Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 25, 2017, 02:49:20 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: CAP the answer?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: CAP the answer?  (Read 853 times)
mco
Newbie

Posts: 2

« on: July 12, 2017, 06:18:29 PM »

Pilot shortage looks to CAP for answers. https://lookaside.fbsbx.com/file/CSAF-Airline-Executive-Notes%20from-18-May-17%20meeting.pdf?token=AWwyiZ4FXOLxuF3L2tz27RFTkVZk3zdfBeqYovDfanJQK6L6OeBCf3yyUmanKiPcoJdMGb4sIROStGmUIMFVqaH83tSD300ew3S25E2yoVOVy3X1Pa9tfWm5kuFk7Qi6_Dab49dH2GpODxpPz6eRsYsTOx0oIjg5fWftBzvyx96-ibkXmFe4ymRD-AcZSj_4mgOrMOMe7zjsNC05DDbnQPxd
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,833

« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2017, 06:52:42 PM »

CAP will need a >LOT< more then $2.4M to have any significant impact on this "problem", not to mention fixing the
private sector issues with being a pilot in general (pay, hours, training costs, etc.).

And investment in CAP cadets (or seniors) to train them as pilots may grow the GA and ATP community, but it doesn't
necessarily grow the military pilot community.

Interestingly, I think the last 3 or 4 cadets from my wing who are Academy bound indicated they want to fly fuelers and
transport planes, not fighters, because they see the writing on the wall in that area, not to mention are looking ahead to civilian careers.
These cadets aren't dumb, they see the vector of automation, and know they may well not even have a full career because
they would be replaced by a microprocessor.

Here's another issue - CAP is almost universally incapable of getting cadets to fly - between the lack of airframes, lack of pilots, constant maintenance issues,
and being woefully underfunded by a factor of about 6x-10x what is actually needed.

This is why NHQ doesn't like math, because it exposes areas where the mission is practically impossible.

The rhetoric is "fly, fly, fly", however if you don't have a plane and O-Pilot sitting in a hangar behind you, it's
a logistical nightmare to arrange to get cadets in the right seat, and then when you do, weather, broken planes,
or "other" many times get in the way (No one expects NHQ to control the weather, but when you have to plan
weeks to months in advance to get something generally simple done, human nature says that people won't do that
dance too often before just forgetting about the idea).

Would everyone agree that 1 powered and 1 glider flight per year / per cadet is at least a good, attainable goal?

At ~$50 per sortie, that's ~$2.4M, per fiscal year just for O-rides.  Setting attendance expectations and
vetting empty shirts lowers that number, but you have to track that information before you can lower the anticipated need.

The mileage varies by wing, but as a whole, CAP doesn't get 1/3rd of that.

There are three kinds of cadets...

1 - Those who live and breath aviation, can't ever fly enough, and will go anywhere (i.e. drag mom and dad)
they have to in order to get in or near a plane.

2 - Those who don't really care that much either way, but will fly if it's not a hassle.

3 - Those who don't want to, and never will get into a GA plane.

#1 generally burns what cash is available, which is great for them, but won't scale up a pilot community as needed.

#2 may light up into #1s if they can get the opportunity to have positive flight experiences that aren't root canals.

#3 are in CAP for "other", >BUT< may be occasionally cajoled into a plane if it's around, but are never going to seek one out or drive
further then normal meetings for a ride.  Get them some low-impact hours and they may lean into #2 or even #1.  Requiring
at least 1 ride per year is the way you help that.

The fix for this is RECRUITING, it'll take several years to normalize >IF< CAP starts today, and there's nothing in the channel
even remotely addressing the issue.

The people in CAP today cannot fix this problem, because it is one of scale and funding, both of which has to come from outside.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2017, 06:58:57 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 766

« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2017, 10:43:55 PM »

We have two Cadets currently taking primary instruction for their PPL. Are there any stats as to how many others nationwide in an average year? Free CFI and plane rental about half of what a FBO charges. Fantastic deal for parents. Which makes one wonder if its more a problem of CAP still being so far under everyone's radar that its more publicity and marketing we need?  We are hesitant to advertise the planes as much as we do STEM, etc.  Maybe now its time to flat out market CAP to teens as a path to your PPL.

But a question. Do we have enough ready and willing CFIs spread out in CAP? Does every composite squadron have at least one CFI that would help train new primary students? If not ... how do we recruit them first?
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,833

« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2017, 11:36:08 PM »

Maybe now its time to flat out market CAP to teens as a path to your PPL.

