Navy vs Army Retained Hardware Requirements

[jayjojay]

In the process of preparing my medical records for MEPS, with a metal plate on my wrist and full functionality, I’ve come across a number of forum threads on this site and others regarding retained hardware for orthopedic injuries and acceptance/disqualification across the different branches’ Special Operations Forces. It seems that the Army, in particular, is much more strict when it comes to retained orthopedic hardware (AR 40-501, 5-3, f.9.) for qualification for Airborne duty (requirement for SF), whereas the Navy is less strict when it comes to this same subject regarding the Naval Special Warfare/Special Operations qualifications (MANMED Article 15-105, 4.j.9.). The physical rigors are similar, why the distinction? Does the Army just have a larger influx of recruits and can be more selective? Is it as simple as a preemptive insurance claim defense?

[Surgicalcric]

...SNIP...

Studies have shown that initial enlistees who have retained hardware become a liability in training at much greater nubers than those without retained hardware. Therefore the decision was made that it is generally not worth the headache or waste in resources and money.

[jayjojay]

That makes sense, but do you know why the Navy would be more open to such enlistees?

[Surgicalcric]

That makes sense, but do you know why the Navy would be more open to such enlistees?

Nope, never cared to ask anyone who might know.

[Eagle5US]

Other than a few exceptions, life / duty requirements for the Navy are not near that of the Army.

Navy body fat standards are also significantly more lenient...why? Because they are in the Navy.

[JJ_BPK]

Navy body fat standards are also significantly more lenient...why? Because they are in the Navy.

What ever FLOATS you boat..
:D:D

[jayjojay]

Other than a few exceptions, life / duty requirements for the Navy are not near that of the Army.

Navy body fat standards are also significantly more lenient...why? Because they are in the Navy.

And that's really the essence of my question. I'm a civilian, no prior service, so I don't know first hand what you do, but from my understanding the physical stresses and rigors of a special operator in the Navy is similar to that of a special operator in the Army (atleast where the effects on an area of the body with retained hardware are concerned). If that's true why is the Navy more willing to take that risk on an enlistee than the Army?

[SF18C]

And that's really the essence of my question. I'm a civilian, no prior service, so I don't know first hand what you do, but from my understanding the physical stresses and rigors of a special operator in the Navy is similar to that of a special operator in the Army (atleast where the effects on an area of the body with retained hardware are concerned). If that's true why is the Navy more willing to take that risk on an enlistee than the Army?

If you fail the quals in the Navy for Spec Ops you get to paint ships from end to end for the rest of your enlistment. If you fail in the Army, you go to the Infantry, combat arms, combat support. That is really oversimplifying the issue but it cuts to the chase.

Also I am not sure if you can join the Navy to go straight into "Spec Ops".

[The Reaper]

And that's really the essence of my question. I'm a civilian, no prior service, so I don't know first hand what you do, but from my understanding the physical stresses and rigors of a special operator in the Navy is similar to that of a special operator in the Army (atleast where the effects on an area of the body with retained hardware are concerned). If that's true why is the Navy more willing to take that risk on an enlistee than the Army?

Why don't you ask the Navy?

I think you have received good answers here already.

TR

[jayjojay]

Why don't you ask the Navy?

I think you have received good answers here already.

TR

I'm not understating or disrespecting the quality of the answers I received here by asking that question. I'm just trying to get as many details and as much information as I can while approach my own personal situation. I've inquired about this with some Navy medical personel, but the level of knowledge on this forum is high and with respect to proper preparation and attention to detail I'm hoping to understand as much as I can.

[Surgicalcric]

<<SNIP>>.

The point is we are US Army SF guys, not NSW and therefore cannot speak for them. You are looking in the wrong place.

Navy recruiters and Navy MDs are who you should pose your remaining question to.

Topic closed