The Impact of an Integrated Study Skills Program on University of La Verne Adult Undergraduates at Vandenberg Air Force Base and Naval Air Station North Island

Inauguration for Adulthood: The Military System as an Effective Integrator for Adult Adaptation, an Israel Air Force Base Perspective

Psychological Reports ◽

10.2466/pr0.1982.51.3f.1083 ◽

1982 ◽

Vol 51 (3_suppl) ◽

pp. 1083-1086 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Stanley Rabinowitz

Keyword(s):

Air Force ◽

Theoretical Framework ◽

Adaptation Process ◽

National Service ◽

Basic Training ◽

Air Force Base ◽

The Military ◽

The Impact

Using, in part, the Eriksonian model as a theoretical framework, the author outlines the crucial factors involved in the adaptation of National Service soldiers to the military system, beginning with the impact of basic training and terminating with the process of separation at the completion of training. The influence of adolescent conflicts upon the adaptation process is elucidated.

Download Full-text

Newton’s Laws, G-forces and the Impact on the Brain

The Journal of Neurological and Neurosurgical Nursing ◽

10.15225/pnn.2019.8.3.6 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 133-137

Author(s):

Vicki Evans ◽

Keyword(s):

Brain Injury ◽

Head Injury ◽

Key Words ◽

Air Force ◽

Structural Level ◽

Newton’S Law ◽

Newton’S Laws ◽

Air Force Base ◽

The Impact ◽

The Brain

The thrill to go fast and push boundaries is something that many seek. From John Stapp’s rocket sled at Edwards Air Force Base in the late 1950’s to todays’ Formula 1 drivers, the “need for speed” is broadcast across TV screens weekly. So too are the horror stories of crashes, many at over 300 km/hr. Yet “need for speed” continues. It appears that the higher and faster the rollercoaster, the better. This leads to several questions. How does the brain stand up to speed and G-forces? Do Newton’s Laws still have reference in today’s world? There has been much attention in the general press on the possibility that high G-force roller-coasters are inducing brain injury in riders. However, research does not wholeheartedly support this notion, but rather the risk of brain injury from a rollercoaster is not in the rides, but in the rider — caused by previously undetected brain or neck conditions. That said there is some truth that high G-forces do affect the brain at a chemical and structural level. This paper will discuss the mechanism of head injury at speed and generally what Newton’s Law means in a neurological setting in todays’ world. Formula 1 racing and rollercoaster rides will be evaluated within a neuroscience context. (JNNN 2019;8(3):133–137) Key Words: concussion, head injury, Newton’s laws, Formula 1

Download Full-text

Musculoskeletal Injuries and Automation in Aerial Port Operations

Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance ◽

10.3357/amhp.5475.2020 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 91 (8) ◽

pp. 669-673

Author(s):

Victoria F. H. Bylsma ◽

Bryant J. Webber ◽

Roger A. Erich ◽

Jameson D. Voss

Keyword(s):

Air Force ◽

Traffic Management ◽

Musculoskeletal Injuries ◽

The Other ◽

Injury Rates ◽

Port Operations ◽

Air Force Base ◽

Dover Air Force Base ◽

The Impact ◽

Duty Time

INTRODUCTION: Aerial ports are being modernized with automated technologies, but the impact on musculoskeletal injury (MSKI) is unknown.METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of U.S. Air Force aerial port technicians and traffic management technicians, we compared reported injury rates from January 2006–December 2016 and Veterans Benefits Administration disability compensation claims awarded from January 2001–March 2017. Ton-adjusted injury rates, associated lost/affected duty time, and percent risk attributable to lack of automation were compared at Dover Air Force Base (which features base-specific automation), Travis Air Force Base, Ramstein Air Base, and Yokota Air Base.RESULTS: Injuries most often occurred during aircraft/flight line activities and were typically sprains/strains, with extremities being most affected. Among aerial port technicians there were 8.0 injury reports per 1000 person-years compared to 5.2 per 1000 among traffic management technicians (incidence rate ratio = 1.5; 95% CI: 0.9, 3.0). Of the aerial port technicians with a compensation award, 70.7% included an MSKI component, whereas 75.7% of traffic management awards included an MSKI component. Aerial port technicians at Dover AFB experienced 1.4 injury reports per 1000 personnel per 1000 cargo-tons per year, lower than the other ports: 3.2 (Travis); 3.7 (Ramstein); and 7.6 (Yokota). Overall, 56% of injuries at Travis, 62% at Ramstein, and 82% at Yokota could be attributed to absence of Dover-like automation. However, mean lost/affected duty days at Dover (12.4) far exceeded those at the other bases (range: 4.5–8.6).DISCUSSION: Automating aerial ports may reduce injury rates, but the impact on lost/affected duty time requires further investigation.Bylsma VFH, Webber BJ, Erich RA, Voss JD. Musculoskeletal injuries and automation in aerial port operations. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2020; 91(8):669–673.

Download Full-text