistic here folks...you are going to need something to help during the critical parts of the mission.
People seem to make it sound like they are forcing this stuff down guys throats like lab rats...trying to OD or get them addicted to the stuff. Typical media overblowning the actual situation. Yes, the USAF is probably proscribing the use of 'go' pills. But jeez people, think about it...what commander is going to want his folks permanently hyped or addicted. When I was flying the B-1, we received briefs on using 'go' pills, but issued specifically by the flt doc, for a specific mission, for a specific situation within the mission. VERY much controlled to prevent or at least minimize loss of combat effectiveness.
Out for now...gotta drink my caffiene and Nutrasweet laced Diet Coke....
FastCargo
A Squared
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 3,006
Hmmm,
what I find surprising about this is that it seems to be a surprise to so many. Maybe I'm unusual in that I know pilots who have served in combat in a number of different conflits, and they all have spoken of the go pills. (several have mentioned "stop" pills too, downers to help come down from a mission and get some sleep.)
what I find surprising about this is that it seems to be a surprise to so many. Maybe I'm unusual in that I know pilots who have served in combat in a number of different conflits, and they all have spoken of the go pills. (several have mentioned "stop" pills too, downers to help come down from a mission and get some sleep.)
SentryIP
Better lucky than good!
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2001
- Posts
- 223
Pills
Eagleflip,
Excellent and insightful posts. When I flew during the Gulf War, I wish I had go-pills. Our missions were 16 hours long with a 6-hour show for mission planning, briefings (weather, intell, SAR, tactics/threats, formation, air refueling), and target study. We were over target after being awake for about 13 hours. I dreaded the flight back to base more than the bomb runs.
Eagleflip,
Excellent and insightful posts. When I flew during the Gulf War, I wish I had go-pills. Our missions were 16 hours long with a 6-hour show for mission planning, briefings (weather, intell, SAR, tactics/threats, formation, air refueling), and target study. We were over target after being awake for about 13 hours. I dreaded the flight back to base more than the bomb runs.
AlbieF15
F15 Ret/FDX/InterviewPrep
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 1,764
I flew 11+ hours in an Eagle, both with and without "go pills". The pills made it easier to land--trust me!
The go pills were given ONLY after a flight doc had given you a controlled dosage over a weekend, and then observed you the following Monday. The idea is you don't want to pop once of these in a jet never having tested its effect on your body first.
20/20 said pilots could just "sign out" the pills whenever they wanted. So could we! We could six our FOUR pills before our trans-oceanic crossing. No other pills would be offered to us again until our next ocean crossing a month later. The idea that pilots had a walking pharmacy in the flight doc was pure hype and hyperbole.
I sling no spears at the F-16 pilots who made a decision to employ force and unfortunately "fratted" some Canadian soldiers. Like Eagleflip...I wasn't there and cannot say what did or did not cause the mishap. However--this reeks of defense lawyers grasping at straws to show the the pilots were somehow not responsible.
As a former Forward Air Controller, I can tell you Fratricide causes much more damage than the simple loss of lives and combat resources when blue force is misapplied against friendlies. The pyschological toll on the force is enormous, and many times the breakdown of trust between services or allied nations causes so much friction that ulitmately combat effectiveness is compromised. Nobody wants to prevent frat more than the US Air Force--trust me on this! Many times to ROE is so restrictive that it puts aircrew into increased harms way to insure 100% positive enemy ID is acheived prior to employing ordnance.
FYI--that bluesuit...General Leaf...he's the real deal. He flew combat missions over Bosnia in the F16, and he's got a son in the Air Force. (I flew him in an aero club plane up to Maxwell AFB from Tyndall a few years ago after he spoke at his son's graduation dinner from ABM school. And no...not at AF expense--he paid for the cost of the plane). Like or dislike the man, I think to dismiss him as a "company man" ignores some facts. He has flown close air support and air interdiction missions in combat. He had some very restrictive ROE. He admits he used his "pilot judgement" and deliberately flew lower than the min altitude (breaking ROE) when attacking a convoy that was advancing towards a UN position. So...he may come off as "another talking cranium" on TV, but the fact is he's been there/done that in combat. If he says "go pills" helped his performance in that operation, then I"d believe him before I believed defense attorneys and Barbara Walters.
You want to talk about a real crisis? Why can a doctor work a 36 hour shift in an ER when doing an intership? That's what I'd worry about as an average American...not fighter pilots on speed.
The go pills were given ONLY after a flight doc had given you a controlled dosage over a weekend, and then observed you the following Monday. The idea is you don't want to pop once of these in a jet never having tested its effect on your body first.
20/20 said pilots could just "sign out" the pills whenever they wanted. So could we! We could six our FOUR pills before our trans-oceanic crossing. No other pills would be offered to us again until our next ocean crossing a month later. The idea that pilots had a walking pharmacy in the flight doc was pure hype and hyperbole.
I sling no spears at the F-16 pilots who made a decision to employ force and unfortunately "fratted" some Canadian soldiers. Like Eagleflip...I wasn't there and cannot say what did or did not cause the mishap. However--this reeks of defense lawyers grasping at straws to show the the pilots were somehow not responsible.
As a former Forward Air Controller, I can tell you Fratricide causes much more damage than the simple loss of lives and combat resources when blue force is misapplied against friendlies. The pyschological toll on the force is enormous, and many times the breakdown of trust between services or allied nations causes so much friction that ulitmately combat effectiveness is compromised. Nobody wants to prevent frat more than the US Air Force--trust me on this! Many times to ROE is so restrictive that it puts aircrew into increased harms way to insure 100% positive enemy ID is acheived prior to employing ordnance.
FYI--that bluesuit...General Leaf...he's the real deal. He flew combat missions over Bosnia in the F16, and he's got a son in the Air Force. (I flew him in an aero club plane up to Maxwell AFB from Tyndall a few years ago after he spoke at his son's graduation dinner from ABM school. And no...not at AF expense--he paid for the cost of the plane). Like or dislike the man, I think to dismiss him as a "company man" ignores some facts. He has flown close air support and air interdiction missions in combat. He had some very restrictive ROE. He admits he used his "pilot judgement" and deliberately flew lower than the min altitude (breaking ROE) when attacking a convoy that was advancing towards a UN position. So...he may come off as "another talking cranium" on TV, but the fact is he's been there/done that in combat. If he says "go pills" helped his performance in that operation, then I"d believe him before I believed defense attorneys and Barbara Walters.
You want to talk about a real crisis? Why can a doctor work a 36 hour shift in an ER when doing an intership? That's what I'd worry about as an average American...not fighter pilots on speed.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