CAP is not a flight school, the possible access to willing CFIs is a rare opportunity provided because
of a cadet's continued service and membership, not the other way around. No different then
"knowing a guy who helps with Academy entrance..." or "An NCO helping with drill...".

First, CAP does not have the resources, man or machine, to do that, and second, it would wind
up with a bunch or "not-cadets" in the same way it has far too many "not senior members" who
just join for free / cheap flying and do little for the organization itself, or the actual missions.

Not to mention they would quit the day after they got their cheap ticket, which again swells the
ranks, adds to the load for people actually doing mission-centric work, and ultimately defeats the intended purpose.

There was talk a few years ago about a push like that, but one which would require a cadet to attain
"x" grade first - I would vote for Phase II, or WB.  That would require at least a year+ in and commitment
shown to the program before getting into the left seat.

Those ideas got watered down pretty far and then someone came to their senses and it was kiboshed.

But a question. Do we have enough ready and willing CFIs spread out in CAP? Does every composite squadron have at least one CFI that would help train new primary students? If not ... how do we recruit them first?

No, no, and CAP shouldn't.
(I would wager a large percentage, possibly even a majority, of composite and cadets units don't even have a pilot, let alone a CFI.)

Your cadets and those CFIs are unicorns.  Direct initial outside an academy is so unusual as to be statistically zero.
Enough that it warrants press releases like the 2 cadets who got scholarships in NER recently.
We're not talking about one or two per wing per year, we're talking "i heard about that one kid once..." per wing.
I've been personally reminded both here and IRL, not to mention any number of others have as well, that
those free PPLs literally take food off the table of our valued volunteer pilot CFIs.

There will always be those with the wearwithall to provide free instruction, but not many on the whole, and fewer still
who want to accept the liability that comes with making a new pilot for no remuneration whatsoever.

The fix for this is 10x's the funding CAP currently has at a minimum, and a recruiting drive for members across the
board.  Not "pilots", not "CFIs", not "ES guys", or "Cadet People", everyone.

FWIW, I have a cadet right now who is in the initial stages of conversation to do exactly what you're suggesting,
and without putting too fine a point on it, "less expensive" doesn't grow $3-5k out of his parent's...ear, nor
does it put the airframe he specifically needs anywhere near him, necessarily.

« Last Edit: July 13, 2017, 12:17:51 AM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 766

« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2017, 11:52:18 PM »


....... does it put the airframe he specifically needs anywhere near him, necessarily.

All very good points "E".

Our squadron was recently offered a new glass 182 to replace our almost new glass 172.  After much discussion amongst our pilots about our mission needs, we opted to just keep the 172. Our Cadets and Seniors who are taking training was the key.  Yes we fly the occasional ELT search, the AP Missions, O'Rides and much more. But instruction is where we utilize so many of our plane hours. We didn't feel the 182 would be flown nearly as much. Our plane says busy. Every squadron is so very different.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
Cliff_Chambliss
Seasoned Member

Posts: 387

« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2017, 08:52:55 AM »

CAP is not a flight school, the possible access to willing CFIs is a rare opportunity

Very Rare.  When I rejoined CAP some of the very first comments I heard were along the lines of:
"great, a new CFI, now I can finish my instrument/commercial/get my kid trained etc".

CAP would not let me charge for flight instruction, so every hour of "donated" time was time I could have been earning $50.00/hr.  I did not have a problem donating time at my convenience which was after my normal day to day job, and after my paid students.  But when I would get calls "But this is THE CAP and I/we really need this"  it gets old.  When a father actually told me to rearrange my schedule to to fit around his cadet sons after school activities is when I said enough. 
Logged
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
2d Armored Cavalry Regiment
3d Infantry Division
504th BattleField Surveillance Brigade

ARMY:  Because even the Marines need heros.    
CAVALRY:  If it were easy it would be called infantry.
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 10,576

« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2017, 11:27:06 AM »

The issue with the USAF's pilot shortage is not a problem with recruiting.

They got more recruits then they got cockpits to put them in.

The problem is keeping them in.
The problem is that the purely civilian pilot training pipeline is not producing enough pilots with the right number of hours and right type of training to satisfy the airlines.
The problem is that the USAF thinks that it is just a money issue and just does not understand why pilots keep leaving.

