Down to the Wire

I support the name change based on simple reasoning. I feel the executive board and the committee, which I know spent many hours and days studying and researching the project, learned and know far better than I the value of such a change. I trust their judgment.

Maj. Carroll J. Jones Sr., AUS-Ret
via e-mail

A new name is fine; any name! When TROA was formed, we had to use the "T" for "the" to avoid confusion with the Reserve Officers Association (ROA), so the acronym was contrived. ...With the new name, "the" won't be necessary or part of the full name. It just makes MOAA sense.

Lt. Col. J.L. Chapman, AUS-Ret.
Hereford, Ariz.

I have been a member of TROA for some 27 years. ... I am also a veteran of three wars - World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. I strongly disagree with the proposed change from TROA to Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) for several reasons, as follows:

1. Recently the tricare For Life program for retirees was approved and put into effect. This finally fulfilled the promise made to me when I first entered military service in early 1943. The only organization which stayed with, and led, this fight for these many years was TROA.
2. I have been a member of the Air Force Association (AFA) for more years than I have been in TROA. That organization constantly fights for and promotes the interests of younger, principally active duty, personnel. The other military services have similar organizations. That is as it should be, and I support their fights. However, in all my years in afa I never heard them once take the lead in promoting, or supporting, a problem or position of retired officers. That was only done by TROA.
3. I am a member of the "greatest generation" and one of those who has stood by and supported TROA in those fights. Because my generation is dying at about 1,500 per day, we will be an ever-declining support group, but I suspect those who you want to attract and bring into the organization are the same ones who resist or are reluctant to use or be associated with the word "retired."
4. You state that [MOAA] will continue to fight for and represent the interests of retired officers. I submit those will not be the kind of members who will support the organization in its battles for the needs of retired officers. Also, as you gain more members who are younger and not yet retired, the normal tendency will be to satisfy the wants and needs of that group of members at the expense of the retired members. As stated, that group has several other organizations representing their interests. The retired have only TROA.

Finally, the acronym MOAA will be just one more of the jumble of pointless, unrecognizable acronyms floating around the Washington area. In contrast, TROA is a well-known and highly respected entity. I have been proud to be a member of TROA. Let's keep it that way.

Lt. Col. V. Stockdell, USAF-Ret.
San Marcos, Calif.

Editor's note: The name change would merely allow recognition of our current mission and remove an impediment to membership. It's not just active duty officers who balk at the word "retired." Second-career, retired officers also don't consider themselves retired. In fact, most of the members we are losing are already out of the service and working in second careers.

The name change is about securing the association's future. If we sit on our laurels, we will become irrelevant or ineffectual. It takes numbers to effect change in Congress. If we don't have a large, powerful organization, we won't be able to influence lawmakers on the Hill and continue our legacy of success in representing all uniformed services officers - both retired and active duty.

Before you cast your vote (on the ballot accompanying this issue) read more about the name change initiative at www.troa.org/namechange.

Jets Over Korea

I noted the picture of the F-86 and turned to page 68 [of the July issue]. I was surprised to find no mention made of the 39th [Fighter Interceptor Squadron]. I was a pilot in that squadron from Sept. 7, 1951, to May 8, 1952. I flew 82 combat missions from K-46 (Wonju) and K-10 (Chinhae) while in the 18th Fighter Bomber Wing.

The 39th was included in the change to F-86s. I was not allowed to change since I didn't have enough missions left...it wasn't worth checking me out for 18 missions.

Lt. Col. Harold Davies, USAF-Ret.
Gulf Breeze, Fla.

I thoroughly enjoyed ["Wing and a Prayer," July 2002]. Amazing as it may sound, the "historic transition" from prop-driven F-51 Mustang to F-86 Sabre jets was not that uncommon, then and now.

In 1964, I was selected to attend a master's degree program at the University of Puerto Rico and was assigned for flying to the 198th Fighter Squadron of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard (prang). At that time, prang was flying the F-86h and my most recent flying experience was in the kb-50j. Nothing can be more different than a prop-jet tanker and a fighter jet.

In those years, the transition program was conducted wholly within the squadron and by part-time squadron personnel. There was no ground school, and instead I was told to visit the different shops and talk to the maintenance folks and learn the airplane that way. As an added incentive, I was reminded that there were no dual-seat versions of the F-86h and I better learn the airplane well! Meanwhile, I was told to get 50 hours in the T-33 to requalify in jets. ...

Despite the fact that I was taking a full academic load, I managed to requalify in the T-33, finish my "self-paced" ground school, and solo the F-86h in less than three months. I was combat-ready in four months, thanks to the prang way of training.

Col. Hector Negroni, USAF-Ret.
via e-mail

Long Term Decisions

["Making a Decision About Long Term Care Insurance," June 2002] appeared to be a reasonably balanced discussion of a fairly complex (and highly individual) subject/decision. I have been frankly wondering what sort of position TROA would take on the long term care issue in light of the [federal long term care insurance program], since you obviously (due to the [General Electric Capital Assurance] connection) are not in a totally unbiased position.

In particular, John Miller's sidebar, "Comparing Long Term Care Insurance Plans," was a frank and helpful addition. In short, thank you for your coverage of this subject. It is anything but a no-brainer for most of us. There are so many factors to consider/ weigh/balance, and your perspective is helpful. Lord knows, we will not receive an unbiased perspective from any long term care salesperson!

Col. H.A. Olson, USAF-Ret.
Houston

About Those Flags...

Thank you very kindly for publishing ["The Flag Makers," Encore, June 2002]. On page 3...it mentions that "an entrepreneurial major sold 'authentic' Japanese flags." There was no way that you could have known, and I failed to mention in my article, that the spurious flags were made by the members of the 173rd Language Detachment, G-2, 37th Infantry Division and were not for sale but to be used for barter purposes only. Of course, we had no control over the flags once they left our hands.

In addition, at the time of the short-lived existence of the spurious flag makers I was then a master sergeant.

Maj. Susumu Toyoda, USA-Ret.
Carlsbad, Calif.