CAP can't really help with this problem.
Even if we turned CAP into a flight school and got all of our cadets in the air and earning their tickets.....it is not a recruiting problem....it is retention.

The fix.....the real fix......is to bring back Warrant Officer Pilots, recruit from within the ranks, make them sign up through their 20th year, and just let them fly.


Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
Pacific Region
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 661
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2017, 08:36:43 PM »

The "Flying Encampments" of days gone by were partially rooted in career making. For example, applicants had to have a Class II medical. The thought was that there was no point starting people toward a flying career who couldn't get paid to fly.

There were some efforts at rounding up CAP planes and CFIs. Until reality set in. There was simply no way to do it consistently and within realistic timeframes.

It was resolved by sending people to Part 141 schools, which bid for the contracts. Zero time to license in one month. But it was tough. They modified it to one month, but you had to have 15 hours on arrival, with at least 5 solo, obtained locally. And NHQ would pay 1/3 of those costs, Wings paid another third and local units were encouraged to pick up what the cadet couldn't afford. Mitchell was the minimum, along with passing score on FAA written, age 17 and the Class II.

CAP trained about 100 cadet pilots to private license per year from about 1967 to 1971 or so. In my case year, 1970, they ran 2 classes, back to back, at Oklahoma State University. Concurrently, they ran two classes back to back at University of Oklahoma. Lodging was in college dorms. Our ONLY expenses were meals and incidentals, such as laundry. And, we had to buy our own log books, plotters and E6B computer. Even though we had already passed the written, FAR 141 required ground school. That was held Monday through Friday evenings during the first two weeks. All books provided. We were transported to the airfield every morning, then back for lunch. About every other day we flew a second time in the afternoon.

Twenty-eight days after I arrived, I was a private pilot.

I soloed near home. National and Wing picked up 2/3, I worked my way toward the remaining third. I bought my own computer, plotter and log book. Meal tickets for the month cost $98.00. Laundry cost me $1.00 in quarters, wash and dry. And Oklahoma State University, with their renowned flying training program, taught us well. I got what probably was worth $1000 in flight training at the time for $98 and some change.

I don't know why they brought it to an end. But it's probably easy to figure out. With 17 as the lowest age (me), and most of my fellow cadets being 19 or 20, we weren't going to be cadets for much longer. And, with such low hours (as a Part 141 school, the minimum was 35 hours, not the usual 40, and not the then-average 100 hours), we weren't going to fly search anytime soon, or fly cadets, or get flying jobs. In fact, I think of the 24 in my class, maybe two went on to USAF flying training, one got a commercial
license and I don't believe any of the others ever actually got "paid to fly."

I think the thought process after that was "O-rides - get more cadets up in the air rather than train fewer to fly."

Anyway - is that a solution for anything today? I don't know. Only one way to find out. Fund it. But, if they do try it, they have to decide the objective. If it's to create private pilots, great. Train 100 per year. Or 200. Or 300. But that only gets private pilots. If the objective is to train commercial pilots, or mission pilots, it has to be understood that it will cost way more - and the pilots should be expected to do more than cover meals and laundry. They'll owe something in return.
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
Mustang
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 691

« Reply #8 on: July 16, 2017, 10:29:11 PM »

We have two Cadets currently taking primary instruction for their PPL. Are there any stats as to how many others nationwide in an average year? Free CFI and plane rental about half of what a FBO charges. Fantastic deal for parents. Which makes one wonder if its more a problem of CAP still being so far under everyone's radar that its more publicity and marketing we need?  We are hesitant to advertise the planes as much as we do STEM, etc.  Maybe now its time to flat out market CAP to teens as a path to your PPL.

But a question. Do we have enough ready and willing CFIs spread out in CAP? Does every composite squadron have at least one CFI that would help train new primary students? If not ... how do we recruit them first?
My wing is just wrapping up its second flight academy, 9 cadets soloed at a cost to them of only $500. Nowhere else could they touch that value--especially in near-new G1000-equipped 172s.

That said, we will incur a great deal of wrath from private flight schools if we start marketing CAP as a flight training entity. They will (rightly) complain of unfair competition as we have no capital costs to recover, our aircraft having been purchased with federal funds.
Logged
"Amateurs train until they get it right; Professionals train until they cannot get it wrong. "

Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: CAP the answer?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.291 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me